View in EDS HTML Full Text PDF Full Text

Holding Tension and Navigating Dilemma in Multicultural Education in South Korea: Towards Pedagogical Third Space

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Title: Holding Tension and Navigating Dilemma in Multicultural Education in South Korea: Towards Pedagogical Third Space
Language: English
Authors: Younkyung Hong (ORCID 0000-0002-9334-0420), Eunhye Cho, Kegan Mixdorf
Source: Pedagogy, Culture and Society. 2025 33(1):287-304.
Availability: Routledge. Available from: Taylor & Francis, Ltd. 530 Walnut Street Suite 850, Philadelphia, PA 19106. Tel: 800-354-1420; Tel: 215-625-8900; Fax: 215-207-0050; Web site: http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals
Peer Reviewed: Y
Page Count: 18
Publication Date: 2025
Document Type: Journal Articles
Reports - Research
Education Level: Elementary Education
Descriptors: Foreign Countries, Multicultural Education, Problems, Teacher Attitudes, Korean Culture, History Instruction, Barriers, Student Diversity, Community Problems, Social Environment, Time Perspective, Elementary School Teachers, Public Schools, Government Employees, Educational Policy, Teaching Conditions, Federal Regulation, Teaching Experience, Disadvantaged, Power Structure, Elementary School Students
Geographic Terms: South Korea (Seoul)
DOI: 10.1080/14681366.2023.2257708
ISSN: 1468-1366
1747-5104
Abstract: We take up this qualitative inquiry as a means of practicing and advocating for a deeper understanding of South Korean teachers' pedagogy and perspectives in multicultural education, moving beyond surface-level critiques. Through the lens of postcolonial theory, this study highlights how government-led multicultural education places teachers in a position where they participate in the othering and exclusion of multicultural students. Simultaneously, we recognise that teachers contribute their professional insights to envision a Third Space in their practice. This paper also sheds light on the challenges faced when teaching Korean history in classrooms with multicultural students. Overall, this study provides insights into the intricate nature of the hybrid pedagogical space that has evolved historically and socially in South Korea, as well as its interconnectedness with global relationships. Given the professional hybridity of South Korean teachers, we believe that developing a new consciousness within this hybrid space is a crucial starting point for empowering teachers to reflect on their pedagogy and practices when working with students from diverse backgrounds.
Abstractor: As Provided
Entry Date: 2024
Accession Number: EJ1453450
Database: ERIC
Full text is not displayed to guests.
FullText Links:
  – Type: pdflink
    Url: https://content.ebscohost.com/cds/retrieve?content=AQICAHj0k_4E0hTGH8RJwT4gCJyBsGNe_WN95AvKlDbXJGqwxwEzSMkIGk20SCGkFbULnVw7AAAA4zCB4AYJKoZIhvcNAQcGoIHSMIHPAgEAMIHJBgkqhkiG9w0BBwEwHgYJYIZIAWUDBAEuMBEEDLje7ERQmgPOJeQaZAIBEICBm4Pf0mxY_0ceewW8IHgNR5nd_yF3xwO5c8296vxgc2sPi3b5Uz2LeZOKqG4bcY1zHM-6lUuT_ay225VlURpw1QC2eXRyqfCtQ5eU_0Q3eJl-7zXsTCOnsiox3-zavMeyDX0q_uYPS1VtO8ZgWqEvfrvPOMrFUb-j1K4swLCEPqP3bDPYyH6-GRJFiYDXWCjkujr9RK6pUecm766K
Text:
  Availability: 1
  Value: <anid>AN0181661915;nt901jan.25;2024Dec17.05:19;v2.2.500</anid> <title id="AN0181661915-1">Holding tension and navigating dilemma in multicultural education in South Korea: Towards pedagogical third space </title> <p>We take up this qualitative inquiry as a means of practicing and advocating for a deeper understanding of South Korean teachers' pedagogy and perspectives in multicultural education, moving beyond surface-level critiques. Through the lens of postcolonial theory, this study highlights how government-led multicultural education places teachers in a position where they participate in the othering and exclusion of multicultural students. Simultaneously, we recognise that teachers contribute their professional insights to envision a Third Space in their practice. This paper also sheds light on the challenges faced when teaching Korean history in classrooms with multicultural students. Overall, this study provides insights into the intricate nature of the hybrid pedagogical space that has evolved historically and socially in South Korea, as well as its interconnectedness with global relationships. Given the professional hybridity of South Korean teachers, we believe that developing a new consciousness within this hybrid space is a crucial starting point for empowering teachers to reflect on their pedagogy and practices when working with students from diverse backgrounds.</p> <p>Keywords: Multicultural education; social justice pedagogy; teacher education; postcolonial theory; whiteness; post qualitative inquiry; phenomenological methodology</p> <hd id="AN0181661915-2">Introduction</hd> <p>Social justice-oriented teacher education guides teachers to engage reflective practices and critical perspectives in their daily pedagogy responding to the diverse multicultural identities and experiences of their students (Leonardo [<reflink idref="bib40" id="ref1">40</reflink>]; Sensoy and DiAngelo [<reflink idref="bib52" id="ref2">52</reflink>]). Despite the Republic of Korea's (referred to as South Korea hereafter) public education's interest and effort in supporting multicultural students and families in public education over 16 years, their educational approaches often result in (re)producing the marginalisation of students and families with minoritised cultural and immigrant backgrounds. Meanwhile, studies have addressed how South Korean public school teachers are forced to participate in multicultural education with little space to develop their own curriculum and pedagogies relevant to their students' and school contexts (Kim [<reflink idref="bib33" id="ref3">33</reflink>]; Misco [<reflink idref="bib47" id="ref4">47</reflink>]). Um and Cho ([<reflink idref="bib62" id="ref5">62</reflink>]) explicate that the issues and problems of multicultural education in South Korea need to be examined at the intersection of social justice education, neoliberalism and ethnocentric nationalism. This approach allows us to consider South Korean teachers' ambivalent perspectives, confusion and anxiety in their multicultural education practice because of the conflicting ideologies given to them (Um and Cho [<reflink idref="bib62" id="ref6">62</reflink>]). In addition, understanding South Korean public school teachers' position as civil servants adds an additional perspective from which to investigate how their positionality affects their unwavering injection of ethnocentric national identity and values in their teaching practices.</p> <p>Kim and Choi ([<reflink idref="bib37" id="ref7">37</reflink>]) point out that the current government-led South Korean multicultural education, based on a conventional and liberal approach to multicultural education, has failed to address structural and systemic oppressions and exclusions in South Korean society and education. Since liberal multicultural education mainly focuses on cultural pluralism and tolerance of minoritised cultures, South Korean multicultural education discourse has evolved with little recognition of structural racism, inequity and South Korean privilege in society and the classroom. Leonardo ([<reflink idref="bib40" id="ref8">40</reflink>]) notes that multicultural education focuses heavily on minoritised students without problematising the oppressive power that individual people in the dominant group embody and enact, and this places an extra burden on multicultural students and families. In this regard, scholars concerned with a critical approach to multicultural education have argued the urgency of shifting the scholarly discourse and practice towards exploring and addressing dominant and oppressive norms in teaching practices and among teachers (Kim and Choi [<reflink idref="bib37" id="ref9">37</reflink>]; Sleeter [<reflink idref="bib55" id="ref10">55</reflink>]). This strategy of unpacking and disrupting dominant power structures is an important manoeuvre as it aims to dismantle the fundamentally oppressive systems and norms in postcolonial and neoliberal South Korean society and education which have contributed to some people becoming and/or maintaining power and privileged positions.</p> <p>In this post-qualitative informed phenomenological inquiry, we respond to the call for a critical and justice-oriented approach to multicultural education and understanding teacher practices within a social context and discourse. We purposefully insert this study into conversations about justice-oriented teacher education and seek ways to support South Korean teachers' engagement with the topics and practices related to culturally responsive and equitable teaching in multicultural South Korea. In taking this route, guided by postcolonial theory, we also challenge the prevalence of analysing multicultural education curricula and practices through U.S.-based multicultural education scholarship that makes it difficult to capture unique aspects of multicultural education and teaching practice in South Korea. This work is grounded in the perspective that various axes and dimensions of power relations inform curriculum and pedagogy, and classroom teachers must learn how to navigate various ideologies and expectations involved in their professional and social positionalities (Asher [<reflink idref="bib5" id="ref11">5</reflink>]). Through the lived experiences of South Korean elementary teachers, we theorise how the teachers navigate and construct their Third Space. This exploration highlights the intricate and multifaceted nature of this space, encompassing teachers' hybrid roles, the interplay between policy and pedagogy, and the sociopolitical context of postcolonial South Korea.</p> <p>In this process, we draw on postcolonial theory as a theory that prompts critical questions about South Korean teachers' dominant positionalities, perspectives and power they hold in their understanding of multicultural education and practice in postcolonial South Korea. Our analysis starts by illustrating how the phenomenon of multicultural education in South Korea takes shape in the teachers' lived experiences and understanding of multicultural education. Then, we focus on examining the teachers' critical engagement with multicultural education and its limitations. The last section of analysis highlights the teachers' dilemma with teaching history that represents the complex and complicated nature of justice-oriented teaching practice in postcolonial and neoliberal South Korea. Inspired by the postcolonial concept of 'Third Space', we suggest transformative possibilities for multicultural education to become a pedagogical Third Space where teachers develop their critical and justice-oriented pedagogy while developing their 'hybrid consciousness'.</p> <p>The context of this study is multicultural education in South Korea. The Korean Ministry of Education (Ministry of Education [<reflink idref="bib44" id="ref12">44</reflink>]) describes multicultural education as having been initiated as a response to the increasing needs and demands of education for children from immigration and intercultural/national marriages. They set up 'measures for educational support for children from multicultural families' in 2006, focusing on administrative and policy-level support to include these children in the public education system. In 2012, the Korean language curriculum and education programme started, and South Korea selected and started operating a 'multicultural education policy school' to support and ensure equal educational opportunities for children from multicultural families (Ministry of Education [<reflink idref="bib44" id="ref13">44</reflink>]). The 'Basic Plan for Multicultural Education' issued by the Seoul Metropolitan Office of Education ([<reflink idref="bib53" id="ref14">53</reflink>]) includes enhancing all members of educational communities' multicultural sensitivity and global citizenship as one of the rationales of multicultural education. However, it only requires two hours of multicultural education incorporated into the public school curriculum per school year, leaving the responsibility of further multicultural education to individual teachers and schools. We provide a more vivid and situated illustration of South Korean multicultural education as we engage questions and dialogue in the following analysis section.</p> <hd id="AN0181661915-3">Theoretical framework</hd> <p></p> <hd id="AN0181661915-4">South Korea's multicultural policies: sociopolitical shifts and economic imperatives</hd> <p>Throughout the history of postcolonial and post-war Korea, South Korean society has predominantly perceived itself as insular, monocultural, and monoethnic. This strong national identity was believed to make the nation stronger and safeguard it against foreign invasion. This sociopolitical ideology prevailed in modern South Korea until the late 1980s when several factors, such as the end of authoritarian rule, the hosting of the Olympics in Seoul, and joining the United Nations, compelled the country to acknowledge and address its existence as a multicultural community on the global stage (Draudt [<reflink idref="bib12" id="ref15">12</reflink>]). Consequently, the government-initiated efforts to foster multiculturalism in the early 2000s, aspiring to create a 'Global Korea' (Draudt [<reflink idref="bib13" id="ref16">13</reflink>]).</p> <p>Simultaneously, South Korea's status as a neoliberal country that emerged during the Cold War significantly influenced the contours of its multicultural policy. The primary motivation behind this push for multiculturalism was economic, with foreign labour seen as a means to strengthening the economy. This emphasis had secondary implications, as 'through regulated immigration, the state [could] grow its workforce while withholding full citizenship' (Draudt [<reflink idref="bib13" id="ref17">13</reflink>], 161). This message is also directly and indirectly conveyed in South Korean national curricula. Moreover, national sociopolitical and educational policies place more emphasis on monocultural assimilation rather than diversity, equity, and inclusion (Song [<reflink idref="bib57" id="ref18">57</reflink>]). These two aspects have created tension, as Shin ([<reflink idref="bib54" id="ref19">54</reflink>]) points out that children from multi-ethnic families are socially perceived as both valuable labour resources and potential destabilising elements in society. This perception is evident in multicultural education policies and curricula, particularly in how multiculturalism and multicultural/ethnic individuals are represented in textbooks. Draudt ([<reflink idref="bib12" id="ref20">12</reflink>]) explains that 'Korean education outlines a narrative of continued [monoethnic] descent on the Korean Peninsula for five thousand years' (<reflink idref="bib15" id="ref21">15</reflink>).</p> <p>The status of public school teachers as civil servants, which requires them to maintain political neutrality while following government policies and order, has limited teachers' abilities to question the policy and take initiatives in multicultural education. In recent years, however, efforts have been made and progress has been achieved in adopting more inclusive teaching methods for students from non-Korean cultural backgrounds, driven by both teachers and administrators. Research in this field has also seen significant development. However, a major obstacle remains overcoming the unconscious biases of educators that stem from an environment that heavily values cultural hegemony (Um and Cho [<reflink idref="bib62" id="ref22">62</reflink>]).</p> <hd id="AN0181661915-5">Postcolonial theory</hd> <p>In this study, postcolonial theory is used to help us view multicultural education in South Korean public elementary schools within its sociopolitical and cultural contexts and to explore its relationship with colonialism, imperialism and neoliberalism (Young [<reflink idref="bib67" id="ref23">67</reflink>]). In his book 'The Location of Culture', Bhabha ([<reflink idref="bib8" id="ref24">8</reflink>]) explicates postcolonial theory using the idea of 'beyond' to highlight that this field of study takes up a complex and complicated understanding of the postcolonial state and identity. Bhabha ([<reflink idref="bib8" id="ref25">8</reflink>]) clarifies that 'the "beyond" is neither a new horizon nor a leaving behind of the past [...] For there is a sense of disorientation, a disturbance of direction, in the "beyond"' (<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref26">1</reflink>). Considering this articulation, postcolonial theory obliges scholars to seek and create liberatory possibilities by examining complex features of identities, cultures, societies and relationships that have been negotiated through colonialism, imperialism and modernisation.</p> <p>Therefore, Bhabha's ([<reflink idref="bib8" id="ref27">8</reflink>]) postcolonial concept of a Third Space – the conceptual interstice as in-between space – needs to be understood as a generative space, rather than a static space, where individual and collective identities, values and perspectives interact, collide and are negotiated from time to time. What makes a postcolonial space a transformative in-between space is a practice of positioning ordinary practices and usual power relations as 'unhomely' (Bhabha [<reflink idref="bib8" id="ref28">8</reflink>]). Postcolonial scholars (e.g., Kanu [<reflink idref="bib31" id="ref29">31</reflink>]; Said [<reflink idref="bib51" id="ref30">51</reflink>]; Spivak [<reflink idref="bib59" id="ref31">59</reflink>]; Viruru [<reflink idref="bib64" id="ref32">64</reflink>]) consider this perception and practice an imperative part of reflective postcolonial work, as it helps uncover dominant perspectives and relationships normalised by colonialists' unfinished colonial and imperialist agendas. In this study, this process enables us to locate the ordinary and taken-for-granted narratives and discourse of multicultural education and multicultural Others in the South Korean context (Said [<reflink idref="bib51" id="ref33">51</reflink>]; Weis [<reflink idref="bib65" id="ref34">65</reflink>]).</p> <p>Postcolonial ambivalence guides us to be patient, not only with seemingly contradictory features of spatiality, practices and identities, but also with malleable processes that take shape and shift over time. Ahmed ([<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref35">1</reflink>]) suggests that, in the postcolonial world, both the colonisers and colonised have embodied the colonial narratives of marginalising and devaluing Others' cultures, values and beings. This embodied coloniality both intentionally and unintentionally participates in legitimising the supremacy of colonisers through producing a conceptualisation of Others as strangers and associating Others' bodies with negative traits, which also impact the Other's understanding of self (Ahmed [<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref36">1</reflink>]; Bhabha [<reflink idref="bib8" id="ref37">8</reflink>]). As for the context of South Korea, understanding and accepting the ambivalent state of postcolonial theory, which Bhabha ([<reflink idref="bib8" id="ref38">8</reflink>]) calls 'hybridity', enables a complicated understanding of postcolonial South Korea and its ambivalent perception and emotionality tied to the U.S. and Japan, the two main countries that have historically and politically infringed its sovereignty.</p> <p>Following the scholars (e.g., Anzaldúa [<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref39">4</reflink>]; Asher [<reflink idref="bib6" id="ref40">6</reflink>]; Hudson [<reflink idref="bib27" id="ref41">27</reflink>]; Kanu [<reflink idref="bib31" id="ref42">31</reflink>]; Macgilchrist et al. [<reflink idref="bib42" id="ref43">42</reflink>]) who have exemplified a Third Space as their aspiration for postcolonial practices, we also draw on the Third Space to map out transformative possibilities for multicultural education in South Korea. In postcolonial theory, Bhabha ([<reflink idref="bib8" id="ref44">8</reflink>]) illustrates the Third Space: it 'constitutes the discursive conditions of enunciation that ensure that the meaning and symbols of culture have no primordial unity or fixity (<reflink idref="bib55" id="ref45">55</reflink>)'. Based on this, Third Space can be understood as the possibilities and practices of rereading, rehistoricising and retranslating ordinary stories, relationships and values by attending to the colonial and imperial processes still underway. Asher [<reflink idref="bib5" id="ref46">5</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib6" id="ref47">6</reflink>]) reminds us that borderline discourses and practices unavoidably create tensions, and we should take negotiating the tensions as the practice of reimagining and moving 'beyond'. As Fanon ([<reflink idref="bib16" id="ref48">16</reflink>]) values the indeterminate space that enables us to be less obsessive about a restrictive understanding of cultural identity, the fluidity of the Third Space enables people to endure hybrid identities and resist the dehumanisation of Others in the name of unity and national security (Fanon [<reflink idref="bib16" id="ref49">16</reflink>]).</p> <hd id="AN0181661915-6">Methodological approach</hd> <p>The focus of this study has been to prompt critical questions and engage in dialogue about multicultural education in South Korea through and with teachers' lived experiences. To analyse and reflect on the intricate layers and complexities of multicultural education in South Korea, specifically the challenges arising from the interplay between majority and minoritised communities and individuals, we employ a methodological approach inspired by post-qualitative phenomenology. Drawing from Ahmed's ([<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref50">2</reflink>]) phenomenological work, we utilise phenomenological inquiry to delve into the lived experiences of multicultural education within the sociohistorical context of South Korea. Our focus here is on understanding how these experiences have been shaped by social and historical factors, rather than perceiving multicultural education as a static and predetermined phenomenon. As Le Grange ([<reflink idref="bib39" id="ref51">39</reflink>]) explicates about the in-becoming state of systems, thoughts and language, we view South Korean multicultural education as a phenomenon that is always changing and moving.</p> <p>In this research, the utilisation of post-qualitative inquiry offers valuable ontological and epistemological perspectives within a phenomenological study. This approach enables us to acknowledge and embrace the inherent limitations and incompleteness of data, while also recognising the significance of the process of retelling and remembering teachers' lived experiences with multicultural education. Post-qualitative inquiry, a field of qualitative research introduced and named by St.Pierre ([<reflink idref="bib60" id="ref52">60</reflink>]), challenges the conventional boundaries of qualitative inquiry, such as phenomenology, by surpassing the constraints imposed by the dominant positivistic understanding of scientific research (Le Grange [<reflink idref="bib39" id="ref53">39</reflink>]). A post-qualitative approach encourages the utilisation of theories as tools to provoke new insights and perspectives, allowing us to delve into the unexplored realms of multicultural education (St.Pierre [<reflink idref="bib60" id="ref54">60</reflink>]). By doing so, we aim to shift the prevailing dialogue, which predominantly focuses on critiquing individual teachers and marginalised individuals and communities, towards a more complex and complicated understanding of systemic and structural oppressions and dehumanisation.</p> <p>With post-qualitative inquiry, post-intentional phenomenology creates a generative space for intercultural research and collaborations in understanding multicultural education in South Korea. Vagle ([<reflink idref="bib63" id="ref55">63</reflink>]) suggests that the practice of phenomenological inquiry involves 'remaining open, flexible, and contemplative in our thinking, acting, and decision making' (135–136). This approach encourages researchers to engage in reflective and transformative practices to better understand a phenomenon (Y. Hong [<reflink idref="bib26" id="ref56">26</reflink>]). Considering the interculturality of the research topic – multicultural education in South Korea – and the collaborative relationships and processes of this project – researcher positionalities – this methodological and philosophical basis orients us to value and highlight ideas, practice, relationships and the ways of being of those who have been undervalued in the Western/Eurocentric intellectual world (Hong [<reflink idref="bib25" id="ref57">25</reflink>]).</p> <hd id="AN0181661915-7">Context</hd> <p>This post-qualitative informed phenomenological study draws on semi-structured interviews with six public elementary school teachers in South Korea. Korean teachers are classified as educational civil servants. According to the Korean Constitution, public servants are 'volunteers for the entire nation and are responsible to the people', and their status and political neutrality are guaranteed by law (Choi and Park [<reflink idref="bib9" id="ref58">9</reflink>]; Oh [<reflink idref="bib50" id="ref59">50</reflink>]). These provisions ensure the stable status of teachers but also impose restrictions on holding concurrent positions, engaging in political activities, or expressing personal opinions on policy and current issues. Due to this dual identity as civil servants and teachers, South Korean teachers are hesitant to strongly voice their opinions on multicultural education and policy. The appointment of Korean teachers is in compliance with the National Civil Service Act and the Educational Civil Servants Act (Ministry of Government Legislation [<reflink idref="bib45" id="ref60">45</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib46" id="ref61">46</reflink>]). In principle, Korean public elementary school teachers are required to change schools every five years and have no choice in selecting their assigned or transferred school. In addition, the South Korean curriculum is largely designed and implemented at a national level (with a few exceptions), and teacher education programmes are also run in accordance with the policy and its implementation (Ministry of Government Legislation [<reflink idref="bib45" id="ref62">45</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib46" id="ref63">46</reflink>]).</p> <p>We recruited participants from various regions in South Korea with diverse teaching experiences. As former and current South Korean public elementary school teachers, we extended invitations for this study through our professional network, which comprises our colleagues and alumni from elementary teacher education programmes. Our selection criteria included the following: being a public elementary school teacher who 1) has a minimum of 1 year of teaching experience with multicultural students, and 2) demonstrates a critical perspective and practice in their teaching. To assess the second criterion, we conducted a simple survey that asked teachers about their response to government-led educational policies and whether they perceived themselves to hold critical perspectives on education. Our intention with this criterion was to include teachers who were likely to possess a critical consciousness regarding education and their own teaching practices. However, we did not intend for it to be a strict filter that excluded teachers solely based on quantifiable criteria.</p> <p>The participants in this study included six South Korean public elementary school teachers who had different amounts of teaching experience in various school contexts and regions. The selection of teacher participants in this study was based on their relevant lived experiences pertaining to understanding and reflecting on the pedagogy, practice, and professional positionality of teachers in multicultural education. The researchers determined the number of participants, settling on six, to ensure a sense of closeness in the data obtained for this post-qualitative inspired phenomenological study. This allowed for detailed information from each participant while still capturing a range of lived experiences (Moser and Korstjens [<reflink idref="bib49" id="ref64">49</reflink>]). All six teachers identified as South Korean women, which aligns with the demographic majority of the elementary teacher population. The table below provides an overview of their teaching experience and the regions in which their schools were located (see Table 1). Although some of the schools and regions may have a relatively higher population of multicultural students, it is important to note that they were still predominantly composed of South Korean ethnicities.</p> <p>Table 1. Teacher participant information.</p> <p> <ephtml> <table><thead><tr><td>Pseudonym</td><td>Age</td><td>Years of Teaching Experience</td><td>Regions</td></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>Misun</td><td>52</td><td>21</td><td>Gyeonggi and Seoul</td></tr><tr><td>Dayeon</td><td>32</td><td>11</td><td>Seoul</td></tr><tr><td>Gina</td><td>38</td><td>9</td><td>Gimhae</td></tr><tr><td>Sumin</td><td>30</td><td>9</td><td>Daejeon</td></tr><tr><td>Sora</td><td>38</td><td>7</td><td>Seoul</td></tr><tr><td>Hana</td><td>27</td><td>3</td><td>Gyeonggi and Seoul</td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <p>Following what Jackson and Mazzei ([<reflink idref="bib28" id="ref65">28</reflink>]) share, we engaged with the interviews and interview transcripts to understand 'how multicultural education happens and is lived' by public elementary school teachers in South Korea. As Korean is two of the researchers' primary language, these authors transcribed all audio-recorded data from the interviews using the app 'Clova Note' and reviewed the transcripts.</p> <p>For data analysis, we followed the cyclical and interactive processes of post-qualitative informed phenomenological inquiry. We took up this process as putting theories, data and researchers into conversation, and what we share in this paper are a tentative provocation and production of multicultural education lived by the six South Korean teachers (Vagle [<reflink idref="bib63" id="ref66">63</reflink>]).</p> <p>In terms of researcher positionality, the first author identifies as a South Korean woman who has taught in elementary schools in Seoul, South Korea for four years and is currently working as a teacher educator at a university in the U.S. The second author identifies as a South Korean woman and has nine years of teaching experience as an elementary teacher in Seoul. The third author identifies as a non-binary American and is a first-year graduate student in history studying post-colonial, gender, and queer theories. Considering our heterogenous positionalities and identities, we consider our collaborative relationships and processes to be intercultural collaboration.</p> <hd id="AN0181661915-8">Teachers at the margin of multicultural education: 'I haven't really thought about multicultu...</hd> <p>What the teachers shared during their interviews individually and collectively describes the way multicultural education was not a pedagogical space in which the teachers had established professional agency or interest in designing multicultural education curricula and practice for their students (Dover, Henning, and Agarwal-Rangnath [<reflink idref="bib11" id="ref67">11</reflink>]; Hong [<reflink idref="bib25" id="ref68">25</reflink>]; Liggett [<reflink idref="bib41" id="ref69">41</reflink>]). During our analysis we pondered whether teachers perceived multicultural education as a hybrid pedagogical space where they needed to negotiate multiple roles and responsibilities that were complexly implied and expected of them. 'I have not really thought about what multicultural education is' – as Hana showed her distance from multicultural education we encountered a dissonance between the teachers' lived experiences with multicultural education illustrated in interviews and what we had read and heard from scholarly organisations and journals about the increased level of interest and engagement with multicultural education in South Korean public schools (Kim [<reflink idref="bib33" id="ref70">33</reflink>]; Kim and Chang Rundgren [<reflink idref="bib36" id="ref71">36</reflink>]). Instead, during the interviews, one of the things that became clearest to us was a familiar sense of frustration and helplessness that we – two of the authors – had also experienced and encountered numerous times as public elementary teachers; we too had had to put our educational philosophy and values aside to prioritise a lesson or activity mandated by the government without having much space or time to make our own pedagogical decisions (Hong [<reflink idref="bib25" id="ref72">25</reflink>]; Kim et al. [<reflink idref="bib38" id="ref73">38</reflink>]).</p> <p>Sora viewed multicultural education as unsustainable as she perceived multicultural education as one of many palliative measures that respond to populism-based government policies (Hudson [<reflink idref="bib27" id="ref74">27</reflink>]). Sora said,</p> <p>I feel like multicultural education is just a trend. It's something that local government officials or politicians casually talk about, and it involves spending money. It appears to be a policy that education authorities adopt abruptly in response to the growing immigrant population. So, I also question its long-term sustainability.</p> <p>Most teachers remained uninformed about this change and new education until they had to participate in multicultural education tasks for multicultural students in their classrooms or schools (de Saxe, Bucknovitz, and Mahoney-Mosedale [<reflink idref="bib10" id="ref75">10</reflink>]; Liggett [<reflink idref="bib41" id="ref76">41</reflink>]). This explains how multicultural education adds a dimension that requires teachers to be involved in the new work while including little of their professional insights and decisions in constructing the hybrid space (Kim [<reflink idref="bib33" id="ref77">33</reflink>]; Oh [<reflink idref="bib50" id="ref78">50</reflink>]). The teachers did not agree with how government-led multicultural education approaches asked teachers to participate in making multicultural students hyper-visible in the classroom in the name of 'helping them' (Ahmed [<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref79">1</reflink>]; Strumska-Cylwik [<reflink idref="bib61" id="ref80">61</reflink>]). Dayeon asked, 'why do you think that the students and families would rather give up resources and support to not be labelled, even though they might need the support?' Similarly, other teachers also criticised one of the common approaches used in schools: identifying 'multicultural students' through a list distributed to classroom teachers, as even before teachers got to know their students the list stigmatised the students as 'different'. We viewed these moments as the teachers looking at multicultural education and its practices with critical awareness (Asher [<reflink idref="bib5" id="ref81">5</reflink>]; Hudson [<reflink idref="bib27" id="ref82">27</reflink>]).</p> <p>For some of the teachers, the terms and concepts multiculturalism and multicultural education became 'unhomely' (Bhabha [<reflink idref="bib8" id="ref83">8</reflink>]) as they continued thinking about them and their meaning. As Hana attempted to articulate her understanding of multiculturalism and multicultural education, she questioned whether it meant only people from different countries or those who had family members with a different ethnic background. After she referred to the definition of 'culture', she wondered why only certain people were categorised as 'multicultural' while 'having the same ethnic background does not mean we all have the same culture as Koreans'. While Gina started describing multicultural education as making students from different ethnic, cultural and linguistic backgrounds 'united' Koreans, she became stuck with a question and confusion as to whether or not North Korean defectors also would be considered 'multicultural students' (Song and Freedman [<reflink idref="bib58" id="ref84">58</reflink>]; Won and Huntington [<reflink idref="bib66" id="ref85">66</reflink>]).</p> <p>Still, the teachers were consistent with their responses that multicultural education was supposed to help students from minoritised cultural, ethnic and linguistic backgrounds to be well absorbed into the public education system (Hudson [<reflink idref="bib27" id="ref86">27</reflink>]; Min [<reflink idref="bib43" id="ref87">43</reflink>]). Some teachers, such as Misun, did not hesitate to use the word 'assimilation' to describe the purpose and goal of multicultural education (Song [<reflink idref="bib57" id="ref88">57</reflink>]). While other teachers hesitated to use the direct term and attempted to find an alternative, their perception of multicultural education remained closely tied to assimilating Others into the dominant culture, which was the focus of multicultural education policy and approaches led by the government (Song [<reflink idref="bib57" id="ref89">57</reflink>]).</p> <p>Considering these aspects, government-led multicultural education policy had the power and authority to regulate and limit the teachers' understanding and engagement with multicultural education as autonomous educators. For example, even though Misun, Sora and Sumin did not agree with the government's identification of which students were eligible to receive support and resources as 'multicultural students', they complied with the classification and cooperated with the policy. This shows that the teachers did not perceive the nuances of multicultural education that encouraged them to contemplate the transformation of the status quo in order to promote inclusivity and equity for multicultural students. As a result, multicultural education did not emerge as a hybrid space in which teachers might be less inclined to perpetuate exclusive and oppressive discourse and practices towards marginalised groups in South Korean society (Said [<reflink idref="bib51" id="ref90">51</reflink>]). This will remain as usual and normal practice unless individual teachers resist the government's dehumanising approaches and narratives for multicultural students (Asher [<reflink idref="bib6" id="ref91">6</reflink>]; Fanon [<reflink idref="bib15" id="ref92">15</reflink>]).</p> <hd id="AN0181661915-9">Paving interstices for critical pedagogy: 'do we have to keep the term 'multicultural'?'</hd> <p>The phenomenon of multicultural education we explored through teachers' lived experiences seemed to have taken shape as a policy-centred space with rigid boundaries that kept teachers from (re)imagining and conceptualising it as a possibility and space for critical and socially-just pedagogy for all students (Freire [<reflink idref="bib17" id="ref93">17</reflink>]). The teachers struggled with making pedagogical connections with multicultural education beyond the national and local government policy-oriented approaches. Gina explained that the current multicultural curriculum was no more than an event programme that provided students with opportunities to experience different cultures through making and eating foods and learning foreign language songs. Gina shared her experience of teaching multicultural lessons while pointing out that teachers do not have to develop their own resources because they only need to teach a few hours a year during 'multicultural education week' (Bennett [<reflink idref="bib7" id="ref94">7</reflink>]). As Hana illustrated, multicultural education had not been incorporated into teachers' daily curriculum and pedagogy because all that was required was a lesson that was good enough to write a report with evidence to be sent to the local education offices.</p> <p>It was obvious that not only were teachers positioned at the periphery of multicultural education but also teachers positioned multicultural education at the margin of their teaching practices. Inspired by postcolonial study's articulation of hybrid consciousness (Anzaldúa [<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref95">4</reflink>]; Asher [<reflink idref="bib6" id="ref96">6</reflink>]), we focused on those moments when teachers attempted to move the existing notion and practice of multicultural education. When our interviews shifted to conversations about what multicultural education should look like, teachers started addressing issues they considered urgent and crucial to be covered in schools. The teachers illustrated their in-between spaces in and beyond current multicultural education by making connections between what they saw happening among students and larger social problems (Bhabha [<reflink idref="bib8" id="ref97">8</reflink>]). They linked those relevant social issues, such as disgust, racism, hatred, discrimination and exclusions, to issues related to multiculturalism and multicultural students (Han [<reflink idref="bib21" id="ref98">21</reflink>]).</p> <p>As Sumin pointed out, the issues needing to be addressed and challenged in multicultural education were discrimination and exclusion based on differences, not merely the lack of understanding other people's differences (Han [<reflink idref="bib21" id="ref99">21</reflink>]). She also emphasised the importance of addressing the issues at the intersection of students' race and socioeconomic status regarding the deficit narratives attached to multicultural students' socioeconomic statuses (Ahmed [<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref100">1</reflink>]; Kim [<reflink idref="bib35" id="ref101">35</reflink>]). The teachers knew that equality and inclusion would not happen naturally in their classrooms but that they need to provide students with opportunities to develop their thoughts through discussion, reflection and analysis of current social issues. For example, Hana used the emotion of disgust, prevalent in South Korean society, to argue that students often develop extreme disgust towards certain people or communities without doing their own research and having their own thoughts (Han [<reflink idref="bib21" id="ref102">21</reflink>]; Kang [<reflink idref="bib30" id="ref103">30</reflink>]). She said,</p> <p>People these days tend to be extreme because they haven't thought about it on their own. They hate something because others hate it. If they had developed their conscience that guides their thoughts and stance, I don't think they would just follow just because that's what others do.</p> <p>Dayeon considered discussions based on 'real world issues'; rather than putting multicultural students in the spotlight, it would be more effective for students to learn and think about ways to interact and respect people who have different backgrounds and perspectives. As she said:</p> <p>The truth is, many parents don't want their children to be labelled as multicultural. They prefer to keep it hidden, but multicultural education still focuses on the idea of 'getting along with them because they are multicultural students'. This perspective seems quite absurd. So, it would be better to get rid of multicultural education and replace it with approaches like human rights-based education or an educational approach that emphasizes caring for one another and tackles real issues.</p> <p>As the teachers uncovered these connections and teaching opportunities, they also offered a clearer understanding of their direct and indirect associations with issues concerning multicultural students and multicultural education (Freire [<reflink idref="bib17" id="ref104">17</reflink>]). However, what we found to be still missing was the critical examination and reflection of themselves within the social context and how the issues were associated with power and privilege (Kim and Choi [<reflink idref="bib37" id="ref105">37</reflink>]). In their analysis of South Korean society and education, using the terms 'our society' and 'our education' of which they were a part, they pulled themselves out of the critiques they made by justifying their standpoints and practices. For example, on one hand, Misun described her discriminatory stance which she articulated as feeling 'uncomfortable' towards multicultural students, as a reasonable reaction after years of teaching immigrant students and interacting with their families. She said:</p> <p>I think I feel uncomfortable with multicultural students. If you ask if that's discrimination, I don't have much to say. When we talk among ourselves, we say things like, 'we have multicultural students in my class'. Well, now we don't divide multicultural students in each class, but just a few years ago, multicultural students were divided evenly according to numbers.</p> <p>On the other hand, other teachers acknowledged the possibility that they were likely to discriminate against minoritised students in their daily practice. For example, Hana described:</p> <p>If you can't recognize discrimination as discrimination, then you might not feel it as discrimination. It's possible not to know, especially if you haven't learned about it or had time to discuss it. The line between what qualifies as discrimination can be quite blurry.</p> <p>However, they tended to be defensive in acknowledging and accepting their limited comfort zones and understanding of cultures with which they were not familiar. For instance, Sumin justified her discomfort with students speaking in languages she did not understand by relating it to her responsibility as an educator, highlighting equality in her practice: 'I would do the same to Korean students because we as teachers need to make sure that students did not say something bad in the classroom'.</p> <p>This demonstrates that the teachers were grappling with their positionality within the realm of multicultural education, although their reflections and analyses often tended to be limited to expressing personal discomfort and disagreement (Kim and Choi [<reflink idref="bib37" id="ref106">37</reflink>]; Moosavi [<reflink idref="bib48" id="ref107">48</reflink>]). The concept of hybridity sheds light on the urgency and necessity of encouraging and supporting teachers to examine how their involvement as members of the dominant group in South Korean society implicates them in perpetuating dominant and oppressive social discourses and norms (Fanon [<reflink idref="bib15" id="ref108">15</reflink>]). By doing so, teachers can gain greater empowerment to envision their educational practices as inclusive and liberatory (Ellsworth [<reflink idref="bib14" id="ref109">14</reflink>]; Sensoy and DiAngelo [<reflink idref="bib52" id="ref110">52</reflink>]). Postcolonial theory helps us be cautious about solely blaming individual teachers for embodying and perpetuating oppressive and exclusionary practices. Instead, our analysis leads us to consider the value and potential of creating hybrid spaces and dialogues where teachers can critically examine their educational philosophies and orientations and collectively reconstruct and envision an equitable pedagogy.</p> <hd id="AN0181661915-10">Teaching history as a hybrid space of dilemma: 'We still have so many unfinished histories wi...</hd> <p>The teachers' accounts of the difficulty of teaching history and having historical conversations in their daily practices with multicultural students powerfully illustrated the complex nature of teaching in hybrid spaces (Asher [<reflink idref="bib6" id="ref111">6</reflink>]; Harris, Sheppard, and Levy [<reflink idref="bib22" id="ref112">22</reflink>]). While countless relationships and aspects were involved in the teachers' lived experiences with teaching history, we chose to share moments and analyses of when teachers held and navigated tensions between nationalism and pluralism as well as between their ethnic identity as South Koreans and professional identity as teachers and civil servants (Choi and Park [<reflink idref="bib9" id="ref113">9</reflink>]).</p> <p>Dayeon admitted that she tried not to evoke emotional responses from students when teaching lessons on Korean historical events related to invasion, colonisation, territorial disputes, and historically distortion controversies involving China and Japan, particularly when she had students with ethnic backgrounds related to those countries (Ha [<reflink idref="bib20" id="ref114">20</reflink>]; Jang [<reflink idref="bib29" id="ref115">29</reflink>]). She described that teaching these historical events made her uneasy because she had to juggle two important responsibilities: teaching all students equally, including her multicultural students, while also ensuring the accurate and proper teaching of history (Ha [<reflink idref="bib20" id="ref116">20</reflink>]). The teacher gave the example of teaching about the Japanese colonisation of Korea and how it became a 'difficult history' to teach when she had students who were Japanese or maintained familial or other close relationships with Japan (An, Cho, and Cho [<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref117">3</reflink>]; Harris, Sheppard, and Levy [<reflink idref="bib22" id="ref118">22</reflink>]).</p> <p>So, the most awkward situation arises when teaching history. It becomes a bit difficult to openly discuss certain topics when there are multicultural students present. For example, when we talk about the Japanese colonial period, it's evident that the Japanese were truly terrible. But if there's a Japanese student present, it becomes challenging to teach about the dehumanizing actions of Japan.</p> <p>She observed how easy it was for students to simply project their emotions and feelings aroused from learning the history of Japanese colonisation onto classmates who they considered to be Japanese or closely related to Japan (An, Cho, and Cho [<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref119">3</reflink>]; Kim [<reflink idref="bib34" id="ref120">34</reflink>]). Dayeon shared that she had chosen instead to teach these historical moments in a 'less explicit' way, which meant she taught the lessons without highlighting emotional aspects tied to collective memories that South Korean people have about certain historical events and countries, such as China and Japan (Hoang [<reflink idref="bib24" id="ref121">24</reflink>]; Kang [<reflink idref="bib30" id="ref122">30</reflink>]; Son [<reflink idref="bib56" id="ref123">56</reflink>]).</p> <p>On the other hand, Sumin believed that it was still important to teach and highlight historical events, even though it could make some students and parents uncomfortable and upset. She explained,</p> <p>Historical and diplomatic relationships are factual, but it can be challenging to address them in a manner that considers everyone's discomfort. Public education is designed to cater to Koreans and the nation. I strive to engage in objective discussions with my students, avoiding words and expressions that may provoke resentment or bias. We are expected to adhere to guidelines that emphasize the importance of teachers being politically neutral and refraining from expressing personal biases or preferences.</p> <p>She not only took up teaching these historical events as part of her professional responsibility but also felt obligated to teach the important history as a member of South Korea (Grever [<reflink idref="bib19" id="ref124">19</reflink>]; Heo [<reflink idref="bib23" id="ref125">23</reflink>]). While developing her argument on the importance of addressing the issues related to historical events, she that considered public education was meant to teach historical events that were necessary and relevant to South Korean people and society (Heo [<reflink idref="bib23" id="ref126">23</reflink>]). Sumin drew a connection with current diplomatic international relations as an extension of historical relationships with China, Japan and other countries, saying it would be unjust to ambiguously teach or not teach the 'difficult history' (An, Cho, and Cho [<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref127">3</reflink>]; Harris, Sheppard, and Levy [<reflink idref="bib22" id="ref128">22</reflink>]). We theorised this as a moment when a teacher's professional identity and value based on nationalism were intertwined and manifested as an exclusive understanding of public education (Kim and Choi [<reflink idref="bib37" id="ref129">37</reflink>]; Son [<reflink idref="bib56" id="ref130">56</reflink>]).</p> <p>The teachers described their stories and thoughts tied to individual and social anti-Chinese and Japanese sentiments without reserve during the interviews (Heo [<reflink idref="bib23" id="ref131">23</reflink>]). For example, Sumin showed her frustration and limited tolerance towards current issues with Chinese cultural and historical distortion of Kimchi: 'If a Chinese student insists that Kimchi is Chinese, then I would just tell them to think whatever they want to believe as truth'. However, during the interviews, none of the teachers reflected on their emotionality towards China and Japan as problematic; instead, the teachers embodied it as 'the awareness and emotions that a South Korean should have' (Kim [<reflink idref="bib32" id="ref132">32</reflink>]). The teachers' emotions and feelings entangled with their South Korean identity and positionality contrasted with their critique on the dominant perspective featured in the curriculum that forces multicultural students to fit into exclusive 'proud Korean' narratives that do not acknowledge students' in-between identities (Choi and Park [<reflink idref="bib9" id="ref133">9</reflink>]). Here, the postcolonial concept of the hybridity of space helps us to view these seemingly contradictory features as examples of how South Korean teachers take up their hybrid roles and responsibilities in the hybrid space of multicultural students (Anzaldúa [<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref134">4</reflink>]; Asher [<reflink idref="bib5" id="ref135">5</reflink>]; Kanu [<reflink idref="bib31" id="ref136">31</reflink>]; Young [<reflink idref="bib67" id="ref137">67</reflink>]).</p> <p>The teachers' commitment to treating all students equally and their adherence to the principle of political neutrality resulted in a practice of avoiding controversial topics and relying heavily on textbook information when teaching history (Heo [<reflink idref="bib23" id="ref138">23</reflink>]; Misco [<reflink idref="bib47" id="ref139">47</reflink>]; Oh [<reflink idref="bib50" id="ref140">50</reflink>]). In contrast, their professional commitment and ethnocentric perspective came into conflict when they had multicultural students in their classrooms (Kim and Choi [<reflink idref="bib37" id="ref141">37</reflink>]). The presence of multicultural students influenced teachers to consider pluralism in their teaching practices, challenging the unquestioned transmission of national and ethnic values intertwined with collective memories and emotions to students (Anzaldúa [<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref142">4</reflink>]; Kim and Choi [<reflink idref="bib37" id="ref143">37</reflink>]). This presented a challenge to the teachers' usual approaches to teaching and addressing controversial sociohistorical topics that had been taken for granted (An, Cho, and Cho [<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref144">3</reflink>]). However, this shift had limited impact in prompting teachers to critically examine themselves and their practices within the sociohistorically and politically hybrid space (Um and Cho [<reflink idref="bib62" id="ref145">62</reflink>]). Furthermore, teachers still felt obligated to maintain certain perspectives due to their dual positionality. This underscores the importance of safeguarding teachers' professional autonomy, allowing them to challenge exclusive and oppressive perspectives and norms within the hybrid educational environment (Asher [<reflink idref="bib5" id="ref146">5</reflink>]).</p> <hd id="AN0181661915-11">Discussion and conclusion</hd> <p>We started this research with reflections and questions about why multicultural education in South Korea did not seem to be a culturally responsive and socially just pedagogical space (Ellsworth [<reflink idref="bib14" id="ref147">14</reflink>]; Gay [<reflink idref="bib18" id="ref148">18</reflink>]; Leonardo [<reflink idref="bib40" id="ref149">40</reflink>]). We took up this study as a form of advocacy that disrupted superficial critiques of teachers' curricula, practices and understandings in multicultural education based on the simplistic assumptions and expectations of individual teachers. Guided by the methodological and philosophical basis that post-qualitative and post-intentional phenomenology together provide, we set multicultural education in South Korea as our focus to 'wait and see' (Vagle [<reflink idref="bib63" id="ref150">63</reflink>]) how the teachers navigated and constructed their Third Space in practice. This exploration has highlighted the intricate and multifaceted nature of this space, encompassing teachers' hybrid roles, the interplay between policy and pedagogy, and the sociopolitical context of postcolonial South Korea (Vagle [<reflink idref="bib63" id="ref151">63</reflink>]). In this study, the phenomenon of multicultural education first appeared to be a policy-oriented space; then it started to become the Third Space as teachers began engaging the practice from their educator standpoint, incorporating critical autonomy and agency. However, we found that the absence of teachers' critical self-reflection and examination of their social and professional positionality, power, and individual and collective ethnocentric identity needed to be addressed and responded to in order to enable the teachers to transform their educational philosophy and orientation to be equitable and responsive for all students.</p> <p>All in all, this study has illuminated South Korean multicultural education as a space where the hybridity of space and individual people meet, interact and collide. Different aspects of the hybridity manifested from time to time depending on the topics and issues brought up during the interviews. The complex nature of the hybrid education space has been historically and socially constructed within South Korea and across multiple global relations, and teachers are situated at the intersection of this hybridity. At the same time, South Korean teachers also maintain their professional hybridity as civil servants and educators which requires them to navigate multicultural education policy and practice from a unique position. We consider teachers' development of a new consciousness – a mestiza consciousness (Anzaldúa [<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref152">4</reflink>]) – in a hybrid space to be a crucial starting point to empowering them to contemplate their critical role, practice, relationships and educational philosophy in working with students from diverse backgrounds. In this process, we suggest South Korean education take on equitable and sustainable changes for teachers and students that involve systemic support and advocacy rather than making it one of the new palliative requirements that expect individual teachers to 'deal with' it on top of other tasks. Teachers need to be provided with enough time and resources to engage in difficult conversations about multicultural and other social issues and brainstorm the pedagogical Third Space (Anzaldúa [<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref153">4</reflink>]).</p> <p>In the meantime, teacher educators and scholars need to work with teachers in the navigation and negotiation of power dynamics and tensions they encounter in their teaching practices. In respect to teachers' nationalist and ethnocentric perspectives, teacher education should encourage them to move beyond Korean-centric historical narratives. While we value collective memory as a form of resistance and defence against colonial and imperialist forces that still exist, this should not play a role in (re)producing exclusion and marginalisation of individual people and communities. Instead, teacher education and professional development can exemplify ways to utilise collective memory and emotionality as a pedagogical source to name and challenge colonial, imperial and neoliberal perspectives prevalent in society. This way, teachers can develop an inclusive and critical pedagogy that enables every student to build relationships with Korean history and homogenous identities in South Korea (Freire [<reflink idref="bib17" id="ref154">17</reflink>]). However, we acknowledge that this empowering approach, centred around posing and engaging in critical questions and multiple perspectives, would not necessarily make teaching history and addressing social issues easier. We argue that it would not be equitable nor sustainable to ask teachers to fight for justice with little institutional and professional support, especially considering potential pushbacks regarding critical approaches and topics that many teachers worry about.</p> <p>Therefore, we want this study to be read as an invitation that asks teacher educators and scholars to take up our scholarship as a form of practice and advocacy to promote teachers' engagement with critical reflections and practices for and with their students. For this reason, we purposely chose to share stories and capture moments of the phenomenon that have the power and potential to provoke awareness and prompt further examination and discussion about South Korean multicultural education, hopefully towards culturally responsive and justice-oriented education.</p> <hd id="AN0181661915-12">Disclosure statement</hd> <p>No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.</p> <ref id="AN0181661915-13"> <title> References </title> <blist> <bibl id="bib1" idref="ref26" type="bt">1</bibl> <bibtext> Ahmed, S. 2000. Strange Encounters: Embodied Others in Post-Coloniality. 1st ed., 224. London and New York : Routledge.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib2" idref="ref50" type="bt">2</bibl> <bibtext> Ahmed, S. 2007. " A Phenomenology of Whiteness." Feminist Theory 8 (2): 149 – 168. https://doi.org/10.1177/1464700107078139.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib3" idref="ref117" type="bt">3</bibl> <bibtext> An, H. J., S. S. Cho, and W. T. Cho. 2011. " The Experience of History Education Related to Japan for Middle and High School Students with Japanese Mothers." Journal of Regional Studies 19 (3): 47 – 75. <ulink href="http://www.dbpia.co.kr/journal/articledetail?nodeid=node01695871">http://www.dbpia.co.kr/journal/articledetail?nodeid=node01695871</ulink>.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib4" idref="ref39" type="bt">4</bibl> <bibtext> Anzaldúa, G. E. 1987/2012. Borderlands/La Frontera: The New Mestiza. 4th ed., 312. San Francisco : Aunt Lute Books.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib5" idref="ref11" type="bt">5</bibl> <bibtext> Asher, N. 2005. " At the Interstices: Engaging Postcolonial and Feminist Perspectives for a Multicultural Education Pedagogy in the South." Teachers College Record 107 (5): 1079 – 1106. https://doi.org/10.1177/016146810510700508.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib6" idref="ref40" type="bt">6</bibl> <bibtext> Asher, N. 2009. " Writing Home/Decolonizing Text(s)." Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education 30 (1): 1 – 13. https://doi.org/10.1080/01596300802643033.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib7" idref="ref94" type="bt">7</bibl> <bibtext> Bennett, C. I. 2001. " Genres of Research in Multicultural Education." Review of Educational Research 71 (2): 171 – 217. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543071002171.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib8" idref="ref24" type="bt">8</bibl> <bibtext> Bhabha, H. K. 1994/2004. " The Location of Culture." In The Location of Culture, 2nd ed. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203820551.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib9" idref="ref58" type="bt">9</bibl> <bibtext> Choi, J., and J. H. Park. 2016. " An Analysis of Critical Issues in Korean Teacher Evaluation Systems." Centre for Educational Policy Studies Journal 6 (2): 151 – 171. https://doi.org/10.26529/cepsj.93.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> de Saxe, J. G., S. Bucknovitz, and F. Mahoney-Mosedale. 2018. " The Deprofessionalization of Educators: An Intersectional Analysis of Neoliberalism and Education 'Reform." Education and Urban Society 52 (1): 51 – 69. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013124518786398.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Dover, A. G., N. Henning, and R. Agarwal-Rangnath. 2016. " Reclaiming Agency: Justice-Oriented Social Studies Teachers Respond to Changing Curricular Standards." Teaching and Teacher Education 59 : 457 – 467. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2016.07.016.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Draudt, D. 2016. " South Korea's National Identity Crisis in the Face of Emerging Multiculturalism." Georgetown Journal of International Affairs 17 (1): 12 – 19. https://doi.org/10.1353/gia.2016.0003.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Draudt, D. 2019. " Multiculturalism as State Developmental Policy in Global Korea." In Korea and the World: New Frontiers in Korean Studies, edited by G. A. Brazinsky, 157 – 177. Lanham : Rowman and Littlefield.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Ellsworth, E. 1989. " Why Doesn't This Feel Empowering? Working Through the Repressive Myths of Critical Pedagogy." Harvard Educational Review 59 (3): 297 – 325. https://doi.org/10.17763/haer.59.3.058342114k266250.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Fanon, F. 1952/2008. Black Skin, White Masks. Revised ed., 206. New York : Grove Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Fanon, F. 1961/2004. The Wretched of the Earth, 320. New York : Grove Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Freire, P. 1970/2000. Pedagogy of the Oppressed. 30th anniversary ed. London : Continuum.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Gay, G. 2018. Culturally Responsive Teaching: Theory, Research, and Practice. 3rd ed, edited by G. Gay. New York : Teachers College Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Grever, M. 2012. " Dilemmas of Common and Plural History: Reflections on History Education and Heritage in a Globalizing World." In History Education and the Construction of National Identities, edited by M. Carretero, M. Asensio, and M. Rodríguez-Moneo, 75 – 91. Charlotte : Information Age Publishing.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Ha, K. 2020. " Changes in History Education Environments and Contemporary History Education in Primary School." Homo Migrans-Migration, Colonialism, Racism 22 : 284 – 318. https://doi.org/10.32715/hm.2020.22.009.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Han, H. 2021. " A Study on the Phenomenon of Hate and Discrimination in Korean Schools." Media, Gender and Culture 36 (4): 187 – 239. https://doi.org/10.38196/mgc.2021.12.36.4.18.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Harris, L. M., M. Sheppard, and S. A. Levy. 2022. " Introduction: Framing Difficult Histories." In Teaching Difficult Histories in Difficult Times: Stories of Practice, edited by L. M. Harris, M. Sheppard, and S. A. Levy, 1 – 12. New York : Teachers College Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Heo, S. 2010. " 한일관계사 수 업 에 서 교 사 들 이 겪 는 어 려 움 의 요 소 와 성 격 [The Elements and Characteristics of teachers' Difficulties in Korea-Japan Relations Class]." Studies on History Education 11 (11): 185 – 212. https://doi.org/10.16976/kahe.2010.11.185.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Hoang, Y. 2017. " Comparison Between Korean Middle School Social Studies Textbook and Japanese Middle School Social Studies Textbook." 21st Century Political Science Review 27 (2): 137 – 164. https://doi.org/10.17937/topsr.27.2.201706.137.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Hong, S. 2019. 교사불신 [Distrust of Teachers]. Seoul : Tekville Education.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Hong, Y. 2019. " Post-Intentional Phenomenology as Ethical and Transformative Inquiry and Practice: Through Intercultural Phenomenological Dialogue." Indo-Pacific Journal of Phenomenology 19 (2): 103 – 113. https://doi.org/10.1080/20797222.2019.1693106.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Hudson, A. H. 2003. " Multicultural Education and the Postcolonial Turn." Policy Futures in Education 1 (2): 381 – 401. https://doi.org/10.2304/pfie.2003.1.2.13.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Jackson, A. Y., and L. A. Mazzei. 2022. Thinking with Theory in Qualitative Research. 2nd ed. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315667768.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Jang, R. 2020. " (A) Qualitative Case Study on Positionality and Historical Cognition of Children in Japanese Multicultural Family." The Korean History Education Review 153 : 163 – 209. https://doi.org/10.18622/kher.2020.03.153.163.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Kang, H. 2020. " Approaching the Problem of Historical Negation in the Classroom by a History Teacher." History and the World 58 : 137 – 180. https://doi.org/10.17857/hw.2020.12.58.137.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Kanu, Y. 2005. " Tensions and Dilemmas of Cross-Cultural Transfer of Knowledge: Post-Structural/postcolonial Reflections on an Innovative Teacher Education in Pakistan." International Journal of Educational Development 25 (5): 493 – 513. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijedudev.2005.01.002.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Kim, H. A. 2020. " Understanding 'Koreanness': Racial Stratification and Colorism in Korea and Implications for Korean Multicultural Education." International Journal of Multicultural Education 22 (1): 76 – 97. https://doi.org/10.18251/ijme.v22i1.1834.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Kim, J. 2021. " The Impacts of National Education Policies on teachers' Interpretations and Implementations of Multicultural Education in South Korea." Multicultural Education Review 13 (4): 323 – 337. https://doi.org/10.1080/2005615x.2021.2006116.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Kim, N. Y. 2008. Imperial Citizens: Koreans and Race from Seoul to LA. Redwood City : Stanford University Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Kim, S. 2022. " A Transnational Application of Critical Race Theory: Schooling Experiences of Multicultural Students in South Korea." Multicultural Education Review 14 (3): 194 – 208. https://doi.org/10.1080/2005615x.2022.2129294.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Kim, S. K., and S. N. Chang Rundgren. 2021. " South Korean Elementary School teachers' Experiences of Inclusive Education Concerning Students with a Multicultural Background." International Journal of Inclusive Education 25 (12): 1327 – 1341. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603116.2019.1609606.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Kim, Y., and M. Choi. 2020. " Towards Critical Multicultural Teacher Education in the Midst of Ethno-Nationalism: Korean Pre-Service teachers' International Learning Experiences." Teaching and Teacher Education 96 : 103 – 155. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2020.103155.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Kim, D., S. Lee, C. Hong, S. Hwang, Y. Lee, and H. Kim. 2013. " A Story on teachers' Workload." The Korean Society Fisheries and Sciences Education 25 (6): 1440 – 1458. https://doi.org/10.13000/jfmse.2013.25.6.1440.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Le Grange, L. 2018. " What is (Post)qualitative Research? " South African Journal of Higher Education 32 (5): 1 – 14. https://doi.org/10.20853/32-5-3161.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Leonardo, Z. 2013. Race Frameworks: A Multidimensional Theory of Racism and Education. New York : Teachers College Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Liggett, T. 2011. " Critical Multicultural Education and Teacher Sense of Agency." Teaching Education 22 (2): 185 – 197. https://doi.org/10.1080/10476210.2011.566603.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Macgilchrist, F., J. Ahlrichs, P. Mielke, and R. Richtera. 2017. " Memory Practices and Colonial Discourse: On Text Trajectories and Lines of Flight." Critical Discourse Studies 14 (4): 341 – 361. https://doi.org/10.1080/17405904.2017.1325382.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Min, Y. 2009. " Multicultural History Learning: A Critical Approach Through the 'History of Memory." Research in Social Studies Education 16 (1): 15 – 30.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Ministry of Education. 2022. 2022 Support Plan for Multicultural Education. Sejong : Ministry of Education.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Ministry of Government Legislation. 2022. Elementary and Secondary Education Act. Korean Law Information Center. https://<ulink href="http://www.law.go.kr/LSW/eng/engLsSc.do?menuId=2andsection=lawNmandquery=Elementary+and+Secondary+Education+Actandx=0andy=0">www.law.go.kr/LSW/eng/engLsSc.do?menuId=2andsection=lawNmandquery=Elementary+and+Secondary+Education+Actandx=0andy=0</ulink>.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Ministry of Government Legislation. 2023. 국가공무원법 [National Civil Service Act]. Korean Law Information Center. https://<ulink href="http://www.law.go.kr/법령/국가공무원법">www.law.go.kr/법령/국가공무원법</ulink>.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Misco, T. 2016. " 'We are Only Looking for the Right answers': The Challenges of Controversial Issue Instruction in South Korea." Asia Pacific Journal of Education 36 (3): 332 – 349. https://doi.org/10.1080/02188791.2014.940031.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Moosavi, L. 2022. " 'But You're white': An Autoethnography of Whiteness and White Privilege in East Asian Universities." Research in Comparative & International Education 17 (1): 107 – 123. https://doi.org/10.1177/17454999211067123.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Moser, A., and I. Korstjens. 2018. " Series: Practical Guidance to Qualitative Research. Part 3: Sampling, Data Collection and Analysis." European Journal of General Practice 24 (1): 9 – 18. https://doi.org/10.1080/13814788.2017.1375091.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Oh, D. 2010. " The Political Rights of Teachers." Democratic Legal Studies 44 (44): 199 – 224. https://doi.org/10.15756/dls.2010.44.199.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Said, E. W. 1978. Orientalism. New York : Pantheon Books.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Sensoy, Ö., and R. DiAngelo. 2017. Is Everyone Really Equal? An Introduction to Key Concepts in Social Justice Education. 2nd ed. New York : Teachers College Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Seoul Metropolitan Office of Education. 2022. Basic Plan for Multicultural Education. Seoul : Seoul Metropolitan Office of Education.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Shin, J. 2019. " The Vortex of Multiculturalism in South Korea: A Critical Discourse Analysis of the Characterization of 'Multicultural children' in Three Newspapers." Communication and Critical/Cultural Studies 16 (1): 61 – 81. https://doi.org/10.1080/14791420.2019.1590612.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Sleeter, C. 2016. " Wrestling with Problematics of Whiteness in Teacher Education." International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education 29 (8): 1065 – 1068. https://doi.org/10.1080/09518398.2016.1174904.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Son, S. 2020. " '교사' 없는 '역사교육'을 넘어 [Beyond 'History education' without 'Teachers']." The History Education Review 19 (1): 77 – 100.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Song, H. 2021. " Deconstructing Discourses of Diversity: Envisioning Possibilities from Impossibilities in Multicultural Education in South Korea." Journal of Asian Pacific Communication 31 (1): 58 – 78. https://doi.org/10.1075/japc.00057.son.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Song, Y., and J. E. Freedman. 2022. " The Construction and Embodiment of Dis/Ability for North Korean Refugees Living in South Korea." Teachers College Record 124 (7): 201 – 220. https://doi.org/10.1177/01614681221111459.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Spivak, G. C. 1985. " Scattered Speculations on the Question of Value." Diacritics 15 (4): 93. https://doi.org/10.2307/464935.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> St.Pierre, E. 2011. " Post Qualitative Research: The Critique and the Coming After." In The SAGE Handbook of Qualitative Research, edited by N. K. Denzin and Y. S. Lincoln, 611 – 625, Thousand Oaks : SAGE.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Strumska-Cylwik, L. 2013. " Other'/'Otherness' in a Multicultural World and Their Diverse Qualities and Varieties in the Context of an Applied 'Logic of Reverse." International Journal of Arts & Sciences 6 (1): 35 – 55.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Um, S. J., and H. Cho. 2022. " Creating the Space of Possibility: The Dynamics of Multiculturalism, Neoliberalism, and Nationalism in South Korean Prospective Teachers Learning to Teach for Social Justice." Teaching and Teacher Education 110 : 103605. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2021.103605.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Vagle, M. D. 2018. Crafting Phenomenological Research. 2nd ed. New York : Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315173474.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Viruru, R. 2005. " The Impact of Postcolonial Theory on Early Childhood Education." Journal of Education 35 (1): 7 – 29. https://doi.org/10.10520/aja0259479x_104.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Weis, L. 1995. " Identity Formation and the Processes of 'Othering': Unraveling Sexual Threads." Educational Foundations 9 (1): 17 – 33.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Won, C., and A. Huntington. 2021. " What It Means to Be Korean: National Identity in North and South Korean Elementary Textbooks 1960–2019." Comparative Education 57 (2): 267 – 289. https://doi.org/10.1080/03050068.2020.1812237.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Young, R. J. C. 2016. " Postcolonialism: An Historical Introduction ". In Postcolonialism: An Historical Introduction. Wiley. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119316817.</bibtext> </blist> </ref> <aug> <p>By Younkyung Hong; Eunhye Cho and Kegan Mixdorf</p> <p>Reported by Author; Author; Author</p> </aug> <nolink nlid="nl1" bibid="bib40" firstref="ref1"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl2" bibid="bib52" firstref="ref2"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl3" bibid="bib33" firstref="ref3"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl4" bibid="bib47" firstref="ref4"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl5" bibid="bib62" firstref="ref5"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl6" bibid="bib37" firstref="ref7"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl7" bibid="bib55" firstref="ref10"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl8" bibid="bib44" firstref="ref12"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl9" bibid="bib53" firstref="ref14"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl10" bibid="bib12" firstref="ref15"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl11" bibid="bib13" firstref="ref16"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl12" bibid="bib57" firstref="ref18"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl13" bibid="bib54" firstref="ref19"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl14" bibid="bib15" firstref="ref21"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl15" bibid="bib67" firstref="ref23"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl16" bibid="bib31" firstref="ref29"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl17" bibid="bib51" firstref="ref30"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl18" bibid="bib59" firstref="ref31"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl19" bibid="bib64" firstref="ref32"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl20" bibid="bib65" firstref="ref34"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl21" bibid="bib27" firstref="ref41"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl22" bibid="bib42" firstref="ref43"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl23" bibid="bib16" firstref="ref48"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl24" bibid="bib39" firstref="ref51"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl25" bibid="bib60" firstref="ref52"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl26" bibid="bib63" firstref="ref55"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl27" bibid="bib26" firstref="ref56"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl28" bibid="bib25" firstref="ref57"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl29" bibid="bib50" firstref="ref59"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl30" bibid="bib45" firstref="ref60"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl31" bibid="bib46" firstref="ref61"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl32" bibid="bib49" firstref="ref64"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl33" bibid="bib28" firstref="ref65"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl34" bibid="bib11" firstref="ref67"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl35" bibid="bib41" firstref="ref69"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl36" bibid="bib36" firstref="ref71"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl37" bibid="bib38" firstref="ref73"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl38" bibid="bib10" firstref="ref75"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl39" bibid="bib61" firstref="ref80"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl40" bibid="bib58" firstref="ref84"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl41" bibid="bib66" firstref="ref85"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl42" bibid="bib43" firstref="ref87"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl43" bibid="bib17" firstref="ref93"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl44" bibid="bib21" firstref="ref98"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl45" bibid="bib35" firstref="ref101"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl46" bibid="bib30" firstref="ref103"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl47" bibid="bib48" firstref="ref107"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl48" bibid="bib14" firstref="ref109"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl49" bibid="bib22" firstref="ref112"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl50" bibid="bib20" firstref="ref114"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl51" bibid="bib29" firstref="ref115"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl52" bibid="bib34" firstref="ref120"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl53" bibid="bib24" firstref="ref121"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl54" bibid="bib56" firstref="ref123"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl55" bibid="bib19" firstref="ref124"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl56" bibid="bib23" firstref="ref125"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl57" bibid="bib32" firstref="ref132"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl58" bibid="bib18" firstref="ref148"></nolink>
Header DbId: eric
DbLabel: ERIC
An: EJ1453450
AccessLevel: 3
PubType: Academic Journal
PubTypeId: academicJournal
PreciseRelevancyScore: 0
IllustrationInfo
Items – Name: Title
  Label: Title
  Group: Ti
  Data: Holding Tension and Navigating Dilemma in Multicultural Education in South Korea: Towards Pedagogical Third Space
– Name: Language
  Label: Language
  Group: Lang
  Data: English
– Name: Author
  Label: Authors
  Group: Au
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Younkyung+Hong%22">Younkyung Hong</searchLink> (ORCID <externalLink term="https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9334-0420">0000-0002-9334-0420</externalLink>)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Eunhye+Cho%22">Eunhye Cho</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Kegan+Mixdorf%22">Kegan Mixdorf</searchLink>
– Name: TitleSource
  Label: Source
  Group: Src
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="SO" term="%22Pedagogy%2C+Culture+and+Society%22"><i>Pedagogy, Culture and Society</i></searchLink>. 2025 33(1):287-304.
– Name: Avail
  Label: Availability
  Group: Avail
  Data: Routledge. Available from: Taylor & Francis, Ltd. 530 Walnut Street Suite 850, Philadelphia, PA 19106. Tel: 800-354-1420; Tel: 215-625-8900; Fax: 215-207-0050; Web site: http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals
– Name: PeerReviewed
  Label: Peer Reviewed
  Group: SrcInfo
  Data: Y
– Name: Pages
  Label: Page Count
  Group: Src
  Data: 18
– Name: DatePubCY
  Label: Publication Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2025
– Name: TypeDocument
  Label: Document Type
  Group: TypDoc
  Data: Journal Articles<br />Reports - Research
– Name: Audience
  Label: Education Level
  Group: Audnce
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="EL" term="%22Elementary+Education%22">Elementary Education</searchLink>
– Name: Subject
  Label: Descriptors
  Group: Su
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Foreign+Countries%22">Foreign Countries</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Multicultural+Education%22">Multicultural Education</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Problems%22">Problems</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Teacher+Attitudes%22">Teacher Attitudes</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Korean+Culture%22">Korean Culture</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22History+Instruction%22">History Instruction</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Barriers%22">Barriers</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Student+Diversity%22">Student Diversity</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Community+Problems%22">Community Problems</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Social+Environment%22">Social Environment</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Time+Perspective%22">Time Perspective</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Elementary+School+Teachers%22">Elementary School Teachers</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Public+Schools%22">Public Schools</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Government+Employees%22">Government Employees</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Educational+Policy%22">Educational Policy</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Teaching+Conditions%22">Teaching Conditions</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Federal+Regulation%22">Federal Regulation</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Teaching+Experience%22">Teaching Experience</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Disadvantaged%22">Disadvantaged</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Power+Structure%22">Power Structure</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Elementary+School+Students%22">Elementary School Students</searchLink>
– Name: Subject
  Label: Geographic Terms
  Group: Su
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22South+Korea+%28Seoul%29%22">South Korea (Seoul)</searchLink>
– Name: DOI
  Label: DOI
  Group: ID
  Data: 10.1080/14681366.2023.2257708
– Name: ISSN
  Label: ISSN
  Group: ISSN
  Data: 1468-1366<br />1747-5104
– Name: Abstract
  Label: Abstract
  Group: Ab
  Data: We take up this qualitative inquiry as a means of practicing and advocating for a deeper understanding of South Korean teachers' pedagogy and perspectives in multicultural education, moving beyond surface-level critiques. Through the lens of postcolonial theory, this study highlights how government-led multicultural education places teachers in a position where they participate in the othering and exclusion of multicultural students. Simultaneously, we recognise that teachers contribute their professional insights to envision a Third Space in their practice. This paper also sheds light on the challenges faced when teaching Korean history in classrooms with multicultural students. Overall, this study provides insights into the intricate nature of the hybrid pedagogical space that has evolved historically and socially in South Korea, as well as its interconnectedness with global relationships. Given the professional hybridity of South Korean teachers, we believe that developing a new consciousness within this hybrid space is a crucial starting point for empowering teachers to reflect on their pedagogy and practices when working with students from diverse backgrounds.
– Name: AbstractInfo
  Label: Abstractor
  Group: Ab
  Data: As Provided
– Name: DateEntry
  Label: Entry Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2024
– Name: AN
  Label: Accession Number
  Group: ID
  Data: EJ1453450
PLink https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=eric&AN=EJ1453450
RecordInfo BibRecord:
  BibEntity:
    Identifiers:
      – Type: doi
        Value: 10.1080/14681366.2023.2257708
    Languages:
      – Text: English
    PhysicalDescription:
      Pagination:
        PageCount: 18
        StartPage: 287
    Subjects:
      – SubjectFull: Foreign Countries
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Multicultural Education
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Problems
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Teacher Attitudes
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Korean Culture
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: History Instruction
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Barriers
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Student Diversity
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Community Problems
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Social Environment
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Time Perspective
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Elementary School Teachers
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Public Schools
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Government Employees
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Educational Policy
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Teaching Conditions
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Federal Regulation
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Teaching Experience
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Disadvantaged
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Power Structure
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Elementary School Students
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: South Korea (Seoul)
        Type: general
    Titles:
      – TitleFull: Holding Tension and Navigating Dilemma in Multicultural Education in South Korea: Towards Pedagogical Third Space
        Type: main
  BibRelationships:
    HasContributorRelationships:
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Younkyung Hong
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Eunhye Cho
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Kegan Mixdorf
    IsPartOfRelationships:
      – BibEntity:
          Dates:
            – D: 01
              M: 01
              Type: published
              Y: 2025
          Identifiers:
            – Type: issn-print
              Value: 1468-1366
            – Type: issn-electronic
              Value: 1747-5104
          Numbering:
            – Type: volume
              Value: 33
            – Type: issue
              Value: 1
          Titles:
            – TitleFull: Pedagogy, Culture and Society
              Type: main
ResultId 1