Analysis of the Librarian Certification System in Korea and Measures for Improvement

3.1 History and evolution of librarian training and education programs

The past 70 years of library and information science education in Korea can be divided broadly into librarian workshops during the Japanese colonial period, foundation of the Joseon National Library School after liberation, and the opening of regular university courses. Depending on the chronology, the history is divided into 3-9 phases (Korean Society for Library and Information Science, 2013; Nam, 2013; Korea Culture and Tourism Policy Institute, 2004). Excluding the librarian workshops, which were practical training courses, the first librarian training institution was the Joseon National Library School. The Fig. 1 below shows the history of librarian training and education by period. Based on this analysis, the historical trajectory of library and information science education can be divided broadly into 3 phases, according to the development phase of organizations (or fields of study).

Fig. 1.

History of librarian training and education by period

Phase 1 refers to the period from 1946 to 1960, which marks the genesis of library science education, when accelerated incumbent worker education courses began and a small number of undergraduate courses opened. In April of 1946, the year following Korea’s liberation, the Joseon National Library School, attached to the National Library of Korea, opened, initiating library science education. The school functioned as a training institution that provided professional training in a short period, at a time when librarians were in short supply after liberation. Curriculum subjects included organization of resources and language studies (classification, cataloguing, bibliography, Korean, Classical Chinese, foreign languages, etc.). In the four years after its foundation (1946-1949), the school produced 77 graduates, but was forced to close when the Korean War broke out in 1950. In 1957, Yonsei University opened the nation’s first undergraduate and graduate courses in library and information science, and the Korea Library School opened, offering accelerated training. Thus undergraduate-level education began to take hold. Additional undergraduate courses were opened at Ewha Womans University (1959), Chung-Ang University (1963), and Sungkyunkwan University (1964). In 1965, the Korean Academy of Librarian Education was founded at Sungkyunkwan University. In total, six education programs for undergraduate students and incumbent workers were established during Phase 1.

Phase 2 refers to the period from 1970 through the 1980s, when growth and expansion accelerated as university undergraduate courses spread across the country, and training and education began in junior colleges. Library science departments existed in only four universities in Seoul until the 1960s, then spread to universities throughout the country in the 1970s. After Kyungpook National University (1974) created a library science department, becoming the first national university to do so, in this period is marked by rapid qualitative growth, with the installation of library science departments in 31 universities and colleges (26 four-year universities + 5 junior colleges) and the foundation of five academic societies.

Phase 3 refers to the period from 1990 to the present. After a phase of rapid growth and expansion, library science education entered a phase of settlement and maturation as it evolved into specialized undergraduate and graduate-level education. At the same time, it was forced to embrace the Internet and the digital information distribution paradigm. In Phase 3, the field of library science is marked by revolutionary changes in the appellation of the academic discipline, curricula, teaching and learning methods, and content of academic research. Library and information science education has entered a maturation phase, and that the supply of librarians has exceeded demand, reaching a state of oversupply. Nonetheless, the Busan Academy of Librarian Education offering accelerated certificate programs opened at Busan Women's College in 1997, and bachelor of library and information science (BLIS) and Class 2 librarian certification courses opened in lifelong education centers of three, necessitating a fundamental improvement in the method of national certification. In the meantime, traditional library science education transformed to embrace information science, the Internet, and digital information technology. In 1991, Chonnam National University took the lead in adopting the name “Department of Library and Information Science.” This trend extended to academic societies, which began adding the word information to their names: the Korean Society for Library Science became the Korean Society for Library and Information Science. Taking into account the new world of digital information, new subjects were added to university programs, including information systems, information retrieval, metadata, user interface, digital libraries, digital content, digital copyrights, and Internet literacy. Moreover, teaching and learning methods and academic research subjects are diverging by age of users (i.e. children, youth, elderly), by socioeconomic status (i.e. disabled, multicultural families, residents of farming and fishing villages, etc.), and by subject (i.e. science, medicine, law, agriculture, theology).

3.2 The status and limitations of the current librarian certification system in Korea

The total number of library and information science education courses for librarian training was 43 (including 37 at undergraduate universities, 3 at academy of librarian education, and 3 at lifelong education centers) in 2020. A SWOT analysis of the actual state of affairs, education providers, and the employment conditions of these courses are shown as below.

First of all, the strength of the internal environment comes from the institutional and external scale. The legal system is concrete and education providers are diverse. Academic associations and committees function as a protective fence, and a large number of academic theses are being produced in the field. Weaknesses include uncertain academic identity and status, disparity of levels by education provider, unbalanced supply and demand, and weak public confidence in the national certification.

Next, opportunities in the external environment were set forth by the Third Comprehensive Plan for Library Development, Korea’s official guiding plan, which specifies the following as objectives: continuous expansion of librarian staff in the libraries. Moreover, societal expectations and awareness of library services and librarianship are increasing, and a consensus is being formed on strengthening educational functions and improving the certification system. However, potential department closings and reduction of recruitment quotas following decreased enrollment, weakened major field education due to the loosening of higher education policy, and the adverse impact of the Internet on the library system and the academic field, are placing strains on the system.

Extending these SWOT analysis results, the status and limitations of the current librarian certification system are as follows.

First, of the 43 education courses offered by universities, 37 are regular courses based on the Higher Education Act, targeted at degrees in library and information science and librarian certification. On the other hand, 6 of the courses offered by universities (3 academy of librarian education courses based on the Libraries Act and 3 lifelong education center courses created and managed according to the Act on Recognition of Credits, etc.) are accelerated courses that place emphasis on obtaining librarian certificates. Recently, there have been attempts to introduce online courses in private online educational institutions.

Second, significant discrepancies are found among courses offered by various education providers (universities, junior colleges, academy of librarian education, lifelong education centers), which are compared in the Table 1. Courses for Class 2 librarian certification are compared in the Fig. 2.

Table 1.

Library and information science credit requirements and librarian certification by education provider

Fig. 2.

Credit requirements for Class 2 librarian certification by education provider

The minimum number of major subject credits required is 50 credits for single majors and 24 credits for double majors under the department system, and around 36 credits under the college system. On the other hand, the academy of librarian education require a minimum of 30 major subject credits, while lifelong education centers require a minimum of 48 credits. Qualifications for enrollment at the academy of librarian education can be met in three ways: a master’s degree with a major outside of library and information science or library science; an assistant librarian certificate + minimum 3 years of work experience at a library or other institution; or a diploma from a 4-year university (incl. air and correspondence univ.) + an assistant librarian certificate + minimum 1 year of work experience at a library or other institution. The eligibility criterion to take a course at a lifelong education center is a non-major degree from a 4-year university, or the equivalent. To summarize, the minimum major subject credit requirement fluctuates severely, with the requirement being 50 credits for university single-majors (around 36 for double majors and the college system), 30 credits at the academy of librarian education (four-year university graduates who hold an assistant librarian certificate and have a minimum 1 year of work experience), and 48 credits at lifelong education centers (university non-majors). Disregarding the variables of instructor quality and educational content levels, the requirement for university single-majors (50 credits) is greater than those for attendees of the academy of librarian education (30 credits) and lifelong education centers (48 credits), and the requirements for university double-majors (24 credits) and students under the college system (36 credits) are less than those for attendees of the academy of librarian education and lifelong education centers. University non-majors are required to earn 30 credits at the academy of librarian education, in addition to holding an assistant librarian certificate and having 1 year of work experience. By contrast, they are required to earn 48 credits at lifelong education centers. Eligibility criteria for taking a course at the academy of librarian education (assistant librarian certificate+1 year of experience) are in no way equivalent to 18 credits (48 credits-30 credits) at a lifelong education center. Thus, the discrepancy in requirements has little persuasive power.

In summary, discrepancies in education levels due to uncontrolled establishment of librarian training providers, and the subsequent weakening of public confidence in the national certification are outstanding issues that must urgently be addressed. The unfair practice of equal recognition of qualifications despite differing education levels must be abolished by improving the certification system.

4.1 Legal basis of the librarian certification system

Unlike the certification systems in the USA and UK, Korea has a national qualification system, whereby a librarian certificate is issued to anyone who completes a prescribed education course. The system originated from the Enforcement Decree of the Libraries Act, enacted on March 26, 1965. Article 4, Clause 2-3 of the legislation classified librarians into “librarians and assistant librarians,” and stipulated their respective qualifications. After an overall revision on August 16, 1988, Table 3 attached to Article 5, Clause 1 of the Enforcement Decree of the Libraries Act classified librarians into Class 1 librarians, Class 2 librarians, and assistant librarians, and stipulated their respective qualifications. Table 3 attached to Article 4, clause 2 of the most recent revision of the Enforcement Decree of the Libraries Act, published on May 6, 2015, stipulates the classification and qualifications of librarians, shown in the Table 2.

Table 2.

Librarian classification and qualifications

The types of institutions offering courses for librarian certification expanded from universities (including graduate schools) and junior colleges, as defined under Article 2 of the Higher Education Act, to educational institutions designated under Article 4, Clause 2 of the Enforcement Decree of the Libraries Act, and lifelong education centers, according to Article 3, Clause 2 of the Enforcement Decree of the Act on Credit Recognition. Certification courses are being offered by various types of education providers. Recently, the academy of librarian education and lifelong education centers have been increasing in the distribution of librarian certificates by education subjects. The same Class 2 librarian certificate is issued by universities and the two types of training centers, despite substantial discrepancies in credit requirements and education levels. These factors contribute to plunging public confidence in the national certification, and encourage discrimination.

4.2 Measures for improvement of the librarian certification system

Key improvement measures for the librarian certification system proposed by academia and expert organizations to date include specifying minimum credit requirements, increasing minimum credit requirements, designating subject requirements, introducing a specialized graduate school system, introducing an accreditation system for education courses, administering certification examinations, and designating required subjects by field and qualification level. (Jeong, 2007; Kwack et al., 2009; KLA, 2013) The Fig. 3 shows a comparison of survey results included in each research report. While introduction of a certification examination is the preferred measure, opinions on introducing a specialized graduate school system, specifying minimum credit requirements, adopting an accreditation system for education courses, and designating required subjects by field and librarian classification differed by conductor of research. The Table 3 reorganizes these proposed improvement measures, after evaluation and comparison with consideration to conceptual implications; juridical, epistemic, and practical grounds and limitations; and their suitability and applicability.

Fig. 3.

Comparison of survey results included in each research report

Table 3.

Comparison and evaluation of improvement measures for the librarian certification system

In brief, transitioning to a national examination system is desirable, since the current librarian certification system is facing such issues as identical certifications being issued despite differences in the number of earned credits, educational content, and instructor qualifications; complaints of discriminatory practices; weakened public confidence in the national certification; and invalidation of Class 1-2 librarian certificates resulting from assistant librarian certificates being the minimum requirement of service examinations. To this end, the preconditions of public announcement of standardized subjects, development of an application model for a national examination system, revision of relevant legislation, and composition of examination management organization, among others, must be met. The following are models and proposals for the introduction of a national examination system.

First, in order to introduce a national examination to the librarian certification system, disparities in undergraduate-level education must be relieved. To this end, the model presented in the Table 4 can serve as a base, to which subjects can be added or subtracted after eliciting opinions and agreement from interested parties, before standardized subjects are finalized and announced.

Table 4.

Model of standardized subjects in library and information science

Second, a special committee of the KLA has presented an application model for a national examination system, and proposed to improve the librarian certification system in four parts through the introduction of a national examination system (The first proposal suggests administering the national examination to every graduate + allowing only successful candidates to enter the job family; the second proposal suggests issuing certification upon graduation + applying the national examination to Class 1; the third proposal suggests administering the national examination to every graduate + issuing certificates to successful candidates + administering certification examinations by specialization; and the fourth proposal suggests administering the national examination to every graduate + issuing certificates of specialization from accredited institutions) (KLA, 2013). While the second proposal is the most desirable, the term every graduate is unclear, and additional supportive measures have not been presented. Supplementing KLA’s model, the Table 5 below shows an application model of a national examination system, proposing issuance of Class 2 librarian certificates and granting eligibility for the national examination upon completion of an undergraduate or higher-level education course, and proposing issuance of Class 1 certificates to successful candidates.

Table 5.

Application model of a national examination system for librarian certification

Third, in order to introduce a national examination system, clauses must be added to the Libraries Act to provide a legal basis. First, an Article stipulating the administration of the national examination must be added, as shown in the Table 6.

Second, the current librarian classifications, specified in Article 4, Clause 2 of the Enforcement Decree of the Libraries Act, must be revised, as shown in the Table 7, creating Classes 1 to 3 (Class 1 denotes specialized librarians, Class 2 denotes librarians, and Class 3 denotes assistant librarians), and the qualifications of each class must be redefined. Additionally, test subjects on the national examination must be specified in a table attached to the Enforcement Decree of the Libraries Act. Because librarian classifications and qualifications and test subjects are important and sensitive matters for academia and other interested parties, it is necessary to reach common ground through public hearings, expert consultations, and the like.

Table 6.

Amendment model for the Libraries Act to provide legal basis for a national examination system

Table 7.

Amendment model for the Enforcement Decree of the Libraries Act, with revisions to librarian classifications and qualifications

Fourth, in order for a national examination system to be successful, a device must be put in place that gives real-life prestige to Class 1 librarian certificates issued to successful candidates. To this end, extra points for librarian certificates should be added to Article 31, Clause 2 of the Decree on Civil Service Examination; and Act 14, Clause 11 (Table of special job benefits) of Regulations on Civil Service Benefits, etc. should be amended, changing the recipient from “a public librarian” to “a civil servant in charge of library duties,” and changing total compensation to “base salary + advanced salary by certification,” so as to apply a graduated pay scale.

Fifth, in order to introduce a national examination system, the Presidential Committee on Library and Information Policy, the Ministry of Culture, Sports, and Tourism, or the representative professional organization, the Korea Library Association, must take the lead in forming a hypothetically-named “Committee on National Librarian Examination,” composed of competent ministry representatives, academic organizations, and employees of various types of libraries, among others, to discuss and decide on measures such as preparing the aforementioned Articles and Clauses to serve as the legal basis, revising librarian classifications and qualifications, determining eligibility criteria and exam subjects, applying an extra point system to civil service examinations for successful candidates of the national examination, renewing librarian certification and reeducation, and reissuing librarian certificates. In addition, standards must be prepared for such details as designation of supervisory organizations for the national examination, composition of the exam board and content of examinations, and criteria for success and proportions.