Culture matters in educational policy transfer: the case of curricular reforms in the two Koreas during the Soviet and US military occupation

Abstract

This paper investigates the influence of cultural and historical factors on educational policy transfer, drawing on an analysis of the curricular reforms made during the Soviet and US military occupation of the two Koreas. In South Korea, curricular changes were made, such as the introduction of the subject of social studies, in order to teach democratic procedures and concepts. In North Korea, a socialist–communist ideology was extensively promoted, along with an attraction to the Soviet Union as a model state to follow. In both contexts, the localization of the reforms was influenced by the authoritarian legacy of Confucianism and Japanese colonization, and the nationalism that had been fostered for the purpose of state formation. The Korean case indicates that while investigating the influence of culture on educational policy transfer, it is important to identify the unique characteristics of educational traditions and nationalism of a country, and to analyze how the newly transferred policies and ideas are received by local actors in their searches for meaning and power.

Keywords:

• Policy transfer
• North Korea
• South Korea
• education reforms
• military occupation
• localization
• cultural influence

Notes

1. Here the term ‘cultivation’ (Kyoyang) does not designate its literal meaning but refers to a translation of the Russian word vospitanie, which indicates political indoctrination as a main function and purpose of education (Pak 1976).

2. This interview was held at the interviewee’s house in Seoul on 27 March 2014.

3. This interview was held at a café in Seoul on 19 February 2014.

4. Re-quoted from (Yi 2003, 103).

5. Kim (2016) categorizes the educational leaders in Korea before the division by the Soviet Union and the USA into radical and cultural nationalists. The radical nationalists, who mainly chose to partner with the Soviet Union, pursued state-building through radical, systemic reforms whereas the cultural nationalists, many of whom collaborated with the USA, favoured gradual reforms by educating ‘individuals’ first.