The Oxymoron of the Free Semester Program in Korea: Intended and Unintended Policy Consequences for Whole-Person Development

• In Event: Centering Whole-Child Development in Global Education Reform: How National Education Policies Work (or Not) for Quality and Equity

Abstract

Objectives
The overall dissatisfaction from emphasizing the cognitive domain in Korean education caused reforms focusing on reducing class hours and lowering the level of education contents to be easier for students (D. Park, B. Shin, & S. Lee, 2019). Furthermore, the Korean university admission system adopted the United States’ Admissions Office System, in which whole-person development was used as a major criterion for college entrance examinations (Y. Cho & Lim, 2012). During these changes in Korean education policy discourse, the Free Semester Program (FSP) was introduced without much controversy. Academia raised concerns regarding this program, but few paid attention to the concerns. Since the FSP was first implemented, minimum efforts have been made during the assessment of the policy evaluation, whether equity has been achieved and the quality of education has increased under the FSP. In addition, strong bipartisan support resulted in the program’s expansion to the Free Year Program regardless of the low public support for the policy. This study examines the dynamics of Korean education reform in terms of bipartisan support, shared belief, policy borrowing, and policy implementation.

Theoretical Framework and Perspectives
Policy corrections have always been deemed to be hard to achieve, especially in a bureaucratic society (Byun, 2015). Policy is not a fluid result of rational thoughts, but rather an institutionalized, path-dependent, and self-reinforcing creature (Lindblom, 1964; Arthur; 1994; Sewell, 1996). Even when the error is detected, the error itself becomes the part of the institution once it settles in the path dependence, and gets harder to alter (Song & Kim, 2006). The FSP case also shows the path-dependent nature of the policy. However, literature has shown that punctuated equilibrium can occur (Krasner, 1984), such as elections, wars, and other historical events that cause the changes in the path dependence.

Data & Methods
Using content analysis method, this paper evaluates governmental documents by the Ministry of Education, policy reports by Korea Education Develop Institute and political parties, academic papers, and newspaper articles related to FSP since 2010. The empirical evidence on the FSP is mixed at best, as the results varied by the data set or the measurement used in the studies (see Table 2).

Findings and Significance
What are the “unintended consequences” of implementing the FSP? This study reveals concerns that the FSP could increase shadow education expenses and lower academic achievement. Whole-person development, the objective the FSP aimed for, largely depends on resources from family and neighborhood rather than traditional school curricula do; programs in schools located in privileged neighborhoods could mobilize more resources than those in less-privileged areas. The FSP policy which is heavily dependent on the resources available in the families and local community, then may inevitably result in greater educational inequities driven by the resource gaps. However, bipartisanship ended up hindering the policy corrections and modification despite the growing concerns from many research findings. The success of the whole-person development policy requires check and balance through evidence-based policy debate and reflection, even if there were shared beliefs and bipartisan support for whole-person development.

Authors

• Daekwon Park, The Academy of Korean Studies
  Presenting Author

• Kyoungjin Jang-Tucci, University of Wisconsin - Madison
  Presenting Author