[KS] Vulnerabilities of Korean Studies

Thu May 15 02:24:29 EDT 2008

Dear All,

I was a little apprehensive about responding to this email discussion.

But I was prompted, by Sue-Je Gage's great suggestion, to speak up and support the idea in that email.

As a scholar who is fluent in both Korean and Japanese, and who is interested in learning other languages (perhaps Putonghua) down the track as well as they become relevant to my research, I am concerned that an excessive focus on a "Koreanist" discourse might marginalize those who have a more general interest (not by any means implying a lesser interest) in Korea, but who do not wish to focus exclusively on Korea due to the comparativist nature of their research.

To address Sue-Je's point, I am sure that everyone wishes to see our network grow to include a greater diversity of scholars rather than vice-versa. It is a reality now that there are many more scholars and students who are interested in topics stretching across numerous faculty and national borders. More and more conferences focus on particular issues with participation by scholars from diverse backgrounds. And they are great conferences. Also, growing regionalization is a given; more scholars are following who are more like specialists in their own fields and involved with Korea to varying degrees as their career progresses, and as they take up tenured positions in Korea and in many faculties and countries around the world they will want to stay in touch with developments in Korean studies. Koreaweb is a very important part of this.

So I would support a wider view of "Koreanist"; wider than seems to be implied by some earlier comments.

After all, we are all here to add to existing knowledge about Korea, so it should not matter from what viewpoint you do that, you should be able to call yourself a "Koreanist".

As for the issue of tenure and heritage, I am not going to touch that with a ten-ja (ten-foot) barge pole. I mean, if the situation has already reached a crisis point, there seems little that I could add that would help, except of course to give my support for stable funding for the study of Korea, but in a way so that we can incorporate as many different perspectives and methodologies as possible.

However, I am embarrassed to confess that I still poorly understand the plurality of needs of "heritage" students. Could we please focus some of this discussion on the specific needs of students, as opposed to discussing them as a faceless market that could serve the needs of faculty?

We need to discuss the plural ways in which "heritage" students are approaching Korea. Be it through religious curiosity, cultural studies, business, etc., it would be foolish to limit the ways in which these students are trying to understand their heritage. It is heart-wrenching to see students with a Korean heritage facing various challenges in engaging with Korea. What strategies can we use to provide support structures for these students? And in meeting the needs of these students, what role are language teachers able to play in addition to the great work they are doing already?

And we need more data than anecdotal evidence. i.e., how many religion students, how many cultural studies students, how many business students, etc. Where can we access this data? (I'm fearful that it doesn't exist.)

Anyway, let's not just look at "heritage students" as a potential market; it seems to be a given that there are many of them. Let's find out how we can provide services to help them join our growing network of scholars of Korea.

Warm regards,

Paul Shepherd

===============================================
Paul Shepherd
Ph.D Candidate
Graduate School of The College of Law, Seoul National University
**NEW** Mobile: (ROK) 010-7668-7675
===============================================> From: slgage at indiana.edu> To: koreanstudies at koreaweb.ws> Date: Wed, 14 May 2008 22:32:40 -0400> Subject: Re: [KS] Vulnerabilities of Korean Studies> > Dear All,> > I've really appreciated reading all the thoughtful comments and suggestions and want to add a couple.> > I recently got a tenure-track position at a liberal arts college in upstate New York, even though they weren't specifically looking for a Koreanist. So my experience may attest that things are changing.> > I'm not sure if anyone brought this up yet, but there was a kind of push to decide if you're a "Koreanist" or historian, anthropologist, sociologist, etc. My feeling about it is now is that one can be both, although I've made choices that positioned me as one or the other.> > Also, I wanted to ask if it was in the Korea Foundation's interest to create a Koreanist database of some kind. This listserve is helpful, but it would be even more helpful to see who's out there, what they're doing and where they are, how many Korea related courses there are at their school, and maybe even if they're heritage or non-heritage scholars, etc.> > Best,> Sue-Je Gage> > > > > > ________________________________________> From: koreanstudies-bounces at koreaweb.ws [koreanstudies-bounces at koreaweb.ws] On Behalf Of michael ralston [mkr_lists at yahoo.com]> Sent: Sunday, May 11, 2008 10:25 PM> To: Korean Studies Discussion List> Subject: Re: [KS] Vulnerabilities of Korean Studies> > Hello everyone,> > Yes, there are vulnerabilities within Korea> Studies. Not to be too Panglossian, but, despite the> weaknesses, the field has never been better.> Hopefully without being too repetitive...> > 1. There are a few strong centers of Korean> Studies-- centers with a good group of scholars> situated within solid Asian Studies programs (e.g.,> UCLA, Hawaii, UBC...).> > 2. There are now Korea scholars in departments at> universities that don't have large Korean Studies> programs and had even less a decade or so ago (e.g.,> Texas, Michigan State, Toronto, Indiana, Cornell...).> > 3. As Mike mentioned, people focusing on Korea are,> generally, more broadly trained in the regional> context and will therefore have the knowledge to teach> broader courses (might not always have the teaching> experience, but the knowledge is there).> > 4. Enough has been written in English that, for> many areas, we aren't limited to the lone book on the> topic when looking for textbooks. There are now> enough good books we can even offer specialized> classes on some subjects. Still lots to do, of course,> but the field has laid a good foundation.> > 5. There is a lot more good material available for> learning Korean than in the past, and the Korean is> offered in more places (though as Ross points out, it> sometime struggles).> > 6. The reasons for studying Korea are as valid as> ever, more so in some ways-- historically important> for understanding East Asia, culturally interesting in> too many ways to mention, strategically and> economically important...> > 7. The number of Korea-focused panels or panels> with Korean content at major or regional conferences> is up, and the there are some good Korean Studies> journals.> > > But there are also things to do.> > > Don's comments about increasing the representation> of Korean studies in liberal arts colleges are bang> on. Another obvious area is larger colleges and> universities (and community colleges?). I left a lot> of good schools out when listing them above (e.g.> Columbia, Illinois, UW, USC...), but the number left> off pales in comparison to the number of schools that> still offer no courses on Korea. In short, two areas> with a lot of potential for growth.> > I'm not sure the "near future" over-production of> PhD isn't actually imminent (if it's not here> already).> > Luckily, the number of academic job listings for an> East Asian position (e.g. history, religion, etc.)> that lists "China and Japan" with no mention of Korea> is decreasing, but they still pop up from time to> time. Is there a way to politely remind search> committees that Korea really is part of East Asia and> there are good reasons for hiring a Koreanist?> > Is there a way to better use the Korean Studies> distinguish lectureship to promote Korean studies at> liberal arts colleges (or to enhance the program at> places that have an East Asian studies program with> little or no Korea representation)?> > One way we might be able to increase the exposure> to Korean studies is join or form thematic panels on> East Asia, history, religion, sociology, etc. at more> conferences (regional conferences included).> > What can we reasonably expect from the Korea> Foundation, which it trying to promote Korean Studies> worldwide? I'm not sure...> > Regards, mike ralston> > > --- michael robinson <robime at indiana.edu> wrote:> > > Dear All:> >> > Don words should be seriously weighed by all in the> > field, and hopefully the KF advisory committee of> which I am a member will be seeing this as well.> > While I have to good fortune to work at a large> > research university, my school is not on the top 10> top 5 or top anything of the Korean prestige> > hierarchy. Yet we are able to maintain a modest> > presence for Korean studies and even convince our> larger EALC department that Korea belongs any integral> > part of any East Asia program. Not for lack of> > trying, we have be off the charts of the KF or other> Korea based funders, but other sources have helped> > us do some amazing things. The current Freeman> > foundation program for Undergraduate education on> East Asia has allowed us to get a number of HS> > teacher, even undergraduate study trips to Korea.> > The impact of these trips is emblematic of how> money, not even large grants, can recruit interest> into the field. My undergraduate study tour last> year...a group with no-heritage students....produced 5> recruits to the Korean language program. These> students are now working their way through school and> several will be out there next year looking for work> in NGOs, graduate school, Law, etc. They continue to> carry their interest in East Asia gained through the> lens of Korea with them. Rebalancing our efforts to> smaller programs, colleges, or places where there is> no representation of Korea of any sort is long> overdue. I fear for the overproduction of Ph.D.s in> Korean studies in the near future(a prospect I never> thought I would see).> >> >> > Another thread in this discussion is the issue of> > why we study this place. While not as bad as 30> years ago, I have always been distracted by the> > disconnect between Korean's interest in our> representations of Korea and our own research and> writing. During the bad old days this meant not> taking> > money with strings real or implied or imagined. But> > there still is the issue of Korean simply agog about> being seen through our work.....now days things are> better. But the money showered on the field was not> for pure research it was in the minds of the funders a> way to get Korea seen and read about. Ironically our> monographs do much less a job of this than any number> > of popular books about the Korean war or travel> > accounts, etc. But the pressures have always been> there to say the right thing. I'm not sure the> Koreans have bought the field in the same manner that> I believe the Japanese did in the 1960s> 70s....producing scholars who literally bought the> "uniqueness" obsession of the Japanese.....but we> might reflect on the topics and general literature> produced by Korean funding in this light.> >> > We now have a field. And as Gari notes that is a> > far cry from the 1950s and 1960s. I still think we> are trained more broadly than our Japan or China> > interested colleagues. So it is incumbent on us to> > push the current trend of thinking about the region> in truly regional terms forward. This can be> > done by re-thinking how we focus our lobbying for> > money and where it might be spent within the North> American educational system.> >> > Mike R> >> > -----Original Message-----> > From: koreanstudies-bounces at koreaweb.ws> > [mailto:koreanstudies-bounces at koreaweb.ws] On Behalf> > Of Clark, Donald> > Sent: Friday, April 25, 2008 12:04 PM> > To: koreanstudies at koreaweb.ws> > Subject: [KS] Vulnerabilities of Korean Studies> >> > Dear All,> > Following Gari Ledyard's comment, and thinking> > about the North> > American advisory group to the Korea Foundation, I> > want to add an> > additional point.> > In my experience the Korea Foundation has ignored> the potential that exists on liberal arts campuses> across America, for the "Koreanization" of existing> Asian Studies curricula.> > Here are thousands of bright undergraduates who> will go on to graduate school and careers teaching> anthropology, history, political science, etc. etc.,> who should be encouraged to use Korea in their future> teaching. They may not have much to do with the> Kyujanggak, ever, but they can turn students on to> Korea across this country, if they themselves have> some exposure to it.> > > The Korea Foundation appears to know nothing> > about this potential pool of scholar-teachers and> their potential effect raising awareness about Korea> in American higher education. The fact that most of> these> > potential teachers are "non-heritage" represents in> > my opinion the future viability of "Korean Studies,"> not as a balkanized special interest that is easy to> cut in hard times, but as an essential component of> the Asian Studies, or even disciplinary, curriculum.> > > "China and India" are sucking all the oxygen> > out of undergraduate resources for education about> Asia. In my service with the liberal arts consortium> primarily concerned with teaching about Asia> (www.asianetwork.org ) I have found much enthusiasm> for Korea and spreading the word about Korea in the> 170+ member colleges that range from Macalester to> Eckerd to Redlands to Bard. "The field," however, is> mesmerized by the great centers that produce numbers> of specialists who appear indifferent to the> possibilities for the development of Korean Studies in> the wide world of undergraduate education--meaning> classroom teaching of smart students (directly, not by> teaching assistants), guiding them to study Korea, to> study abroad in Korea, and to make Korean themes the> subjects of their senior theses in history,> anthropology, and the like.> > > If "Korean Studies" is to outlive the wave of> > heritage students and become a permanent part of> American education, it should pay more attention to> the millions of students who attend liberal arts> colleges and would be enchanted by Korea if only there> were someone to open the window for them.> > Don Clark> > > > > ____________________________________________________________________________________> Be a better friend, newshound, and> know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now. http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ> 
_________________________________________________________________
It's simple! Sell your car for just $30 at CarPoint.com.au
http://a.ninemsn.com.au/b.aspx?URL=http%3A%2F%2Fsecure%2Dau%2Eimrworldwide%2Ecom%2Fcgi%2Dbin%2Fa%2Fci%5F450304%2Fet%5F2%2Fcg%5F801459%2Fpi%5F1004813%2Fai%5F859641&_t=762955845&_r=tig_OCT07&_m=EXT
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://koreanstudies.com/pipermail/koreanstudies_koreanstudies.com/attachments/20080515/0f1ae65a/attachment.html>