Towards an Inclusive Future: Understanding Diversity in Korean Higher Education through the Lense of America's Precedents

 

The recent discussions surrounding diversity in the United States, a country with a strong foothold in higher education globally, are particularly intriguing to me, a doctoral student majoring in higher education administration and an individual who has been working in the field of higher education internationalization for about 13 years.

For the first time in the history of Harvard University, a black individual was elected president at the end of last year. It was in 2023, about 14 years after the emergence of the first black president of the United States, a world-leading power, that a black president was inaugurated at what is often referred to as the world's best university. Shortly after this news was announced, Purdue University, one of America's prestigious institutions, announced in early January 2023 that the university had its first Asian-American president in its history. Interestingly, this appointment drew further attention as it occurred soon after the chancellor of Purdue University Northwest, which belongs to the same Purdue University system, caused a social ripple effect by ridiculing Asians in his graduation speech last December.

On the one hand, it's inspiring to see black and Asian individuals appointed as leaders of America's top universities. On the other hand, it's paradoxical to witness a white chancellor publicly belittling Asians. These seemingly contradictory circumstances highlight the complexity of racial issues intertwined within American higher education.

One can trace back the discussions about diversity issues in universities to the Affirmative Action (AA) measures, which have been in place for about 60 years since the 1960s in American higher education. Within the context of higher education, AA typically appears in the form of taking race and ethnicity into positive consideration during admission evaluations, also referred to as race-conscious admission policy. This policy was implemented to correct the discriminatory factors carried over from a history of denying certain races equal educational opportunities and to enhance their access to higher education. However, AA still sits at the center of various controversies within the United States. Particularly, 2023 could be a pivotal year for the fate of AA. 

The U.S. Supreme Court is expected to deliver a final verdict this year on lawsuits concerning the admission systems of Harvard University and the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, which have been selecting successful candidates by taking applicants' race into consideration. Currently, the U.S. Supreme Court includes three conservative justices appointed by the previous Trump administration. If the U.S. Supreme Court puts the brakes on the system that pursues diversity of admitted students through AA, it will undoubtedly have a significant impact on the American higher education system. Numerous American universities have long valued and promoted diversity. Should a ruling against this trend be delivered, it would inevitably trigger significant changes in many university policies and strategies, and even necessitate fundamental transitions in the universities' vision, overall operation, and guiding principles.

The arguments for abolishing AA can be summarized as follows: firstly, AA is a reverse discrimination factor that reduces the chances of admission for relatively superior non-minority students, mainly white or Asian-American students. Secondly, AA opens a pathway for students who have not fully met the qualifications and competencies to enter the university, causing a mismatch between the abilities needed to successfully complete their studies and the actual capabilities of the student, and consequently, leading to their failure to successfully complete their university education. Thirdly, AA imposes a stigma that members of the AA target group are inferior compared to other student groups. The last pillar of the arguments for abolishing AA suggests that races and ethnic groups that should benefit from AA, like blacks and Hispanics, are no longer disadvantaged minorities in American society and no longer require such a system since there have already been considerable institutional and conscious progress over the 60 years of AA's implementation.

Sabbagh (2011) stated that the paradox of Affirmative Action (AA) lies in its destiny: it openly aims to eliminate the conditions that justify its implementation. AA may indeed be a system that ought to disappear someday. It remains to be seen whether 2023 will be that year in the field of higher education in the United States.

Meanwhile, what is the state of higher education in South Korea from this perspective? The keywords "diversity" and "inclusion" seem to have come to the fore in domestic universities around 2018. Korea University has been leading this societal discourse since the establishment of the Diversity Committee in January 2019. According to the latest data released by the committee, they have developed a 'diversity index' through their own research, and are making efforts to periodically measure and improve the level of diversity in institutional and perception dimensions at Korea University.

In particular, the university announced a diversity statement in December 2022, making it the most proactive among domestic universities in emphasizing this issue. When compared to the scope and degree of diversity discussions in American universities, which include issues like age, abilities, race, ethnicity, gender, linguistic heritage, learning styles, nationality, political inclination, sexual orientation (LGBTQ), religion/beliefs, socioeconomic status, and veteran status, a direct comparison with the situation in Korea may not be completely valid.

However, respecting differences and encouraging the value of diversity is important, and the trend of these principles gradually spreading in Korean universities is something to be welcomed. This is because universities can make the biggest impact in terms of diversity and inclusion. This assertion is based on the fact that universities can inclusively reflect the voices of various societal members, both internal and external – students, professors, staff, local communities, alumni, and both public and private sectors. Looking back at history, universities have functioned as platforms and fora where different voices emerge, mingle, and eventually reach conclusions in response to challenges faced by South Korean and global societies.

As an emerging scholar and practitioner in university administration, I soberly reflect on the extent to which societal discussions about diversity have reached in the context of higher education in Korea, especially in light of the intriguing situation unfolding in the United States. As many Korean universities join the gradually diversifying historical wave of South Korea, I hope they continue their steady roles in enhancing accessibility and equality in higher education, building inclusive discourses, cultures, and programs within the university, and ultimately creating greater societal value.

---------------------------

*Disclaimer

This content is a translation of the article published in March 2023 on the "Lab-Zine", a quarterly magazine published by the graduate student association of the elite universities in South Korea. For the original article, please visit http://pokason.labzine.co.kr/story/st_view?st_no=1574.