Recently, President Yoon Suk-yeol's plans to ease regulations for universities have become hot political topics every day. During his election campaign, the then-candidate Yoon said, "I will increase support for universities and ease regulations, and I pledge to increase education investments for local universities to levels similar to the top universities in the country. I will also increase the number of national scholarships." He also announced his plan to help restructure marginal and struggling universities to become more autonomous so that they can become educational institutions and research and development centers that satisfy corporate needs. Thus, in October, the government announced a 'National Strategic Technology Promotion Plan' aimed at creating new opportunities for the younger generation and securing high-tech sovereignty. This plan involves a total of 12 fields: ▲ semiconductors and display technology, ▲secondary battery technology, ▲ next-generation nuclear power, ▲ advanced biotechnology, ▲ aerospace technology, ▲ hydrogen technology, ▲ cybersecurity, ▲ artificial intelligence, ▲ next-generation communications, ▲ advanced robotic manufacturing, and ▲ quantum technology.
ﾠ
However, the agenda has been criticized by the public. During his inauguration, President Yoon put forward his national vision of 'leaping forward again, creating a country where people live together in harmony.' He also stated that state administration would follow the principles of 'national interest, practicality, fairness, and common sense.' At the same time, he also expressed his ambition to make all parts of Korea become great places to live. However, this has not been the case. The government is pursuing three major plans, all of which have shortfalls. The plan to 'expand the number of universities in the Seoul Capital Area through deregulation' will further increase the concentration of universities in the Capital Area and accelerate the decline of other regions in the country. Furthermore, lifting regulations for the Seoul Capital Area and focusing on improving universities in this region can have adverse effects. Furthermore, by prioritizing 쟵niversities in the Seoul Capital Area when it comes to opportunities for semiconductor manpower training, we could see regional universities in other parts of Korea close down in droves due to the ultra-concentration of universities in the Capital Area. Not only will this fuel regional decline, but the country may also end up facing an educational population crisis due to low birth rates and the aging population.
ﾠ
The same is true for measures to ease regulations regarding university tuition fees. Korea has placed a freeze on university tuition prices for the past 14 years since 2009 and has also implemented half-price tuition policies. With the introduction of national scholarships starting in 2012 made possible by investments of more than 3 trillion won per year, private university tuition fees saw decreases that lowered Korea's rank in the list of OECD countries with the most expensive university tuition costs to 7th in 2019~2020, which is a considerable drop considering that the country was placed second in 2013~2014. The problem is that people are still burdened with college tuition. Since 2011, a tuition cap has been put in place to prevent university tuition from exceeding 1.5 times the average inflation rate of the previous three years, but in reality, this has not been the case at all. Over the past five years, the rate of increase in college and graduate tuition (payments) has nearly doubled for all consumers. In addition, with inflation currently hitting new highs every month, tuition fees are likely to soar even further, kindling strong backlash from parents.
ﾠ
University students also oppose these measures. According to a survey conducted by <The Hannam Times> in October on the awareness of measures to ease university regulations, 100% of the respondents opposed increases in university tuition. Reasons for this opposition included financial problems (53.3%), concerns regarding the lack of noticeable effects (20%), concerns regarding the irresponsible use of tuition fees (17.8%), and concerns regarding other adverse effects (8.9%) like declining university competitiveness. However, certain figures showed a pattern of approval. If existing tuition fees were to increase by 3.825% under the current government's plan to ease regulations on university tuition, 46.7% responded positively and 53.3% responded negatively to the question of whether they would be willing to complete higher education. Lee Bo-mi, a student from the Department of English Literature, stressed the fundamental function of universities, saying that we need to first solve the issue of overly concentrated populations in the Capital Area if universities in the Capital Area and other regions of Korea want to achieve mutual balance. Lee continued by saying, "we need to seek institutional means that can help us move away from Korea's focus on academics so that students can view universities as a place where they can learn instead of a step that we need to take for employment."
ﾠ
The three aforementioned policies have something in common in that they all overlook the background of the current situation. The goal of expanding the number of universities in the Seoul Capital Area through deregulation ignores the background involving universities in other regions. The semiconductor manpower training initiative ignores the current social background of low birth rates and the aging population. The university tuition deregulation policies indicate a lack of understanding regarding the current economic situation with high inflation. The fueling of infinite greed, maximum freedom for capital, deregulation and reckless development, tax cuts for the rich and welfare spending, and the suppression of labor and civil society - these all stem from an unwillingness to understand the background. You could say that this is like giving a crying child even more cookies. It is a difficult challenge to compete against the ideologies of the wealthy, of large businesses, and of vested interests. Nevertheless, as Margaret Mead (the great anthropologist of the 20th century) once said, if more people become aware and unite with each other, we can transform our society's paradigm from economic growth to gross national happiness ("never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world; indeed, it is the only thing that ever has." -Margaret Mead).
