Bill to limit Koreans in foreign schools causes uproar

Home > National > Social Affairs

Bill to limit Koreans in foreign schools causes uproar

Published: 16 Jan. 2023, 18:55 Updated: 17 Jan. 2023, 12:24

A bill that would reduce the enrolment of students with Korean nationality at foreign schools has attracted over 1,000 comments in opposition since it was posted to the National Assembly's bulletin for public review on Jan. 3. [SCREEN CAPTURE]

A bill that would reduce the number of Korean nationals studying at foreign schools has unleashed a firestorm of complaints from parents and school administrators.

The bill, proposed by independent Rep. Min Hyung-bae and sponsored by twelve other lawmakers, would lower the maximum quota of Korean nationals at foreign schools from the current 50 percent of potential enrolment to 30 percent of schools’ current enrolment.

Potential enrolment refers to a school's maximum potential student capacity at a given time.

The bill also would require Korean nationals who want to attend foreign schools to have lived abroad for at least five years — or two years more than the current requirement.

According to the text of the bill, current laws invite abuse because schools set their maximum quota of Korean students based on potential enrolment numbers, not actual student enrolment.

“By inflating their potential enrolment numbers, schools are able to accept far more students with Korean citizenship than if they based the 50 percent quota on actual student enrolment,” the bill claims.

The bill’s sponsors argue that foreign schools have become “schools for privileged classes” with their large Korean student bodies and high tuition fees, which in some cases total 41.98 million won ($33,890).

But since being posted on the National Assembly’s bulletin of bills under consideration on Jan. 3, the proposed law has attracted over 1,000 comments in opposition.

“This act does not understand the current situation of the foreign schools, which are struggling to provide an international education in cities outside of the capital region,” wrote one commentator in English.

“Foreigners who are here for a short period of time (2-5 years) due to their work cannot send their children to adjust to a Korean school and then try to readjust their children back to [another] school system. The same goes for Korean nationals who spend time abroad,” the commentator added.

Another commentator argued the proposed bill would deprive parents of educational choices within Korea.

“It takes away the right to choose from parents/children who strive for an international education. It is backwards, rather than forward thinking,” the commentator wrote in English, predicting the law, if passed, would “drive more families who choose an international education pathway to send their children overseas rather than continuing to learn and live in their home country.”

One school parent who wrote in opposition to the bill criticized its assumption that foreign schools cater mainly to rich Koreans.

“It is astounding that foreign schools are being stereotyped as a means of privileged education for some wealthy children. Is it wrong to send our children, who are not good at Korean and are unfamiliar with Korean culture, to foreign schools?”

The writer added, “I guess the bill’s authors think it’s hard to adapt to Korean schools if you’ve spent five years abroad, but easy to adapt if you’ve only spent three years.”

The parent also criticized the lack of cheaper institutions to educate Korean children who have lived extended periods abroad.

“Before they think about reducing the quota of Korean students at foreign schools, they should create an affordable school that children who have lived abroad can attend.”

According to an administrator of a foreign school in Seoul who spoke on condition of anonymity, foreign schools targeted by the bill are working on a joint response to express formal opposition. The administrator declined to provide further details.

BY MICHAEL LEE [lee.junhyuk@joongang.co.kr]