[Viewpoint] University Tuition Refunds: A Suspension Is Needed

Another tunnel awaits in front of universities that have just emerged from the long tunnel of remote classes. Students are demanding tuition refunds. They completed the semester with remote classes, which were cheaper than face-to-face classes, and claim that at least some remote classes were substandard and that they did not use university facilities.

Reflecting on the evaluation that remote classes were substandard, many thoughts cross my mind: struggling through the semester without even writing a single paper, yet demanding tuition refunds because remote classes were substandard. Were all remote classes substandard? Were there no substandard face-to-face classes in the past? Who judges substandard classes and by what criteria? What are the standards for tuition refunds?

Remote classes, like face-to-face classes, may have been substandard. This semester was replaced by remote classes due to unforeseen circumstances, so there were inevitable trial-and-error processes, and remote classes were likely more substandard than face-to-face classes.

It is also true that universities’ responses to substandard classes were inadequate. For substandard classes, measures such as improvement requests, replacement of the responsible professor, or course abolition were necessary, but universities were confused and failed to respond appropriately.

Nevertheless, it is difficult to see this situation as grounds for uniform tuition refunds. Could it be understood as an unprecedented hardship experienced not only by universities but by our entire society? The K-quarantine system we pride ourselves on is also the result of numerous trial-and-error processes. Shouldn’t universities be given at least one semester to adjust?

Remote universities and general universities, often compared at a glance, have different establishment standards. The professor-to-student ratio for general universities is one professor per 25 students, but for remote universities, it is one per 200 students. The classroom area is one-third that of general universities, and there is no standard for campus land area. The minimum standard for basic property for revenue is 30 billion KRW versus 3.5 billion KRW. The number of students per course also differs. Although the remote classes are the same, labor costs are higher, so the cost inevitably differs.

The claim that tuition should be refunded because university facilities were not used is also difficult to accept. Costs do not decrease simply because university facilities were not used. Facility maintenance and management costs are fixed costs. Strictly speaking, the responsibility for preventing facility use lies not with the university but with the government, which blocked attendance through social distancing measures.

It is true that due to non-attendance, laboratory and practical training fees and student support expenses were not fully spent. The surplus from laboratory and practical training fees can be spent in the second semester. The unspent amount of student support expenses is not large enough to warrant refunds and can be spent in the second semester or reallocated to scholarships if necessary.

The average education cost return rate for private universities is just over 170%. This indicator means that students receive benefits exceeding the tuition they pay. With tuition frozen for 12 years, universities cannot sustain themselves on tuition alone. If tuition refunds are also required, deficits will increase further.

If universities are required to refund tuition, government tax input is inevitable. While there is no problem with the government supporting private universities, which are public education institutions under state supervision, just as it supports private companies, responsibility for the substandard class controversy lies with the universities. Therefore, universities and students should first find a compromise, not the government. However, since the government is responsible for preventing the use of university facilities, it may directly support students to some extent. Regardless of tuition refunds, supporting private universities facing financial difficulties due to tuition freezes and enrollment reductions as part of overcoming COVID-19 is the government’s rightful duty.

Now is the time to set aside the tuition refund controversy and thoroughly prepare to prevent repeated substandard class controversies in the second semester’s remote classes. Additionally, universities should review not only tuition but also institutional improvements in faculty personnel and academic affairs, changes in teaching and learning methods, and the social functions and roles of universities.

Song Ki-chang, Professor, Department of Education, Sookmyung Women’s University