Education Ministry Aide Writes Textbook... "Certification Should Be Revoked" vs "No Procedural Issues"

Application for Certification After Appointment as Youth Advisor
Excluded from Final Writing Team
Opposition: "Certification Cancellation Due to Procedural Issues"
Ministry of Education: "No Issues with Announcement"

Concerns have been raised that the textbook review should be withdrawn after it was revealed that a youth aide to the Deputy Prime Minister, an employee of the Ministry of Education, participated in writing history textbooks managed by the Korea Institute for Curriculum and Evaluation (KICE). The Ministry of Education explained that there was no procedural issue, stating that the announcement for authors by KICE did not include related provisions at the time.

On the 24th, Jin Sun-mi, a member of the Democratic Party of Korea, argued at the National Assembly Education Committee plenary meeting that "there is naturally a procedure to cancel the review after the textbook review," and insisted that the review of the textbook with procedural defects should be canceled. Jin said, "At the time of the review, the youth aide was already part of the writing team," adding, "According to the response from KICE, the explanatory booklet for the review application stated that Ministry of Education officials could not participate. The fact that the writing was completed and only the name was removed is problematic."

[Image source=Yonhap News]

Members of the ruling People Power Party also partially agreed with the issue. Jo Jeong-hoon, the ruling party's secretary of the Education Committee, commented, "The appointment of a youth aide from the Ministry of Education before the revision and supplementation work of a specific writing team member was completed is quite regrettable for the Ministry of Education, especially since the pain of the state-issued textbook has not yet been forgotten."

A, who was appointed as a youth aide to the Ministry of Education in November last year, is known to have drafted the initial manuscript of the high school Korean History 2 textbook for KICE. The application for the textbook review was made in December, one month after A's appointment. At the time of the review application, A was listed as one of the six writers but was omitted from the final version.

The Ministry of Education maintains that there is no procedural problem because the initial announcement did not include any restrictions on the participation of Ministry of Education officials. Lee Ju-ho, Deputy Prime Minister for Social Affairs and Minister of Education, said, "The author announcement by KICE does not say that Ministry of Education employees cannot participate," adding, "From that perspective, it is difficult to say the criteria were not met."

Regarding the claim that the relevant regulation exists in the guidance document rather than the announcement, a Ministry of Education official responded that it is presumed to be an 'administrative error.' So Eun-ju, the Ministry of Education's Chief Education Policy Officer, said at the meeting, "The announcement was made in January 2023, and the explanation for the review application was given by the previous review agency in December 2023, much later. Including criteria not in the announcement in the guidance document is an administrative error."

Democratic Party lawmaker Kim Moon-soo questioned whether youth aide A specified 'Ministry of Education' as their workplace when applying for the review. Kim asked, "The review application form requires the workplace to be written. What did A write as their workplace?" and requested related documents. He added, "If A joined the Ministry of Education in November and applied for the review in December, if they wrote 'Ministry of Education,' the Institute should have said 'not allowed,' and if they did not write 'Ministry of Education,' it would be falsification of documents."

In response, Chief Policy Officer So said, "If the Institute had pointed out that A wrote 'Ministry of Education,' and the applicant said they could not accept something not in the announcement, the Institute would have had no choice but to reject it," adding, "I think this issue should fundamentally be judged based on qualification criteria." She further said, "It would be better to check the materials a bit more and then provide further comments."