Evaluation of Teacher Education Programs in South Korea: Quality Control for What?

• In Event: 81.033 - MTCC Roundtable Session 38
  In Roundtable Session: 81.033-6 - Analyzing Teacher Education Accountability Policies: Multiple Voices and Different Contexts

Abstract

Purpose and Theoretical Framework
Since 1998, the Ministry of Education (MOE) in South Korea has been conducting nation-wide evaluation on its teacher education programs to ensure accountability and enhance programs quality. Nevertheless, many critiques have been raised that the evaluation is high-stakes and overwhelming for the programs; that some criteria are unclear or unfair; and that it does not have much effect on improving teacher education quality (Kim, 2010; Kim, 2012; Lee, 2014; Song, 2016). Using a framework for accountability analysis (Authors, 2018b), this study aims at making sense of this policy through three clusters: examining its underlying assumptions, ideas, and ideology; its promotion of the teacher education problems and solutions; and the power relationships and implications of the policy to teacher education.

Methodology and Data Sources
Seventeen documents related to this policy were obtained, including policy reports, evaluation guidelines and relative regulations, press releases, and journal articles by evaluation stakeholders or participants that present reviews and reflection on this policy. Based on the accountability framework (Authors, 2018), through repetitive reading on each document, their main points were summarized and then categorized into the three thematic clusters presented above.

Preliminary Findings
The data evidences a nationalistic view in that the evaluation is justified as an instrument to “examine the competencies of the program” for developing quality teachers who meet the nation’s needs. A market ideology is also prevalent as the evaluation emphasizes providing reliable information to prospective teachers and stresses effectiveness of the program based on commonly applicable and measurable criteria. Accordingly, the policy conceptualizes the teacher education problem as the ineffectiveness of teacher education programs in preparing candidates for the job and insists that the evaluation can lead the enhancement of program quality by facilitating the programs’ “self-initiated efforts” because the evaluation provides useful information on their strengths and weaknesses. Nevertheless, a view that supports national control on teacher education programs is evident in this evaluation. It is primarily initiated and run by the MOE and programs are given rewards or sanctions (e.g., award or closure of the program) based on the evaluation results. The evidence of program effectiveness mostly relies on quantifiable measures (e.g., number of students per course, number of graduates employed as teachers). Furthermore, there is lack of participation by teacher educators and teachers as well as consideration of their perspectives in the evaluation design and implementation.

Significance
Through the analysis, it is unclear what kind of teacher and teacher education are promoted from this evaluation, leaving the question of “evaluation for what?” Due to its high-stakes, programs tend to focus on fitting themselves to the criteria, without further reflection on improving their curricula and practices. This implies that any accountability policies require critical deliberation on their meaning and purpose, needing to include various stakeholders’ views to truly address the quality and effectiveness they aim for through the policies.

Author

• Jina Ro, Sungkyunkwan University