Soeun Lee
Soeun Lee is an Associate Research Fellow at the Korea Institute for Curriculum and Evaluation (KICE). She is interested in how students relate to history within contemporary society and seeks ways to support the development of their historical thinking. In line with this interest, she earned her Ph.D. from Seoul National University with a dissertation on students’ understanding of substantive historical concepts.
Her research centers on historical literacy and the teaching of “difficult histories.” She has co-authored a book examining history curricula designed to promote historical literacy. More recently, her work focuses on how difficult histories, such as immigrant histories and colonial pasts, are represented within school contexts. Her research aims to identify effective pedagogical approaches and the professional support that teachers need to foster students’ deeper, more critical, and meaningful historical understanding.
Korea Institute for Curriculum and Evaluation
Sessions
World history education in South Korea has undergone continuous revision, reflecting shifting historiographical paradigms, national priorities, and changing understandings of global interconnection. While curricular reforms have sought to address critiques of Eurocentrism and to incorporate approaches associated with New World History and global history, significant tensions remain between reform discourse and classroom practice. This panel investigates the current state and challenges of world history education in South Korea through four interconnected dimensions: national curriculum discourse, textbook narratives, high-stakes assessment, and scholarly debates shaping reform.
The first paper analyzes the normative goals embedded in national curriculum documents, identifying enduring tensions between “human history” and “today’s world.” The second paper investigates how high school textbooks construct global narratives, focusing on Eurocentrism and the distribution of historical agency. The third paper turns to assessment by examining eleven years of College Scholastic Ability Test (CSAT) items, revealing how high-stakes testing constrains the realization of global history ideals. The fourth paper situates these developments within broader scholarly debates, analyzing how researchers’ positionalities shape discourse on world history education in Korea.
Taken together, these studies show that world history education in South Korea operates at the intersection of global intellectual trends and national institutional structures. By integrating curriculum, textbook, assessment, and discourse analysis, the panel offers a comprehensive examination of how “the global” is conceptualized, institutionalized, and contested in world history. Korea’s experience offers a valuable case for international scholars seeking to understand how world history education is evolving within national education systems in a period shaped by new debates about globalization.
This paper examines how the colonial past is represented in secondary school history textbooks across national and world history narratives in South Korea and Spain. The two cases offer a compelling comparison, as South Korea experienced colonial subjugation under Japanese imperial rule, whereas Spain was a major imperial power with a long history of overseas expansion. By juxtaposing these two cases, the study seeks to illuminate how differing historical positions shape the discursive construction of the colonial past within both national memory and world history narratives. Drawing on Systemic Functional Linguistics (SFL), it analyses textbook passages addressing colonial expansion and decolonization in world history sections, alongside national history chapters dealing with Japanese colonial rule in Korea and Spain’s colonial expansion in the Americas.
Findings indicate that both countries predominantly employ Material processes, presenting colonial history as a sequence of dynamic actions. However, substantial differences emerge in agency and evaluation. In South Korea’s textbooks, the colonized frequently appear as active agents in both national and world historical narratives. Colonial experiences are consistently framed as a morally charged domain: the colonizers are typically evaluated negatively through judgment, while the colonized are positively positioned as active agents of resistance. In contrast, Spain’s textbooks construct the colonizer as the primary active participant in both national and world history narratives. Abstract actors such as institutions and systems also appear prominently as active agents. Rather than foregrounding moral judgment, Spain’s narratives tend to evaluate colonialism through institutional or structural appreciation, producing a comparatively detached and neutral framing.
This comparative study highlights the role of linguistic choices in mediating the colonial past within historical discourse and contributes to a deeper understanding of the discursive mechanisms through which official histories legitimize or distance themselves from colonial heritage.