Universities Present a United Front

For the first time in Korea’s history, the heads of 200 four-year universities have made a formal joint declaration to change the current admissions system that depends almost entirely on the standard entrance exam scores and school grades (JoongAng Daily, June 2009, “Potential for Education“). Instead, the group vows to see through policy reforms so that talents in areas not reflected in school report cards, as well as intangible qualities such as potential and creativity, are taken into account when evaluating candidates. These universities have committed to the cause because they recognize that university admissions policies have a direct impact on the structure of public education as well as the private education epidemic in South Korea.

The author of the editorial (anonymous) adds that the following supporting factors are critical to ensure the success of the joint declaration:

• Active participation of secondary schools in the admissions process reform to make sure that the new policies have a positive influence on public education
• Strong and lasting partnership between universities and provincial/municipal education authorities
• “Diversify and specify the screening process different areas of study” (paragraph 6)
• Secure public’s trust in the newly established “admissions officer system” that recognizes intangible qualities like potential as an evaluation criterion

The group of universities united in the mission to reform admissions policies is somewhat like a coalition where the schools are in no way bound to a legal entity, the declaration was signed entirely voluntarily (I assume), there is no particular funding for the cause to speak of, and the universities themselves take ownership of the group. Therefore, without a formal organization, the group may be vulnerable to quick dismantling. Also, its social impact depends heavily on coordination and funding for the 4 supporting factors listed above.

Social Entrepreneurship Framework (Austin et al, 2007, Entrepreneurship in the Social Sector, p. 23)

It is actually unclear as to whether the coalition seeks to bring about drastic changes to the university entrance exam itself, or to simply give the standard exam a lower weight in the assessment process no matter what state the exam structure is in. If changing and perhaps even diversifying the entrance exam is indeed one of the coalition’s objectives, then its SVP (social value proposition) could indeed be transformation of the public education system for the better. More specifically, using government funding (capital) as well as partnerships with public schools and education offices (people), the coalition can capture the opportunity to provide an environment in the public education system that nurtures thinking outside the box, problem solving, teamwork, and self-initiative rather than the ability to survive 12 – 15 hours of class per day.

Advertisement