From K-Soft Power to K-Higher Education: Time for a Strategic Shift

The global rise of "K" branding is undeniable. Sparked by the Korean Wave, terms like K-pop and K-dramas became household names. Later, K-quarantine emerged during the pandemic, and in more recent political turbulence, even "K-democracy" entered the lexicon. Together, they reflect the undeniable strength of Korea’s soft power. And while many countries begin with the letter “K,” it is perhaps only when paired with the assets of South Korea that the initial feels natural, even self-assured.

Education has recently entered this expanding K-brand universe. The notion of “K-Ed” is already widely recognized, both for its merits and its flaws. On one hand, it reflects the national ethos that “our only real resource is human capital,” and indeed, South Korea’s meteoric rise owes much to its education system. International benchmarks such as PISA have consistently validated Korea’s academic excellence.

Yet there is a darker side to this success story. The relentless pursuit of upward mobility through education has taken a toll. From alarming mental health issues among students to recent controversies around four- and seven-year-olds sitting for standardized tests, the human cost is becoming difficult to ignore. Such developments suggest that the future of K-Ed, far from being secure, demands urgent rethinking.

What, then, is K-Higher Ed?

Some universities have eagerly adopted the term, often as a shorthand for the integration of cutting-edge technologies like AI into curricula. But reducing K-Higher Ed to a buzzword or a tech-forward marketing strategy does a disservice to the complexity of the sector. The previous administration’s mismanagement widened the national gap in AI capabilities. So while incorporating AI is necessary, it cannot be the centerpiece of Korea’s higher education identity.

To understand what K-Higher Ed should truly encompass, we must look to its historical foundations. Korea’s higher education system absorbed Western models through missionary schools during Japanese colonial rule, and later underwent American-led restructuring under the U.S. military government. This history has created a system that is, in many ways, hybrid and externally influenced.

America’s sustained global leadership in international education, carried out strategically over the past 75 years, also offers a lens through which to examine Korea’s higher education evolution. Yet despite this long trajectory, there has been surprisingly little discourse around how Korea should define and pursue a distinctively Korean model of higher education today.

As Korea prepares to turn the page on a six-month leadership vacuum and welcomes a new administration, it is time to reassess the direction of K-Higher Ed. I propose we examine five key tensions that will shape its future:

1. Homogeneity vs. Diversity: Can Korea shift from a domestically oriented, Korean-centric system toward an inclusive academic environment that embraces racial and ethnic diversity?

2. Import vs. Export: Will Korean universities continue to import global models, or will they grow into exporters—establishing campuses and academic influence abroad?

3. Certainty vs. Skepticism: As the value of traditional university degrees comes under scrutiny, can Korean institutions reaffirm their societal relevance while also adapting to new definitions of educational success?

4. Sending vs. Receiving: Korea has long been a “sending country” for students going abroad. Can it successfully pivot to become a preferred destination for international students?

5. Centralization vs. Decentralization: After decades of Seoul-centric growth, can new initiatives like the RISE project redistribute resources and opportunities across the nation?

These challenges do not exist in a vacuum. They unfold within a rapidly shifting global context, one where geopolitics, technological rivalry, and educational mobility are deeply intertwined. From the return of Trump Administration and the resurgence of MAGA politics, to clashes between U.S.-led alliances and China’s Belt and Road Initiative, Korea will need to navigate a delicate balance among U.S., China, and Japan while securing its own space in global higher education. AI-powered competition for talent will only intensify this urgency.

Some critics argue that tacking on “K” to everything is little more than a branding gimmick. They have a point. To overcome this critique, K-Higher Ed must be grounded not in style but in substance, rooted in Korea’s unique educational philosophy, institutional experiences, and its evolving place in the world.

K-Higher Ed should offer more than another clever label. It must become a new paradigm for higher education—one that is globally responsive and locally meaningful. Korean universities should be active players in global knowledge creation, straddling the boundaries of social sciences and emerging technologies. Only then will Korea’s researchers, educators, administrators, and graduates earn their rightful place on the world stage, not because of a brand, but because of their substance.

* This is a translation of the Korean article published in the University News Network in May 2025. For the original work, please visit https://news.unn.net/news/articleView.html?idxno=579315.