This blog post examines whether an easier college entrance exam can actually curb the private education frenzy, evaluating its effectiveness based on various statistics and logic.
In Korea, the College Scholastic Ability Test (CSAT), held every November, is a topic of conversation for many people, even those not directly taking the exam. It’s said that even planes can’t fly on CSAT day, highlighting the nationwide focus on it. The difficulty level of that year’s CSAT is also one of the biggest talking points. The Korea Institute for Curriculum and Evaluation and the government claim that the rising difficulty of the CSAT fuels private education fever. Therefore, they propose creating an easier CSAT to reduce private education. I believe an easier CSAT has little correlation with reducing private education fever.
Before discussing whether an easier CSAT contributes to reducing private education fever, let’s examine surveys on why students receive private education. According to the Anti-Corruption and Civil Rights Commission, 70.7% of students were receiving private tutoring. The main reasons cited for private tutoring in Korea were ‘school classes alone are insufficient’ (31.9%), ‘the university one attends is important for employment, etc.’ (29%), and ‘students are selected based primarily on scores in various entrance exams, such as for specialized high schools and university admissions’.
Looking at the above statistics, the most frequently cited reason for private tutoring, ‘school classes alone are insufficient,’ could be partially addressed by implementing an easier CSAT, potentially reducing the need for supplementary private study. However, if a student lacks sufficient understanding of academic concepts due to inadequate school instruction, they will likely seek private tutoring to fill that gap. This is because the CSAT is a relative evaluation, not an absolute one. The easier the CSAT, the narrower the score gap becomes. Consequently, achieving a high score requires flawless understanding of every aspect of the curriculum. And literally, since the primary reason for private tutoring is ‘because school classes are insufficient,’ the most effective way to reduce private tutoring is to ‘make school classes sufficient.’
The next two reasons cited, ‘University of origin matters for employment, etc.’ (29%) and ‘Specialized high schools, university admissions, and various entrance exams select students based on scores,’ inherently involve the element of ‘competition.’ However, implementing an easier CSAT narrows the gap between students. Yet, since only a minority can achieve their desired outcomes, competition intensifies.
Summarizing the above statistics, the fundamental reasons for private education are the inadequacy of public education and entrance exam competition. Therefore, to reduce private education, we must first strengthen public education and find ways to reduce entrance exam competition. Let’s discuss whether an easier CSAT reduces entrance exam competition.
Those advocating for an easier CSAT hold the following positions. First, more people would believe that good grades can be achieved solely through schoolwork, without the need for private tutoring outside of school. Second, it could prevent top students from becoming overly fixated on boosting their scores and engaging in unlimited competition, encouraging greater interest in holistic activities beyond academic grades. Additionally, it is said to have the effect of allowing students with lower grades to achieve a certain level of score, thereby instilling confidence.
First, the government argues that an easier CSAT reduces academic burden by discouraging excessive studying, leading to significant reductions in the curriculum content previously taught. Consequently, according to the Ministry of Education, the gap in CSAT scores between regions with high private tutoring rates and those without has narrowed. However, according to the Anti-Corruption and Civil Rights Commission, paradoxically, after the easier CSAT, the rate of admission to top-tier universities increased more in areas with high private tutoring. This is because, with the reduction in regular admissions based on the CSAT, students began preparing for the different early admissions processes of each university. Each university’s admissions guide reaches up to 100 pages, and the details of the early admissions process vary significantly between institutions. Consequently, admissions consulting firms charge substantial fees to provide students and parents with admissions information. Students who gain early access to this information hold a distinct advantage in the admissions process. This has made the admissions process more difficult for students without private tutoring, worsening their situation.
Second, for the government’s argument that an easier CSAT would free students from unlimited competition over academic grades to hold any validity, the CSAT must be an absolute grading system, not a relative one. This is because an absolute grading system allows students at any level of learning to focus on their studies without being overly preoccupied with ‘scoring points’. However, because the CSAT is a relative grading system, an easier exam actually intensifies the ‘scoring points’ competition, where success or failure hinges on a single question, driving students to avoid missing even one problem.
Finally, it is claimed that an easier CSAT instills confidence in students with lower grades. However, as mentioned earlier, the CSAT is a relative evaluation system. Paradoxically, contrary to the government’s claims, the score reports of students who take the CSAT show percentile scores, grade scores, and standard scores for each subject. In other words, the score reports do not include raw scores; the three scores listed above are calculated as relative indicators compared to other students. It is clear that reducing raw score differences is distinct from building confidence.
As long as the CSAT is a relative evaluation, the inherent nature of ‘ranking’ is already embedded within it. Therefore, attempting to eliminate this inherent nature is fundamentally misguided. That is, an easy CSAT is problematic because it loses the ability to distinguish between top-tier students, and conversely, a difficult CSAT is problematic because it loses the ability to distinguish between lower-tier students. Therefore, the optimal difficulty level for the CSAT is one that avoids leaning excessively in either direction. Furthermore, as seen in the statistics above, the reason private education has become overheated is because public education is failing to fulfill its role. Rather than looking for scapegoats, what is needed is the strengthening of public education—specifically, the ability to provide education tailored to individual preferences within the school setting, where many students gather.
