Hello,

Today I’m writing to you with an urgent matter. Myongji University, which established the first department of Baduk (Go) Studies in 1997, decided to abolish the department in the process of restructuring the university. Even though we had suggested expanding the department to a mind sports department by including chess and bridge, they evaluated the future of our department as low and therefore concluded the abolishment.

It would be of great help if you could voice your opinion on the value of our department as the only academic institution that offers a Bachelor, Master, and Ph.D. course in Go Studies and thus prepare experts to work in the field of Go in Korea and abroad as Go teachers, Go journalists, broadcasters and tournament players. Among the Go teachers abroad, Yoon Youngsun 8p, Kim Yoonyoung 8p, Diana Koszegi 1p, Hwang Inseong, Lee Semi, Svetlana Shikshina 3p, Oh Chimin, Daniel Chan, Shaun Jiang, and Cindy Lim are former students of our department. Many more have taught Go abroad in the past. If you would like to voice your opinion, there are two options:

1) (Online Petition) “Don’t abolish the department of Baduk Studies”.
https://secure.avaaz.org/community_petitions/en/myongji_university_don_t_abolish_the_department_of_baduk_go_studies_at_myongji_university/?cvlrntb&utm_source=sharetools&utm_medium=copy&utm_campaign=petition-1659359-don_t_abolish_the_department_of_baduk_go_studies_at_myongji_university&utm_term=cvlrntb%2Ben

2) (Opinion Poll) Feel free to write your comments and thoughts in a google form. https://forms.gle/EAkYhkBjx8h3YoBr9

We will be happy to forward your voices as a last resource hoping to change Myongji University management’s opinion.

Thank you.

Daniela
(on behalf of the Dep. of Baduk Studies)

It's sad that they decided to close the department. Unfortunately the academic world is really driven by money. Baduk clearly still has a substantial following in South Korea. Did they simply decide that the department generated less revenue than they required, or did they really feel that Baduk was on the way out?

_________________
North Lecale

Hi Daniela

Disappointing news, but we need more concrete information in order to be able make responses that your top brass will listen to. A list of go teachers that virtually no-one has heard of here is not the sort of thing that will sway hearts and minds of administrators looking at a balance sheet of either money or reputation.

The sort of contributions made by the Baduk Faculty that I would expect to register more with administrators are new research discoveries (i.e. publications in academic journals), collaborations with overseas universities and other disciplines (e.g. cognition studies in go and neuroscience) and, more cynically perhaps, spreading the fame of Korea overseas - go diplomacy. And has there been follow-through to report on the contributions made by graduates? I have been in the lucky position of going to Myongji a couple of times and know that excellent work has been done there, but I can't honestly say that PR has been one of the faculty's strengths.

What we need, in order to make a strong case, is something to work with - information. Your hands may be tied as to what you can say publicly, but it would be useful to know at least the following.

1. What is the university's credo now? I know it began as a women's college. If that still has some resonance, you now have the success of Ch'oe Cheong to study and write about publicly. You have the success of female go in Japan to study and to publicise what lessons Korean go can learn. Myongji also became a vocational college early on. If it remains such, then training go instructors and the like clearly fits the mould, but where is the evidence that these instructors have actually contributed much. There are plenty of go instructors who did not go to Myongji. There are plenty of go writers and translators who did not go to Myongji. In fact, I'd say that the contributions in both those categories from Myongji graduates is rather hard to pin down. If the credo is now something different, what is it?

2. Why does the university think your future prospects are poor? Is the problem with the future of go itself? Is AI a deadening factor? Are westerners now deemed capable of looking after themselves? Or whatever? I infer from your suggestion to add chess and bridge to the portfolio (i.e. add expense) that money may not be a problem. Is that so?

3. If money is a big issue, what is the thinking about other ways of studying at Myongji? On-line degrees, degrees by correspondence, or even just short courses? You have a wide array of languages at your disposal in the Baduk Faculty and I would rate that as one of your strengths. Are you not able to help other faculties to publicise their own work (or joint work with you) overseas?

4. Is university politics a factor? Are you competing with some other discipline?

I'm sure other people here could (and should) add questions of their own. As I say, we need something to work with if we are to make a case.

If the first time the academy comes down to this forum is to ask for our support to not close it down, that probably proves the decision is right.
Maybe I've missed it but the role it could have played in the amateurs' quest for knowledge is - to my knowledge - non-existent, whether here or on SL or on any forum where Go theory is being discussed.

I have heard of the department and I know some names on that list of students, but I really don't know how important their studies in the baduk department were for their careers as international baduk teachers, compared to the efforts made by (for example) the KBA.
From what I see, it seems the baduk department is mostly catering a domestic demand in South Korea and the arguments for closing the department are also mostly domestic.
I don't even know how important international popularisation of baduk has been for the department.
So I think it would be a pity if yet another baduk instute were to close down (like for example the European Go Center), but outside prospective students, I don't expect closing it or not will affect baduk in the West all that much.
I did sign the petition though.

Hi John,
first of all, thank you very much for your critical analysis and questions. I'll try to answer to some of the points you made.
Half of the list are very popular Go teachers in Europe and Americas, so I mentioned them indeed to try to sway European & North/South American Go players' hearts. I completely agree that such a list won't convince administrators.
I appreciate your advice and I agree that PR is not our strongest point. It's not easy to list all achievements and contributions the department has made, but I'll try with a short but not complete list.

25 years Department of Baduk Studies

Education
- Since 1997 B.A. course
- Since 2001 MA. course
- Since 2009 Ph.D. course
- 85 international students from 25 countries
- Faculty members from Korea, China, Germany, Taiwan
- International Baduk Teachers’ workshops hosted by KBA
- Life Long Learning Center: Baduk course for Baduk teachers
- Global Baduk CEO course
- Baduk courses for non-Baduk major students
- European Go teachers workshop
- Course for Chinese Baduk teachers
- Myongji University’s Award “Outstanding international department”
- 2022 Major Curriculum Certification

Achievements
Many Go tournaments prizes, such as
- 2010 Asian Games 1 Gold & 1 Bronze medal winner Kim Yoonyoung 2p (Women team, Pair Go with Choi Cheolhan 9p)
- 2003 Open EGC winner Hong Seul Ki
- 2006 EGC winner Shikshina Svetlana
- 2008 Open EGC winner Park Jong-Wook
- 2009 Open EGC winner Kim Eunkuk
- 2012 Open EGC winner Yoon Nam-gi
- 2018 Open EGC winner Song Jun-Hyup
The Korean amateur and pro tournament achievements are too many to list them all here.

Research and Publications
- 2003 the Korean Society for Baduk Studies established:
o published 22 volumes of the Korean Journal of Baduk Studies
o organized 10 national and 10 international conferences on Baduk Studies
o published 20 Conference proceedings
- 40 Master theses published
- 10 Ph.D. theses published
- About 100 research papers published
- Many presentations at national and international conferences, seminars and workshops in and outside Korea
- Book publications :
o About 50 books in Korean, about 20 books in English
o About 50 book translations to English (such as "Fall in love with baduk", Book series "Level Up" etc.)

Cooperation Partners
- Korean organisations like KBA, KBF etc.
- Foreign universities in China, Japan, Taiwan

Exchanges
- Many exchange trips to China, Japan, Taiwan, and hosting exchange meetings in Korea
- Exchanges with Korean Baduk Middle and High School

Regarding the university politics and finances, I prefer not to answer as that is indeed the root of the problem and I'm not confident that I understand the whole situation completely to talk about that in public.
On the petition website I have written a few of the university's arguments, such as a declining Korean adult population and our counter arguments. We have presented twice a 15-page department development plan to the university, including a SWOT analysis and suggesting an expansion to a Mind Sports department to meet changes in society and be able to attract even more international students in the future. The expansion was an option, not a must.

In the end, it comes down to simple math: in order to create more promising new departments, you have to shut down existing departments to meet the university quota that is restricted by the government. Then small departments like ours with a 20-student quota are welcome prey. Furthermore, they hired an external consulting company that simply looked at trend words and tried to shape the new Myongji University + Myongji College into that picture. Whether a benchmark with more prestigious universities is a smart idea, is a different question but our department was obviously too 'unique' to meet their standards. Infact, they mentioned a recent try to establish a mind sports department at another Korean university that failed. That was part of their arguments why our department is also bound to fail in 10-20 years. So they prefer to rather close it now then waiting until the current 3:1 application rate might drop.

I hope that answers some of your questions.

It is a tough crowd here sometimes.

I have heard about the department at Myongji University, though I don't know very much about it, it would still be sad if the only such program for Go was closed down. I know that in some European countries it is common for athletes and coaches to study in sports programs, even chess world champion Magnus Carlsen spent time (as a non-degree student I think) in a Norwegian sport university. It is a model that seems to work, as far as it does nurture better athletes and coaches that then will continue to have an impact by spreading the game and increasing the quality of teaching and training. Maybe having a single small program in Korea, which has so much Go activity, seems like it is a drop in the bucket but it can have quite the impact around the world because of the international students.

Maybe I should write a letter

Daniela:

Thank you for the long explanatory notes. The long list of achievements (the tip of an iceberg, I'm sure) makes me lament even more the lack of PR effort these accomplishments deserve. I am also pessimistic about the value of a petition now that I see more clearly what you are up against - administrative euthanasia when the young patient is alive and well! The standard tesuji of administrators when they have a weak case has already been deployed - they have commissioned a consultants' report and we all know consultants are expected to reach the result the commissioning party wants. No petition will overcome that.

However, hand-wringing over the past gets us nowhere. My assessment is that the Myongji administrators will listen only to a higher power. My suggestion, therefore, is to go for the Korean Foreign Ministry. A big part of their job is to promote Korea overseas, and go is (or should be) a major weapon. Football is a good (and currently topical) weapon. I saw a rather large middle-aged lady proudly wearing a Son Heung-min shirt while shopping recently. But if we look at what else Korea is famous for, kimchi, K-Pop, Gangnam and admittedly good cars but cars that everyone here thinks are made by the Japanese (KIA and High-oon-die) are very thin gruel. I listened in to a quiz yesterday, involving well-educated people. A multiple-choice list of countries was read out to help answer the question "Which country is known for the martial art taekwondo." The answer given was Japan. Meanwhile, in go, Korea has the best male, best female and best team in the most intellectual large-scale game in the world, a game that has become well known worldwide because of AlphaGo. And who beat AlphaGo - a Korean! The Korean Foreign Ministry is not using this tool - a tool unique in the world. They should, and they can get a ready-made working model at Myongji University.

So, my conclusion is that it may produce dividends if you can persuade the presidents of go associations in Europe, the Americas and Australasia to write to the Korean ambassadors in their respective countries, lamenting the Myongji decision and pointing out that they are missing a great opportunity in a field where they haven't been doing all that well. I would expect at least some of them to report back to Seoul. If at the same time, Cho Hun-hyeon can use his political clout and open a channel to the Foreign Ministry himself, a word in the ear of the administrators would not go amiss.

It's a longshot in that it doesn't address the domestic concerns, or even what may turn out to be genuinely imperative forces elsewhere, but I do think involving native Korean ambassadors will carry more weight than the amorphous body of go players of the west. These ambassadors need to be urged to make more effort than just putting their name to cheap Ambassador's Cups. Can they really be satisfied that Korea is better known for kimchi than the world's best game?

https://forums.online-go.com/t/controve ... ions/44896

https://lifein19x19.com/viewtopic.php?f ... =Ramblings



It's weird how you didn't include Janggi. Is it not high brow enough for Myoungji? I've been saying baduk spaces should be general mindsport spaces for some time now

It's called the department of Baduk Studies.

And that's exactly one of the reasons why, or rather one of the excuses made by the higher ups, it is being shut. If practically possible everything baduk should also be baduk and mindsports. A baduk and mindsports department implies about 50% of the focus is on baduk but if just one of the other mindsports are increasing in popularity that discards one of the excuses. Since it's an Abrahamic university the focus should probably be on perfect information mindsports.

I doubt that any attempt to broaden the department's scope will be successful.
Either you convince it that Baduk is still relevant and important in Korean Society or you lose the argument.

I do wonder if the income generated by the department, or its academic output have any relevance ?

_________________
North Lecale

If baduk is seen as a standard bearer to compare all mindsports to,then it's success would linked to the success of those other mindsports . . .

Even saying that the game is relevant and important to society may not be sufficient. From what I understand, it's not only the go program that's getting the axe, but also departments in philosophy, math, and physics. I doubt that these subjects have lost their relevance or importance.

_________________
be immersed

If according to certain criteria the existence of departments in philosophy, math, and physics are threatened then the criteria must be wrong.

Then all those departments should be combined into one Department for the Philosophy of Artistic Mathematics.

Mindsports are Artistic Mathematics, and studying mathematical philosophy through the artist avenue of mindsports is sure to attract a wide range of people including international students.

The university was founded as a vocational training institute in the liberal arts. So, if cutting back under pressure while keeping to their founding charter, they may feel those three subjects are first in line for the chop. It's not as if they are not done elsewhere in Korea. But go differs in that it is unique to Myongji, it is vocational (go instructors), and go can easily be classed as a liberal art despite the efforts of all the numbers guys here.

Seconded.

And isn't there a politician in Korea who's a fan of Choi Jeong? https://namu.wiki/w/%ED%99%8D%EC%A4%80%ED%91%9C why not contact him and let him know about the situation?

This still feels wrong to me, but I may misunderstand something. Aren't philosophy, math and physics among the most fundamental fields that exist since Antiquity? Aren't they in the list of liberal arts (or am I misunderstanding the concept of liberal arts)? Or are you saying that these fields are less suitable for vocational training than others? What is then the list of departements that the university should focus on?

I think you may be overlooking something.

The Oxford dictionary that rests on a shelf behind me says, "liberal arts: arts subjects such as literature and history, as distinct from science and technology." It further marks the term as "chiefly North American." That may be so, but "arts and sciences" has been a standard dichotomy here in Britain. In my day at school, you were expected to choose one side or the other for higher education. I chose arts and did four languages in my sixth-form.

I can also remember a big debate when social sciences came on the scene (from America) and were generally despised as arts pretending to be sciences.

There is, of course, an older meaning, or should I say 'several meanings' from Greek times when logic, rhetoric, music and astronomy were thought to be the main intellectual fodder, and through medieval times when the first universities were founded. But that's not relevant here.

The bit that I think you are overlooking here is that Myongji began as a women's college (under a different name), and women then were still not expected to become engineers and the like. Furthermore, it was not what we then used to think of a pukka university. It was what we use called a polytechnic, or college, in England, widely regarded as a step below a real university and focusing heavily on vocational subjects. We used to have the same distinction at school level: grammar schools (doing Latin) were at the top of the pile, then came technical schools for boys and commercial schools for girls (who learnt basically secretarial skills). At the bottom were what were regarded as "secondary modern" dumping grounds for the riff-raff. That has all changed. Polytechnics can (and do) now call themselves universities, and almost all schoolchildren are lumped together in massive "comprehensives" - education factories. But the old distinctions remain below the surface.

I would expect similar transitions to have taken place elsewhere, including Korea, but with different cultural emphases. But what they are, I don't know. I take no interest in education systems. America, in particular, is a closed book to me. Korea is, too, except that I have visited Myongji a couple of times and so have done the guided tour. I am, however, making an educated guess when I point to the history of Myongji and assume that their history and/or founding charter may count for something even today.