What’s Wrong with Public Education?

Public interest in the JTBC drama “SKY Castle” is intense.

One reason this drama is so popular is likely that its satire of the current college admissions system resonates with many people.

The parents in this drama use every possible means to get their children into top-tier universities. The people they hire for their children are not simple “private tutors” who teach the knowledge and techniques needed to solve exam questions, but rather “admissions coordinators” who comprehensively manage everything related to college admission. Because they believe that only by hiring a capable admissions coordinator can their children enter the most sought-after departments at top universities, parents even compete with one another to hire coordinators who cost several billion won. For them, investing in their children’s private education is a necessary condition for getting them into elite universities.

One problem that is invariably raised when discussing Korea’s education system, especially secondary education, is the crisis in public education. This is always followed by the claim that the crisis in public education is fueling the craze for private education. While it is difficult to rigorously establish the causal relationship between the crisis in public education and the boom in private education, at the very least, considering that the contraction of public education and the expansion of private education have continued simultaneously for quite a long time in terms of their respective roles, it is reasonable to view public and private education not as complements, but as substitutes.

That public and private education are in a substitute relationship means that education consumers choose whichever of the two they prefer more. This is precisely the fundamental reason why the crisis in public education has not been easily resolved.

The starting point of the problem lies in the fact that the ultimate goals of public and private education have converged into one. As the top priority of both public and private education became “admission to top-ranked universities,” education consumers came to compare the two means of achieving that goal—public education and private education—on the same plane.

If the only goal considered is admission to top-ranked universities, which is the more efficient means, public education or private education? As even introductory economics textbooks explain, although both public and private education are heavily regulated by the government, private education—where regulations are relatively less stringent and market principles operate more freely—can be said to be more efficient than public education. As long as the goal of public education is confined to admission to top-ranked universities, it will be extremely difficult for public education to gain the trust of consumers over private education.

Coupled with widening income inequality, investment in children’s private education is now perceived as another means of passing wealth down to the next generation. The expansion of private education is not only accelerating the crisis in public education, but is now also worsening income inequality.

In response to such criticism, education policy has also undergone repeated changes. The Academic Achievement Test was replaced by the College Scholastic Ability Test, and the comprehensive student record screening process came to account for a large share of college admissions. However, as the drama “SKY Castle” has been praised for being highly realistic, contrary to the intentions of policymakers, Korea’s private education market has continued to expand year after year.

According to Statistics Korea’s survey on private education expenditures for elementary, middle, and high school students, total private education spending for high school students increased by about 1.5 trillion won over 10 years, from about 4.2 trillion won in 2007 to about 5.7 trillion won in 2017.

At this point, one even begins to doubt whether public education can surpass private education and restore trust. Normalizing public education is not as easy as it sounds. It will clearly be a very tedious task that takes a long time, but it is also true that it is a task we absolutely need.

I believe the starting point for restoring public education lies in differentiating public education from private education. Only then can we change the current educational reality in which private education receives the spotlight, and in which any public education system that produces results similar to those of private education is praised.

With the development of technology, learning now takes place through many different channels. Public education is one of them, but many more belong to the sphere of private education. The purpose of private education is basically the acquisition of knowledge or skills. The purpose of public education should be broader. Public education authorities should think about what they can provide students beyond the transmission of knowledge.

For example, education aimed at helping students become proper members of society—such as character education, respect for life, and a sense of social community—is the domain of public education. Accordingly, serious thought should be given to how current education policy ought to be improved for that purpose.

The ideal relationship between public and private education, in my view, is one in which they complement each other and create synergy—in other words, a complementary relationship. I hope students can learn through public education not only lessons in knowledge, but also lessons in wisdom.

Jinyoung Lee

Professor, Division of Economics and Information Statistics, Kangwon National University

---

Original title: 공교육의 위기, 무엇이 문제인가?

Author: Jin-young Lee

Date: 2019-01-30

Source: https://www.cfe.org/bbs/bbsDetail.php?cid=column&pn=15&idx=11404