EXPLAINER What’s in Korea’s ‘English kindergarten ban law?’

gettyimagesbank

A bill aimed at restricting early English education for young children has been introduced in the National Assembly, as lawmakers move to curb what they describe as “excessive and premature” tutoring and cram school lessons for preschoolers.

Under the bill, led by Rep. Kang Kyung-sook of the minor left-wing Rebuilding Korea Party, all cram school programs in English or other school subject areas would be completely prohibited for children under 36 months. For older children not yet enrolled in school, instruction is restricted to no more than 40 minutes.

If passed, it would apply to all types of education, including tutors and for-profit private educational institutions. Penalties for violators include the “cancellation of the registration, or suspension of all or part” of the business.

The bill aims to safeguard young children’s well-being while easing the financial and emotional burden of early private education on parents, according to the lawmaker’s office.

“Private education expenses are increasing exponentially every year. This year, it reached as much as 32.5 trillion won ($23.3 billion). In a situation where such expenses exceed more than half of the national defense budget, I think it is necessary for the Assembly to find ways to help parents who are struggling with these costs,” an official at Rep. Kang’s office told The Korea Times Monday. “We understand criticism of the bill, but we will continue to push for the bill while convincing other legislators and people in the industry that it is necessary.”

According to a report released by the Ministry of Education last year, 47.6 percent of preschoolers in Korea participated in private education. Even among children aged 2 or younger, the rate was 24.6 percent. For 5-year-olds, the rate surged to 81.2 percent. On average, parents spent 332,000 won ($250) per child each month.

“Private education during this period not only offers little educational benefit compared to the excessive costs, time and difficulty involved, but also raises concerns about violating the rights of young children,” the bill says.

This view is supported by a majority of teachers at early childhood institutions, according to a poll conducted by left-wing civic organization World Without Worries about Private Education, showing that 76.1 percent of respondents said they were opposed to toddlers participating in private education.

But critics argue that the ban would hurt working-class and lower-middle-class families most, as wealthier families could still afford expensive private alternatives or even overseas study.

“Many middle-class families would lose access to more affordable after school or preschool English classes,” a mother of two children in Gimpo, surnamed Choi, said on Tuesday. “This could end up widening the education gap between the rich and poor ... It would be ironic if the ban ends up limiting access for most families but not the wealthy.”

Critics also warn that such a ban could face constitutional challenges.

A similar prohibition on private tutoring, enacted in 1980 under the Chun Doo-hwan administration, was struck down by the Constitutional Court in 2000. The court ruled that government authority over private education is limited and emphasized that “there should be opportunities for parents’ particular wishes to be realized.”