While the question of "Is a university a public good or a private commodity?" might not readily engage those outside the field of 'Higher Education Administration' - a specialty familiar to the author - it is one that should provoke contemplation not only among those who consider themselves experts in the broader Korean educational sphere and more specifically higher education, but also among us, the upcoming generation of scholars thriving in the university environment. This question substantially influences the paradigm by which we perceive universities as societal organisms and subsequently impacts relevant policy and system implementations.
Financial considerations surrounding universities form an integral part of this conversation. South Korea's expenditure in higher education trails considerably behind the OECD average. Although the need for bold investment to enhance the competitiveness of universities is frequently discussed, viable solutions seem elusive, resulting in a stale rhetoric void of fruitful action.
Since the mid-1990s, spurred by discourses on globalization, market-oriented educational reforms, and financial support initiatives such as the Brain Korea (BK) project, some universities have managed to emerge on the international stage. However, beneath this veneer of progress are critical observations regarding the essential utility of universities. An extreme evaluation could brand them as entities "draining the pockets of students and parents with high tuition fees for a degree that delivers questionable value." Such perceptions of universities, which have seemingly lost societal trust, are glaringly reflected in online comments and YouTube channels discussing the crisis in higher education with sentiments like "Why do we need a university degree?" and "Half of the universities should disappear!"
Having spent half of my life immersed in higher education – as an undergraduate student, a university staff member, and currently juggling work and studies in graduate school - these harsh realities provide an uncomfortable truth.
Even considering the sensitive political implications surrounding the notion of 'half-priced tuition fees,' it seems paradoxical to discuss international competitiveness while freezing tuition fee for nearly 15 years. Whether intentional or not, government finance support projects have seemingly led to a state of subjugation, where universities are essentially under the thumb of national power. The path to improving financial stability through tuition fee rationalization is essentially blocked, resulting in a structure that has been held captive to government finance support projects for decades, so much so that it appears to have become the standard.
The autonomy and independence of university operations should, in principle, be preserved according to each institution's ideologies and visions. Yet, how should we interpret the state's manipulation of university reform directions via financial support projects within the broader context of university history? The historical lesson conveyed in the book "University and Power: A Hundred Years of Korean Universities" (Kim Jung-in, 2018) - which reveals a past where, despite increasing societal demand for higher education, the state tacitly condoned the quantitative expansion of private education without making sufficient investments - calls for scrutiny.
There is a perspective that believes the state's involvement in determining university tuition fees is weaker than the need to bolster competitiveness, which ultimately determines the survival of universities. Higher education is not compulsory, and in the face of immediate existential concerns, proudly championing the public nature and affordability of education can ultimately be deemed irresponsible. If students and their parents feel that they are not receiving value equal to or beyond the costs they have incurred, regardless of the amount the university charges, the institution risks social obsolescence. It is a matter that each university must decide, act upon, and take responsibility for.
If there are universities unable to sense or manage this responsibility, it might be socially advantageous from a broader perspective to let them naturally fade away. For the upcoming generation of scholars, who strive to become intellectuals and experts in their fields, a university is a haven for learning and living, a space to realize life's ambitions and career success, and an entity with which they should establish a connection even after degree attainment as they navigate the ecosystem of knowledge. For these reasons, as a student who learned, lived, and conducted research in a university, I long for the current deadlock surrounding university finances to be structurally resolved so that universities can assert themselves as more dynamic societal actors before it is too late.
---------------------
* Disclaimer
This content is a translation of an article composed in Korean language, which was published in December 2022 on the Kyusu (meaning "Faculty" in Korean) Daily, a premier media outlet in South Korea dedicated to higher education. For the original article, please visit http://www.kyosu.net/news/articleView.html?idxno=97678.
Comments
Post a Comment