How can contrastive rhetoric redress the balance in Korean business academia?

In this paper we compare Contrastive Rhetoric (CR) and the ‘traditional approach’, as pedagogical strategies with the potential to improve the academic writing skills of business graduate students in South Korea. In unstructured tests we test the performance of students using both strategies using three key indicators；1, Grasp of Field of Study； 2, Structure, Communication and Presentation and 3, Thesis Contribution. Taking a largely conceptual approach we explain the numerous pedagogical advantages of CR compared to the ‘traditional approach. We find that the CR methodology encourages a student to appreciate social context and rhetorical choices；thus, giving students the opportunity to find their ‘voice’. We find this approach superior to the ‘traditional approach’ because the ‘traditional approach’ encourages a to replicate the rhetoric of a mainstream business author, and present this view as their own.