[Opinion] Let's Break Free from the Myth that 'College Entrance Regular Admissions = Private Education'

Recently, the Presidential Transition Committee announced the 110 national tasks of the Yoon Suk-yeol administration. The campaign promise to expand the regular admissions (Jeongsi) for college entrance was reflected in the national tasks as "balanced operation and simplification of admissions" by February 2024. According to the Ministry of Education's 2024 college entrance examination implementation plan, the regular admissions ratio for 2024 was 21%. Since this is far from balanced operation, it is interpreted as an intention to improve it.

The regular admissions ratio, which began to be distinguished from early admissions (Susi) in 2002, dropped from 71.2% in 2002 to 48.5% in 2007, becoming lower than early admissions. After that, it decreased from 39.3% in 2011 to 26.3% in 2018, 23% in 2021, 22% in 2023, and finally 21% in 2024. Although it rebounded to 24.3% in 2022, if this trend continues, the 20% range may collapse by 2025.

Expectations for the college entrance system varied depending on the perspective. High schools hoped for the normalization of education, universities expected to select qualified candidates with academic ability, and education authorities aimed to reduce private education expenses. In contrast, students expected a college entrance system with fairness and objectivity.

Criticism has also emerged that the pledge to expand regular admissions contradicts the purpose of the high school credit system, which will be fully implemented from 2025, and may increase private education expenses. The high school credit system is summarized as an expansion of elective subjects and an achievement evaluation system for elective subjects. If regular admissions increase, the influence of the College Scholastic Ability Test (CSAT) will grow, leading students to focus more on common subjects rather than electives, thereby nullifying the credit system. This argument is possible under the assumption that the current CSAT system remains unchanged, but it could change if the CSAT system is reformed to align with the credit system.

The claim that increasing regular admissions will raise private education expenses seems to be based on a simple average of private education costs for students preparing for regular admissions and those preparing for early admissions. However, it should also be considered that the spectrum of private education expenses for early admissions preparation is broader than that for regular admissions. Students applying for popular majors or top-tier universities through early admissions also find it difficult to secure a competitive edge with school classes alone and are similarly tempted by private education.

There is also an argument that if regular admissions decrease, competition within regular admissions will intensify, potentially increasing private education expenses. If expanding regular admissions increases private education expenses, then reducing regular admissions should decrease them. Over the past 20 years, the regular admissions ratio has decreased by a staggering 47 percentage points, yet private education expenses have not decreased but rather continued to rise. Whether it is school grades or the CSAT, it is difficult to ignore private education to improve relative ranking. Ultimately, the extent of private education depends not on whether it is regular or early admissions, but on which university one aims for and how much one is willing to spend on private education.

If regular admissions decrease, the original purpose of distinguishing admissions into early and regular categories becomes meaningless, reducing the choices available not only to current students but also to repeaters. On the other hand, even if students are dissatisfied, they may increasingly choose to enroll in a university through early admissions and then opt to retake the exam (ban-su). An increase in ban-su imposes unnecessary costs on individuals, universities, and society. Before arguing that regular admissions should not be expanded to stabilize the credit system, it is necessary to reflect on whether expanding early admissions has reduced private education and normalized education. It should also be considered that the achievement evaluation-centered credit system may negatively affect the reliability and fairness of early admissions and could lead to the revival of university-specific entrance exams.

Whether regular or early admissions, if either falls below a certain ratio, opportunities for choice are limited and the purpose of the system is difficult to achieve. If early admissions increase excessively, concerns about fairness will also rise. In 2018, the National Education Council recommended through a public discussion process that the regular admissions ratio be increased to at least 30%, and the Ministry of Education issued guidelines to 16 universities in the Seoul area to expand regular admissions to over 40%, both in the same context. It is now necessary to break away from the myth that "regular admissions = private education" and enhance fairness and expand choices in college entrance by having all universities expand regular admissions to over 40%.

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