The government stresses equality and universities want to be competitive.

Home > >

Published: 22 Apr. 2007, 21:19

The government stresses equality and universities want to be competitive.

College students oppose the “three nos” policy of the Education Ministry at a rally in front of Seoul Station on March 30. [NEWSIS]

One term frequently encountered in recent weeks on the front pages of newspapers is the “three nos” policy, an ambitious and controversial education strategy devised by the Roh Moo-hyun administration. The president is no stranger to controversy. He has sparked spirited debate on a series of issues and initiatives. The three nos policy, however, commands attention because of the intensity of the controversy that surrounds it and the keen public interest the issue commands.
University presidents have begun to speak out, calling for the abolition of the three nos policy. In an uncompromising response, the president strongly defended the policy, saying that its abolition would lead to a “true crisis” of education. The deputy prime minister for education, Kim Shin-il, is on a nationwide barnstorming tour to defend the policy, calling it a measure that “will determine the future of the country.”
What is this controversial policy? To summarize, the policy bars universities from doing three things that they claim should be within their rights when they select students for admission:
First, the government does not allow universities to accept donations in exchange for student admission. Second, the government bans the practice of ranking high schools by academic performance, giving an edge to applicants from the higher-ranked schools. Third, universities are not allowed to conduct their own in-depth admission examinations, including an essay test.
Currently, universities are expected to base admission decisions on students’ scores in the College Scholastic Ability Test, administered annually by the government, high school performance records, a standardized essay test and interviews.
Universities argue that high schools around the nation have different levels of academic rigor. Thus, if one of the criteria for student selection is their high school performance, even though two students might have received the same grades, it’s unfair to give them the same points for admission, the universities claim.
Why is this education policy important enough to merit space on the front pages of newspapers?
First, we need to understand the importance of education to Koreans, who see schooling as a “plan for 100 years to come.” Education to Koreans means much more than just earning a diploma. To many Koreans, education has long been a means for individuals to ascend the social and economic ladder. This is what drives many Korean parents, who are willing to incur heavy debts in order to live in southern Seoul, because the area reportedly has better schools and private institutes. They believe it’s worth the burden of years of paying off debts if the outcome is that their children get a better chance to enter a prestigious university.
Why then is the government determined to pursue the three nos policy?
Deputy Prime Minister Kim said on April 10 at a special lecture that the practice of donation for admission to universities is “killing the morale of the have-nots of society.” In a strongly worded speech, Kim said the practice “should not be used as a way for universities to collect money.” He continued, “Universities should not dispirit those who are not born with money and [privileged] social background.”
Kim said that he strongly disagrees with the idea of ranking high schools, because senior students’ academic achievements would decide the future of juniors.
The ranking of high schools has actually been a long-running controversy in Korean education. Until 1974, when the government sought to equalize Korean high schools, high schools were officially categorized at different levels. To enter a prestigious high school, students had to take separate examinations. Starting in 1974, the government instituted a lottery system that had students going to high schools close to their homes in most parts of the country.
Regarding the claim that universities should have the right to give their own admission tests, Kim said that this would give universities “complete control” to shape high school education. In addition, as President Roh pointed out, universities would end up setting difficult questions in their examinations, which would drive parents and students to seek private supplementary instruction to give students an edge that public education cannot provide. Safeguarding public education is an important reason for keeping the three nos policy.
Private instruction, such as individual tutoring or going to cram classes at a hagwon, or private institute, is a major part of life for Korean students and a serious issue in Korean education. Deputy Prime Minister Kim said that the government is trying to keep the three nos policy to stop universities from “taking full command” of high schools.
Is the three nos policy legally binding? In the view of the education ministry the donation for admission violates the Constitution and the laws governing education, which prescribe equality of opportunity in education as a basic right.
The individual in-depth essay tests, meanwhile, are clearly banned by regulations under the law governing higher education. The law states the universities cannot conduct individual assessments other than simple essay tests.
The most controversial of the three prohibitions is the ranking of high schools by universities, as it is not clearly stated in the law. It is instead described as a guideline for “minimum standards” in the government’s plan for university entrance.
This means that the government may impose sanctions against universities for violations, but it is not legally binding.
Indeed, in early admissions for the year 2005, several elite universities, including Yonsei and Korea, were found to have given different points to students who came from different high schools.
Prosecutors, however, could not indict the universities, due the lack of a law that prohibits universities from ranking high schools.
Meanwhile, universities continue to challenge the government over student selection. Seoul National University’s faculty committee for long-term development last month denounced the policy as a “reef” that may sink the university's’ efforts to become globally competitive. Days after their statement, presidents of private universities followed suit, calling for “reconsideration” of the three nos policy.
Professor Chang Ho-wan, of Seoul National University, said on April 11 that President Roh’s viewpoint on education is “not keeping pace with the times.”
He described the government’s policy of “leveling off” as “opium that gnaws at society.” He continued, “The policy may comfort the students and parents for now, but in the long run, it will end up being a distorted pursuit of equality for those who want to be globally competitive.”
Chang added that the three nos policy made public education “incapable” [of achieving competitiveness] and has brought about an educational divide in society.
To be globally competitive, he said, the government should set the universities free from restrictions like the three nos policy.
Lee Jang-moo, the president of Seoul National University, has also called for an open discussion on the three nos policy.
Korea University’s acting president, Han Sung-joo, also offered criticisms of the policy in a press conference on April 10, although he conceded that donations-for-admission has led to problems.
From this year, students’ College Scholastic Ability Test scores and high school performance records will be assessed in levels, not in specific points. Noting this change, Han said that the universities cannot tell the difference between a student who scored 91 and one who scored 100, if they’re both given the same level.
Still, the Education Ministry is adamant in its defense of the three nos policy.
For now, the only thing that seems certain is that the controversy will continue.