{"title":"创造企业家:韩国国家课程改革","authors":"Sookpil Jang","doi":"10.1080/03626784.2021.2021373","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This article explores national curriculum change initiated by the South Korean state by examining the 2015 curriculum reform. Relying on interviews with policy actors who participated in the curriculum-making process, I aimed to understand how certain reform ideas within an institutionalized, state-led curriculum change made—or failed to make—their way into official documents. Three main themes emerged from interviews: (a) entrepreneurial vision supported by elite bureaucrats and politicians, (b) education professors importing performance standards from the United States, and (c) parent-citizens empowered by education consumerism opposing elitism. Based on the data analysis, I argue cyclical South Korean national curriculum revisions, dominated by Korean elites, function as a social apparatus to disseminate and underpin neoliberal ideology. I also argue parent-citizens’ political activism—empowered by three decades of education consumerism policies—succeeded in challenging Korean elitism and demonstrated anti-neoliberalism potential. As a theoretical framework, I chose critical works addressing neoliberal education reform discourses. I conclude by discussing the future of national curriculum making in the continued process of neoliberalisation.","PeriodicalId":47299,"journal":{"name":"Curriculum Inquiry","volume":"52 1","pages":"51 - 74"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Creating entrepreneurs: National curriculum change in South Korea\",\"authors\":\"Sookpil Jang\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/03626784.2021.2021373\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract This article explores national curriculum change initiated by the South Korean state by examining the 2015 curriculum reform. Relying on interviews with policy actors who participated in the curriculum-making process, I aimed to understand how certain reform ideas within an institutionalized, state-led curriculum change made—or failed to make—their way into official documents. Three main themes emerged from interviews: (a) entrepreneurial vision supported by elite bureaucrats and politicians, (b) education professors importing performance standards from the United States, and (c) parent-citizens empowered by education consumerism opposing elitism. Based on the data analysis, I argue cyclical South Korean national curriculum revisions, dominated by Korean elites, function as a social apparatus to disseminate and underpin neoliberal ideology. I also argue parent-citizens’ political activism—empowered by three decades of education consumerism policies—succeeded in challenging Korean elitism and demonstrated anti-neoliberalism potential. As a theoretical framework, I chose critical works addressing neoliberal education reform discourses. I conclude by discussing the future of national curriculum making in the continued process of neoliberalisation.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47299,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Curriculum Inquiry\",\"volume\":\"52 1\",\"pages\":\"51 - 74\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Curriculum Inquiry\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"95\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/03626784.2021.2021373\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"教育学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Curriculum Inquiry","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/03626784.2021.2021373","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
Creating entrepreneurs: National curriculum change in South Korea
Abstract This article explores national curriculum change initiated by the South Korean state by examining the 2015 curriculum reform. Relying on interviews with policy actors who participated in the curriculum-making process, I aimed to understand how certain reform ideas within an institutionalized, state-led curriculum change made—or failed to make—their way into official documents. Three main themes emerged from interviews: (a) entrepreneurial vision supported by elite bureaucrats and politicians, (b) education professors importing performance standards from the United States, and (c) parent-citizens empowered by education consumerism opposing elitism. Based on the data analysis, I argue cyclical South Korean national curriculum revisions, dominated by Korean elites, function as a social apparatus to disseminate and underpin neoliberal ideology. I also argue parent-citizens’ political activism—empowered by three decades of education consumerism policies—succeeded in challenging Korean elitism and demonstrated anti-neoliberalism potential. As a theoretical framework, I chose critical works addressing neoliberal education reform discourses. I conclude by discussing the future of national curriculum making in the continued process of neoliberalisation.
期刊介绍:
Curriculum Inquiry is dedicated to the study of educational research, development, evaluation, and theory. This leading international journal brings together influential academics and researchers from a variety of disciplines around the world to provide expert commentary and lively debate. Articles explore important ideas, issues, trends, and problems in education, and each issue also includes provocative and critically analytical editorials covering topics such as curriculum development, educational policy, and teacher education.