KF뉴스레터-First SSRC Korean Studies Dissertation Workshop

First SSRC Korean Studies Dissertation Workshop

With sponsorship support from the Korea Foundation, the Social Science Research Council (SSRC) hosted the first Korean Studies Dissertation Workshop (July 13-17, 2008). Held at the scenic beachfront Ansilomar Conference Grounds in Monterey, California, the Workshop brought together 12 PhD students, four faculty mentors, and two SSRC staff members in an intensive, interdisciplinary setting to discuss 12 doctoral projects in Korean Studies.

It was an extraordinarily rigorous and rewarding opportunity. As Hae Yeon Choo of the University of Wisconsin, Madison noted: “The workshop was one of the best experiences I had in my graduate career 18 people coming together who genuinely care about each other’s work and support one another. It was very empowering, and I walked away with so much gratitude, having met many mentors and future colleagues.”
The 12 participating students came from nine institutions in the United States, and were at various points in their PhD program, ranging from pre-dissertation to final stages of dissertation-writing. Disciplinary backgrounds and research interests also varied, ranging from ethnography to premodern history, as well as cinema studies and cultural geography.
Despite the disciplinary and methodological differences, the Workshop clearly demonstrated the robust and dynamic developments in the field of Korean Studies. The participants questioned the established bounds of national belonging, traced wide-ranging transnational movements and imaginaries, and reconsidered historical transitions and political transformations. Many grappled with the spuriousness of colonial/postcolonial periodization, especially in the Korean context, and the “transnational turn” in Korean Studies was apparent in the recurring theme of locating Korea in the world whether through the exploits of contemporary evangelical Christian missionaries, modern spectacles of national airports, or early 19th Century Neo-Confucian ruminations of Tasan Jeong Yak-yong. The critical eye toward the margins and transgressive subjects queer, foreign, criminal, or peripheral to the nuclear family stimulated discussions of normativity, traditions, and conventions, along with generating provocative conversations around marginality, hybridity, and liminality.
Four outstanding faculty members served as mentors: Nancy Abelmann of the University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign; Keong-Hee Choi of the University of Chicago; John Duncan of the University of California, Los Angeles; and Jae-Jung Suh of Johns Hopkins University. Going above and beyond any expectations, each faculty mentor generously and tirelessly contributed feedback and guidance to the Workshop participants, during a daily schedule that began as early as 8 a.m. and ended as late as midnight. On the final night, one faculty mentor stayed up all night with a handful of students, sharing stories and discussing history, politics, and academic life.

Collegial Environment
The discussions were both critical and constructive, but perhaps the most worthwhile aspect of the Workshop was the intellectual camaraderie and genuine friendship built among the participants over the intensive schedule. Sungyun Lim, a PhD candidate of history at UC Berkeley, said that more than anything, she enjoyed the sense of community she felt with all the participants. “It was a refreshing experience,” Lim said, “as someone who is used to often being the only Korean specialist in the room.” Similar sentiments were expressed by others who welcomed the rare opportunity to receive in-depth, knowledgeable feedback in such a collegial environment.

Intensive Format
The extraordinary success may have something to do with the demanding format of the Workshop. The application deadline was May 1, 2008, and the selected participants were notified by early June, when each received a packet containing all 12 participants’ dissertation project descriptions that were submitted as part of the application. We were to read the entire packet before arriving at the Workshop. This was certainly no small task with each essay being about ten pages long, and the packet totaling more than 120 pages. After closely reading all ten statements, each student was required to submit a 10-page essay synthesizing the projects statements according to common themes or issues, and raise questions to be addressed during the Workshop. Subsequently, we were provided with a second reading packet containing copies of everyone’s synthetic essays, which again totaled nearly 120 pages, again to be read prior to the Workshop.
There’s no doubt, however, that the packets made for fascinating reading and all the preparations ensured that all participants went into the workshop very well-informed. Closely reading the project statements beforehand and writing the synthetic essays deepened everyone’s understanding of all participants and projects, and this depth of knowledge directly contributed to the high level of engagement during the Workshop. In fact, by the time the Workshop came to a close, several of us felt like we were in company of people who knew and understood our projects better than anyone else.
The Workshop itself was divided into four major sessions. After informal introductions and meeting on Day 1, Day 2 began with Session I, which was divided into twelve 30-minute segments. Each participant was assigned to present the work of another student in five minutes, after which a group discussion of that project took place. Being in the “hot seat” to present someone else’s work proved to be challenging, but this format again forced us to think in someone else’s shoes, and to really try to understand what the project is grappling with.
On Day 3, Session II was again divided into twelve 30-minute segments, this time with each student responding to the comments, critiques, and questions raised during the previous day. The student then led a discussion among participants and faculty of her/his own project for the remainder of the 30-minute session. Some used this time to clarify misunderstandings and address concerns raised during Session I, some solicited feedback on specific issues and questions, and some sought help for dissertation organization and structure. Session III and IV took place on Day 4, and included group discussions on methodology, research design, and professional development. In addition, the four faculty participants mentored three students each, contributing to an even more in-depth and focused guidance.
Some affectionately referred to the Workshop as summer camp or half-jokingly, dissertation boot camp but all of us left the Workshop enriched by the experience and grateful for the opportunity. Alice Kim, a PhD candidate of rhetoric at UC Berkeley, remarked that it was “a wonderful experience to have such close interaction with so many Korean Studies scholars.” She added that “the generosity and engagement of faculty and graduate students on all the projects was both heartening and incredibly helpful.” Sueyoung Park-Primiano, a PhD candidate of cinema studies at New York University, also commented effusively: “I will continue to benefit from the collective work given the new connections made with future colleagues and mentors with whom I have and will continue to stay in contact. Many thanks to the Korea Foundation and the SSRC!”
For additional information or to apply for next year’s Workshop, please visit the SSRC Korean Studies Dissertation Workshop website: http://fellowships.ssrc.org/korea/.

한국국제교류재단

First SSRC Korean Studies Dissertation Workshop

SEARCH

First SSRC Korean Studies Dissertation Workshop

SEARCH

전체메뉴