Court Cancels Decision on Correct Answer for CSAT Life Science II Question... "Clear Error in Question" (Comprehensive)

Question 20 of the 2022 College Scholastic Ability Test (CSAT) Life Science II, which sparked controversy over a "question error."

[Asia Economy Reporter Choi Seok-jin, Legal Affairs Specialist] The court ruled to cancel the Korea Institute for Curriculum and Evaluation's (KICE) decision on the correct answer for question 20 of the 2022 College Scholastic Ability Test (CSAT) Science Inquiry Area Life Science II, which had sparked controversy over a question error.

On the 15th, the Seoul Administrative Court Administrative Division 6 (Presiding Judge Lee Ju-young) ruled in the hearing for the cancellation lawsuit filed by 92 Life Science II test takers against KICE, stating, "The plaintiffs' claims are accepted, and the correct answer decision is canceled."

The court first identified the issues in this case as ▲whether there is an error in the question ▲and if there is an error, whether such an error prevents examinees from selecting the correct answer, among two main points.

The court pointed out, "When calculating the number of individuals in an animal population using the conditions presented in this question, a problem arises where the number of individuals with a specific genotype appears as a negative number," adding, "Since the number of individuals in an animal population cannot be negative according to the principles of life science, there is a clear error in this question as there is no population I or II that satisfies all the given conditions."

Furthermore, the court stated, "The Science Inquiry Area of the CSAT is designed to measure reasoning, analysis, and inquiry abilities based on the information included in the questions. Therefore, the question setter must compose questions so that examinees can select the correct answer when they attempt to solve the problem using logical and rational methods."

Continuing, the court said, "Some examinees, including the plaintiffs, attempted to solve the question by establishing a sufficiently logical and rational method, although it did not exactly match the method intended by the defendant. In the process, due to the error in the question itself, they were unable to select the correct answer. Requesting examinees to select answer 5 as the correct answer under these circumstances is equivalent to ignoring some of the conditions stated in the question or choosing an answer while disregarding the principles of life science, which is unfair," the court judged.

The court emphasized, "Therefore, there is no meaningful difference in academic ability between examinees who selected answer 5 as the correct answer and those who did not," adding, "Ultimately, this question failed to fulfill its basic role as a CSAT question measuring college education academic ability."

The court pointed out, "If the correct answer to this question is maintained as answer 5, examinees will inevitably have unnecessary concerns about whether errors that contradict scientific principles in future CSAT Science Inquiry questions are mistakes by the question setter or intentional."

It added, "There is also a concern that instead of focusing on developing the ability to solve problems by exercising thinking and creativity while preparing for the CSAT, examinees will focus only on finding the specific solution method intended by the question setter."

Finally, the court concluded, "There is a clear error in this question, and such an error makes it impossible or at least seriously difficult for examinees to select the correct answer. Therefore, this question cannot fulfill the basic role of measuring the academic ability required for college education and has lost its validity as an evaluation indicator. Nevertheless, the defendant's decision to designate answer 5 as the correct answer for Life Science II question 20 is illegal and is hereby canceled."

The court advanced the originally scheduled verdict date from the 17th to the 15th. This move is interpreted as an effort to minimize confusion in academic schedules amid the imminent university admission schedules.

Earlier, examinees filed a main lawsuit on the 2nd, demanding the cancellation of KICE's correct answer decision for Life Science II question 20, citing errors in the question, and simultaneously requested a provisional suspension of the decision's effect. On the 9th, the court granted the provisional suspension, stating, "The decision by KICE on November 29 to designate answer 5 as the correct answer for Life Science II question 20 is suspended until the main lawsuit verdict is delivered."

Subsequently, KICE distributed score reports marking Life Science II scores as 'blank' to examinees, and the Ministry of Education, after consulting with the Korea Council for University Education, postponed the announcement date for early admission successful candidates to the 18th. The registration period for early admission successful candidates was also delayed from the 17th?20th to the 18th?21st, and the early admission unregistered supplementary admission period was postponed from the 21st?27th to the 22nd?28th, each by one day.

The question in controversy involved reading the given passage and identifying which of the two groups maintained Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium, then evaluating the truth of three answer choices based on that.

The examinees who filed the lawsuit argued that according to the passage, calculating the number of individuals in one group results in a negative number, indicating that the premise of the question itself is invalid. However, KICE maintained the correct answer decision, arguing that even if the conditions of the question are incomplete, it remains valid as an evaluation question to differentiate academic achievement levels.

Meanwhile, KICE announced in the afternoon that it would not appeal the court's first-instance ruling. Accordingly, this ruling is expected to be finalized as is.

This content was produced with the assistance of AI translation services.