|USFDC Home||| RSS|
This item is only available as the following downloads:
xml version 1.0 encoding UTF-8 standalone no
record xmlns http:www.loc.govMARC21slim xmlns:xsi http:www.w3.org2001XMLSchema-instance xsi:schemaLocation http:www.loc.govstandardsmarcxmlschemaMARC21slim.xsd
leader nam a22 u 4500
controlfield tag 008 c20029999azu 000 0 eng d
datafield ind1 8 ind2 024
subfield code a E11-00262
Educational policy analysis archives.
n Vol. 10, no. 14 (March 07, 2002).
Tempe, Ariz. :
b Arizona State University ;
Tampa, Fla. :
University of South Florida.
c March 07, 2002
Japanese higher education policy in Korea during the colonial period (1910-1945) / Jeong-Kyu Lee.
Arizona State University.
University of South Florida.
t Education Policy Analysis Archives (EPAA)
xml version 1.0 encoding UTF-8 standalone no
mods:mods xmlns:mods http:www.loc.govmodsv3 xmlns:xsi http:www.w3.org2001XMLSchema-instance xsi:schemaLocation http:www.loc.govmodsv3mods-3-1.xsd
mods:relatedItem type host
mods:identifier issn 1068-2341mods:part
mods:detail volume mods:number 10issue 14series Year mods:caption 20022002Month March3Day 77mods:originInfo mods:dateIssued iso8601 2002-03-07
1 of 17 Education Policy Analysis Archives Volume 10 Number 14March 7, 2002ISSN 1068-2341 A peer-reviewed scholarly journal Editor: Gene V Glass College of Education Arizona State University Copyright 2002, the EDUCATION POLICY ANALYSIS ARCHIVES Permission is hereby granted to copy any article if EPAA is credited and copies are not sold. Articles appearing in EPAA are abstracted in the Current Index to Journals in Education by the ERIC Clearinghouse on Assessment and Evaluation and are permanently archived in Resources in Education .Japanese Higher Education Policy in Korea During the Colonial Period (1910-1945) Jeong-Kyu Lee Korean Educational Development Institute and The Hongik UniversityCitation: Lee, J-K. (2002, March 7). Japanese highe r education policy in Korea during the colonial period (1910-1945). Education Policy Analysis Archives 10 (14). Retrieved [date] from http://epaa.asu.edu/epaa/v10n14.html/.Abstract The purpose of this article is to examine the impac t of Japanese nationalistic thought on the administrative systems and structures of colonial and modern higher education in Korea, as w ell as to analyze Japanese higher educational policy in Korea during the colonial period (1910-1945). It begins with an examination of Shint o, a syncretistic Japanese state religion and the ideological basis o f national education. The author investigates Japanese educational policy and administration during the colonial period, including the establish ment of a colonial imperial university in Korea. He also reviews the a dministrative systems and organizational structures in imperial and colon ial universities. Both beneficial and negative impacts of the Japanese col onial education
2 of 17system on current Korean higher education conclude the analysis. ShintoShinto was a spiritual foundation of the educationa l system of imperial Japan, as well as the national religionor some would say cult. Throu ghout the history of Northeastern Asia, ancient Japan had close political, economic, and cultural relations with old Korea.Both Japanese Nihongi (Chronicles of Japan from the Earliest Times to AD 697) and Kojiki (Records of Ancient Matters) indicate numerous and multi-layered relationships between Korea and Japan. The earliest relations of Japan with the continent were mainly with Korea, particularly the Paekche Ki ngdom (18 BC-AD 660) 1 which was a cultural mediator between China and Japan (Ho ng, 1988; Longford, 1911; Maki, 1945). According to the records of Japanese Nihongi and Kojiki, Korea's two greatest early contributions to Japan were the transmission of Chinese writing and literature, and more importantly, Buddhism 2 .The introduction of Buddhism had a significant eff ect on the development of Japanese culture and religion.A form of the northern branch of Buddhism ( Mahayana ) was transmitted to Japan via Tibet, China, and Ko rea (Aston, 1905, p. 359; Reader et al., 1993, p. 93). Indeed, Buddhism had a great impact on the development of Japanese culture as well as Shinto In the historical development of the Japanese relig ion and national thought, the origins of Shinto are highly controversial. Many eastern an d western scholars (Aston, 1905; Holtom, 1938; Hong, 1988; Picken, 1994; Reischauer and Craig, 1973; Tsunoda et al., 1964)point out that Shinto cannot be separated from Buddhism, Confucianism, and other continental influences 3 In its earliest stage, Shinto was a primitive natur al religion with elements of animism, natural worship, shamanism, ancestral reverence, ag ricultural rites, and purifications. Shinto later merged with Buddhism and Confucianism as Ryobu (Dual) Shinto 4 which contained religious and ethical components of a hig h order. Finally, the separation of Shinto from Buddhism was achieved, that is, Kokka (State) Shinto or Jinja (Shrine) Shinto as the state cult or religion (Aston, 1905; Bocking, 1996; Herbert, 1967; Holtom, 1938; Picken, 1994).Japanese ancestral worship is a combination of Shinto and Confucianism, what we call Shinto-Confucianism.Twelve centuries later, Shinto was established under national and patriotic auspi ces and was subsequently adopted as Japan's national religi on and ideology. 5 In 1870, Japanese Emperor Meiji issued a rescript defining the relati on of Shinto to the state and the intention of the government concerning this matter. The Rescript states: We solemnly announce: The Heavenly Deities and the Great Ancestress...established the throne and made the su ccession sure. The line of Emperors...entered into possession thereof and t ransmitted the same. Religious ceremonies and government were of a singl e mind....Government and education must be made plain that the Great Way of faith in the kami [gods] may be propagated....(Holtom, trans., 1938, p. 55)
3 of 17After the declaration of the Rescript, the Japanese government formulated the Three Principles of Instruction for the establishment of royal rule through a Shinto-centered indoctrination and decreed the Education Code for t he foundation of modern educational systems. On April 28, 1872, the Education Code was proclaimed: (1) compliance with the spirit of reverence for Kami (Gods) and love of country; (2) clarification of the principle of Heaven and the Way of man'; and (3) ex alting the Emperor and obeying the Imperial Court (Tsunetsugu, 1964, p. 206). The 1872 Education Code of Japan emulated the uniform and centralized system of France initia ted by Napoleon III in 1854 (Anderson, 1975, p. 21).Furthermore, the Japanese government attempted to s et up national morals within the schools based on the Shinto-Confucian Imperial Resc ript on Education 6 that was promulgated on October 30, 1890 (Anderson, 1959, p. 13; Beauchang & Vardaman, 1994, pp. 4-5; Holtom, 1938, p. 71; Horio, 1988). T he Rescript stressed the Shinto ideology of royal worship mixed with Confucian ethi cal concepts and practices such as loyalty, filial piety, benevolence, ancestor worshi p, learning, and harmonious human relationships. Shinto appealed to Japanese cultural nationalists because it combined ethical codes of virtue and honor with an even more exalted ethic of duty to the state, and to the divinely inspired head-of-State in parti cular. Therefore, Shinto ideology and Confucian concepts w ere two main pillars of Japanese imperial education. The Meiji Rescript, as a Holy W rit or a national moral prop of the Japanese people, was reinterpreted several times in maintaining the rising militaristic and ultranationalistic ideology. Its philosophy ext ended to the educational systems of Japan. State-Shinto or National-Shinto dictated an administrative structure in government as well as in higher education that enfo rced a strict stratification system, centralized governance, and intellectual conformity Certainly these features were reinforced further, even ossified with the Japanese occupation and colonialization of Korea from 1910 to 1945. Japanese imperialists set up the ruling policy that aimed to let Koreans assume the personalities of loyal citizens of her imperialism. To fulfill their political scheme, the Japanese nationalists imposed Shinto-Confucianism on Korea and attempted to design a new educational system and an administrative structure suitable for the execution of their colonial policy. Therefo re, higher education was an essential tool in accomplishing the Shinto-Confucian ideologi es during Japanese colonization.Japanese Educational Policy and Administration in C olonial Higher EducationAfter the 1895 Shimonoseki Treaty, Japan introduced western-style institutions and reforms Kora including the elimination of such soci al practices as class discrimination. However, these reforms were met with hostility from a broad cross-section of Koreans who felt their traditional Confucian and shamanisti c beliefs threatened by the social-leveling tendencies of western-style democra cy. Having won the Russo-Japanese War in 1905, Japan moved immediately to establish a protectorate over Korea, called the 1905 Protectorate Treaty (Kibaek Lee, 1984, p. 309) After the treaty was signed, the Choson government nearly lost its national right to govern. During the Protectorate' period (1905-1910), the Japanese educational policy was chiefly the preparatory operation for colonization through the promulgation and practice of various educational ordinances and regulations. For instance, the Priva te School Ordinance ( Sarip-hak-kyo-ryeong ), which was promulgated in 1908, was a means of pl acing under
4 of 17Japanese control and suppression all the private sc hools administered by Christian missionaries and patriotic Korean leaders (KNCU, 19 60, p. 15). In 1911, the Japanese colonial government proclaime d the Educational Ordinance 7 in accordance with the Imperial Rescript (Cheong, 1985 p. 283; Keenlyesids and Thomas, 1937, p. 100; Sung-hwa Lee, 1958, pp. 83-84; Nam, 1 962, p. 38; The Government-General of Choson, 1935, p. 167; Yu, 199 2, p. 126).The Educational Ordinance appeared as follows: Be filial to your parents, affectionate to your bro thers and sisters; as husbands and wives be harmonious, as friends true; bear yourselves in modesty and moderation; extend your benevolence to all; pursue learning and cultivate the arts, and thus develop your intel lectual faculties and perfect your morality. Furthermore, be solicitous o f the commonwealth and of the public interest; should emergency arise, off er yourselves courageously to serve the State.(Keenlyeside and Th omas, 1937, p. 100). Based on the above Ordinance, the Japanese colonial administration urged elementary, secondary, and vocational education, including medi cal, foreign language, and teacher education. The Educational Ordinance of 1911 allowe d higher educational institutions, such as Christian missionary colleges, to lose thei r college statuses and be downgraded to non-degree granting schools. It was not until th e promulgation of a new Educational Ordinance on February 4, 1922 that previous higher educational institutions were accredited once again.The ordinance was a strategy by the Japanese to for ce the Korean people to become compliant to Japanese imperialism, to undermine the nationalism of Koreans, and ultimately to transform the people into loyal Japan ese citizens. After issuing a new Educational Ordinance on February 4, 1922, several Christian missionary schools and one Korean private collegiate school that had lost their college statuses were upgraded as college institutions.The major difference between t he old (1911) and the new ordinances (1922) was that the latter abolished a dual discrim inative system and applied the Japanese educational system throughout Korea.At the same time, patriotic Korean leaders promoted an educational movement to implement their own private colleges or universitie s (Lee, 1965, p. 241). To offset this trend, the Japanese administration opened Keijo Imp erial University (now evolved into Seoul National University) in 1924, under the Ordin ance of University, and based on the Meiji Rescript (The Government-General of Choson, 1 935, p. 486). This was to be the first modern university in Korea, which included th e departments of law and literature, and medicine. Although the Japanese established a n ew national-level university in Seoul, most Koreans, nationalists and conservative Confucians, did not enroll their sons and daughters in the new imperial university. Inste ad, many patriotic intellectuals who were eager to encourage nationalism opened several private schools. These open, night, and labor schools were designed for Koreans to enha nce national spirit. The Japanese colonial government claimed that Keijo Imperial University in Seoul was almost the same as Imperial universities in Japan i n terms of quality (The Government-General of Choson, 1935, p. 486), but th e university was not a scientific research institute like the Japanese imperial unive rsities. In truth, Tokyo Imperial University, as a scientific research university, wa s organized into four departments: law,
5 of 17science, literature, and medicine. Despite the fact that Keijo University was a prototype of a Japanese imperial university, it became a mode l for successive modern Korean universities.Regarding educational structure and systems, an Edu cational Bureau under the Internal Affairs Department in the Government-General of Cho son became a top organ of educational administration after Japanese annexatio n. The Educational Bureau was composed of an educational section, an editorial se ction, a religious section, and a school inspectorate. In the provinces, educational sections formed part of the Department of Internal Affairs and had a staff of s chool-inspectors (The Government-General of Choson, 1921, p. 75). The chi ef of the Educational Bureau was controlled and supervised by the Director of Intern al Affairs, who was in charge of the entire educational system of Korea (Cynn, 1920, p. 100). Educational administration under Japanese rule was highly centralized in the I nternal Affairs Department and in the Educational Bureau, and was directed and supervised by these offices due to their coercive power within the organizational hierarchy. The Educational Bureau under the Internal Affairs Department had responsibility for most aspects of the whole school system, including missions and aims, scholastic ter ms, curricula, qualifications of teaching staff, management of personnel, fiscal rev iew, allotment of funds, and inspection of educational facilities.Administrative control of educational affairs such as policy-making, establishment of schools, compilation and censorship of textbooks, g ranting of teacher certificates, hiring and assigning of teaching staff, formation of the e ducational budgets and approvals, and scholarship administration were exercised on the au thority of the Government-General of Choson (The GovernmentGeneral of Choson, 1921, 1935). Top policy of the Japanese Emperor was issued in Im perial Ordinances prepared by the governor of the Government-General of Choson. Polic y change was usually initiated in the form of directives and instructions by the depa rtment and bureaus under the Government-General (Anderson, 1959, p. 75). The adm inistrators of these offices stressed authoritative hierarchical orders that wer e followed without questions by the subordinates of the organizational systems.During the Japanese occupation, the highly centrali zed system of educational administration based on Imperial Ordinances was use d to reinforce centralized governance and intellectual conformity, as well as to eliminate Korean nationalism, independence, and cultural identity. The Japanese e ducational system and structure was a means to edify the Korean people in accordance wi th the Meiji Rescript on Education. Thus, the colonial educational system and structure were tools to achieve Japanese political schemes, denationalization and assimilati on.Administrative System and Organizational Structure in Imperial and Colonial UniversitiesUnder the imperial Japanese rule, there were nine i mperial universities. Seven of these were in Japan: Tokyo (1886), Kyoto (1897), Kyushu i n Fukuoka (1903), Hokkaido in Sapporo (1903), Tohoku in Sendai (1909), Osaka (193 1), and Nagoya (1931). Two were located in the colonies: Keijo in Korea and Taihoku in Taiwan (Anderson, 1959, p. 126). The governing system and the organizational structu re of Keijo Imperial University were
6 of 17copied directly from Japanese Imperial Universities which were patterned after several Western countries' academic models and institutions particularly Germany (Altbach, 1989; Anderson, 1959; Cummings, 1990). Many ideas a nd models of higher education were taken from Western countries, including French administrative organizations and bureaucratic coordination systems, Pestalozzi's dev elopmental educational system, Herbartian moral centered-pedagogy, German universi ty models and structures for academia, Anglo-American ideas of utilitarian educa tion, American liberal arts philosophy and American pragmatism, especially John Dewey's educational philosophy (Altbach, 1989; Cummings, 1990, p. 73; Cummings, Am ano, & Kitamura, 1979; Nakayama, 1989, pp. 31-48).Chinese educational ideas based on Confucianism and Chinese classics also had a great impact on Japanese education. Indeed, after adoptin g many Western ideas of higher education, the Japanese incorporated them into the Shinto-Confucian tradition. Shigeru Nakayama (1989), a Japanese historian, asserts that "the first example of the window-shopping mode occurred in the late nineteent h century, whereas the involvement mode is best illustrated in the post-Wo rld War II Occupation period, in which reforms based on the American system were car ried out" (pp. 31-32). Japanese Imperial higher education adopted the cent ralized system of France, as well as a system of rank structure modeled on the German ap proach (Anderson, 1975, p. 21; Cummings, 1990, p. 113). Keijo Imperial University as a colonial institute was also shaped by a highly centralized organizational struc ture. The entire academic structure was set up in accordance with the Japanese prototyp e. Accordingly, the curriculum of Keijo Imperial University was almost identical to t he Japanese imperial universities and the majority of the academic staff and students wer e Japanese (The Government-General of Choson, 1935). Furthermore, educational administ rators and faculty members used the Japanese language for higher education, includi ng teaching and learning, textbooks, and communicating with faculty members. Not only di d the Japanese colonial administrators manage academic affairs and finance, but they also supervised closely all faculty members from the president to the administr ative and teaching staff (The Government-General of Choson, 1935, p. 486). The Ja panese administrators appointed all faculty regarding their working positions and f unctions, and controlled students' activities and academic freedom (Ibid).In terms of educational administration, the adminis trative system and structure of Keijo University was almost the same as that of the Japan ese university. Like the metropolitan imperial universities, Keijo University was hierarc hical in organization and had an authoritative system of rank structure. The univers ity administrators and the colonial authorities imposed strict rules, and hierarchical authority through royal rescripts, ordinances, policies, and directives. As Cummings ( 1990) points out, the system comprised a linear rank structure in which the head of the chair exerted absolute authority. Further, the academic ranks of professor assistant professor, instructor, assistant, and vice-assistant taught and assisted i n each field. In the selection of new faculty members, the most important criterion was a ge. The age rank structure based on Confucian ethical and social values solidified auth oritarian leadership of top and middle line senior administrators. Accordingly, the open-r ank system, which depended on cooperation and more objective evaluations, was not practiced. In this manner, the organizational structure of Kei jo Imperial University was maintained in a highly centralized formal system based on Shin to-Confucian values and norms. In
7 of 17addition, the Meiji Rescript was a blueprint of the Shinto-Confucian educational plan and a seed of institutional culture in colonial hig her education. Under Japanese colonial rule, Koreans were discrimi nated against either in institutional programs or training. The Japanese imperial adminis tration offered higher educational opportunities to the Japanese people. Few Koreans c ould access elite (Lee, 1984, pp. 367-68). Actually, Japanese administrators under re strictive administration and curriculum policies provided Koreans with few chanc es to enter higher educational institutes and did not educate them in advanced eng ineering and scientific courses. In 1925, at the college level, the proportion of Korea n enrollment was no more than one-twenty-sixth of Japanese and at the university level over one-one hundredth (Lee, 1984, p. 367). Japanese used two educational system s to discriminate between Japanese and Koreans: one was an educational system for pers ons using Japanese, and the other for persons using Korean. As Jin-Eun Kim (1988) poi nts out, the Japanese were allowed to operate within a separate privileged system, whi le the Koreans were subject to limitations in secondary and higher education.At that time, university admission of Korean people was strictly limited, and only very few Koreans, who were by and large the offspring of pro-Japanese persons or rich people, attended Keijo University. Many scions of p ro-Japanese and rich people enrolled at Japanese vocational or teachers' schools. Sungho Lee (1989) points that "the total enrollment of the Keijo Imperial University in 1934 in ten years since its establishment was 930, of which the Korean fraction was only 32 p ercent" (p. 95). Specifically, in 1939, there were only 0.27 Korean students in colleges and teachers' training seminaries for every 1,000 Koreans of the general population, and 7.20 Japanese students for every 1,000 Japanese in Korea. There w ere 0.0093 Korean students enrolled in university for every 1,000 Koreans, while 1.06 J apanese university students per 1,000 of Japanese population in Korea (Grajdanzev, 1944, p. 264; Sungho Lee, 1989, p. 94; UNESCO, 1954, p. 24). The higher educational school s under Japanese colonial rule were viewed by the nationalistic Koreans as trainin g institutes that cultivated pro-Japanese agents serving the Japanese imperialis ts. In fact, as Byung Hun Nam (1962) mentions, the primary motives of the establi shment of this university were to offer higher education for the Japanese in Korea, t o forestall growing Korean nationalism, and to indoctrinate the Korean elite a s pro-Japanese. Indeed, some of the Koreans who studied at Keijo University faithfully served Japanese imperialists as puppets or collaborators during the Japanese coloni al period (Chang, 1992; Seo, 1989). For instance, among 804 Korean graduates, 228 perso ns served at Japanese governmental and public offices (Chang, 1992, p. 39 2). In particular, during World War II (1937-1945), the Japanese regime announced three educational principles of its administration. These included profound understanding of the national mission, strengthening Japanese and Ko rean unity, and dedication to labor for the realization of national goals. Japanese mil itarism reached its peak following the establishment of the puppet government of Manchukuk The Japanese colonial administration demanded that the Korean people, inc luding Western missionary teachers and students, should pay homage to Shinto shrines ( Palmer, 1977, pp. 139-40). They forcibly demanded that the Koreans should use the J apanese language, instruct all classes in Japanese, and change their traditional f amily names to reflect Japanese styles (Meade, 1951, p. 213).
8 of 17From this, it can be concluded that the purposes of the Japanese colonial education were denationalization, vocationalization, discriminatio n, and assimilation, according to Han-Young Rim's (1952) analysis. Especially at the higher level, the ultimate goal of university education in Korea was to foster the pro -Japanese elite as faithful Japanese puppets. Furthermore, after the liberation in 1945, these Japanese agents ironically became the privileged class leading to a new Korean society (Chang, 1992; Cheong, 1985; Choi, 1990; Im, 1991; Lee, 1985; Lee, 1997; S eo, 1989). For example, during the 12 years Syngman Lee's administration (1948-1960), 83 percent of 115 Cabinet ministers were Japanese agents or collaborators und er Japanese colonial rule (Seo, 1989, p. 452).On the contrary, many patriotic or nationalistic Ko rean people participated in the army for national independence, and attended the native private schools, or Christian missionary institutes instead of Japanese institute s. More than half of the Korean students attended private Korean colleges or colleg iate schools, and many of them journeyed abroad 8 to access higher education (Lee, 1984, p. 368). In fact, many Confucian learned men were actually reluctant to ac cept Western education, resulting in their adherence to the Confucian educational tradit ion at village schools 9 .The Impact of the Japanese Colonial Education Syste m on Current Korean Higher EducationDuring the Japanese colonial period (1910-1945), Ja panese imperialists designed the educational system and administrative structure to reflect a Shinto-centered philosophy. This was used as a tool to aid the assimilation of Koreans to a more Japanese point of view and subverted the Korean national spirit. Shin to ideology was integrated into colonial higher education through emphasis on the w orship of Shinto shrines as well as Shinto-Confucian concepts in the college curriculum With the enforcement of the cultural assimilation policy and practice, Japanese colonizers used Shinto ideology as a means of strict disciplinary action against Koreans eliminating freedom of speech, clamping down on colleges or universities, and erad icating Korean nationalism. The resulting tensions among Korean nationalism, indepe ndence, and democracy were at the heart of Korean educational development in the twen tieth century. In addition, the Japanese authorities offered highe r education opportunities to some pro-Japanese Koreans to train as an elite group who could support the pro-Japanese militarism. Despite such an undesirable policy, the heritage of Japanese colonialism shaped the nature of the modern Korean universities and left both positive and negative outcomes within Korean higher education.The positive effects were that the Japanese colonia l government established several collegiate institutions including a university, end orsed public education for many Koreans regardless of social status and gender, int roduced Western technical and professional training through common higher or coll egiate level institutes, and transferred preferred administrative systems and pr actices. The administrative system and structure became models for modern Korean highe r education. Many Korean intellectuals who had studied at the colonial or Ja panese imperial universities played an important role in the foundation of contemporary Ko rean higher education (Banminjokmoonjeyeonkuso, 1993; Chang, 1992; Cheong 1985; Choi, 1990; Im,
9 of 171991) 10 Several negative results can also be noted. Firstly Japanese colonial authorities regarded higher education as a tool to foster pro-Japanese e lite agents who were able to practice Japanese colonial policy and Japanese imperialism b ased on Shinto-Confucianism. Secondly, the Japanese abolished the Confucian Nati onal Academy which had preserved the Korean academic tradition. Thirdly, Korean tert iary institutes under the Japanese colonial period lost opportunities to introduce Wes tern models which may have been well suited for Koreans' needs. Finally, some Korea n alumni of the Keijo Imperial University became pro-Japanese collaborators, resul ting in unfair or discriminatory practices for Korean educators (Banminjokmoonjeyeon kuso, 1993; Chang, 1992; Choi, 1990; Im, 1991; Lee, 1985) 11 In terms of educational administration, a closed or ganizational system--rigid and authoritative leadership, a hierarchical centralize d formal sturcture, closed communication networks, and administrator-centered education--has formed the organizational system and culture in contemporary K orean higher education. Moreover, several Western education systems, for example, "wi ndow shopping modes," adopted by the Japanese are the typical types of administrativ e systems in current Korean higher education. For instance, a centralized system and a linear rank structure are the backbones of the organizational systems in the Mini stry of Education and higher education institutions.In particular, the Meiji Rescript on Education prom ulgated by the Japanese Emperor Meiji in 1890 was a matrix of the Chart of National Education 12 promulgated for the recovery of national spirit and educational reform by the Park Administration in 1968. The Chart was a guiding principle in Korean educati on from the 1968 until the early 1980s. In addition, Keijo Imperial University estab lished by the Japanese Colonial Administration in 1924, was a precursor of the pres ent Seoul National University, and has produced a large number of bureaucrats and tale nts as leading individuals who play important roles in the present Korean society.From all of this, it can be concluded that the stor y of Japan's influence in Korea and the historical connection between these two traditional rivals is far more complex and nuanced than the paper would suggest. That history is replete with rich and telling ironies. The importance of Shinto, a syncretistic J apanese state religion borrowing elements not only of Chinese Confucianism but also of Korean Buddhism and Shamanism, is a good case in point. In addition, Ja pan undertook to introduce Western-style institutions and reforms, including t he elimination of such social practices as class discrimination. Furthermore, State-Shinto dictated an administrative structure in higher education as well as in government that enfo rced a strict stratification system and intellectual conformity, and even ossified the Japa nese colonialization of Korea 1910-1945.The Japanese reforms based on the ideology of State -Shinto met with general hostility from a broad cross-section of Koreans, who felt the ir traditional Confucian and national beliefs being threatened by the social-leveling ten dencies of western-style democracy. After 1910, Japanese colonizers took a harder line against Koreans, eliminating freedom of speech, the press, and association and clamping down on the universities. This caused public resistance, but around the issue of independ ence, not the restoration of
10 of 17western-style freedoms. The tensions between Korean nationalism, independence, and democracy are at the heart of the story of Korean e ducational development and yet remain largely unexplored. Clearly, the heritage of Japanese colonialism has contributed to the shaping of the administrative systems of the contemporary Korean universities and also has positively and negatively affected overall current Korean higher education.Notes1 In the history of Korea, Paekche Kingdom (18 BC-AD 660), as one of Three Kingdoms, was located in the southwest of the Korea n peninsula. Three Kingdoms were Koguryo (37 BC-AD 668) in the north; Silla (57 BC-A D 935) in the southeast; and Paekche. Silla unified the Korean peninsula. The ne xt epoch was Koryo Kingdom (918-1392), and the last Korean kingdom was Choson (1392-1910). 2 Like Nihongi's records (Vol. I, pp. 262-63), Kojiki also left Wangin (Wani)'s contribution in AD 285 (Aston notes that the year c orresponds to AD 405). Kojiki describes that the King of Paekche presented a man named Wani-kishi, and by this man he presented the Confucian Analects in ten volumes and the Thousand Character Essay in one volume (tr. Chamberlain, p. 306). In AD 552, the Nihongi records that the King of Paekche in Korea sent an embassy to Japan with a present to the Mikado of an image of Shaka Buddha in gold and copper, banners, umbrel las, and a number of volumes of the Buddhist Sutras (tr. W. A. Aston, pp. 59-60).3 Wontack Hong (1988), a Korean historian, claims th at "The dominant religion in Korea prior to the introduction of Buddhism and Con fucianism was Shamanism. This Shamanism seems to have been brought to Japan by th ose who migrated from Korea" (pp. 138-39). Ryusaku Tsunoda and William T. de Bar y (1964) also claim that "Shinto was not an indigenous religion...Shamanistic and an imistic practices similar to these of Shinto have also been found through northeast Asia, especially in Korea" (p. 21). In addition, Edwin O. Reischauer and Albert M. Craig ( 1973) assert that "[m]embers of the priestly class who performed the various rites...pr obably represented the Japanese variant of the shamans of Korea and Northeast Asia" (p. 473). Lastly, W. G. Aston (1905), a translator of Nihongi, insists that in pr ehistoric Shinto, there are definite traces of a Korean element in Shinto A Kara no Kami (God of Korea) was worshipped in the Imperial Palace (p. 1). Stuart D. B. Picken (1994) mentions that "Shinto has been described as the source of Japan's creative spirit on the one hand, and as an incorrigible source of militaristic nationalism on the other" (p 4).4 Ryobu Shinto means "Two-sided" or "Dual Shinto." A Popul ar Dictionary of Shinto (Bocking, 1996) notes, "An interpretation of Kami ( Gods) beliefs and practices developed in the Kamakura period (1185-1333) and ma intained by the Shingon School of esoteric Buddhism. A derivative theory that reve rsed the status of kami and Buddhas was proposed by Kanetomo Yoshida (1435-1511)" ( p. 145).5 After the Meiji Restoration of 1868, the affairs o f both Shinto and Buddhism were placed under the same set of official regulations o n April 21, 1872 (Holtom, 1938, p. 59). However, in February 1873, the Japanese govern ment proclaimed officially that it would protect the freedom of Shinto and Buddhism an d that it encouraged each of them to grow (Herbert, 1967, p. 51). Brian Bocking (1996 ) notes: "'State Shinto,' National
11 of 17Shinto,' or Shrine Shinto' was a concept defined r etrospectively and applied by the occupation authorities in the Shinto Directive of 1 945 to the post-Meiji religious system in Japan. In the Directive, State Shinto is defined as 'that branch of Shinto ( Kokka Shinto or Jinja Shinto) which by official acts of the Japanese Gov ernment has been differentiated from the religion of sect Shinto ( Shuha Shinto) and has been classified a non-religious cult commonly known as State Shinto, National Shinto, or Shrine Shinto'" (pp. 100-01).6 The Japanese Emperor Meiji's Rescript on Education notes: Know ye, Our Subjects:Our Imperial Ancestors have founded our Empire on a basis broad and everlasting, and have deeply and firmly implanted v irtue; Our Subjects ever united in loyalty and filial piety have from genera tion to generation illustrated the beauty thereof...Ye, Our Subjects, be filial to your parents, affectionate to your brothers and sisters; as husba nds and wives be harmonious, as friends true; bear yourselves in mod esty and moderation; extend your benevolence to all; pursue learning and cultivate arts, and thereby develop intellectual faculties and perfect moral powers; always respect the Constitution and observe the laws; shou ld emergency arise, offer yourselves courageously to the State; and thus guar d and maintain the prosperity of Our Imperial Throne coeval with heave n and earth....(Sansom, trans.,1950, p. 464)7 With the Meiji Rescript, the Educational Ordinance was a fundamental frame for governing colonial education in Korea until August 15, 1945, although the Japanese colonial administration revised and enacted several educational ordinances in 1922, 1938, and 1943 (Cheong, 1985; Jin-Eun Kim, 1988; Na m, 1962; Yu, 1992).8 In 1931, 3,639 Korean students were enrolled in Ja panese tertiary institutions, whereas as many as 493 Koreans were studying in the United States (Lee, 1984, p. 368).9 In the history of Korea, Confucian education tradi tionally maintained two streams from the Three Kingdoms period to the early twentieth ce ntury. One stream was of national institutions, and the other stream was of civil or village schools. The national Confucian institute, Seongkyunkwan, was compulsorily abolishe d by the Japanese imperialists in the early twentieth century, but many Confucian civ il or village schools actually existed in the provincial areas during the Japanese colonia l period.10 When the United States Military Government organiz ed Korean Committee on Education in September 1945 in order to build a new Korean education, the majority of committee members were pro-Japanese collaborators w ho studied in Japanese imperial universities during the Japanese occupation (Banmin jokmo-onjeyeonkuso, 1993; Cheong, 1985, pp. 85-88; Im, 1991). Furthermore, ma ny graduates of the colonial and imperial universities became faculty members of the new university when Keijo University evolved into the Seoul National Universi ty in 1946 (Choi, 1990, p. 51).11 Many Korean alumni became Japanese governmental or public officers and suffered
12 of 17the Korean people (Chang, 1992; Lee, 1985). For ins tance, H. N. Lee, an alumnus of Korean Imperial University, was a county magistrate who drafted young Koreans for the Japanese Pacific War under the rule of Japanese imp erialism, but he became a professor and president at a university in Seoul under the co ntemporary Korean government (Chang, 1992, p. 348). B. D. Jeon, as a public offi cer in Kyungki province, suppressed many patriotic Korean nationalists in the Japanese colonial period (Chang, 1992, p. 394).12 The Chart states: We have been born into this land, charged with the historic mission of regenerating the nation...With the sincere mind and strong body impr oving ourselves in learning and arts, developing the innate faculty of each...we will cul tivate our creative power and pioneer spirit. We will give the foremost consideration to public good and order, set a value of efficiency and quality, and inheriting the traditio n or mutual assistance rooted in love, respect and faithfulness, will promote the spirit o f fair and warm cooperation... The love of the country and fellow countrymen together with the firm belief....we pledge ourselves to make new history with untiring effort and collective wisdom of the whole nation. (Ministry of Education, 1976, p. 3)ReferencesAltbach, Philip G. (1989). Twisted Roots: The Weste rn Impact on Asian Higher Education. Higher Education 18 : 9-29. Anderson, Ronald S. (1959). Japan: Three Epochs of Modern Education Washington D. C.: United States Government Printing Office of Education. Anderson, Ronald S. (1975). Education in Japan Washington D. C.: U. S. Government Printing Office.Aston, W. G. (1905). Shinto (The Way of the Gods ). New York: Longmans, Green, and Co.Banminjokmoonjeyeonkuso (1993). Chinilpa 99 In (99 Pro-Japanese Koreans) 1, 2, 3. Seoul, Korea: Dolbege.Beauchang, Edward R., & Vardaman, James M. Jr. (Eds .). (1994). Japanese Education Since 1945: A Documentary Study Armonk, New York: M. E. Sharpe Inc. Bocking, Brian. (1996). A Popular Dictionary of Shinto Surrey: Curzon Press. Chang, S. Y. (1992). Ilje-ui Kyungsung-Jekuk Daehak Seolipkwa Woonyoug ( The Establishment and Management of Keijo Imperial Univ ersity ), Hankuk-Dokrip-Woondongsa-Yeonku, Vol. 6 pp. 347-408. Cheong, Jae-cheol. (1985 ). Ilje-ui Dae-hankuk-Sikminji-Kyoyuk-Jeong-cheksa (A History of Colonial Educational Policy in Korea und er Japanese Imperialism) Seoul, Korea: Iljisa.Choi, Hojin. (1990, August). Kyungseongdae Jekeon-gwa Kukdaean-padong-ui
13 of 17Oajung-eseo ( Rebuilt of Kyungseong University under the Vortex o f a Kukdaean Wave ). Shin-Dong-A, 8 248-60. Cummings, William K. (1990). The Changing Academic Marketplace and University Reform in Japan. New York: Garland Publishing. Cummings, William K., Amano, Ikuo & Kitamura, Kazuy uki. (1979). Changes in the Japanese University: A Comparative Perspective New York, New York: Praeger Publishers.Cynn, Heung-wo. (1920). The Rebirth of Korea New York: Abingdon Press. Grajdanzev, Andrew J. (1944). Modern Korea New York: The John Day Company. Herbert, Jean. (1967). Shinto: At the Fountain-Head of Japan New York: Stein and Day.Holtom, D. C. (1938). The National Faith of Japan New York: E. P. Dutton & Company.Hong, Wontack. (1988). Relationship Between Korea and Japan in Early Perio d: Paekche and Yamato Wa. Seoul, Korea: Ilsisa. Horio, Teruhisa. (1988). Educational Thought and Ideology in Modern Japan: S tate Authority and Intellectual Freedom. (Steven Platzer Ed., & Trans.). Tokyo, Japan: University of Tokyo Press.Im, Chong-Kuk (1991). Silok Chinilpa (Authentic Stories of Pro-Japanese K oreans) Banminjokmoonjeyeonkuso (Ed.), Seoul, Korea: Dolbeg e. Keenlyesids, Hugh & Thomas, A. F. (1937). History of Japanese Education. Tokyo, Japan: The Hoku Sei-do Shoten.Kim, Jin-Eun. (1988). South Korea. In George Thomas Kurian (Ed.), World Education Encyclopedia, Vol. II. New York: Facts on File Publications. Kojiki (Records of Ancient Matters ). (1973). (Basil Hall Chamberlain, Trans.). Tokyo, Japan: The Asiatic Society of Japan.Lee, Chong Sik. (1965). The Politics of Korean Nationalism Berkeley: University of California Press.Lee, Jeong-Kyu. (1997). A Study of the Development of Contemporary Korean H igher Education, Unpublished Ph. D. dissertation, The University of Texas at Austin. Lee, Kibaek. (1984). A New History of Korea (Edward W. Wagner & Edward J. Shultz, Trans.). Cambridge: Harvard-Yenching Institute.Lee, Kidong (1985). Iljeha-eui Hankukin Kwanrideul (Korean Officers und er the Japanese Imperialism) Shin-dong-A, 3, 472-75. Lee, Sungho. (1989). The Emergence of the Modern Un iversity in Korea. Higher Education, 18 87-116.
14 of 17Lee, Sung-hwa. (1958). The Social and Political Factors Affecting Korean E ducation (1885-1950). Unpublished Doctoral dissertation, University of P ittsburgh. Longford, Joseph H. (1911). The Story of Korea London: Adelphi Terrace. Maki, John M. (1945). Japanese Militarism New York: Alfred A. Knopf. Meade, E. Grant. (1951). American Military Government In Korea New York: Columbia University Press.Minisry of Education (1976). Education in Korea Seoul, Korea. Nam, Byung Hun. (1962). Educational Reorganization in South Korea under the United States Army Military Government, 1945-1948 Unpublished Doctoral dissertation, University of Pittsburgh.Nakayama, Shigeru. (1989). Independence and Choice: Western Impacts on Japanese Higher Education Higher Education, 18 31-48. Nihongi (Chronicles of Japan from the Earliest Times to AD 697 ). (1896). Vols. I & II (W. G. Aston, Trans.). London: The Japan Society.Palmer, Spencer J. (1977). Korean Christians and th e Shinto Shrine Issue. In C. I. Eugine Kim & Doretha E. Mortimore (Eds.), Korea's Response to Japan: The Colonial Period 1910-1945 Western Michigan University: The Center for Korea n Studies. Picken, Stuart D. B. (1994). Essentials of Shinto: An Analytical Guide to Princi pal Teachings. Westport, Connecticut: Greenwood Press. Reader, Ian, Andreasen, Esben, & Stefansson, Finn. (1993). Japanese Religions: Past and Present. Sandgate, Folkestone, Kant, England: Japan Library Reischaure, Edwin O., & Craig, Albert M. (1973). Japan: Tradition & Transformation, Boston: Houghton Mifflin.Rim, Han-Young. (1952). Development of Higher Education in Korea during the Japanese Occupation (1910-1945). Unpublished Ed. D. dissertation. Teachers College, Columbia University.Sansom, G. B. (1950). The Western World and Japan New York: Alfred A. Knopf. Seo, Byung-Uk. (1989, October). Minjok-Jeongki Salyeoja-hammida ( We Should Revive A National Spirit). Shin-Dong-A, 10 444-455. The Government-General of Choson. (1921). Annual Report on Reforms and Progress in Chosen (1918-21). Keijo. The Government-General of Choson. (1935). A History of 25 Year Administration. Keijo.The Korean National Commission for UNESCO [KNCU]. ( 1960). UNESCO Korean Survey Seoul, Korea: The Dong-A Publishing Co., Ltd.
15 of 17 Tsunetsugu, Muraoka. (1964). Studies in Shinto Thought (Delmer M. Brown & James T. Araki, Trans.). Japan: Ministry of Education.Tsunoda, Ryusaku & de Bary, William T., & Keene, Do nald. (1964). Sources of Japanese Tradition, Volume I. New York: Columbia University Press. Underwood, Horace H. (1926). Modern Education in Korea New York, New York: International Press.UNESCO. (1954). Rebuilding Education in the Republic of Korea Frankfurt am Main: Johannes Weisbecker.Yu, Bongho. (1992). Hankuk Kyoyuk Gwajeongsa Yunku ( A Study of the History of Curricula in Korea ). Seoul, Korea: Kyohak-yunkusa.About the AuthorJeong-Kyu Lee Associate Research Fellow The Division of School Education Research Korean Educational Development Institute (KEDI)Joint Professor of Higher Education Administration Hongik University Seoul, Korea.Phone: (02) 3460 0382; Fax : (02) 3460-0117 E-mail: email@example.comThe author received a Doctor of Philosophy degree i n Higher Education Administration at the Graduate School of The University of Texas a t Austin in the United States of America. He is Associate Research Fellow in the Div ision of Educational Policy Research at the Korean Educational Development Inst itute, a Korean government-funded research institute, in Seoul, and Joint Professor at the Graduate School of Educational Management at Hongik Universi ty in Seoul, South Korea. His work has been published in a variety of national an d international journals. His research interests are organizational culture and leadership social and ethical values, and educational policy analysis.Copyright 2002 by the Education Policy Analysis ArchivesThe World Wide Web address for the Education Policy Analysis Archives is epaa.asu.edu General questions about appropriateness of topics o r particular articles may be addressed to the Editor, Gene V Glass, firstname.lastname@example.org or reach him at College of Education, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ 8 5287-2411. The Commentary Editor is Casey D. Cobb: email@example.com .EPAA Editorial Board
16 of 17 Michael W. Apple University of Wisconsin Greg Camilli Rutgers University John Covaleskie Northern Michigan University Alan Davis University of Colorado, Denver Sherman Dorn University of South Florida Mark E. Fetler California Commission on Teacher Credentialing Richard Garlikov firstname.lastname@example.org Thomas F. Green Syracuse University Alison I. Griffith York University Arlen Gullickson Western Michigan University Ernest R. House University of Colorado Aimee Howley Ohio University Craig B. Howley Appalachia Educational Laboratory William Hunter University of Calgary Daniel Kalls Ume University Benjamin Levin University of Manitoba Thomas Mauhs-Pugh Green Mountain College Dewayne Matthews Education Commission of the States William McInerney Purdue University Mary McKeown-Moak MGT of America (Austin, TX) Les McLean University of Toronto Susan Bobbitt Nolen University of Washington Anne L. Pemberton email@example.com Hugh G. Petrie SUNY Buffalo Richard C. Richardson New York University Anthony G. Rud Jr. Purdue University Dennis Sayers California State UniversityStanislaus Jay D. Scribner University of Texas at Austin Michael Scriven firstname.lastname@example.org Robert E. Stake University of IllinoisUC Robert Stonehill U.S. Department of Education David D. Williams Brigham Young University EPAA Spanish Language Editorial BoardAssociate Editor for Spanish Language Roberto Rodrguez Gmez Universidad Nacional Autnoma de Mxico email@example.com Adrin Acosta (Mxico) Universidad de Guadalajaraadrianacosta@compuserve.com J. Flix Angulo Rasco (Spain) Universidad de Cdizfelix.firstname.lastname@example.org
17 of 17 Teresa Bracho (Mxico) Centro de Investigacin y DocenciaEconmica-CIDEbracho dis1.cide.mx Alejandro Canales (Mxico) Universidad Nacional Autnoma deMxicocanalesa@servidor.unam.mx Ursula Casanova (U.S.A.) Arizona State Universitycasanova@asu.edu Jos Contreras Domingo Universitat de Barcelona Jose.Contreras@doe.d5.ub.es Erwin Epstein (U.S.A.) Loyola University of ChicagoEepstein@luc.edu Josu Gonzlez (U.S.A.) Arizona State Universityjosue@asu.edu Rollin Kent (Mxico)Departamento de InvestigacinEducativa-DIE/CINVESTAVrkent@gemtel.com.mx email@example.com Mara Beatriz Luce (Brazil)Universidad Federal de Rio Grande do Sul-UFRGSlucemb@orion.ufrgs.brJavier Mendoza Rojas (Mxico)Universidad Nacional Autnoma deMxicojaviermr@servidor.unam.mxMarcela Mollis (Argentina)Universidad de Buenos Airesmmollis@filo.uba.ar Humberto Muoz Garca (Mxico) Universidad Nacional Autnoma deMxicohumberto@servidor.unam.mxAngel Ignacio Prez Gmez (Spain)Universidad de Mlagaaiperez@uma.es Daniel Schugurensky (Argentina-Canad)OISE/UT, Canadadschugurensky@oise.utoronto.ca Simon Schwartzman (Brazil)Fundao Instituto Brasileiro e Geografiae Estatstica firstname.lastname@example.org Jurjo Torres Santom (Spain)Universidad de A Coruajurjo@udc.es Carlos Alberto Torres (U.S.A.)University of California, Los Angelestorres@gseisucla.edu