Korea Herald Education Series

SEOUL, FRIDAY, DECEMBER 22, 2006

Following is the first in a series of articleson the challenges faced by Korea’s educa-tion. — Ed.

By Sung Ki-sun

The high school leveling policy is one ofthe most controversial educational policiesin Korea. According to this policy, middleschool graduates are distributed to highschools using the lottery method, whichmeans they attend the nearest school to theirresidence without taking any entrance exam-ination.

From the end of 1960s, the volume of stu-dents who wanted to receive secondary edu-cation in Korea has increased dramatically.For example, the advancement rate of ele-mentary school graduates was 54.3 percentin 1965, 77.2 percent in 1975 and 99.2 per-cent in 1985. And the advancement rate ofmiddle school graduates was 69.1 percent in1965, 74.7 percent in 1975 and 90.7 percentin 1985. Because of the enormous explosionof middle school level students, the selection

system for sec-ondary school en-trance was veryproblematic. As aresult, the middleschool entrance ex-amination and highschool entrance ex-amination was dis-carded in 1969 and1974. At the time, thehigh school levelingpolicy aimed to cor-rect six major edu-cational problems.First, to cure the

“problem of 9th grades” and make an effortto normalize middle school education.Second, to maintain homogenization andequalization of high schools on students,teachers and faculty. Third, to promote sci-ence and vocational education in the highschool level. Fourth, to promote a balanceddevelopment of education through local

school upbringing. Fifth, to reduce privateexpenditure on tutoring by discarding the en-trance examination. Finally, to control stu-dent population growth in the major citiesand stabilize the rural economy.

For these purposes, the government hastried to reduce the gap between schools bycoming up with various efforts. Today, muchhas been achieved with the introduction ofthis policy. But people are worried about thenegative effects of this policy and insist onpartly discarding it. Many critics say themost serious problem is the under-achieve-ment phenomenon of high school students.And another main criticism of the levelingpolicy is that a distinct heterogeneity in stu-dents’ ability makes it difficult for the teach-ers to teach classes, and students also havedifficulties following the lessons, which alllead to a fall in quality of education and sat-isfaction. But many studies on this themehave proved that the under-achievementphenomenon could not be explained solelyby this policy.

On the other hand, this policy has lessened

Sophomores take a simulated college entrance exam at Poongmoon Girls’ High School in northern Seoul. Yonhap News

Equality vs. excellence in education Debate continues over the controversial high school leveling policy

Sung Ki-sun

By Cho Ji-hyun

Korea has logged some remarkableachievements in education evidenced byrecent international surveys that gave thecountry high ratings for access to high ed-ucation and the performance of students inmathematics and sciences. The highlycompetitive school environment and unri-valed educational zeal has turned out qual-ity human resources that have underpinnedthe nation’s economic success and politicaldevelopment over the past half century.

The education system is now undergo-ing a major transition. Calls are mountingfor an overhaul of the current system whichis viewed as irrelevant to this globalized,knowledge-based economy and society,which require talent with more creative, in-ternational and comprehensive ability.

But opinions widely differ on the direc-tion and pace of the proposed changes,leading to heated debate over a wholegamut of educational issues — includingthe egalitarian school policy, school gover-nance and funding, government regula-tions, the private education market, collegeadmission standards, university reforms,educational content and so forth.

The Korea Herald will run a series of ar-ticles to look into major challenges facedby Korea’s education system.

The first part involves the current egali-tarianism in secondary education, namelythe high school leveling policy, underwhich middle school graduates are as-signed to upper-level schools in theirschool district by lottery. The more than30-year old system has helped nurture a

vast educated labor force to supportgrowth in the mass production era.

But critics said the outdated system isimpeding creativity and diversity in educa-tion. The equalized learning and test sys-tems are blamed for an overall mediocrityin education as they force students focuson rote memorization instead of criticaland independent thinking. It is also said tohave widened the educational gap betweenrich and poor as affluent parents resort tocostly cram schools to get children into

prestigious universities. Some elite schools, specializing in sci-

ences and foreign languages, have been in-troduced since in mid-1990s as a means tomake up for the uniformly low-quality ed-ucation. But they are still subject to strictgovernment regulations. They are also fac-ing criticism for deviating from their pur-ported specialty, and only serving demandsby parents for better preparation for col-lege entrance exams.

([email protected])

2

Korean education faces challenges

the school achievement gaps and raised thequality of high school education generally.For example, according to the Program forInternational Student Assessment 2003 con-ducted by the OECD, Korean students of 15years old showed remarkable results.(Korean students recorded first place in theproblem solving field, second in mathematicsand third in science.) The vice secretary ofeducation department of the OECD said thatthe result is due to the segregated effects ofthe diverse ability brought forward by stu-dents in same class. This is also the samemethod used by Finland, which ranked high-est in this test.

Nevertheless, the debate on the highschool leveling policy has continued formany reasons. Recently, the demands to di-versify schools are so high that the basis ofthis policy is being fundamentally shaken.Because of this demand, the governmenthas established diverse types of highschools, such as: Special Purpose HighSchools (Foreign language, science),Independent Private High Schools, Inde-pendent Public High School and Inter-national Schools for Korean students andmany others. Today, these diverse specialhigh schools number more than 40 estab-lishments. I think the negative effects ofthese schools outnumber the positive ef-fects. The competition for enter these spe-cial schools is very intense, which is thereason so many families suffer the burdenof paying for private tutoring. The more im-portant thing is that the opportunity of en-tering these special schools is not equally

distributed according to the family’s socio-economic backgrounds.

Possibly improvements to the running andmanagement of the current leveling policymay be summarized as below:

First, there is a need for an institutionalmechanism which would allow middleschool students to check their basic educa-tional ability when they apply for highschool education. A middle school gradua-tion test turned out to be popular among ex-perts, whereas students preferred to be testedon main subjects, and teachers preferred atest embracing all subjects in the curriculum.This means that in addition to schools’record of achievements in the middle schoolcurriculum, there is a need for an objectiveand a fair test in order to verify the students’educational ability and in order to preventthe possibility of “dumbing-down” highschool education.

Second, within the leveled area, it is nec-essary to expand the “apply first, allocate ac-cordingly” principle, in order to uphold thestudents’ right to choose schools.

In particular, in order to present studentswith realistic choices, it is recommendedthat schools are given more freedom to de-velop their own distinct educational pro-grams and tradition, and they ought to be en-couraged and supported in doing so.

Third, in order to prevent the studentcatchment areas from exclusively actingas a tool for regional segregation and un-equal opportunities, catchment areas needto be broadened and students must be al-lowed proper power to choose. However,

at the same time, it ought to uphold theprinciple of allocating students to schoolsthat are close to their home. This couldsatisfy both the right to choose and mini-mize the inconvenience of “commuting”to schools.

Fourth, in order to diversify school educa-tion and alleviate the complaints of pri-vately-funded schools for lack of freedom,these schools, when found to be capable offinancial independence, and with clearfounding principles and objectives, ought tobe given greater freedom in order to satisfythe students’ and parents’ right to chooseschools as they wish.

We have to consider this policy’s longterm effects, and consider what kind of poli-cies are effective across the whole educa-tional spectrum based upon objective re-search findings, and these ought to form thebasis of specific educational reform policies.Then the future of Korean education will behopeful.

The writer is a professor of education atCatholic University of Korea in Seoul. — Ed.

A student and her mother look at a leaflet during a Seoul university session on ad-mission guidelines. Yonhap News

3

Corporatization of national universi-ties in Korea has recently been in thespotlight and generated much debateamong government and university pro-fessors.

First proposed in 1995, the planwould introduce a drastic change in theoperation of those schools. The univer-sities will be run by special corpora-tions which will still be owned by thegovernment but have far more auton-omy in personnel management, organi-zation, budget allocations and other ad-ministrative affairs.

The Education Ministry officialsclaimed that it is rather difficult for pub-lic institutes to voice their own opinionswhen creating necessary organizationsunder the current governance systemand that the schools also do not havemuch control over their budget. Theysuggested that the new system will al-low the university president to havemore power — such as selecting its ownpool of employees. Also, it will bringthe competitiveness of national universi-ties to a new level, officials added.

However, numerous professors at na-tional universities said it is yet too earlyfor the government to make this move.They say it is impossible for corporati-zation to succeed with the current edu-cational budget.

In 2005, students attending public in-stitutes were funded with about 7.5 mil-lion won ($8,066) a year by the govern-ment and, in 2003, the government’ssupport on higher education onlyreached 2.2 percent of the nationalGDP, according to Yonsei Universityprofessor Kang Sung-jin.

In contrast, England secured 1.3 tril-lion won for university funding in theyear of 2006 to 2007.

Also, professors stressed that corpo-ratization may only result in downsiz-ing national universities, raising tu-ition fees and reduction of financialsupport.

Ministry officials held a public hear-ing in November after drafting the billlast year, but only a few oppositionistswere allowed to participate in the hear-ing. The ministry plans to submit the billto the National Assembly sometime inJanuary after negotiating with the uni-versity representatives, officials said.

The Korea Herald will observe theopinions of those who approve anddisapprove the issue, which is consid-ered to be a measure that can greatlyimpact the entire education system inKorea.

([email protected])

A new universitygovernance

system

CORPORATIZATION

By Jung Hae-ryong

The corporatization of national universitiesin Korea has been a hotly debated issue aroundnationwide campuses since 2005. It was origi-nally announced by the government as a part ofthe promotion of university reform in May1995. This year the Ministry of Education ispushing its plan in order to legally separate na-tional universities from the government whilealmost all members of the university, includingprofessors, staff and students, are opposed to it.The higher education reform to introduce busi-ness or market mechanisms into the nationaluniversity sector is undoubtedlya radical and controversial plan.If implemented, it would in-volve the greatest change in thehistory of Korean higher educa-tion.

The Education Ministrymaintains that the corporatiza-tion of national universitiesaims to strengthen the globalcompetitiveness of Korean uni-versities. In order to fulfill thispurpose it emphasizes the in-crease in autonomy and ac-countability for the manage-ment of the universities. Noone would argue against theproposition that universitiesshould become stronger by improving the ef-ficiency of management. But, given the cur-rent educational budget the government pro-vides to national universities, the corporati-zation of national universities is too prema-ture to be adopted and can not serve the pur-pose aimed by the government. More impor-tantly, it allows the government to abrogateits responsibility for higher education.

What would happen if Korean nationaluniversities were corporatized? There is nodoubt that the government will gradually re-duce its financial support for national uni-versities and make them self-reliant by pur-suing its own profitable projects. The corpo-ratization might not only result in downsiz-ing of national universities but would almostcertainly result in the raising of tuition fees.Expensive tuition fees would conflict withthe stated mission of national universities ofgiving the public a universal opportunity toobtain higher education. In addition, externalfinancial support, such as donations from theprivate sector, is seldom anticipated in thehumanities and social sciences, which arenot seen to directly contribute to industry.

The Ministry of Education’s special billfor corporatization has lots of problems.First, its governance system is undemocraticbecause it excludes the participation of theprofessors in university management. Accor-ding to the special bill, the council is com-posed of up to 15 members. Appointment forthem might be controlled by the power of thegovernment. This university council, exclud-ing the internal members of the university,has an absolute authority for decisions on allimportant matters within the university. It isnecessary to respect the autonomy and inde-pendence of universities as seats of learning.

Secondly, the ministry’s promise of finan-cial support is unclear. The bill stipulates thatthe government provide financial support atcurrent levels to the corporatized university

but this is only a promise. There is no guaran-tee that the budget department of the govern-ment will continue to support the universities.

According to an official at the EducationMinistry, the bill promises autonomy andcontinuing stable financial support for uni-versities even after corporatization.However, we encounter numerous instancesof the control and regulation of the ministerof education over the university managementin many places in the bill. Therefore, the min-istry’s bill, as it stands, will erode the acade-mic autonomy of universities.

The Ministry of Education maintains thatthe corporatization of nationaluniversities would upgrade theinternational competitivenessof the Korean university sys-tem. But it is a very dangerousproject which ignores the real-ity of Korean national universi-ties. Only 0.3 percent of theGDP of Korea was spent onhigher education expenditures,lower than the average of 1.1percent for all OECD countriesreporting data. Basically, most university pro-fessors, staff, students and eventhe president are opposed to theadoption of corporatization.Nonetheless, the Ministry of

Education is going its own way without con-sidering opposing opinions. The public hear-ing by the Ministry of Education on Nov. 6,2006 shows how ill-mannered and arrogantthey are by proceeding unilaterally withoutproper consultation. In order to obstruct op-posing voices, 600 policemen were alreadystationed at the front and in the corridors ofthe hall, and hundreds of people who wantedto participate in the public hearing were pro-hibited from entering.

Corporatization would not be the best so-lution to international competitiveness for thenational universities in Korea. As far as weare concerned, the corporatization of nationaluniversities is only rhetoric promising the en-hancement of university autonomy and acad-emic excellence without paying attention tothe reality of the situation in the national uni-versities. We have called for an increase ingovernmental financial support to reach lev-els found in other developed countries. Weclaim that the budget for current expenses ineducation and research should be increasedsubstantially. If corporatization proceedswithout securing sufficient additional fund-ing for the higher education budget, the ex-pected goals will not be achieved. It is im-portant to ensure that consultation betweenthe government and the university is giventhe highest priority in this process. In thisperspective, measures by which academicautonomy and accountability in the nationaluniversity system can be harmonized shouldbe further investigated. Government incen-tives should play an important role in achiev-ing the streamlining of the universities.

The writer is the chairman of KoreaFederation of National University ProfessorAssociations and an English professor atPuykong National University. He can bereached at [email protected].

National universities notready for corporatization

Jung Hae-ryong

4

By Yim Chang-bin

Ever since universities were established,enhancing the competitiveness of universi-ties has always been a challenging issue.Apart from the advanced countries, thenewly industrialized countries in Asia likeChina and Malaysia have taken contentiousmeasures in orderto upgrade its uni-versities’ competi-tiveness.

Corporatizationof national univer-sities in Japan is agood example. In2004, the Japanesegovernment suc-cessfully trans-formed its 89 na-tional universities,which served aspart of the govern-ment agencies, tonational universitycorporation. There is no doubt why so manycountries addressed great concerns over uni-versity competitiveness; it is because univer-sity reform greatly impacts the nation’s owncompetitiveness in the new century.

Despite its half century-long history, na-tional universities in Korea have tremen-dously contributed to human resource devel-opment and R&D in the industrialized era,which was characterized by mass productionand standardization. In the knowledge-basedsociety, universities demand productivemanagement policies, but the administrativepolicy planted in the current national univer-sity system has revealed that it lacks flexi-bility.

Without arduous changes of system,Korean universities would experience “de-velopmental lags” in the industry and eco-nomic sectors and the tendency will becomestumbling blocks to the nation’s overall so-cial and economic development. Therefore,it is time to discuss the issue of corporatizinguniversities to enhance autonomy and allowflexibility of national universities.

Corporatization of national university is-sue was first raised in the “May 31Educational Reform plan” in 1995. Afterseveral years of lapse, in 2002, the Ministryof Planning and Budget required the nationaluniversity to corporatize, but the issue failedto be fully recognized. In 2005, the govern-ment announced national university corpora-tion plan based on university self-determina-tion in “University reform strategies throughspecialization.” From this time, specialistsfrom the academic, economic and the mediadiscussed the plan and made the first draft ofa bill of the national university corporation.

The bill recently opened to the public wasa result of much discussion among diversepanels since the first draft came out.

The bill included a transition of manage-ment at national universities and placed em-phasis on independent decision-making, au-tonomous management of budget and orga-nization. Individual universities were re-quired to establish a board of trustees, com-posed of university officials and some fromoutside of the university. Under the new gov-ernance system, management accountabilityshould be improved and head of the univer-sity can exercise his or her leadership.

The autonomous administration policy af-fects sub-issues of management like person-nel, organizational, and financial manage-ment. So far, a national university is over-

looked by the governmental human resourcemanagement and budget and accounting poli-cies. There were constraints for a university torealize autonomy due to the government’s ex-cessive control and interventions over person-nel and financial management matters.However, in the “special legislation regime,”there are more pros than cons and each insti-tution can enjoy autonomy in policies that canhave affects on staffing, payroll, sub organi-zational planning and financial management.

As for the negative perspectives of thelaw enforcement, opponents criticize that itcan possibly depreciate public value and in-stitutional autonomy. Other issues includeretrenchment of governmental subsidy and alack of commitment to financial support; ap-prehension over involuntary ranking amonguniversities across the country; and down-grading of research in traditional “non-in-come-generating” fields such as humanities.

The Education Ministry showed effort tominimize the adverse effects of the reformplan and promised funding, free-of-chargetransfer of governmental properties, and re-inforcing government responsibility in purescience. The measure also covers favorableprovision such as succession of employmentand securing tenure and pension plans forthe corporate body.

In the implementation stage, the educa-tion agency encouraged voluntary participa-tion, which is different from Japan wheregovernment made mandatory for all nationaluniversities to be national universities corpo-rations. We hope that members of the uni-versity partake in the endeavors of long-termdevelopment and for the new legislation toserve as a true administrative tool that con-tributes to the nation’s development.

I hope the plan can act as a cornerstonefor development of national universitiesthrough much discussion among universitymembers.

The writer is the chief of UniversityRestructuring Team at the EducationMinistry. He can be reached [email protected] — Ed.

Students study at a Seoul National University library. The Korea Herald

Yim Chang-bin

Why should we changethe higher education system?

Following is the third in a series of arti-cles on the challenges facing Korea’s educa-tion system. — Ed.

By Jin Hyun-joo

Though she still has one year to go beforesitting college entrance exams, 11th-graderLee Ah-reum has no time to lose. The stu-dent at Sungshin Girls’ High School in Seoulhas been in cutthroat competition with herpeers for better school exam results, whichwill greatly affect college admission for the2008 academic year.

She spends most of her time studying atschool and private institutes. Once a week,she attends a special “cramming school” fora four-hour essay writing class.

“I have to study not only for school ex-ams, the College Scholastic Aptitude Test,but also an essay writing test. I am so lost,”she told The Korea Herald.

“After the essay writing class from 7 p.m.

to 11 p.m., I am exhausted and go to bedright after I come home.”

The 18-year-old girl is one of the hun-dreds of thousands of students who will bethe first to be affected by the nation’s newadmission system, which puts greater weighton high school grades and less on the CSAT,a standardized test accepted by all Koreanuniversities.

The government will implement the sys-tem from 2008 to encourage students to fo-cus on school education and reduce their re-liance on cramming schools for the CSAT.

But the new regulation has backfired,spawning fierce competition among studentsand leading universities to rely on their ownessay tests instead of the CSAT, which issaid to be difficult in terms of evaluatingstudents’ abilities.

The government has long attempted toregulate university admissions, frequentlyaltering the system when problems emerged.

The nation’s college admission system

has been through some 13 changes in the last60 years since Korea was liberated fromJapanese colonial rule in 1945. Each admis-sion framework, therefore, has lasted for fiveyears on average, sowing confusion amongteachers, parents and students.

Universities have also long criticized thegovernment’s interference in admissions andhave sometimes defied the guidelines.

At the center of heated debate are threeadmission rules which are rarely found inother countries.

Under the regulations, dubbed the “ThreeNo’s Policy,” universities are banned fromtaking contributions for admissions; takinginto consideration differences betweenschools when evaluating applications; andadministering a test known as “bongosa,” anin-depth assessment focusing on three mainsubjects — the Korean language, Englishand mathematics.

The aim of the regulations is to provideequal education opportunities for all stu-dents. In reality, parents spend a dispropor-tionately high amount on private educationas they strive to ensure social success fortheir children.

Leading universities have slammed thegovernment for having pursued equality atthe expense of excellence and autonomy.

“The problems related to the universityadmission system are the products of super-ficial egalitarianism. The university admis-sion system, the product of proud progres-sive egalitarians, is a comedy that is too se-rious to laugh at. However, today is not atime for equality but for competition. Theonly way we can survive is by securinggood human resources through competi-tion,” Hyun Sun-hae, head of admissions at

5

State control of admissions stiflesuniversities

Students look at signs on a Seoul street criticizing the government’s college admission policies. Yonhap News

6

SungKyunKwan University, said in a news-paper column early this month.

Political parties are also divided alongideological lines over the issue, with the left-leaning Uri Party favoring the bans and theconservative opposition Grand NationalParty calling for the abolishment of the rules.

The Ministry of Education and HumanResources Development has forbidden uni-versities to administer their own examina-tions for fear that such tests would fuel theprivate tutoring craze and endanger publiceducation.

Under current rules, the ministry requiresuniversities to give essay tests only to sup-plement other admission standards such asschool records and the CSAT.

They maintain the regulations were im-plemented after trial-and-error experience.

Parents once had to spend huge sums ofmoney in private education to prepare theirchildren for rigorous bongosa-style tests ad-ministered by universities.

“When they were allowed, there weremany side effects. The situation would havegotten worse if we had not imposed thosebasic bans,” an Education Ministry officialLee Ki-bong told The Korea Herald. Kim ishead of the ministry’s university academicaffairs division, which is in charge of thegovernment’s university entrance policies.

Further controlling university admissions,the government has drawn up a list of “do-nots” on universities’ own tests, including aban on English essay tests. The ban comes asuniversities are set to put more emphasis ontheir own tests from 2008 when the new ad-mission system takes effect.

“The guidelines demand that the essaytest should not have a correct answer, not bebased on specific knowledge, and Englishpassages should not be used. These demandsgo against the trend of the times. Whyshould schools ask questions that have noanswer? What is wrong with asking for

knowledge in this knowledge-based indus-trial society, and why can’t we ask highschool students questions in English, whenwe teach English even at kindergarten?” pro-fessor Hyun said.

The government has also often faced defi-ance regarding the second rule: disallowingcolleges to give an advantage to applicantsbased on their high school’s university ad-mission rate.

In the past, when the academic status ofhigh schools was a criterion to admission,students whose parents could afford to livein more expensive areas where education fa-cilities were generally of a higher standardhad a better chance of getting into the topuniversities.

Effectively, the government requires uni-versities to treat a top student from a goodhigh school — mostly in affluent areas insouthern Seoul — the same as a top studentfrom a school with a poorer academicrecord.

The ministry said university hopefulsshould not be judged by their predecessors’academic achievements given that most stu-dents are randomly allocated to high schoolsadjacent to their homes.

Since the 1970s, the government has de-nied high schools’ rights to select their stu-dents in an attempt to reduce competition toget into elite high schools.

Despite these attempts, scholastic abilitydiffers starkly in schools from region to re-gion, leading universities to favor studentsfrom high schools that have superior acade-mic records. Some leading universities, in-cluding Yonsei University and KoreaUniversity, were found in October 2004 tobe in breach of the regulation and had theirstate subsidies cut.

But top universities have said they need torely on their own essay tests and interviewsbecause most applicants have superior high-school grades and CSAT scores.

The final ban, on the admission-for-dona-tion system, is opposed by private universi-ties which heavily depend on tuition fees fortheir budgets.

Proponents say donations would relieveuniversities’ financial difficulties and in-crease the number of scholarships available,benefiting both colleges and students.

Some leading universities tried to publi-cize the issue but failed to whip up socialsupport due to a general antipathy toward thesystem.

The Education Ministry and other oppo-nents say the system runs counter to theConstitution which says: “All citizens havean equal right to receive an education corre-sponding to their abilities.”

The government’s efforts to normalizepublic education center on regulating univer-sity admission and discouraging competitionbetween schools and among teachers.

Public distrust of the nation’s formal edu-cation therefore shows no sign of abating.

The public demand for private educationis growing and an increasing number of stu-dents are leaving Korea to study overseas.Some 20,400 elementary, middle and highschool students went abroad to study be-tween March 2005 and February 2006, Rep.Yoo Ku-hong of the ruling Uri Party said,based on data submitted by the EducationMinistry. The figure was a 24 percent risefrom the 16,446 recorded a year earlier.

Most of the students went to the UnitedStates, Canada, China, East Asia, NewZealand and Australia.

Despite the exodus of students, the gov-ernment appears to be pouring most of itsenergy into tightening its grip on universityadmissions in hopes of putting public educa-tion on the right track.

When asked about whether the govern-ment has any plans to adjust or abolish thethere rules, Lee said, “For now, no plan.”

([email protected])

Parents attend a talk on college essay tests at a Seoul private institute. Yonhap News

7

Following is the fourth in a series of arti-cles on challenges faced by Korea’s educationsystem. — Ed.

By Kim Ui-chol

In international studies of academicachievement, Korean middle school studentsare the highest achievers. Among the eco-nomically developed nations, Korean stu-dents rank second overall, following Finlandand surpassingJapan. This phenom-enon is now knownas Korea’s educa-tional miracle.

Why is this a mir-acle? Some 50 yearsago, Korea had oneof the lowest levelsof literacy and acad-emic achievement inthe world. She stoodamong the impover-ished nations, alongwith Bangladesh andRwanda. Currently,Korea’s literacy ratestands at 100 percentand more than 80percent of Korean adolescents attend a uni-versity — the highest in the world. In a mat-ter of one generation, Korea turned from theworst to first. This is truly a miracle.

Although Korean high school students arethe best in the world, top Korean universitiesfail to be ranked in the top 100. How couldthe best students in the world suddenly dropto the third tier once they enter a university oftheir dreams?

This is the case since Korean universitieslack transparency, integrity and accountabil-ity. Professors teach curricula that are out-dated and outmoded. Research is considered apersonal hobby. Incoming faculty are oftenselected on the basis of “yeongo” (social net-work) and not necessarily on scholarly merit.Professors often spend more time maintaining

harmonious social relations rather striving tobe the world’s best.

Once students enter a university, theyspend more time socializing and networkingrather than focusing on their academic work.University serves as an interim break, rest andrelaxation between the intense pressures ofhigh school and the competitive workplace.Restaurants, bars and cafes surround universi-ties. On any given evening, you will findmore students in restaurants, bars and cafesthan in libraries.

Once children enter a university, parentsrelax as if their job is done. They no longer in-vest as much time or money in their children’seducation nor do they pressure them to study.It is ironic that it costs less to send child to auniversity than to a high school with the re-quired tutorial training.

Korean universities are micro-managed byMinistry of Education. The Ministry does notprovide a clear direction, but flounders withthe ebb and flow of political fortunes. Univer-sities are burdened by irrational bureaucraticdemands that impede research and innova-tions.

The egalitarian attitude of Korean students,administrators and professors limits innova-tions and transformation. Democracy is her-alded as the only way to achieve competitive-ness. Resources are distributed on senioritynorm (that is based on age) rather than per-formance. The prestige of a university is de-fined by the quality of the entering class andneither by the quality of the professors nor bythe graduating class.

In the USA, the ranking of universities isbased primarily on research performance ofprofessors. The knowledge they generatedthrough research is taught in lecture halls andlaboratories. Recognition, rewards and re-sources are given to those universities, pro-fessors and students who excel.

Universities in Korea are a continuation ofelementary, middle and high school whereknowledge is imparted from teachers to stu-dents in a lecture format. Critical analysis andchallenge from the students are frowned

upon. Criticizing the work of a colleague tostudents is a taboo, sanctioned by the highestdisapproval.

In American universities, students aretaught to criticize and to challenge what theyknow to be true. They are encouraged to chal-lenge what they learn in other classes andfrom other professors. They participate inknowledge generation through laboratory ex-periments, fieldwork and research. They areforced to think for themselves, to judge rightfrom wrong, and at the same time participatein the academic community through research,conferences and publications.

In Korea, funds and resources distributedequally or by the seniority norm. Some usethe resources for research, while otherssquander them. Professors supervise equalnumber of students, with the senior professorsselecting the preferred students.

Professors in the USA compete for fundsand resources and given to those who excel,regardless of their seniority. Transparency, in-tegrity and accountability are demanded at alllevels. Students flock to the best performingprofessors desiring to learn the latest innova-tions.

It is ironic that American high schools re-semble Korean universities, which are rathermediocre. Korean universities resembleAmerican high schools, which are rathermediocre.

The solution for the Korean universities isclear: We must implement transparency, in-tegrity and accountability. Pursuit of excel-lence must become the goal and resourcesneed to be distributed based on performanceand not on seniority norm. Government bu-reaucracy must be replaced institutional struc-ture that evaluates and rewards excellence.Political consideration of equal distribution,regional development, and social welfareshould not play a primary role in universityeducation. The pursuit of excellence, researchand knowledge generation, integrity and ac-countability should be the highest goals. Thisis the strength of the US universities and whythey are the world’s best.

At the societal level, fierce competition,pursuit of excellence and elitism are extendedto the American society. While it can boast thelargest and most dynamic economy in theworld, they suffer from serious social prob-lems and injustices.

In Europe, they value and foster enlight-ened minds at the university level. However,once they enter society, they emphasize uni-versal justice, balanced and sustainable devel-opment, and social justice. As a result,Northern European countries boast stabledemocracy, social justice and the highestquality of life.

In university, critical analysis and creativethinking are essential. In society, we need en-lightened minds who understand the moraland ethical dimensions of social life, balanc-ing science with social justice. Although theeducated and enlightened minds should be-come leaders in society, they must under-stand the virtues of harmony and universaljustice.

In order for Korea to be a global leader, weneed a second miracle at the university level.We have done at it once at the high schoollevel and we can do it again. This requires stu-dents, parents, professors, administrators andthe larger society work together towards thepursuit of excellence and universal justice.

The writer is a distinguished professor atthe College of Business Administration inInha University. He can be reached at [email protected].

Students hard at work at a university library in Seoul The Korea Herald

Korea’s universities: the flipside of educational miracle

Kim Ui-chol

8

Following is the fifth in a series of articleson challenges faced by the Korean educationsystem. — Ed.

By Cho Ji-hyun

For 16-year-old Yoon Se-jin, studying atschool is an alternative. The real learning be-gins after school at a “hagwon,” or institute,and through private tutoring.

He gets out of school at around 5 p.m. butthat is just another start to the day, said hismother Park Soung-hee. He has other privateclasses lined up, which take him home ataround 11 p.m.

“Private lessons are a ‘must-do’ for an11th grader,” she told The Korea Herald.“But it’s becoming a headache for all of usbecause there’s too little time and too manysubjects our kids need to master in order toget into the right schools.”

That’s just a glimpse into the private tu-toring craze, a nationwide phenomenon inthis country.

The National Statistical Office announcedin 2004 that an average-income familyspends 232,000 won ($250) per week on pri-vate education — namely private tutoringand hagwon fees, excluding costs incurredfrom spending on public schooling. This isan 80 percent increase compared to 2000, theagency said.

It was also reported that 7.5 percent of thenational GDP is spent on education, accord-ing to a 2006 OECD report released earlierthis year.

Spending on private education is continu-ously escalating as parents are likely to doalmost anything — take second and thirdjobs, eat and spend less and sell whateverthey can — to send their children to presti-gious colleges, which often serve as thestairway to a promising future.

This so-called “education fever” has re-sulted in more money spent on private edu-cation.

Private tutoring per subject ranges any-where from 300,000 won to 1 million won a

month, Park said.“I don’t think private tutoring will ever

disappear here, but the government needs tostop coming up with reformative measuresthat encourage more competition and moreprivate lessons among students,” said ParkLee-sun, a parent of a high school studentand a Gyeonggi Province bureau chief of aparents’ group called the NationalAssociation of Parents for Cham-Education.

Numerous parents, students and teachersagreed that the current public education sys-tem does not quite meet their demands. Thefeedback was that the college admission sys-tem and the egalitarian system are a part ofwhat push the students to go for private edu-cation.

“I feel that what we learn at school is notenough to get into the universities we want,”said 16-year-old Kim Eun-ji, who lives inSangdo-dong, Seoul. “In many instances, Ifeel that some teachers lack professionalknowledge and some are just not good atwhat they do.”

After the government announced inSeptember new college qualifications for2008, the number of writing academiesspiked, said Education Committee membersat a recent national audit.

Forty institutes would put more emphasison the essay writing exam for 2008 com-pared to 22 institutes in 2007, the govern-ment announced.

As a result, an average of 300,000 stu-dents nationwide spent about 25.8 billionwon per month at institutes teaching essaywriting, according to a survey conducted byRep. Yoo Ki-hong of the ruling Uri Party.

An 11th grader who only wanted to beidentified by his surname Gong said he wasalso affected by this new announcement.

Gong, who already attends two hagwonsand receives private tutoring in English, saidhe is ready to register for an essay writingclass immediately after he finishes takingthis semester’s finals at school.

“This is now becoming terribly unafford-able,” said his 50-year-old mother Ji Kyung.

“Spending more money doesn’t mean all thekids will get accepted into top-class univer-sities. Something needs to be done.”

In an attempt to tackle the over-the-topspending on private education, the govern-ment launched the After School program at99 percent of public schools nationwide,said Kwon Sung-yeon, an official at theAfter School Planning Team at theEducation Ministry.

The scheme is designed to offer high-quality educational programs at low costs,said Kim Hong-won, director of SchoolInnovation Office at the Korean EducationalDevelopment Institute.

However, those who cannot find a solu-tion here are flying out of the country to lookfor better opportunities.

An increasing number of students are go-ing abroad, mostly to English-speakingcountries such as the United States, Canada,Australia and New Zealand, said Lee Jeong-a, an official at Seoul Education, a localcompany that arranges study abroad trips forstudents.

Recently, more elementary school stu-dents are going abroad with their parents,said a counselor of a trip scheduling com-pany in central Seoul, who wished to remainanonymous because of company policy.

“The parents say that educating their chil-dren here is economically difficult and hasnegative effects on the children physicallyand psychologically,” the official said.

According to the Bank of Korea, about2,000 students on average leave the countryeach month.

Korean parents fork out $2.43 billionwhile foreign students here spend $10.5 mil-lion on education, creating a huge overallbudget deficit.

This is a more than 31 percent jump com-pared to last year, which shows why the gov-ernment may need an alternative plan, ana-lysts said.

The bank said that more than 15,000 stu-dents left the country between January andAugust this year due to the government’segalitarian policy.

The policy, which randomly allocated stu-dents to high schools nearest to their resi-dence, aimed to normalize middle school ed-ucation and to take away the burden of pri-vate tutoring costs from the parents.

But critics said this policy encouraged un-derachievement among high school students,resulting in a dumbing down of high schooleducation.

“At public schools, students of differentlevels are thrown together into a classroom,which I think is why students go to hagwons,so they’re with students of similar abilities,”said Han Seong-yeo, a language teacher atWolgye Middle School in Seoul. “Also,schools have a slower reaction to suddenchanges, which makes it easier for hagwonsto get a head start.”

Education Minister Kim Shin-il an-nounced a set of plans that aim to strengthenstudents’ English and essay writing abilitiesafter his inauguration in September.

Starting from 2009, Korean teachers ofEnglish will be required to take writing andlistening exams and give a class demonstra-tion “all in English,” Kim said.

The ministry will select 1,000 teachers toreceive intensive English training and teach-ers will be sent abroad once every threeyears for more hands-on experience. Therewill also be 2,900 native English speakingteachers instructing at middle schools by2009. There were 640 native speakers atmiddle schools as of May.

([email protected])

Private education market prospers on competition

Students make their way home after classes at a private institute in southern Seoul.The Korea Herald

9

By Kim Hong-won

Acting on the suggestion of the Presidential Committeeon Educational Reform in May 1995, after-school pro-grams have been implemented to develop talent, characterand creativity in students. The cost of private educationhas long been a burden to every parent and often the causeof some distress. So much so, it has now become one ofour biggest social problems. When theEducation Ministry announced the“February 17 Policy for the Reduction ofPrivate Education Costs” in 2004, after-school programs were suggested as beingthe most promising method for decreasingprivate education costs. However, after-school programs have not been substan-tially and actively implemented, and as aconsequence, have not contributed to a de-crease of private education costs in any ef-fective way.

Private education greatly influences astudent’s academic performance and a stu-dent’s ability to obtain higher levels of ed-ucation. According to a report in 2006,private education expenses in the top 10percent income bracket are 10 timeshigher than that in the bottom 10 percentincome bracket. As a by-product of rapideconomic growth, social bipolarity andthe educational disparity among different social groupshas become severely pronounced. Korea has become acountry with the lowest rate of childbirth in the worldand is rapidly entering an aging society. The biggestreason for this is that women are hesitant to deliver achild because of the costs for child-care and education— especially private education.

The ministry introduced the “After School” in 2005,which is a system that consists of high quality, but inex-pensive educational programs. The system was createdwith four goals; (a) reduce private education costs, (b)narrow educational gaps between socio-economic classesand/or between regions, (c) place at-risk students in a safeand secure environment, (d) provide every student withprograms able to develop diverse abilities and aptitudeswith a link to the school curriculum .

The ultimate goal of “After School” is to offer everystudent quality educational programs at public institutes.

The programs are operated by schools and by non-profit organizations within the community. Teachers andcertified instructors in many areas within the communityoffer instruction to the students. The programs utilizeabundant human and physical resources within the com-munity. The education activities are available at varioustimes; in the evening, during the weekend, or even dur-ing the summer and winter vacations. The diversity andquality of after-school programs will satisfy the educa-tional needs of beneficiaries. Main curricula includechild-care programs for students in the lower grades ofelementary school, activities focused on the develop-ment of talents for students in elementary and middleschool, and in-depth or supplementary subject programs

for middle and high school students. Some offer lifelongprograms for adults. Presently, 98.9 percent of schools inKorea operate after-school programs and 42.6 percent ofelementary and secondary school students also partici-pate. The program enables students to forge a real con-nection with the local community.

Because “After School” utilizes the facilities alreadywithin the school and community and receives financial

support from federal and local governmentsand provincial offices of education, it canprovide students with high quality pro-grams at a relatively lower cost compared tothat of private educational institutes. On av-erage, students take 2.7 courses and onlypay 25,000 won a month. This is approxi-mately one-third to one-fifth of the privateeducation costs. Furthermore, students inthe lower socio-economic bracket can takethese classes for free. Since this October, a voucher system wasintroduced with which 100,000 studentsfrom low-income families can freely accessany course with a 60,000-won voucherevery month. Students from low-incomefamilies, or farming, mountain, and fishingvillages are taught by mentors who are un-dergraduate students in universities for free.Next year, 300,000 students will benefitfrom the voucher system.

The programs are flexible according to any given situa-tions. In farming, mountain, or fishing villages, where thenumber of students and teachers is limited, students cantake advantage of a shuttle bus that connects schools. In ur-ban areas, each school has specialized programs and stu-dents are more likely to choose among educational pro-grams in neighboring schools. For example, WeeBong ele-mentary school in Busan opens and runs 29 courses for1,600 students, including students from other schools, theirparents and adults in the community. The classes teachEnglish, English conversation, math, science, dance, oca-rina, soccer, jazz dance, musical performance, writing,computers, Korean checkers, film-making, sewing, yoga,badminton, Chinese, and singing.

The “After School” system has great potential to suc-ceed when it acquires a competitive edge over private ed-ucational institutions in terms of variety, quality and cost.High quality instructors are needed in subject diverse ar-eas. For this, a great deal of administrative and financialsupport is needed. Local governments and community or-ganizations with abundant capacity for administration andfinance should actively engage in the effort and supportthe programs. Resilience, or self-sustenance, is the mostsignificant key to its success. It is acquired through a col-laboration of enthusiastic school teachers, the local com-munity, and the central government with consistent poli-cies and support.

The writer is the director of the Office of SchoolInnovation of the Korean Educational DevelopmentInstitute. He can be reached at [email protected] — Ed.

After-school programspromoted as alternative

to private education

Kim Hong-won

10

Following is the sixth in a series of arti-cles on challenges faced by the Korean edu-cation system. — Ed.

By Shin Hae-in

As right- and left-wing teachers clashfiercely over education issues, schools havebecome arenas for ideological battles andstudents have become their main audiences.

But many are concerned that the worn-outideological disputes and political biasescould interfere with preparing students forthe reality of a post-ideology and knowl-edge-based society.

Earlier this year, a group of right-wingteachers launched the New Right Teachers’Association, aiming to become an alterna-tive force to the radical Korean Teachers andEducation Workers’ Union.

Espousing “reformative conservatism,”the new group also vowed to block whatthey see as the left-leaning education poli-cies of the Roh Moo-hyun administration.

The conservative Grand National Partysupports this new group, saying that it willhelp instill rational conservatism in youngstudents.

Some had raised hopes that it would neu-tralize the extreme leftist teachers of theKTU.

But the ideological clash only left stu-dents more confused.

The radical KTU was first established in1987 amid an intense pro-democracy move-ment that had taken over the nation. Withhelp from the radical Korea Confederationof Trade Unions — one of Korea’s umbrellalabor groups — the union was approved as alegal entity by the government in 1999.

Although the KTU had come up with var-ious reformative measures to overhaul theeducation system, it soon began to causedisharmony with its militant strategies.Allying with the progressive labor group,members of the KTU could often be seenwaging fierce protests outside school cam-puses, alienating the union from conserva-tive colleagues and parents.

A KTU teacher stirred controversy thisweek as he led about 100 of his students in amemorial ceremony for communists respon-sible for guerilla movements in the Southduring the 1950-53 Korean War.

The middle school teacher, known onlyby his family name Kim, said that he wantedto teach his students properly about thetragic division of the nation and convincethem that there should be no more strugglewith North Korea.

About 300 long-term communist prison-ers, five other teachers and 20 parents werepresent at the ceremony, calling for reconcili-ation between the two Koreas and a united na-tion without the presence of the U.S. military.

Conservative politicians, scholars andparents expressed concerns over the inci-dent.

Kim, the chief of the KTU’s unificationcommittee in North Jeolla Province, wasfound to have held many ideology educationsessions with his students.

In 2003, he asked his students to join in acampaign protesting against the U.S. war inIraq. In 2004, his class received media atten-tion for writing letters to North Korean stu-dents.

Most recently, the KTU has been protest-ing against government plans to introduce a

new teacher evaluation system. Last year, the KTU faced public criticism

for allegedly promoting pro-North Koreanideas by using a book published byPyongyang titled “Modern Joseon History”in its seminars.

North Korean textbooks describe the1950-53 Korean War as a “battle to liberatethe Korean people,” and make other claimsthat are disputed by the South.

Conservative groups, including the NewRight force, called for an investigation intowhether the KTU had violated the NationalSecurity Law in using the North Koreanbook. The book clearly denied the political le-gitimacy of South Korea as a state, they said.

The radical teachers’ union, however, ar-gued that the texts were used to discuss theideologies of the communist country and notas education guidelines for its members.

The union’s anti-APEC sentiments havealso stirred a row.

The KTU launched a controversial cam-paign denouncing the Asia-Pacific Econo-

mic Cooperation summit, which was held inBusan last November, and U.S. PresidentGeorge W. Bush, raising concerns of foster-ing anti-U.S. sentiments amongst students.

Although the government immediatelyasked the KTU to maintain political neutral-ity, conservative political parties criticizedthe government for failing to prevent thecampaign beforehand.

Despite the government’s moves to taketough action on the KTU, right-wingers claimthat the extreme activities and protests are infact the fault of the Roh administration itself.

Since he became president in 2003, Rohhas advocated egalitarianism in educationand tried to shift political and economicpower away from the traditional elite. Theabolition of Korea’s academic clique was amain priority in terms of Roh’s educationalreforms.

The GNP opposes the government’s edu-cation policies, insisting that they severelyharm the freedom of schools and the right ofstudents to learn.

Meanwhile, right-wing scholars havesparked a separate debate over a new historytextbook which is said to glorify militaryleaders who rose to power through coups.

The book, launched by the New RightUnion-affiliated Textbook Forum, calls theMay 16, 1961, military coup by formerPresident Park Chung-hee a “revolutionaryupheaval” which paved the way for Korea’s

current economic development. The bookalso dismisses pro-democratic civil uprisingsas mere “radical student movements.”

Historians generally agree that the inci-dent was a political coup d’etat by the dicta-torial former president, then an army gen-eral.

Although the group said that the bookaims to “balance the ideological pendulumthat now leans toward the left,” the book hasbeen fiercely criticized for for its revisioniststance.

Academics, religious leaders and civic ac-tivists of the New Right force have been work-ing since 2004 to publish a new textbook.

The New Rightist group had put forwardits own account of modern Korean history ina new version of “Understanding HistoryBefore and After Liberation” last year. Thenew version presented a right-leaning his-toric view on the leftist activists of the 1980s.

The original six-volume series had beenpopular amongst pro-democracy activistswho fought the then authoritarian govern-ment.

Some right-wing educators had wantedthe new series to be used in classrooms.

Even the teaching of economics — typi-cally a much less controversial subject thanhistory — has come under fire.

Economic circles have long called fornew textbooks and a balanced education toteach students properly about marketeconomies.

Earlier this month, the Federation ofKorean Industries and Korea Federation ofTeacher’s Associations — a union of rightistteachers — held a joint seminar on econom-ics education in schools.

The two groups criticized the current text-books as instilling anticapitalist sentimentsamong students.

“Students are being taught that economicgrowth is not as important as fair distribu-tion, and they are forced to take a negativeview of businesses and market economies,”professor Seo Seung-hwan of YonseiUniversity said in the seminar. “It is deeplyconcerning that students are being educatedin such a biased way.”

For Korea, which has seen the nation di-vided and military dictatorships rule, someideology clashes may be inevitable.

The radicals who fought against dictator-ial governments believe the country needs tobreak away from the authoritarian legacy of“development first, democracy later,” andstresses an equal footing in the Korea-U.S.alliance.

The conservatives, largely made up of theolder generation who lived through theKorean War, cling to the traditional alliancewith the United States and argue that Seoul’slenient policies toward North Korea wouldonly help to prolong the Pyongyang regime.

And Roh, a former human rights lawyer,widened the ideological gap during his termin office with his socialist goals.

But this is not reason enough to confusestudents with conflicting ideologies, whenthey should instead be learning from a unitedcurriculum, experts argue.

In order to provide the younger genera-tion with the right education, schools, teach-ers and parents should reject all political andideological disputes. Education is the lastsector that a tired, worn-out ideological bat-tle should take over.

([email protected])

Teachers take fight into classrooms

‘Students are being taughtthat economic growth is not asimportant as fair distribution,and they are forced to take anegative view of businesses

and market economies,’professor Seo Seung-hwan ofYonsei University said in the

seminar. ‘It is deeply concern-ing that students are being ed-ucated in such a biased way.’

11

By Jin Hyun-joo

The system of direct balloting for univer-sity chiefs is the major stumbling block toreforms, said outgoing president of KoreaUniversity Euh Yoon-dae.

Because professors, not the boards oftrustees, are given the power of selection,university presidents find it hard to pushahead with unpopular polices such as a shiftto performance-based wage systems, Euhsaid in an interview with The Korea Herald.

KU faculty members recently votedagainst the reform-minded Euh in his at-tempt to win a second term as head of theelite university.

Euh, who is highly regarded by studentsand alumni for implementing sweepingchanges, fell out of favor with faculty mem-bers for increasing the number of lectures inEnglish and introducing stricter evaluationsof professors.

“Which professors would vote for a can-didate who pushes policies unfavorable tothem? The current election system provesthat university governance at Korean univer-sities is yet to be modernized,” he said.

Most Korean universities adopted directvoting in the late 1980s in line with thedemocracy movement sweeping the nationat the time. However, this led to presidentsoften succumbing to the whims of reform-re-sistant professors.

“Some of the professors may have beenunhappy about my policies. But I aimed highas my goal was to nurture KU into a world-class institution. They may have tired of therapid reform. They may have wondered why

we were in such a fuss while other universi-ties are doing fine without many changes.”

During his three-year term, he carried outaggressive reforms, transforming KU into aglobalized university.

KU has formed partnerships with 172 uni-versities overseas and sends some 1,000 stu-dents abroad every year. The number of for-eign students at KU has skyrocketed from100 to 1,700, mostly at its language institute.

Euh also increased contacts with alumniand raised 350 billion won ($385 million) infunds during his tenure.

His term, which started in February 2003,expires in December 2006.

KU became one of only two Korean uni-versities to be included in a list of the best200 universities worldwide in a survey byBritish newspaper the Times in 2005. KUranked 184th place on its debut and jumpedto 150th the following year.

But not all faculty members respondedpositively to the university’s dizzy growth.

He increased the ratio of classes taught inEnglish from 10 percent in 2003 to 34 per-cent in 2006. He had aimed to increase thisnumber to 60 percent by 2010.

Professors, in particular from the collegeof liberal arts, reportedly raised objections tohis policies, such as the expansion ofEnglish-language lectures, several times.

Euh also required faculty members to setand meet performance targets such as thenumber of papers published and the employ-ment rate of students and provided incen-tives to top performers.

“The Management by Objectives systemis very old. Many other organizations have

it, but not many schools. So the change cameas a shock to faculty members.”

KU also granted 500 million won annu-ally each to the two professors who pub-lished the most. “They earned more than meannually,” he said.

“If I had done better, I would have wonre-election despite those changes,” he added.

Asked about future plans, the 61-year-oldsaid, “I plan to read many books, have agood sleep and take holidays including atwo-week tour to Kenya with my wife.”

He also said he has not yet decided whatto do job-wise, but he wished to have a “highvalue-added job which greatly contributes tosociety.”

Euh also shrugged off speculation that hecould enter politics.

“I lack the talent to be a politician. I havealso not received any offers.”

He holds a bachelor’s degree and master’sdegree in business administration fromKorea University and a Ph.D. from theUniversity of Michigan.

([email protected])

What hinders reformat Korea University?Outgoing chief cites professors’ direct balloting for president as stumbling block

Euh Yoon-dae

A main building on Korea University’s Seoul campus The Korea Herald

12

By Cho Ji-hyun

Notwithstanding the strong performancesof Korean students in international tests, it’stime that the nation shifts its focus to thequality of education and builds a more flexi-ble learning system, a senior official of theOrganization for Economic Cooperation andDevelopment said.

Although Korea’s secondary education israted the best among OECD countries, asproven in the Program for InternationalStudent Assessment test results, it does notmean the education system is good, BernardHugonnier, deputy director for education atOECD said in an interview with The KoreaHerald.

“School education and out of school edu-cation is good (in Korea) but I’m not sure ifit’s a perfect system,” he said. “Studentswork too hard, there’s too much competition.They’re excellent students but they are nothealthy students.”

He said that children should not be anx-ious when they are only 15 years old.

“You should enjoy life. It’s a question ofhappiness which is very difficult to change,”he added.

This is because the Korean education sys-tem is mostly based on competition, not gov-ernment support, according to Hugonnier.

Hugonnier was invited to Seoul by theEducation Ministry and the Korea ResearchInstitute for Vocational Education andTraining to attend an international seminar

that focused on development of national ed-ucation and human resources.

Comparing Korea to Canada or Finland,he said students there with learning disad-vantages and those from a disadvantagedeconomic background receive great educa-tional support from the education systemwhile that is rarely the case in Korea.

Korean students do not receive much ed-ucational support from public institutes, butthey greatly rely on private tutoring instead,Hugonnier said.

Also, the curriculum-based education sys-tem and “learning-by-heart” studyingmethod are drawbacks for students that excelin problem solving, math and science, hesaid.

Teachers in Korea tend to aim to finish thecurriculum by the end of the semester,Hugonnier said, while teachers in countrieswith an advanced education system makesure every student has acquired the neces-sary skills before moving onto the next chap-ter.

“Learning by heart is an efficient way oflearning but would they know how to use theknowledge in the future?” he asked. “(Themethod) is not so appealing, but is efficient.There’s a question here that is hard to an-swer.”

But when comparing Korea to other coun-tries that became OECD members at a simi-lar period — about a decade ago — such asMexico, Hugonnier said he would giveKorea two thumbs up for the rapid develop-

ment it has achieved.“Mexico is still considered a developing

country but Korea is not,” he said. “Koreafocuses on school education, sends studentsabroad, which led to better school educationand has a very dynamic industry. Mass edu-cation equals higher quality.”

Now it’s time to change the focus fromquantity of education to quality of education,said Hugonnier, adding that quality educa-tion directly relates to quality teaching.

“You need to invest in the education ofteachers and make sure that students are tak-ing courses that really fit their capacities.You need to have better career guidance to-ward appropriate studies and you need tomake sure that you don’t have too many stu-dents (per class),” he commented “Lastly, itis important that at the local level, there is agood partnership between public authoritiesat universities and the employers and the de-cision makers ... and a continuing educationsystem that can be efficient.”

([email protected])

Korean pupils face too muchcompetition: OECD official

Bernard Hugonnier

By Cho Ji-hyun

Korea is increasing cooperation withDemark to improve lifetime learning andvocational education programs, which areincreasingly crucial to a nation’s competi-tiveness in a knowledge-based society.

The two countries signed an agreementin November to boost exchanges in fourareas: vocational training, e-learning, life-long learning in general and education ofadult teachers.

Joern Skovsgaard, senior adviser at theDanish Education Ministry, said the twocountries have much to learn from eachother to advance their education systems.

“We have strong features you (Korea)can learn from and you have strong fea-tures that we can learn from,” he said.

Skovsgaard was invited to Seoul by theEducation Ministry and the KoreaResearch Institute for Vocational Educationand Training last week to attend an interna-tional seminar that focused on developmentof national education and human resources.

His trip is the sixth visit to Seoul madeby Danish education officials this year.

“Korea has a state-of-the-art e-learning(electronic learning) system,” he said. “Itwas striking to see how this was done in

Korean universities.”He said introduction of the Danish vo-

cational education system and lifelong ed-ucation system would be beneficial toKorea.

Skovsgaard noted that the output of col-lege graduates exceeded the required de-mand in Korea.

“It’s a challenge to ensure dynamic cor-respondence between the labor market andthe output,” he added.

Also, more education is needed but peo-ple in Korea are graduating at an older age,which may result in their exclusion fromthe labor market, said Skovsgaard.

“You need to establish lifelong learningin the sense that you study while working.That applies to everyone, from blue collarworkers to managing directors.

“The need for knowledge and new com-petences will increase. Education mustchange focus and scope from traditionalacademia to hands-on oriented researchand educational products.”

He also said that globalization and theinternationalization of education systemsis a factor that should not be missed be-cause it is like “a protest where you can’thave a referendum.”

“I don’t think education systems are

globalized at the moment. When it comesto secondary and primary, their interna-tional networks are insufficient, but we’reon the move,” Skovsgaard said. “Our gov-ernment will encourage these branches tointernationalize.”

For better cooperation between theKorean and Danish education ministries inthe future, feasibility studies will be con-ducted to eliminate weaknesses in the twosystems and develop the strengths, he said.

Skovsgaard said he hopes to establish aprogram for adults in Korea and find lead-ers of solutions to improve primary andsecondary education.

“The only way we can develop (is for)our nations to get close to one another andcreate a mutual understanding,” he said.“And I believe it begins at the institutionallevel.”

([email protected])

Korea, Denmark increaseeducational cooperation

Joern Skovsgaard

13

Following is the eighth in a series of arti-cles on challenges facing the Korean educa-tion system. — Ed.

By Hwang Dae-joon

The demand for change and innovationhas created a lot of pressure, but at the sametime acts as a driving force for new opportu-nities to enliven and enrich society. The edu-cation sector, which is more conservativecompared to other fields, also requireschanges and innovation.

According to Harvard University profes-sor John P. Kotter, who is an expert in man-agement innovation, the first step for man-agement change is to confirm the crisis first-hand. He also said that there is a need to in-form members that changes need to be made.

We do not need to exaggerate the criticalstate of education in Korea — the signs ofcrisis are clearly there. These include: a dis-trust of school education; the side effects ofstudying abroad at an early age; conflictsamong school organization members andpoorly administered entrance examinations.

Each of these issues on their own could beconsidered a starting point for futurechanges from Kotter’s perspective. As a mat-ter of fact, Korea has made continuouschanges in such critical situations in thename of education reform and education in-novation, and has always been at the fore-front of new changes in the event of new cri-sis factors.

The e-learning society requires changes ineducation at a fundamental level. In particu-lar, the cyberspace created by the use of in-formation and communication technologiesin education is threatening conventionalschool spaces and encouraging students tolook for necessary information on the inter-net instead of referring to textbooks or teach-ers. The overwhelming volume of informa-tion produced in modern society already ex-ceeds the intake capacity of individual learn-ers.

Despite the advantage of convenience,ICT use in education has brought with it newsocial threats, including cyber addiction andthe loss of ethics. This situation sends astrong message that fundamental changesneed to be made in the education system as awhole and at the level of individual schools.This includes ways of obtaining knowledge,learning materials and a sense of ethics innew spaces. Furthermore, a ubiquitous soci-ety, which is a culmination of the informa-tion society, is shaking the foundation of ed-ucational institutions.

The concept of ubiquity, where every ac-tual space in the world can be utilized as alearning space, does not just require changesin educational methodology and media butalso changes in the educational mechanismitself. Learners do not just study within a settime and space, they can study whenever andwherever they are, using any number ofportable learning materials. From the viewof traditional education, this phenomenonmay be regarded as destructive.

However, ubiquitous learning also con-

tains solutions, which differentiate it fromother crises. Our attempt to transform educa-tion from being the responsibility of schoolsinto the role of the learning society can beregarded as a crisis from the traditional edu-cational viewpoint, but also as an opportu-nity for new possibilities at the same time.

Informatization also serves as a means toset up detailed visions and strategies and ac-celerate the effect of changes by providingvarious information sources and opportunitiesfor communication anytime and anywhere.

Korea already considers informatizationas an opportunity instead of a crisis in theeducational sector. Since the ICT Use inEducation policy of 1995, there has been acontinuous effort to build an open and life-long-learning society where anyone can beprovided with education whenever andwherever they are. As a result, we have maderemarkable achievements including infra-structure building, innovation in teachingand learning methods, effective support inbuilding an infrastructure through educationinformation services, improvement in effec-

tiveness of educational administrationthrough ICT implementation and a world-leading e-learning system.

Korea is now a forerunner in innovativechanges to the educational environment,such as research and development of theCyber Home Learning System for primaryand secondary school students, establish-ment of a high school e-Campus, and thelaunching of cyber colleges.

Cyber education provides a few visibleresults that do not exist in the current schoolsystems. It enables individual students tostudy different materials for their levels, andhelps narrow the digital gap by providing ed-ucational opportunities to schools in remoteplaces such as islands, where educationalopportunities and resources are scarce.

Cyber colleges are establishing them-selves as part of the social infrastructure tomeet the various educational desires of adultlearners and provide opportunities for self-development. The development of a ubiqui-tous society will serve as the driving forcefor development of the lifelong-learning so-ciety which is now being discussed in termsof the emerging social structure.

The lifelong-learning society refers to asociety which encourages every sector tostudy in an active manner through their dailyactivities. To make a lifelong-learning soci-ety real, there is a need to shift away fromthe traditional educational methods, whichonly focused on school-based education andprovided limited education according to stu-dents’ ages.

In a ubiquitous society, various types oflearning spaces can be created which guar-antee easy access to every society memberfrom infants to the elderly. Learning inter-faces are also available without space limita-tions. In this sense, ubiquitous education willbe the best tool for realizing a lifelong-learn-ing society.

E-learning started influencing society bysimply providing materials and improvingeducational methods. It has now expandedthe educational space to include all cyber-space, and is leading to the development of anew ubiquitous-based educational system, alifelong-learning society. The lifelong-learn-ing society will bring about fundamentalchanges to the existing school-centered edu-cation system, which has been regarded asthe standard educational paradigm since theera of industrialization. Those in educationcircles are already discussing the school sys-tem reforms that the emergence of a life-long-learning society will produce. Thismeans more than adjustment for elementary,middle and high schools, but the optional ad-justment of grades, course lengths or schoolsbased on student performance.

This will revolutionize even the basis forclassification of schools and grades. If learn-ers can choose among various curriculum op-tions, the curricula that had previously beennationally managed would be differentiatedby region and become more learner-focused.The meaning of graduation would alsochange to become a qualification provedthrough various evaluations or licenses.

E-learning: A paradigmshift in education

Hwang Dae-joon

In a ubiquitous society, various types of learning

spaces can be createdwhich guarantee easy access to every society

member from infants to theelderly. Learning interfacesare also available withoutspace limitations. In this

sense, ubiquitous educationwill be the best tool

for realizing a lifelong-learning society.

14

In order to develop the oppor-tunities presented by informati-zation into the success of a life-long-learning society, new poli-cies need to be pursued. Thisshould include new institutionsdifferentiated from existing edu-cation informatization policies,which only focus on the penetra-tion rate.

First, in order to accomplishthe new educational vision of re-alizing a lifelong-learning soci-ety, we should create a sustain-able social atmosphere whereeducation and learning can bedone not only in schools but alsoin any place around us.

Second, the ubiquitous soci-ety, which will be at the centerof all changes, will affect notjust technical aspects of ourdaily lives but the quality of ourlives in general. In other words,the harmonizing of technologywith our daily lives, whereintechnology is adapted to humanlife rather than the other wayaround. A systematic studyshould first be conducted onhow education and learning canbest be integrated into a human-centered, ubiquitous society.

Third, the ubiquitous conceptis closely related not only to thedevelopment of informatizationtechnology but also to changesin the social and economicstructures. Therefore, educa-tional institutions should be con-sidering every facet of the ubiq-uitous-based lifelong-learningsociety, including the social,cultural, environmental, indus-trial and economic aspects.

The information society hasnot yet solved the issues of per-sonal information abuse, pri-vacy protection and informationethics. These issues should bemore seriously considered in theubiquitous environment whereinformation is expected to bemore easily accessible andavailable.

Informatization cannot be apanacea for every problem inour education sector and society.However, we have found andwill continue to find hope forour education and societythrough informatization, whichhas cast us into a new crisis butalso provided us with a new op-portunity for innovation.

The seventh and eighth stepsof John Kotter’s change man-agement suggest not slowingdown the pace of change andstabilizing the changes in the or-ganization. An e-learning soci-ety based on knowledge doesn’tjust require us to adopt newtechnologies but to foster the ca-pabilities of our society to trans-form a crisis into an opportunityfor change.

Hwang Dae-joon is presidentof the Korea Education andResearch Information Service.He can be reached at [email protected] — Ed.

A teacher demonstrates an electronic learning program for students with physical disabilities atthe Seoul Education Research and Information Institute. Yonhap News

15

Following is the ninth in a series ofarticles on challenges faced by theKorean education system. — Ed.

By Choi Don-min

There has recently been a rapid in-crease in the number of adult learners.Courses such as vocational educationand training, career development, aswell as leisure and hobbies have in-creased in number.

According to the National StatisticalOffice, the participation rates of adultsin continuing education rose from 17.2percent in 2000 to 21.6 percent in 2004.A 2004 survey by the KoreanEducational Development Institutefound that 54.7 percent of adults werewilling to learn new skills, but only 43percent actually did.

These statistics show that there is aneed for a systematic mechanism thatassists adults to realize their learningpotential. It is noteworthy that the par-ticipation rate of professionals and cler-ical workers was 45 percent, whereasthat of service workers, farmers, and la-borers was less than 17 percent. This in-dicates a rising polarization in adultlearning.

Since the financial crisis in 1998, oursociety has shifted from the concept of a“lifelong workplace” to a “lifelong pro-fession.” It is no longer common to ex-pect to work for only one company un-til retirement.

Not many businesses are willing tospend much time or money training andeducating their workers; instead, theymight rely more on temporary or expe-rienced workers who can meet theirneeds on a short-term basis.

Individuals also may follow thisgrowing trend. There has been a signif-icant increase in the number of job hop-pers. This has led to a new term: “body-temperature retirement,” referring to theaverage age, 36.5, at which someoneleaves their first job.

Another phenomenon is an increasein leisure time due to the five-day work-week adopted in July 2005. Peoplenowadays want to enjoy their leisuretime, rather than spending too muchtime in career development. French sta-tistics data give us some insights: thedecrease in working hours increases thenumber of travelers, which has led to anincrease in adult learning participationrates in the past three or four years.

Today, adult learners tend to demanda variety of education and training pro-grams. They do not spend all their timeworking and appreciate quality of life.They realize how to appreciate thelearning process itself. This explainswhy tailored programs on enrichmentlives are becoming more and more pop-ular.

Willingness to learn dissipates afterleaving school. The number of over-35sat university is only 2.87 percent of to-tal college students. This is the third-lowest among the OECD countries, fol-lowing Japan, 2.17 percent, andMexico, 2.78 percent.

It is important to implement a systemthat enables and encourages workers todevelop their competence. The existingsystem is school-based, which makes itdifficult for dropouts to have a secondchance to learn. Neither does it providechannels for vocational education andtraining and career development foradults. This has been a huge obstacle forthose who want another chance to learn.

We therefore need to construct a sys-tem that connects adult education andtraining institutes with schools. Thisemphasizes an education policy that en-courages adult and continuing educa-tion, and opens higher education to thepublic.

In order to connect the intention tolearn with actual participation, we needto remove obstacles, in particular lackof time and money. The lack of time canbe solved with education leave and thelack of money can be tackled withscholarships and subsidies.

In Korea, education leave is short-term, less than three months, and about10,000 people per year take it. For thosewho have money to learn, financial sub-sidies can relieve their personal spend-ing on tuition.

Adult learners pay a portion of theirown tuition fees — 50 percent for menand 70 percent for women. Less than 10percent of them receive financial sup-port from their company.

Financial support from the work-place is essential. This motivates work-ers to study hard and make time tolearn.

However, financial support will notdecrease the gap in social strata, as themonetary support will mainly benefitmiddle-class adults only.

As the Korean Constitution states, itis the government’s duty to provide op-portunities to learn for all. Yet this hasbeen applied only to school education.Thus, the focus has been on formal edu-cation for teenagers, paying little atten-tion to education opportunities foradults.

As a result, inequalities in learningparticipation due to income gaps are in-creasing. Those who have missed thechance of education in their teens tendto show low participation in adult andcontinuing education. Therefore, thegovernment should establish a policypromising the chance for education toeveryone. In order to guarantee the rightto learn for adults, the governmentshould support learning for low-incomefamilies.

Adult learning can be effective, inconjunction with welfare and work. Thesocial safety net should comprise re-lated welfare policies in order to over-come obstacles to learning. This shouldbe mutually connected with a systemthat enables workers to save time andmoney for their future education andtraining. In a developed welfare society,education can serve as a link that con-nects work and welfare.

Choi Don-min is a Sangji Universityprofessor who majored in lifelong edu-cation. He can be reached at [email protected] — Ed.

Motivating adults to learnKorea needs to shift toward lifelong education regime

Choi Don-min

The existing system isschool-based, whichmakes it difficult fordropouts to have a

second chance to learn.Neither does it providechannels for vocationaleducation and trainingand career development

for adults. This hasbeen a huge obstacle

for those who want an-other chance to learn.

16

By Kenneth Kyoungsup Gimm

“I’ve wasted 10 years of my life,” a mid-dle school student cried out after completingthe Korea Leadership Center’s youth leader-ship education program.

Leadership theory was first established inthe 1930s in the United States to train peopleto improve their performances in an organi-zational context. “Leadership,” however, hasnow become a buzzword and a topic of thisera. Various leadership programs are offeredin many different sectors, and many bookson the topic are published every year. Thisera is definitely swamped with leadership.So what does that imply?

In college and graduate school, I majoredin civil engineering. My dream was to be aland reclamation engineer and to enlarge theKorean land through reclamation projects,converting the tidal flats into rice fields.

Then as my dream was realized and manyreclamation projects in the tidal flat areas ofthe southern and western coasts were com-pleted, I began to plan my next big project— to educate Koreans in leadership. It was aproject to enlarge people’s minds and hearts.

We can become better employees,spouses and parents through leadershiptraining, no matter how old and outdated oureducation was. Leadership is no longer achoice, but a necessary skill everywherefrom the educational sector to the familycontext.

Knowledge can be acquired even in oldage. We always learn new things as long as

we don’t give up. Yet self leadership, orcharacter education, and leading and servingothers is a most important skill which mustbe learned before physical maturity.

The Junior Leadership Festival that wehave held every year since 2003 reflects thisfact well. Many junior high school and high

school students are already taking leadershipcourses as extracurricular programs. Thistrend first started in Daewon ForeignLanguage High School and is now spreadingall over Korea. Paju Technical High School’sadoption of various self-development pro-grams can be seen from the same context.

As the old adage goes, “Deeply rootedtrees do not sway to the winds and theirflowers blossom and produce many fruits;Deep fountains never go dry and theirstreams reach the seas.”

Most people like only to nurture trees thatappear strong. But we can also nurture theones that look otherwise into large andstrong trees.

Warren Bennis, a world-renowned leader-ship expert once said, “Leadership is likebeauty; it’s hard to define, but you know itwhen you see it.”

Leadership is indeed hard to define. Butwe can clearly detect the presence of leader-ship if we look into people and organiza-tions.

My wish is to see leadership go beyondindividuals and a few schools, and and for itto be established as a compulsory course foreveryone.

The more we train our young people to beleaders, the firmer and more solid our soci-ety will be.

Kenneth Kyoungsup Gimm is president ofthe Korea Leadership Center. He can bereached at [email protected]. kr — Ed.

Leadership training for youth

Kenneth Kyoungsup Gimm

Visitors look at English-language textbooks on display at the International English Expo and Conference. The four-day event, spon-sored by Herald Media, opened at COEX in Seoul yesterday. The Korea Herald

17

Following is the 10th in a series of arti-cles on challenges faced by the Korean edu-cation system. — Ed.

By Ahn Choong-yong

Several Nobel laureates — invited byKorea’s major universities this year to attendschool anniversary celebrations and sympo-siums — were quoted as being quite sur-prised to see so few foreign students and fac-ulty members visible on campus. Yet, manyof Korea’s universi-ties talk publicly oftheir desire to be in-cluded among thetop 200 or even 100institutions aroundthe world. With themajority of theirstudents Korean na-tionals, how canKorean universitiesand colleges becompetitive in theera of borderlesseducation?

Despite the factthat Korea has achieved the world’s 11thlargest economy status, the ratio of foreign-ers to Korean nationals enrolled remains amere 0.2 percent. This is the lowest averagefor OECD member countries, which have onaverage 6.4 percent. Even this achievementis due to a very recent drive by the Koreanuniversity community to attract foreign stu-dents just to keep their doors open. At pre-sent, the number of high school students isfar less than that required for college admis-sions.

In contrast, Singapore has gained recogni-tion as an international education destina-tion. Since 1998, Singapore has operated a

“global school house” and “world-class uni-versities” program as a national agenda to at-tract foreign students by both inviting for-eign faculty and setting-up collaborative de-gree programs with globally recognized uni-versities. As a result, Singapore currently hasa foreign student population approaching66,000, which is fourfold of that of Korea.The city state intends to increase this numberto 150,000 by 2015.

Australia is another good example of themultinational campus trend. Recognizingforeign student enrollment as a “key export,”Australian universities jointly established“IDP Education Australia,” a non-profit or-ganization to attract foreign students byopening 100 branch offices all over theworld. The Australian government plans toincrease the number of foreign studentsthreefold to 560,000 by 2025.

Both countries have the tremendous ad-vantage of using English as their official lan-guage which increases their appeal as theyseek to become international educationalhubs of the Asia Pacific.

Although belatedly, in Korea, one mayfind a recent surge of foreign students onsome campuses thanks to international stud-ies programs partly funded by the Koreangovernment aimed at equipping Korean stu-dents with greater global awareness.

There has been a high demand for suchprograms from the public and private sectoras they face increasingly complex interna-tional relations.

Korean students continue to dominatethese international study programs, but for-eign students are slowly starting to enroll inclasses conducted in English. As a result, thetotal number of foreign students, includingundergraduate and post graduate rose from1,983 in 1995 to 5,759 in 2000 and again to15,577 in 2005. Reflecting the trend, this

year, one daily newspaper began includingboth foreign students and faculty membersas key globalization indices when publishingthe annual performance ranking of local uni-versities.

In recent years, a growing number of uni-versities have adopted a requirement for fac-ulties to publish in internationally recog-nized academic journals when they advanceto tenured positions. Furthermore, many uni-versities have granted lucrative incentives,in the form of research grants and salary in-creases, to high-performing professors.

Korea’s new “publish or perish” paradigmis likely to contribute to raising both thequality of the education and internationaliza-tion of the Korean university system.

If Korea’s universities provide competi-tive academic programs and attractive livingconditions for foreign students, and also be-come globally recognized for academic ex-cellence, there is a good chance of their se-lected as a favored destination of foreign stu-dents. Simply put, the academic degreegranted by Korean colleges should be capa-ble of effectively assisting foreign studentsregardless of what career they select in thefuture.

Enhancing Korea’s competitiveness inthis area proves a primary national agendaitem deserving of serious consideration froman economic point of view. Last year, over436,000 Korean students went abroad to en-roll in degreed and some short-term lan-guage programs. In the United States alone,the number of Korean students and support-ing family members reached some 120,000and constitute the largest nationality amongforeign students. It is reported that Korearecorded a record deficit of $3.6 billion in itsinternational education service account.

Another well known fact is that manyKorean young children go abroad with afamily member, usually their mother,thereby making the father the “tuitionearner,” or the “migrating goose,” which isthe more popular term for the lonely bread-winners who pay occasional visits to theirfamilies abroad. In light of the obvious prob-lems resulting from the migrating goose phe-nomenon, the “English town” conceptshould receive higher priority.

Additionally, some international campusprojects by major universities in the Incheonfree economic zone or local provinces needto be implemented through a viable govern-ment-private-academia consortium. A vari-ety of programs including core science andengineering, Korean history and languagestudies, and the ongoing “Korean wave”could be designed to attract foreign students.

Korea should also pay utmost attention tobuilding foreign schools similar to Yongsanforeign school in all major cities, and indus-trial and business centers to attract foreigninvestment to Korea, which the country isbadly needs in this age of globalization.

Korea should realize an internationalmindset can be nurtured far more easily byadding an international aspect to the existingschool system, and international campuses.

In this context, it is imperative that theMinistry of Education and local NGOs com-mitted to educational causes adopt a for-ward-looking perception of the internationaleducation system as Korea makes its way tobecome a prominent Asian business hub.

The writer is chair professor of theGraduate School of International Studies,Chung-Ang University and ForeignInvestment Ombudsman at the Korea Trade-Investment Promotion (KOTRA). — Ed.

Korea needs to furtherglobalize education

Foreign students attend a class at Sungkyunkwan Graduate School of Business inSeoul. The Korea Herald

Ahn Choong-yong

18

Following is the 11th in a series of arti-cles on challenges faced by the Korean edu-cation system. — Ed.

By Cho Ji-hyun

Education Minister Kim Shin-il said thegovernment will grant universities greaterautonomy in the areas of administration andacademia while providing more support toenhance their competitiveness.

In an interview with The Korea Herald,the professor-turned-minister said reformingthe higher education system will be a policypriority for next year. The ministry is devis-ing a set of comprehensive measures to im-prove university education, he added.

He believes enhancement of universityeducation is an ultimate solution to theperennial debate over egalitarianism andelitism in education which currently focuseson high schools.

Discussions on promoting excellenceshould be more focused on university andhigher level education, rather than secondaryschools, he emphasized.

Local governments and educational insti-tutions have been pushing to establish spe-cialized high schools as a means of over-coming what they call the uniformly low-quality secondary education as a result ofequalized learning and test systems.

They called for lifting government regula-tions on the establishment and operation ofthose institutions.

The minister agreed in principle that di-versity should be guaranteed and specializedschools can serve that purpose. But he addedthat they are currently deviating from theirpurported specialty and have been reducedto training students to enter prestigious uni-versities.

He reaffirmed that the government willcontinue to curb the reckless rush by localgovernments to set up elite schools.

To enhance university education, he said,school authorities should be given more au-tonomy. He did not elaborate as to whatmeasures will be taken but said the govern-ment will consider the opinions of schoolsmore than ever before.

Local universities have called for moreleeway in admission policies, tuition rates,budget operations, curriculum and personneldecisions.

The minister, however, remains cautiouson admission guidelines saying that auton-omy should not be given to an extent thatfurther intensifies competition among stu-dents and restricts autonomy and diversity ofhigh school education.

Following are excerpts from the interviewwith the education minister.

The Korea Herald: The demand for animprovement of the egalitarian system, orthe high school leveling policy, is on the rise.We understand that you have also empha-sized the necessity of an alternative plan for

the education system to reach excellence anddiversity while maintaining the frameworkof egalitarianism. Could you please assessthe policy and explain how the system canbe changed?

Kim: The policy was designed to offer anequal opportunity of education for allschools in the secondary level. It was intro-duced to relieve the tense competition be-tween middle school students, over-the-topprivate tutoring costs and the educationalgaps that occur in different regions.

The policy is said to have achieved a mea-sure of success in that regard but the qualityof education provided still varies accordingto regions and economic standards.

Rather than putting all responsibility onthe egalitarianism policy, however, we be-

lieve this stems from underlying differencesin social and economic conditions and aschool education that focuses on enteringprestigious colleges.

The effort to minimize the educationalgap will continue with the ministry’s practi-cal support and the effort to strengthen pub-lic education will also be pushed inside theframework of egalitarianism to have a goodmix of equality and excellence in education.

KH: We understand the ministry hasstarted an investigation of special-purposehigh schools over what extent they deviatefrom their purported specialty while servingdemands by parents for better preparationfor college entrance exams. What measurescan we expect to fix the situation and what isyour opinion of the request to expand the

‘Universities will begranted greater autonomy’

Education Minister Kim Shin-il The Korea Herald

Education Minister Kim outlines his policy priorities in an exclusive interview

19

number of foreign language schools and in-ternational middle schools?

Kim: It is correct to say that the regionaleducation offices have recently formed ataskforce that is conducting an investigationon the current status of special-purpose highschools. The inspection will examinewhether those schools composed their cur-ricula around college admission, if they holdcollege fairs that should not be held at aschool and if they are operating illegal studyabroad groups. Also, the schools will bechecked to see if they meet their initial pur-pose of establishment.

If problems are discovered after the endof investigation, we will take appropriate ad-ministrative and legal measures. Special-purpose high schools will be encouraged tooperate a curricula for their specialized field.

High schools with more diverse curriculaneed to be set up if there are skills neededthat cannot be found at local schools.

Our opinion on the request to establishmore foreign language schools, internationalhigh schools and science high schools is thatthe schools are becoming almost like privateinstitutes that prepare the student for en-trance to colleges. Also, we believe thatthere are too many of them, causing a nega-tive influence on the public education sys-tem as a whole.

While specialized middle schools wereintroduced to promote hands-on education,we believe international middle schools areaimed to raise gifted students. The establish-ment of such schools could lead to severecompetition between students to receivemore private education and to enter betterschools.

It could damage social integration. It isundesirable to grade students at such anearly age.

Some local governments are excessivelypushing to establish special-purpose highschools for their own local interests. Thatcould undermine the balanced educationaldevelopment of the whole nation.

That is the reason the ministry announceda set of measures on the reckless establish-ments and inappropriate operations of somespecial-purpose high schools, including for-eign language schools.

The autonomy of education should be re-spected. But as a central government agency,we need to present some guidance on educa-tion policies that will affect the entire nationand the basis of the education system.

However, we will continue to invent andsupplement programs within the school cur-ricula that focus on promoting excellence.

KH: You have strongly hinted that a re-form is needed in universities in order toraise the quality of overall education in thenation. What plans are under consideration?Also corporatization of national universitiesis a controversial issue. In the meantime,some are asking for more autonomy in uni-versity operations. What is your opinion onthese matters?

Kim: Although Korean universities con-tributed enormously to the rapid develop-ment of the nation since the 1970s, it is alsotrue that they are criticized today for notmeeting the demands to produce qualifiedworkers that fit the knowledge-based 21stcentury.

Globalization is removing many of thebarriers of time and space and the competi-tion among nations to secure distinguishedtalents is intensifying. But our universitiesare still not well prepared for this trend.

We need to think of measures that will en-hance the quality of education and researchto go along with the trend of international-ization.

We will continue with human resourcesdevelopment policies, the second stage ofBK 21 (a project aimed to promote more re-search at graduate schools), NURI (an inno-vation project for regional universities), andcooperation between industry and acade-mies.

We also plan to implement an interna-tional-level evaluation system so the degreesreceived at local colleges can be accepted atforeign schools. We are on our way to inventa guidance system that can direct the univer-sities to concentrate on a specialized fieldrather than having numerous majors of everykind.

We are currently building a long-termmaster plan that will internationalize our lo-cal universities to prevent our qualified stu-dents from looking outside the nation for aschool or workplace.

University corporatization is an effort toallow schools to become an independent en-tity, which enables them to develop on theirown. The schools will be granted more inde-pendence when making decisions on the or-ganization, hiring staff and about the finan-cial budget.

Through this opportunity, national univer-sities will select and proceed with a develop-ment plan that goes accordingly with theirspecialty.

We, our nation as a whole, have focused abit too much on secondary education whilehigher education has been ignored. Startingnext year, the Education Ministry will pushto ensure universities get the autonomy theyneed, which will allow universities toachieve excellence in education.

Professors play the key role when itcomes to producing the force that will drivethe future of the nation. The ministry will putmost of its emphasis on pursuing excellencebased on autonomy of universities and pro-fessors.

But freedom provided at universitiesshould not affect high school education.There are certain things which can only betaught at high schools, but university admis-sion tends to dominate the high school cur-riculum. Independence at universities is crit-ically necessary but this needs to be done toan extent that it does not hurt the secondaryeducation system.

KH: Some educational experts are oppos-ing the opening of the Korean educationmarket. Explain the necessity of the openingof the education market and steps to be takenin the future. Also, what alternative plans areto be provided to comfort the oppositionists?

Kim: In a knowledge-based society, edu-cation goes beyond national borders and isconducted on the fundamental basis of com-petition and cooperation between differentnations. The country, relying greatly onoverseas markets, is pushing a free tradeagreement with the United States as a na-tional project to secure stable overseas mar-kets and enhance the competitiveness of thenation’s service sector.

In negotiations with the United States, ourprinciples are prohibiting the opening of theelementary and middle school educationmarkets and allowing partial opening of thehigher and adult education market.

The U.S. side expressed interest in tele-education and testing services in the secondround of negotiations from July 10-14 butdid not put up concrete requests until the

fifth round of talks in Dec. 4-8.Most importantly we have to raise the na-

tion’s own competitiveness through massiveinvestment in public education and effectiveeducational programs.

We will consider methods that canstrengthen elementary and middle school ed-ucation, specialize universities and offer away to provide universities with reformativestructural measures as a solution to makehigher education more globally compatible.

KH: You have always emphasized theimportance of a lifelong learning society andthe necessity of human resource develop-ment. However, our society is unable to re-tract from a curriculum-based education.How necessary is it to make the transition toa lifelong learning society and what are thescheduled short-term and long-term plans?Also, what steps should be taken to developinto a nation with strong human resources?

Kim: The transition to a “learning soci-ety,” which focuses on continuing educationthroughout a person’s life span, is necessarywith the introduction of information-basedand knowledge-based societies. We must turnaway from credentialism and advance into anability-oriented society. I believe a systemthat certifies the person’s learning accord-ingly to its circumstance must be put in placein the long-term to accomplish this goal.

Also, in order to promote lifelong learn-ing, we must minimize the lifelong opportu-nity gaps between different social classes. Asupport learning system must be built forthose that are at a disadvantage in learningand an infrastructure for educational trainingmust be secured along with diversifying theeducation programs and enhancing the qual-ity of education. For adult learners, theworking conditions and the labor marketshould be improved and advanced.

Over the last half century, human resourcewas the force of power that led to the currenteconomic standing.

However, the environment surroundinghuman resource development is constantlytransforming at a rapid pace. New technolo-gies of today are demanding people to ac-quire and develop new abilities and forcingpeople to continue studying.

To stand side-by-side with this trend,every branch of the government should co-operate with the universities and the publicto establish an evaluation system that canmanage human resources in an overall na-tional viewpoint.

KH: Currently, the Roh Moo-hyun gov-ernment has a year and three months leftahead, which is a rather short time to covernew educational policies. What are someprojects you plan to go forward with nextyear?

Kim: I do not think any of the currentplans that are being pushed should receiveany less attention. I will add a good finishingtouch to those plans and minimize students’and parents’ distress created by the con-stantly changing educational policies.

My goals for next year are regaining trustfor public education and raising the compet-itiveness of university education.

In particular, I intend to concentrate on in-vestigating the current status of private edu-cation which has been every education min-ister’s goal but an unaccomplished one.After the examination, we will put in place apolicy that fits the situation and take anotherstep with it.

([email protected])

20

Following is the last in a series of articleson challenges faced by the Korean educationsystem. — Ed.

By Annie I. Bang

When it comes to teaching Korean litera-ture, Chang Ji-sook is a 34-year-old teacherwith two outstanding characteristics.

She says she is one of the most passionateteachers at her school in Dobong-gu, north-ern Seoul, spending about three hours everyday preparing for her class.

Yet she describes herself as “the mosthated teacher in the whole world,” knowingalmost no student listens to her or her lec-ture, but would rather do “their own thing”in her class.

Chang’s contrasting self-identities reflectwhat could be defined as the most dauntingchallenge for teachers at many elementary,junior high and high schools in the nationnowadays — instructing students while be-ing distrusted by them.

“I’m actually scared of students thesedays. Students have become so mean. I can’treally say things that I want even when stu-dents behave badly because they often swearback at teachers,” Chang told The KoreaHerald.

“It’s a shame to say this, but I often regreteven becoming a teacher when I can’t passany wisdom or knowledge onto the kids.”

As many students face “an examinationhell” in Korea where a harsh regime of end-less cramming, the memorization of facts, is

probably the worst in the world, Chang saysan effective teacher has to balance all of theexpectations and challenges from students,parents and schools.

“It is one thing to learn how to deal withstudents who frequently resist and disobeywhat we require them to do, such as home-work, and it is another thing to simply pro-vide core information that would lead themto top universities,” she said.

In fact, with the little dependence studentsput on public schools for their education,many teachers in the nation say teaching hasbecome a difficult task, and that the govern-ment has been struggling with trying to findalternatives to highly expensive private edu-cation and how to build a strong bond be-tween students and teachers in publicschools.

The Education Ministry proposed ateacher evaluation system last year, whichhas been on a trial basis on 67 elementary,junior high and high schools sinceNovember of last year in a move to upgradethe quality of education. The teacher evalua-tion system is part of the government’s edu-cational reform plan and is waiting for theNational Assembly to approve its introduc-tion nationwide within this year.

However, the evaluation system, wherestudents, parents and faculty colleagueswould also participate in evaluating an indi-vidual teacher’s performance, has beenstrongly opposed by thousands of teachers inthe nation, mostly represented by the KoreanTeachers and Education Workers’ Union.

The teachers’ union staged a massive rallywith thousands of teachers and took vacationen masse from schools in late November,claiming that the system would only worsenpersonal relationships between students andteachers. About 430 teachers are expected toreceive disciplinary punishment.

Unionized teachers ask how it is possiblefor a young student to evaluate their teacherwithout any personal feelings affecting theirdecision, saying a student would most likelygive high marks to popular teachers who arepossibly less demanding and less strict inclass.

“About 70 percent of the students, parentsand teachers at the schools participating inthe trials have expressed great satisfactionwith the new evaluation system,” said KimKap-sung, an associate research fellow at theKorean Educational Development Institute,a state-run advisory organization for educa-tional policy.

“I don’t believe the distrust between stu-dents and teachers is something that can beresolved through a governmental system, butthe new teacher evaluation system could per-haps pave the way to improving the qualityof public education.”

He said by realizing what is good and badin their lectures, teachers can learn how tochange and develop the class preparation.

“As we all know, traditional public educa-tion has been a one-way system in whichteachers impose their knowledge on theirstudents and parents. But students and par-ents are customers in a sense, and it is timefor teachers and schools to listen to whatkind of education students want, like a cus-tom-made education,” Kim said.

In fact, Kim Ju-hyeon, a 15-year-old ju-nior high school student who was acceptedto Myung Duk Foreign Language HighSchool in Seoul, admits that teachers at herjunior high school did not help her get intothe highly competitive specialized highschool.

She says private tutors have more

Teachers struggle toregain their authority

Officials at Sungkyunkwan University in Seoul receive admission applications for the 2007 academic year yesterday.The Korea Herald

21

information on the entrance exam of foreignlanguage high schools, and she often had somuch homework assigned by teachers at pri-vate education institutes that she had to do itduring classes at school.

“My kid wanted to apply for a specializedor elite school, and we needed an educationthat was going to get her on the right track.And it seems like the public schools can’tprovide the service,” Kim’s mother said.

Nam Joo-mi, a 27-year-old teacher atChungju Agricultural High School in NorthChungcheong Province, says everythingseems very different from a decade ago.

“Everything has changed, such as a stu-dent’s interests and expectations fromschool, but the education system has notchanged. I can see how the new teacher eval-uation system could bring benefits throughknowing whether teachers are providingwhat students really want, but I don’t thinkthere’ll be fewer students who pay for theirprivate education,” Nam said.

She said it has become natural for parentsto spend a huge amount of money on theirchildren’s education as the country comes toterms with a low birthrate, and children willface tougher competition in the future.

Teachers are also facing greater competi-tion in landing jobs this year. The ministry

said the total number of applicants for 4,339teaching positions at secondary schoolsacross the nation was 8,463, which is thehighest competition rate since the govern-ment started collecting data in 2000.

Previously, graduates from national uni-versities of education were granted posi-tions at primary schools, and the govern-ment decided to cut the number of appli-cants to state-run educational universitiesby about 800 next year due to an oversup-ply of teachers at primary schools in the na-tion.

But the government plan led to hundredsof teachers and college students protestingover the new teacher recruitment policies,requesting the government reconsider itsplans and produce alternatives.

Resentment against the government’s ed-ucation reform policies doesn’t stop here.

The ministry has proposed a new privateschool law, which stipulates all privateschools should fill one-fourth of the seats onboards of school foundations with outsidefigures such as teachers, parents, alumni andprominent figures from the region.

The controversial regulations, passed uni-laterally by the ruling Uri Party late last year,have triggered fierce disputes, not onlyamong the policymakers but also among

many private schools, mostly represented byreligious foundations.

They claim that the revision violates theright of private ownership and autonomy.

A feud between the opposition GrandNational Party and ruling Uri Party over thelaw is disrupting work in the NationalAssembly, which is in session for budgetreadings and other pending bills.

A group of conservative religious organi-zations, including the Christian Council ofKorea and some Catholic education founda-tions, have threatened to shut down theirschools unless the National Assemblyamends the law within this year.

However the government insists that asmuch as 98 percent of the operating ex-penses at private junior high and highschools nationwide are covered by grantsmade by the state, therefore the privateschools are not really private organizations.

“I just hope we can see the government’splans as sprouts coming out in the springrather than as fallen leaves and with policy-makers focusing on what went wrong.Eventually, however, those fallen leaves be-come fertilizer and help the sprouts groweven bigger,” Park Young-sook, a senior re-search fellow at KEDI, said.

([email protected])

Copyright by The Korea Herald Inc., with all rights reserved.