▲ The state-controlled textbook before 2011. Provided by Joins.com

The Park Geun Hye administration’s decision to publish state-controlled history textbooks caused a social debate on the method and orientation of history education. As propaganda campaigns of the political parties and civic groups increased, the controversy on history textbooks gradually became a political battle between the conservatives and the liberals. However, the intrinsic value and the fundamental purpose of history education have been overlooked during the battle. 

 

The government and the ruling Saenuri Party argue that the current authorized textbooks mislead middle and high school students by indoctrinating them with biased views towards modern Korean history. According to them, the authorized textbooks degrade the economic success of 1970s and 1980s, and justify misrules of the North Korean regime. The slogan of the conservatives is “teaching the right history.” 

 

   
▲ Current authorized Korean history textbooks. Provided by KBS.

However, there are diverging opinions on whether the government can define what a right history is. Furthermore, the opposition party and liberal civic groups view the government’s measure as a scheme to glorify dictatorships and pro-Japanese activities during the Japanese imperial rule. Former President Park Chung-hee, though contributing to the rapid economic development, controlled Korea for 20 years, and was alleged to attend pro-Japanese military activities. 

 

Many college students around the nation also raised their voices condemning the government’s new measure. Approximately 40 thousand students attended a signature campaign against the state-led publication, and among them, 7300 were Korea University (KU) students. Seo Jae Woo (’12, Industrial Management Engineering), the president of Korea University Student Association (KUSA), stated, “To prevent the regression of democracy, the government should call upon public opinions.”

 

After all, the publication and contents of history textbooks have been a subject of much debate for many years. Before 2011, the high school Korean history textbook was published by the Ministry of Education, while high school modern Korean history textbooks have been published by private publishers and then authorized by the government since 2003. Thus, the conservatives’ criticisms on history education were focused on the latest Korean history textbooks.

 

Then, in 2007, the government decided to cease the state-controlled publication of high school Korean history books. Textbooks published by private publishers and authorized by the government emerged in 2011. Meanwhile, the conservatives’ discontent towards history education soared, and right-wing scholars finally wrote a new textbook based on their beliefs, which was published by Kyohaksa.

 

Kyohaksa’s textbook, however, was selected by only a small minority of schools. Then, the ongoing state-controlled text project was initiated by the government. Most historians oppose the publication of a state-controlled textbook. They point out that how the conservatives meddled with history education for past several years explains the conservatives’ eventual goal. “The failure of a right-wing textbook led the conservative government to come up with another measure, a state-controlled textbook,” said Professor Kwon Nae Hyun (History Education).

 

Since the Kyohaksa textbook was accused of glorifying pro-Japan activities and dictatorships, many are concerned that the new textbook published by the government would involve the same problems. Nevertheless, some individuals and civic groups insist that when criticizing the government, one should focus on the fact that a state-controlled textbook will enforce a single view of history to all students. 

 

In the same context, Seo, the president of KUSA, stated that “the opposition between uniformity and diversity is more significant than issues related to dictatorships or pro-Japanese activities” in the student association central steering committee. “It can be interpreted that uniformity is a broader concept than glorifying pro-Japan activities and dictatorships,” said Professor Kwon. In other words, unquestioningly justifying specific activities of certain historical figures without remarking their conspicuous faults eventually forces students to think on a singular perspective.

 

Based on such logics, more than four hundred historians in universities around the nation have announced that they oppose the state-led publication of history textbooks and pledged not to participate as authors. As a result, only a limited pool of right-wing historians will participate. “It is hard to assume that the small minority will represent the whole academic world,” Kwon said.

 

     
   
▲ Professor Kwon Nae Hyun. Photographed by Lee So Young
Another significant problem associated with the ongoing project is that three textbooks (middle school 1 and 2, and high school) will be completed in a year, which implies that the textbooks could be written in a rough-and-ready method. “Many people overlook the small amount of time allocated for each textbook, but even authorized textbooks were completed after two years of research,” said Professor Kwon. 
 
Then, how should history education be improved? To clear the charge of only incurring conflicts, history education needs to be a result of academic debates, rather than political disputes. Until now, historians have belittled the significance of history education, only focusing on academic research. Nevertheless, academic research and general education are interdependent. “Historians should seek for the direction of history education through ceaseless struggles and debates,” Kwon uttered.
 
Furthermore, rather than simply enumerating historical concepts, history textbooks should be written in a manner that could help students comfortably approach historical facts and lessons. Textbooks up to now have discouraged many students, merely listing concepts and facts without illustrating them enough with detailed examples or stories.  
 
When educating students, what kind of identity the students should have as a citizen of Korean society is a crucial issue. The government and conservative historians have argued that students should be proud of Korea, which accomplished both industrialization and democratization in less than 60 years. Others contend that an identity as a citizen of a democratic society is more important than an unwavering national identity. The eventual goal of history education should be defined based on a national consensus. According to Kwon, “History education could develop to facilitate the construction of a wholesome society."
저작권자 © The Granite Tower 무단전재 및 재배포 금지