[School Stories] The Bright and Dark Sides of Equalization

The equalization policy also has its advantages. Above all, it means children do not have to suffer through entrance-exam pressure starting in middle school. If the high school equalization policy were abolished, high school entrance exams would in all likelihood return, and children would have to devote themselves to exam preparation from an early age. In that sense, the equalization policy to date has at least been successful in reducing the entrance-exam burden on middle school students.

However, its drawbacks are by no means insignificant. First, contrary to popular belief, this system is not all that egalitarian. Before equalization, students who performed well academically entered good schools. But once equalization was introduced, students living in good school districts came to enter good schools. The problem is that housing prices in desirable school districts are also high. Thus, unlike in the past, what determines whether a student can attend a good school is not how well the student studies, but whether the parents can afford a home in a prestigious school district.

Second, equalization makes teachers less responsive to the needs of students and parents. School administrators naturally want their schools to be recognized by society as good schools. To achieve that, they would want to select outstanding students, and as a school’s reputation rises, more outstanding students apply. As a result, schools strive to become better schools. But under an equalization system like the current one, where schools cannot select students, that virtuous cycle cannot be sustained, because students are assigned by lottery regardless of how the school is run.

As a result, schools become less proactive in educating students. The more this happens, the more students turn to private tutoring. In other words, while high school equalization may have reduced entrance-exam tutoring for middle school students, it likely intensified private tutoring for high school students.

Because both equalized and non-equalized systems have their own strengths and weaknesses, it would be better to allow the two systems to coexist and let students and parents choose between them. One possible approach would be to maintain the current district-based equalization policy for public schools, while allowing private schools to decide for themselves whether to join the equalization system. Private high schools that do not want equalization could be allowed to establish their own methods for selecting incoming students. After that, students and parents should be allowed to choose the school or school district they prefer. If this is done, it will also become clear which option students and parents actually want.

Original title: [학교이야기] 평준화의 빛과 그림자

Author: Center for Free Enterprise (CFE)

Date: 2008-06-30

Source: https://www.cfe.org/bbs/bbsDetail.php?cid=column&pn=18&idx=10713