Why political neutrality rules leave teachers unable to address classroom hate speech

The principal of Paichai High School weeps while reading an apology at Gwangju Jeil High School in Buk District, Gwangju, July 6. Some members of Paichai's baseball team drew criticism last month for chanting "Let's go to Starbucks" during a national tournament, seen as mocking Gwangju's 1980 pro-democracy movement. Yonhap

Korean teachers say the growing problem with hate speech among teenagers in the classroom could be addressed by expanding educators' political rights, while experts stress that adults must model responsible language first.

Concern has intensified following a series of controversies, including an incident last month when Paichai High School students chanted a phrase condemned as a direct reference denigrating the 1980 pro-democracy movement in Gwangju, prompting calls for a broader look at how schools address the issue.

A survey by the Korean Teachers and Education Workers' Union, released last week, found that 89.3 percent of 1,109 elementary, middle and high school teachers nationwide had witnessed or heard about students engaging in hate speech, discrimination, historical distortion or anti-democratic expressions in their remarks, assignments or presentations over the past year.

The most commonly encountered expressions mocked politicians or historical figures, cited by 88.9 percent of teachers, with 58.2 percent saying they heard such remarks repeatedly and often.

That reality is familiar for Park, a Gyeonggi Province teacher who asked to be identified only by his surname. Having taught middle and high school for six years, he said addressing the problem calls for giving teachers greater freedom of political expression.

Korean teachers are bound by a constitutional duty of political neutrality that applies to public officials and education more broadly.

That mandate, Park said, becomes an obstacle in practice, since tackling hate speech inevitably requires touching on politics. Such cases include the 2009 death of liberal former President Roh Moo-hyun, or Korea's democratization, as seen in the Paichai High School baseball chant controversy.

“Even though such language is deeply intertwined with politics, teachers must strip away all political context when addressing hate expressions in the classroom,” Park said, calling it a fundamental limitation.

Members of the Korean Teachers and Education Workers' Union hold a press conference announcing the results of a survey on teacher and youth awareness of hate speech in Seodaemun District, Seoul, July 7. Yonhap

His view is backed by last week's survey, which found that 69.9 percent of teachers cited fear of being accused of violating political neutrality as a reason why it is difficult to address the issue with students.

Park Dae-hoon, another teacher with more than 30 years of experience, echoed the call for basic political rights for teachers.

“High school seniors can already vote and first-year students can join political parties [when they turn 16], but teachers cannot voice political opinions or join parties. Teachers without rights are dealing with students who have them,” he said.

Legal protection for classes on socially controversial issues and field learning where students can learn firsthand about Korea's modern history should both be introduced, he added.

Both teachers agreed that punishments like recording hate speech incidents in a student's official school documents are not the answer.

“Some students use hate expressions intentionally, but others use them playfully, without knowing what they mean. Noting it in their school records as punishment won't change how they truly feel,” the Gyeonggi Province teacher said.

Adults set example

Experts say the roots of the problem lie in the language modeled by adults, from politicians to the media.

Chung-Ang University endowed chair professor Min Byoung-chul, the founder of the Sunfull Foundation, which leads campaigns for respectful online communication, said students learn by watching adults.

“If adults' language doesn't change, classrooms won't change either,” Min said.

That starts with the demeaning language often used by politicians and broadcast personalities, Min said, adding that it is contradictory to teach students kindness while television programs and online content show adults insulting each other with abusive language.

Yang Jung-ho, a professor of education at Sungkyunkwan University, echoed that assessment.

After Paichai High School students received a six-month ban from tournaments, he said that many other students will demand the same standard apply to politicians or business figures who use similar expressions.

“What matters more than punishment or education is applying standards consistently and equally, which is what today's teenagers are sensitive about,” Yang said. “Such inconsistencies have often been allowed to slide for political reasons in the past. Korean society must earn students' trust on that front first.”

Their diagnosis lines up with last week's survey, which showed teachers ranked hateful and mocking language from politicians and the media as the second most important external factor at 74.4 percent, behind online hate content and community culture at 94 percent.

How other countries handle it

While Korea debates the limits of teachers' roles, other countries are building systems to address hate speech and extremism in schools.

Britain's Department for Education publishes case studies for schools to use as guidance, showing how staff identified and responded to warning signs, including extremist ideologies and racial prejudice.

In one case, a 17-year-old college student expressed hostility toward Muslims and was later found to have acquired a Nazi armband after meeting with far-right recruiters. A government program coordinated an assessment and a specialist intervention, and the case was closed after 11 months, when the student stopped engaging with extremist groups.

In another, a 10-year-old refused to work with immigrant classmates after watching videos of immigrants purportedly carrying out criminal acts. His teacher led a class discussion, explaining that criminal behavior is not unique to any one group. The school also added lessons on prejudice and digital literacy to its curriculum.

The U.S. Department of Education uses Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, applying it to programs or activities that receive federal funding and treating persistent hate speech targeting students' race, ethnicity or religion as a potential violation.

At the state level, Massachusetts issued updated guidance in 2024 reminding school districts of their legal obligations to allow for discourse and the expression of different viewpoints, while also requiring them to promptly investigate and respond to any incidents of alleged harassment or bullying.

The state also held a webinar to train school leaders and school district attorneys on the guidance.