← Back · ← Home · ← Back to list

Public Opinion Briefing 16-4: Education Policy for the Next Administration

  • Im Cheon-soon and Kim Byung-guk
Category
Commentary and Issue Briefing
Published
October 7, 2007
Related Projects
Korean IdentityConditions for Presidential Success

Public Opinion Briefing 16: Changes in the Educational Environment and Strategic Choices of Education Consumers

[1] Educational Issues Require a Paradigm Shift - General Remarks by the Research Team

[2] Strategic Choices of Education Consumers: Overseas Study - Cheonsoon Lim & Iljun Jeong

[3] Early Study Abroad: How Far Will It Spread? - Sojeong Seo & Hanwool Jeong

[4] Education Policy for the Next Administration: Multifaceted and Complex Measures Are Urgently Needed - Cheonsoon Lim & Byungkook Kim

[5] Other Key Findings

4. Education Policy for the Next Administration

Cheonsoon Lim (Sejong University) & Byungkook Kim (EAI President, Korea University)

□ The dichotomy of 'regulation versus autonomy' is not a viable solution. Customized, complex policies are needed.

Since democratization, South Korea's education policies have repeatedly debated issues such as equalization, amendments to the Private School Act, and the issue of contribution-based admission. One side argued that the college entrance exam-oriented education, stemming from the hierarchy of academic credentials, should be resolved through government-led equalization policies and normalization of public education. On the other hand, it was argued that excessive state intervention and regulation harmed the autonomy of private schools and the education market, ultimately leading to a distorted structure of public education failure and the expansion of private education. Korea's education debates were a rerun of another ideological debate between 'market versus state'.

In a modern society where the world is interconnected and rapidly changing, and diverse interests of various strata compete through the advancement of democratization, the dichotomy of state versus market becomes an obstacle to policy production that aligns with these realities. The diverse educational demands, varying by social class, age, taste, and ability, have already become too complex and large to be resolved by a single principle. To adapt to the rapidly changing global educational environment and meet the rapidly evolving and diversifying domestic educational demands, the government's flexible yet multifaceted policy response capability is essential.

The survey results confirmed that people are already diverging from the existing, standardized formula of prestigious university success in the changing environment and are seeking diverse educational paths for their children. The direction of educational policy desired from the next government is also diversifying according to their strategic choices. For the younger generations in their 20s and 30s, who are positive about early study abroad, 57.5% and 58.2% respectively are critical of government regulations, while in the 40s and 50s and above, the opposite stance, supporting regulations, exceeds the majority with 52.9% and 55.6% respectively. 67.5% of the group expecting to attend foreign universities and 54.0% of the group expecting to attend domestic prestigious universities oppose regulations on early study abroad, while parents hoping for admission to other domestic universities are evenly divided on the pros and cons of regulation. Overall, 47.4% expressed support for government regulation, with 11.5% believing the government should restrict early study abroad and 35.9% believing it should be regulated to some extent. On the other hand, 5.9% believe it should only be an assessment of the situation, and 46.6% believe it should be left to the judgment of parents and students, indicating that public opinion critical of government intervention is also evenly split.

On the other hand, there is also public opinion that the government should actively provide alternatives rather than overseas study solely for the purpose of acquiring English or foreign language proficiency. When asked how to increase supply in response to the expanding demand for English, 53.3% supported the government providing various English infrastructure, and 37.0% supported strengthening English classes in schools. In contrast, only 6.7% responded with overseas language immersion programs and 3.1% with domestic private academies.

These results provide important implications for the next government in presenting its educational policies. First, the differences in attitudes towards educational issues among the public are not judged by existing ideological standards. This survey shows a contrasting pattern to previous ideological surveys where older generations showed a conservative tendency emphasizing market autonomy, and younger generations showed an egalitarian tendency focused on state regulation. In fact, this survey showed no significant difference in attitudes toward early study abroad or government regulatory policies based on differences in self-identified ideology.

Second, detailed judgment and differentiated policy implementation are needed regarding areas that can be resolved by government policy and those that cannot. Parents with higher education and income, and younger students who choose early study abroad and overseas study as new educational strategies, opt for overseas study to secure better educational opportunities and competitiveness for their children, irrespective of the issue of normalizing public education. The dismantling of the hierarchy of university prestige in Korea or the normalization of public education does not influence their educational preferences. Forcing the principle of normalizing public education upon them would act as a restriction on the freedom guaranteed by the Constitution. However, it also showed that there are areas where government roles are expected and possible.

At least in terms of educational issues, the public is demonstrating a shift in thinking centered on the demands and interests of reality, moving away from ideological dichotomies. It is questionable how much the educational authorities and politicians, who should be exercising leadership, recognize and how sensitively they are responding to this shift in thinking. We hope that the presidential election in December will serve as an opportunity for a paradigm shift in perception and thinking across the political and educational sectors.

[Figure 1] Desired Government Policy Direction for Early Study Abroad (%)

Note) Calculated after removing 'Don't know/No response'

[Figure 2] Generational Stance on Government Policy for Early Study Abroad (%)

Note) Calculated after removing 'Don't know/No response'

[Figure 3] Differences in Stance on Government Regulation by Desired University for Children (%)

Note) Calculated after removing 'Don't know/No response'

*This text is an AI translation of an original written in Korean. Some translations or nuances may be inaccurate.

← Back · ← Home · ← Back to list