By Oh Young-jin
Assistant Managing Editor
Looking at the heated debate over whether to abolish elitist foreign language schools, I can't help thinking that we Koreans are never Darwinian evolutionists but rather true believers in Schumpeter's theory of creative destruction with the emphasis on destruction.
The prevailing narrative in the national debate is that the foreign language schools are monopolizing the brightest students from middle schools and producing too many successful applicants to top universities and colleges. Simply put, they are too successful for their own good.
Of course, this is not the reason cited by Rep. Chung Doo-un of the governing Grand National Party for his push to do away with these schools.
Chung, widely regarded as President Lee Myung-bak's hatchet man, says that these special-purpose schools, which select new students through tests, are the main culprits fanning the fever for after-school supplementary private lessons, notably in English, and aggravating the already-dismal educational divide.
Chung suggests that these schools should be converted into a new form of high school being promoted by the government ― private schools that are allowed a higher degree of leeway in curriculum and admissions, among other things.
The new schools, chosen from existing high schools, will have their first year of students next year, selected on the basis of their academic records in middle school and by lottery. Proponents claim their debut will put the brakes on the runaway costs of the private lessons, save parents from financial burden and set the education system back on track.
Once they opt to convert into this new type of school, the foreign-language schools as we know them will cease to exist.
Chung's crusade comes in the context of President Lee Myung-bak's effort to overhaul the education system with a primary focus on taming supplementary private education. Previously, an attempt was made to curb it, but it didn't pan out.
I certainly agree with the necessity of educational reform but I believe it should come not through revolution but by evolution.
In other words, the academic excellence achieved by the foreign-language schools ― one of them ranked in the world's top 20 high schools ― should be respected and their teaching know-how should be disseminated to other schools.
In that sense, trading attacks do not help. Rep. Chung denounces these schools as the root cause of the systemic sickness, calling them "witches" that deserve to be hunted. This is causing the schools to respond in kind, with principals vowing to fight Chung's legislative onslaught with everything they have.
Any standoff runs the risk of turning into a war of attrition that draws attention away from the core of the problem. Besides, Chung and Co. should prove that the abolition of the foreign-language schools would help fix the education system. Detractors argue that it will end up as a stopgap measure, with the problem of private lessons continuing in a different form.
It is beyond doubt that these foreign-language schools have deviated from their stated purpose of fostering foreign language talent and turned into big cram schools helping prepare students for good universities.
Then, a transformation back to their original purpose can be best achieved through a consensus-building approach. It is not hard to imagine how tempted those in power are to change the system by decree.
But we know all about the complications that arise from changes by coercion in the area of education, as we see them whenever a new administration takes over. Their policy differs but their victims are always the students, as the changes implemented by the previous administration are often undone by the following government.
If we can learn from past mistakes, any new attempt to fix the system should take a holistic stance rather than a one-upmanship approach.
Above all, any changes to the existing system should be made in tandem with the universities.
For instance, colleges are increasing courses taught in English. KAIST, the nation's top science and engineering college, even teaches its students Japanese and Chinese in English.
This means the emphasis on English in their selection of freshmen will not likely decrease, causing high schools, whether foreign-language schools or the new government-promoted schools, to concentrate more on teaching English.
The growing number of students going abroad to study English is also testimony that the abolition of foreign-language schools will not dampen the students' appetite for private English education.
Thus, the priorities are obvious for all parties concerned. It can start with the foreign-language schools showing a high degree of earnestness and providing a package of solutions aimed at addressing the problems at their roots. Politicians should give up their take-it-or-leave-it ultimatum and foster an atmosphere for dialogue. It is imperative that the Ministry of Education, Science and Technology should play the role of honest broker in the process.
It is often said that education determines the future of a nation for 100 years to come. Then, rather than trying to fix it overnight, we should give ourselves time to be deliberate enough to ensure the changes will be good for 100 years.