Refer Report

“I couldn’t help but evaluate it as a poorly written and defective textbook, with factual errors, inconsistent use of terminology, and leading questions (that reveal the author’s view of history).”

It was revealed that there are over 300 errors in the Korean history textbook for high school published by the Korea Institute for Curriculum and Evaluation, which has been embroiled in controversy over glorifying pro-Japanese collaboration and dictatorship. The Institute for Research in Collaborationist Activities (IHNI) announced that it had commissioned a total of 13 people, including Han Sang-kwon, Professor Emeritus of Deoksung Women’s University (History major), Lee Jun-sik, former Director of the Independence Hall of Korea, Oh Su-chang, a visiting researcher at the Institute of Humanities at Seoul National University, and current history teachers with textbook writing experience, to verify the textbook. The experts who participated in the verification unanimously pointed out that “at first glance, it appears to be an acceptable narrative according to the writing standards, but when looking at it as a whole, the content is so substandard that it makes one wonder how it passed the verification.”

The People’s Solidarity for Participatory Democracy pointed out that there were a total of 338 problems with this textbook, including: △ basic factual errors such as years and organization names; △ inconsistent use of terminology; △ inappropriate citation of photos, diagrams, and data; △ errors in notation of the lunar and solar calendars; and △ notation that does not follow the rules of spelling.

What stands out is the ‘Joseon Education Ordinance’, which was a Japanese colonial education policy. Minmunyeon said about the explanation of the Joseon Education Ordinance on page 12 of the Korean History 2 textbook for high school students from the Korea Institute for Curriculum and Evaluation, “We summarized it briefly in a table, but it is full of content that is either completely absent from the Joseon Education Ordinance or is incorrect,” and “It is difficult to find the correct content among the explanations in the table.”

This textbook describes the Second Education Ordinance of Joseon, which was implemented in 1922, as “Korean language is mandatory.” According to the explanation of the People’s Solidarity for Participatory Democracy, from the First Education Ordinance in 1911 to the Fourth Education Ordinance in 1943, Japan restricted Koreans’ opportunities for higher education and provided them with general and vocational education. In the various regulations of the First Education Ordinance, Korean (Korean language) was already a mandatory subject along with Japanese. What changed in the Second Education Ordinance was that while in the First Education Ordinance, Korean language was integrated with Chinese characters and was a mandatory subject under the name of “Korean-level Chinese characters,” in the Second Education Ordinance, the subjects were divided into “Korean language” and “Chinese characters,” with the former being mandatory and the latter being elective. During the Second Education Ordinance, the number of Korean language classes in elementary schools was 4 hours per week for grades 1 and 2, 3 hours for grades 3 and 4, and 3 hours for grades 5 and 6, for a total of 20 hours per grade. During the first education period, it actually decreased to 22 hours, 6 hours per week for grades 1 and 2, and 5 hours per week for grades 3 and 4. On the other hand, during the second education period, Japanese was taught for a total of 64 hours, which was more than three times as much time as Korean. Therefore, if you were to describe language education during the second education period, it would be more correct to say something like “strengthening Japanese language education.”

Even in the period of the 3rd Education Ordinance (1938), the description of “Japanese (used as the national language)” is clearly incorrect. Japanese was used as the national language already in the early days of Japanese colonial rule. Japanese textbooks had been renamed as national language textbooks long before the 3rd Education Ordinance. Contents such as “recitation of the Imperial Subjects’ Oath” and “bowing to the palace” (the Japanese Empire and its colonies bowing in the direction of the palace) were policies implemented in schools, but they were not written in the Joseon Education Ordinance.

The People’s Solidarity for Participatory Democracy explained that the Joseon Education Decree was also “a part that was pointed out as a fatal error in the Kyohaksa Korean history textbook (which became controversial in 2013 due to historical distortion).” At the time, the Kyohaksa textbook wrote “Korean language essential for Koreans” as an explanation for the part in the original text of the 2nd Education Decree that said, “The purpose is to master the Korean language.” The “Korean language” used in the original text refers to Japanese, but there was criticism that it was a direct copy of Wikipedia, which at the time misunderstood it as Korean. However, this time, it is said that the explanation for that part has changed to “Korean language essential.” The People’s Solidarity for Participatory Democracy stated, “It is not wrong in terms of content, but it is content that does not need to be emphasized in a situation where Japanese language education time is increasing.”

The New Right view of history, which has already been pointed out in various cases through field teachers, etc., was also captured here and there. In the topic exploration section titled “What is the historical background of Syngman Rhee’s Jeongeup speech?” on page 94 of the Korean History 2 textbook, the book “Alternative Textbooks: Modern and Contemporary Korean History” by the Textbook Forum, published in 2008, was directly cited. The Textbook Forum is an organization founded in 2005 by New Right scholars. The Textbook Forum’s alternative textbooks are based on the following: △acknowledging colonial modernization, △affirming the anti-communist dictatorship system, and △criticizing the North Korean system.

The Minmunyeon explained, “By emphasizing that North Korea established an independent government first under Stalin’s instructions, they are inducing the evaluation that Syngman Rhee’s Jeongeup remarks were a bold decision to respond to North Korea, which had already been communized,” and “The New Right’s historical perception was pushed through through the Textbook Forum, textbooks, and state-authored textbooks to free Syngman Rhee from responsibility for establishing an independent government.”

Regarding the policy of “continental invasion and logistics base development” on page 25 of the Korean History 2 textbook, Minmunyeon said, “It reflects the New Right perception of colonial modernization theory that the industrialization of the Korean Peninsula became the foundation of the Korean economy after liberation.”

It is unusual that figures or historical materials that are not usually included in existing history textbooks have appeared. On page 34 of the Korean History 2 textbook, it is written that “the March 1st Movement was planned nationwide and the Declaration of Independence was written in the names of 33 national representatives including Lee Seung-hoon and Han Yong-hoon.” Regarding this, the Minmunyeon said, “Generally, Son Byeong-hui is described as the first of the 33 representative names, but this is the first time I have seen Lee Seung-hoon and Han Yong-un, who can be considered representatives of the religious world, being mentioned instead of Son Byeong-hui.” In addition, the title of “Self-directed History Exploration” on page 88 of the same book is “The Atomic Bomb of Love, Pastor Son Yang-won.” Although it is possible to discover new figures not included in existing textbooks, the Minmunyeon pointed out that “Pastor Son Yang-won’s case first appeared in the Kyogaksa textbook as a victim of the Yeosu-Suncheon Rebellion.” The “Namsan Easter Service” incident on page 112 of the same book is an important incident that triggered the anti-dictatorship struggle of the Korean Christian community, but it is the first time it has been covered in a textbook. The Minmunyeon raised questions about the fact that the introduction to the Mincheonghakryeon incident, a representative anti-dictatorship democratization movement, was weak, while the Namsan Easter service incident was given significant attention. “It reminds me of the incident that led to the arrests of Christian evangelists such as (New Right leader) Kim Jin-hong and In Myeong-jin (former Liberty Korea Party emergency response committee chairman),” he explained.

The Institute for Research in Collaborationist Activities and experts said, “Since it passed the Ministry of Education’s screening, it was expected to meet the minimum basic requirements for a textbook, but the textbook in question is not enough for students to learn history or take the CSAT,” and “The screening officials concluded that it is nothing more than a public opinion poll to serve as a stepping stone in preparation for the publication of a full-fledged far-right textbook in the future.”

Reporter Shin So-yoon yoon@hani.co.kr

Source: Korean