Forest Service's Five Types of Forest Welfare Experts, Pass Rates Vary Greatly Depending on Operation Methods

Published 13 Oct.2021 15:54(KST)

Assemblyman Joo Chul-hyun: Overissuance Compared to Demand Is Also a Problem, Operation and Other Improvements Needed

Forest Service's Five Types of Forest Welfare Experts, Pass Rates Vary Greatly Depending on Operation Methods

[Yeosu=Asia Economy Honam Reporting Headquarters Reporter Sim Kyung-taek] The pass rates of the five types of national professional certification systems issued by the Korea Forest Service vary significantly depending on whether they are operated by the public or private sector, prompting calls for a comprehensive survey and system improvement.

According to the office of National Assembly member Joo Cheol-hyun (Jeonnam Yeosu-si Gap) of the Agriculture, Food, Rural Affairs, Oceans and Fisheries Committee, the Korea Forest Service operates three types of forest education expert certification systems?Forest Interpreter, Early Childhood Forest Instructor, and Forest Trail Hiking Instructor?through private training institutions selected by the Korea Forest Service, as well as the Level 1 and Level 2 Forest Healing Instructor professional certification systems operated by the Korea Forest Welfare Promotion Institute under the Korea Forest Service.

The pass rate for the three forest education expert certification systems from 2017 to 2021 was 100%, with certificates issued to 13,002 people and not a single failure during that five-year period.

Certificates are issued after paying tuition fees ranging from 1,000,000 to 1,800,000 KRW depending on the exam type, completing 145 to 205 hours of training, and passing the exam conducted by the respective training institution.

The pass rate for the Level 2 Forest Healing Instructor certification operated by the Korea Forest Welfare Promotion Institute is 45.9%, and 28.8% for Level 1, showing a significant difference compared to the pass rates of the three certifications issued through private training institutions.

There are also criticisms of “over-issuance” compared to the demand for forest education expert certificates.

Forest welfare specialized companies must hold certificates for at least three forest education experts to participate in government projects, but only 20.3% of the total certificate holders registered with specialized companies as of August this year.

This is interpreted as a considerable number of national professional certificates issued by the Korea Forest Service becoming “drawer certificates” (certificates that are unused and kept stored away).

Member Joo Cheol-hyun urged, “The forest education expert evaluation exam should establish at least a minimum objective verification process befitting the name ‘national professional certification.’” He added, “Along with a comprehensive investigation of the existing certification system operation, the Korea Forest Service must actively manage the system through precise demand forecasting to avoid the stigma of being an ‘institution that issues certificates excessively.’”