A Theoretical Analysis of How Critical Literacy May Support the Progressive Goals of the Korean National Curriculum

Critical Literacy and Semiotic Juxtaposition: The Possibilities of Multimodal Pedagogy in Korea

“…The critical quality of a literacy event can be analyzed by identifying the sign relationships as icons, indexes, and symbols, and using these relationships to juxtapose signs in ways that intentionally take up for critique the underlying interpretants. Thus, the practice of critical literacy conforms to the current Korean Ministry of Education's English Curriculum in that it encourages communication between teachers and students, promotes critical thinking, seeks the situating of knowledge to context, and promotes the creativity of thought and action (Pederson, 2019).…”

“…This compulsion towards convention in dyadic literacy is perhaps even more evident in EFL practices as the use of standardized forms of English and the meritocracy of high-stakes testing dominates EFL curricula in Korea and other Asian nations (Pederson, 2019;Shin, 2010;Stein & Newfield, 2006). This autonomous from of literacy tends to stifle critical thinking and limit a greater understanding of the creative potentials of language use and interpretation (Street, 1984), as well as limiting a greater understanding of the target culture (Shin, 2010).…”

“…It is clear that the dominance of GTM and ALM methodologies in EFL curricula function as autonomous forms of literacy, and thus, do not generally allow for Vygotsky's (1981) theories of learning through social interaction and by doing that many progressive second language educators believe greatly facilitates learning (Lantolf, 2000;Morgan & Ramanathan, 2005). As such, EFL students are constricted to the boredom of rote learning, or banking education (Freire, 1970), that not only stifles greater engagement in learning but also retards creativity and the goal of gaining greater fluency in the target language (Lantolf, 2000;Pederson, 2019;Shin, 2010). In addition, traditional dyadic methodologies typically used in Korean EFL classrooms do not follow the dictates of the current Korean National Curriculum that calls for student-centered classrooms, communication, the application of knowledge to context, and creativity (Pederson, 2019).…”

“…As such, EFL students are constricted to the boredom of rote learning, or banking education (Freire, 1970), that not only stifles greater engagement in learning but also retards creativity and the goal of gaining greater fluency in the target language (Lantolf, 2000;Pederson, 2019;Shin, 2010). In addition, traditional dyadic methodologies typically used in Korean EFL classrooms do not follow the dictates of the current Korean National Curriculum that calls for student-centered classrooms, communication, the application of knowledge to context, and creativity (Pederson, 2019).…”

“…As such, the idea of critical literacy has become commonplace in reading and language education and has had several extensive articulations over the past two decades (Beck, 2005;Behrman, 2006;Cervetti, Pardales, & Damico, 2001, Fairclough, 1992Fehring & Green, 2001;Gee, 1992;Iyer, 2007;Lankshear & McClaren, 1993;Morgan, 1997;Shor, 1999;Stevens & Bean, 2007). Critical literacy has also seen increasing use in English as a foreign language (EFL) pedagogy as well (Canagarajah, 1999;Luke, 2012;Morgan & Ramanathan, 2005;Norton & Toohey, 2004;Pederson, 2019;Pennycook, 2001). These authors describe interpretive activity with print and/or multimedia texts in similar ways to represent meaning making as a type of thinking or knowing that is referred to as critical.…”