In this paperthe following key words will be clarified and estimated on theoretical perspective; the concept literary ability-distinguished from literary competence, the educational significance literary ability, and the direction of performance in `literary doing`. Literature may abstractly be defined as a linguistic conformation of valuable experience of human being. Along with the definition, criticism, literary scholarship, historiography, some philosophical writings can be resided in the area of literature. In this point, the genre system of literature, for example novel, poetry, drama and the essay, must be re-conceptualized in a new direction, especially in literary education. The works of the authors will be enumerated, literary criticism of Kwak Kwang Soo, literary scholarship of Kim Youn Shik, historiography os Sa Ma Cheon, Martin Heidegger`s art theory etc. Here, it must be point out that the literary ability is not the practical ability to explicate any literary text but it is the ability of human values and ability available for human self formation. In literature, we can find out various aspects human life and human faculties, and it is caused by the polyphonic and complex nature of literary conformation that all the literary values must be convergent to the value system of the audiences of literature. Through the process of literary education, the students will learn how to overcome the monologic meanings and attain the dialogic or polylogic imagination which is unique in literature. This is the genuine meaning of literary ability.

This study is a conceptual and analytical research for realization of evaluating literary competency. The point of issues are that hardly any assessment for `competency` was made in the classroom for literary education and that at the bottom of the fact theories for literary education has failed hierarchic conceptualization of literary competency. In this study I raised a question whether the developmental gradation for literary competency is possible or not, and inquired how we can evaluate if possible (theorically), or how we get the favorable condition of actualization if possible (practically).

This article discusses computer games in relation to literary education-a natural connection, considering that computer games are a part of the culture of storytelling, and the fact that the act of playing games can provide the players with certain kinds of aesthetic experiences. Many theoretical discourses on game narratives have focused on the questions of whether computer games could be considered as a form of narrative and, if so, ascertaining the characteristics of the game narrative. These discourses, however, seem to have failed to respond to anxious parents and educators whose primary concerns have dwelled on the moral and cultural values of computer games, which are in many cases considered violent and immoral, and as making the players "mindlessly" addicted to them. Considering the gap between the theoretical and practical discourses on game narratives, this article endeavors to discuss the ways in which game education can be related to literary education by focusing on the cultural values of the stories, taking the argument beyond the protectionist`s perspective which discourages game playing itself.

In this essay, I focus(ed) on the literary ability which is goal, or content, of literary education in curriculum and set up literary experience as a literary ability which is essentially pursued in literary education. I took aesthetic experience of literary emotion in Sijo as an example of concrete literary experience. I suppose(d) the literary ability pursued in curriculum as what learners should (know, understand) (knowledge-understand), what learners should do(practice, skill function?) and attitude that they should take(definition, emotion). I assent that the first thing to improve learner`s literary ability is literary knowledge in intellectual field, but I think that what literary education essentially pursue is cultivation of literary emotion. So, I try(tried) to find how to experience literary emotion aesthetically. First of all, I (examine, define) what the literary emotion is, lay the foundation of discussion by searching for aesthetic meaning about aesthetic experience of literary emotion. Literary emotion is not a neuro-physiological emotion but a emotion, on a level with thought, that can occur by thinking with a regular procedures. It(literary emotion) occurs with a form that learners and authors communicate with each other through literary work. In this essay, experience means all of the (mental, psychological) processes that learners experience directly literary works. I explain learner`s aesthetic experience of literary emotion by relating to Sijo. Learners can experience aesthetically with the structure of formal aesthetic which Sijo has and their internal reference system of emotion. Plans for aesthetic experience of literary emotion are empathy which means to have same emotion with author, reflection through their own internal reference system of emotion. This paper carefully inspects that current Korean curriculum of Sijo education related to literary teaching contents, found the direction as the instruction for cultivating literary emotion. sympathy formation, imaginative specifications, embodied reorganization, internal unify of Sijo emotion make form for the emotional cultivating to Sijo education. Though it is important to define the (notion/concept) ofliterary ability, the goal of literary education, more important thing is to realize it in school. And we need to consider how to realize it in curriculum. It is well presented that what learners should know and reception and production of literary work in the aims for the school years. But literary ability in field of definition related to the attitude that learners should take is not presented. Also it is controversial how to measure the literary ability.

This study led from the research which sees and the elements of literary activity and ability of the elementary student who becomes known investigated. Assumed two types of research instruction and general instruction and collected with data of the instruction cultural analysis which will reach applied the instruction of above 3 units in respectively type. The research result which sees with afterwords is same. First, "thought and impression" the activity which expresses in the method which is various was accomplishing the center from "research instruction" of 4 units. From the side of evaluation, the studying activity will connect a text contents mainly in student experience and will be a method which announces an emotional reaction, percentage composition ability will lead and ratiocination only will be able to evaluate. Second, "general instruction" of 3 units were become accomplished in all textbook center. The student activity is faithful to a textbook instructions justly, also the literary ability was used from within textbook presentation scope. From side of evaluation, to the case which is student announcement and product the possibility the process evaluation becoming accomplished was, but was a basis of assessment where the instruction satisfaction of teacher is important from question and answer teacher central instruction. Third, aim pursuit of unit instruction there was a possibility of becoming the militant in whole literary ability and but the possibility of trying to seek like this prospect from these instruction was not. The instruction preparation of most of the elementary school is consumed with one time and is rolled up. With like this reason, the operation of "instruction helper" etc. to keep the management which teaching & learning data is efficient is necessary.

Knowledge must be not only taught in literature class, but also be derived as a result of learning literature. For this reason, literary knowledge is the beginning and closing of teaching literature. So, it is important matter for us to show what knowledge is needed in literature education and to describe the relationship with literary knowledge and literaryability or competence. This study explored the concept, peculiarity and position of literary knowledge in the Korean national curriculum(2007) and recognized the present of literary knowledge research and practice. We have found some problem. First problem is thegoal or aim of teaching literature is vague or uncertain, so there are not criteria to select, display, and assess literary knowledge. Second problem isthe confusion of contents and method. As this confusing, procedural knowledge (know how) has been regarded as the more important contents than declarative knowledge (know that) in literature education. We have shown that it is not right anymore. All kind of knowledge which is taught, is accepted as a mode of propositional knowledge to students. It is more important to alter literary knowledge to literaryability or competence. Finally, this study confirmed the proposition that the goal is decided, literaryability or competence is specialized as the goal, literary knowledge is selected, andthe method to alter literary knowledge to literaryability or competence is designed in Korean literature education.

I think that the criticism in Western Europe is different from the East Asian "비평(批評: /Bipyeong/)." There must be differences between the Modern criticism and the Middle Age criticism, there also be differences between the Western Europian criticism and East Asian criticism. In the East Asia the criticism was developed in the 4~5th century in China when there were in a state of disorder. Too many intellectuals were set fee from the tie of their native province and they were invited by many of the ambitious persons. Jong Yong[鍾嶸 469?∼518?]`s important book titled Si Pum[詩品] was brought out under the circumstances of these necessity. Pum[品] means evaluation and ordering by criterion. Pum[品] became the same thing as Pyeong[評], the criticism. A few centuries later there brought out Bi[批] as a kind of literal activity. But like Pyeong[評] it was an ordinary cultural activity at first. In Song Dynasty, Bi[批] meant choosing good literary works and indicating the reason why these were good. It followed mark with dots on the side of good phrases or characters. And after a long time, in a certain period, these two different literary activities, Bi[批] and Pyeong[評], merged into one literary activity the same as we know Bi-Pyeong[批評], the criticism. During the Middle age Korean literacies and aristocrats used the two things in three way. One is the grading literary works in Kwageo[科擧], the highest level state examination to recruit ranking officials. The official examiner evaluated the examination papers which were always in the form of literary works. Then give marks and grade the candidates. They did Bi[批] and Pyeong[評], evaluating and ordering. And the second is in the field of literary education. In the middle age the official school were not so efficient method to pass the state examination. So the candidates must study in private school and learning was more important than the education in the case of literary education. Good books were very important to study by themselve. These books contained selected prose and poems with the marks and evaluations that worked a good indication how literary works were written. Third, on the way of creating literary works the criticism did a critical role in its literal sense. Creators of literary works sent his literary works to his friends or masters to seek the criticism. Then the critics used to commented good advises, but in some cases the critics mended or changed the literary works. As the critics were plural so the comments sometimes collided. At that case the worker must decided but what is more important is that the critics and the criticism also was not the kind of consumer, a distributor and a guide. These were the case in the Modern Western Europe not in the Middle Age of East Asia. Nowadays the culture and education became democratic. I expect that the culture and the education will be immanent in every person`s personalities so the critics will be. So the critic systems of Modern Western Europe will be collapsed into an every person`s culture which is similar to that of the Middle Age of East Asia.

This paper aims at exploring a desirable direction for the assessments of literary abilities, focusing on connecting learning and assessment. For this aim, I analyzed some examples of assessments that had been conducted in the middle school and high school classroom, and could see the problems of the assessments of literary abilities; the objectives of assessments were unclear, the standards were not detailed, and the assessments were not enough connection with learning process. Through this analysis, we could grasp current status of teaching literature and explore a desirable direction for the development of literary assessments. To improve literary assessment, first, `assessment for learning` have to be stressed. Assessments for learning, compared with assessment of learning, are to diagnose student needs, plan next steps in instruction, provide students with feedback they can use to improve their literature ability, and help students see and feel in control of their learning. Second, assessment needs to examine the metacognition of literary ability. Metacognition refers to a level of thinking that involves active control over the process of thinking that is used in literary class. Third, scoring rubrics have to be more detailed, especially `instructional rubrics`. Instructional rubrics have the purposes that are both to give students informative feedback about their works in progress and to give detailed evaluations of their final products.

Lee Gi yeong`s `Gohyang` is considered a masterpiece of realism novel produced by KAPF in the 1930s. However, if only the typicality of realism novel theories is brought into focus, we cannot understand the reality of `Gohyang` properly. This study reexamined `Gohyang`, which has been studied based on realism theories, from the aspect of vulgarity. Lee Gi-yeong is politically a hardliner of KAPF. Steadily from the beginning, however, his works show vulgarity on the subject of love affair or illicit love. This can be connected to the fact that, different from other KAPF writers and critics, Lee Gi-yeong adopted Kim Gi-jin`s theory of vulgar novels positively. In the narrative structure of `Gohyang`, the motif of love triangle or the secret of birth is important. The achievement of `Gohyang` was attained because it stood on the boundary between serious novels and vulgar novels. The reason that this study was focused on love triangle or the secret of birth is that we can see other sides of `Gohyang`, which can hardly be captured when the novel is read and evaluated based on realism theories. What should be emphasized in reading novels is not the application of theories or background knowledge but the feeling arising from the reading of the novels with the reader`s eye. This study called it `actual feeling.` This should be emphasized further in literature appreciation in middle and high school.

The relationship between literature education and media education should have a virtuous cycle for enhancing the students` multi-literacy and cultural literacy. However, it is often thought that media culture including film, mass media, internet etc. has a bad influence upon the minds of youths. On the other hand, literature is now so boring to them and may not have much say in the development of their cultural literacy. This paper deals this situation from a viewpoint of literature education, but eventually tries to help the students to get an advanced literacy not only of literatur e but also of media culture. I suggest that literature/media education for media/literature education is needed in order to develop multi-literacy. So I give an example of teaching literature/media through media/literature for enhancing the student`s multi-literacy which is composed by combining various texts of literature and mass media. Actually I give a comprehensive and integrated series of lecture on literature by using multimedia that is related the literary text in terms of theme, subject matter, morals, etc. Then I ask college students to submit a report which shows their own literary or cultural experiences in reference to the text and presents the inter-textuality with other literary or cultural texts. It may look very strange to those who teach literature only by explaining literary texts itself with concrete exegesis on them. However, in my class, a lot of students write unique essays of their own and some of them show high level of cultural literacy. They find their abilities and potentials as so called `prosumers`. They navigate by the internet, follow the hypertexts, and combine them with their own ideas and experiences in relation to the literary text. Thus, multi-media in the literary classroom should be used not just to motivate the students, but to develop their potentials and literacies as producers and consumers in the age of new media.