[Public Voices] How the Basic Academic Proficiency Guarantee Act Can Succeed

Song Ki-chang, Honorary Professor of the Department of Education at Sookmyung Women's University, is speaking at the 'Asia Economy Chatham House Roundtable' held on the 6th at the Asia Economy Conference Room in Jung-gu, Seoul. Photo by Kang Jin-hyung aymsdream@

Concerns about educational disparities have grown due to the prolonged COVID-19 pandemic, and a social consensus has formed on the need for systematic support for students falling below basic academic proficiency. In response, the government enacted the “Basic Academic Proficiency Guarantee Act” to strengthen the state's responsibility for ensuring basic academic skills, which has been in effect for over a year. The Ministry of Education established and announced a “Comprehensive Plan for Guaranteeing Basic Academic Proficiency” and also developed a “Customized Academic Achievement Autonomous Evaluation System” that allows schools to voluntarily participate in assessments. Earlier this year, the existing School Innovation Support Office was reorganized into the Responsible Education Policy Office, and last month, measures to enhance the competitiveness of public education were announced.

There is skepticism about whether these efforts will yield results. Both the law and the comprehensive plan for guaranteeing basic academic proficiency leave the diagnosis of basic academic skills to the discretion of schools and teachers, while the responsibility of schools and teachers who directly handle education remains ambiguous. The basic academic proficiency diagnostic test is at the principal’s discretion. If the test is not conducted, students who need learning support cannot be identified, and without selecting target students, customized education for those below basic proficiency is unnecessary. In extreme terms, even if the diagnostic test is not conducted, target students are not selected, and learning support education is not provided, there is no way to hold principals or teachers accountable. Naturally, there are no disadvantages imposed on them.

If the “Customized Academic Achievement Autonomous Evaluation” announced by the Ministry of Education is an assessment that diagnoses students’ knowledge, competencies, skills, and attitudes through the curriculum and provides tailored feedback, it should be usable across all grades and subjects. However, the evaluation targets are limited, and participation is left to the autonomy of schools and teachers. Even if a system is built at great expense, it is useless if teachers do not utilize it. Parents are often unaware of such systems, and even if the teachers responsible for their children’s education ignore the customized academic achievement evaluation, they have no way of knowing.

In 2017, the nationwide academic achievement assessment changed from a census evaluation to a sample evaluation. While debates over census versus sample evaluation continue, the proportion of students below basic academic proficiency has been increasing annually. Moreover, students or schools excluded from the sample cannot know their academic achievement levels and can only vaguely guess based on other schools’ evaluation results. There is no known statistical method that selects students below basic proficiency or schools for support based on sample evaluation results. It is also questionable whether census evaluation leads to ranking while sample evaluation does not. Whether ranking occurs depends on how evaluation results are disclosed and utilized, regardless of census or sample evaluation. Using census evaluation results as personnel data for teachers may be problematic, but rejecting academic achievement information for students and schools out of fear of ranking is an even bigger issue. This ultimately drives students who want to know their academic achievement levels to private academies.

The “Basic Academic Proficiency Guarantee Act” does not clarify the causes of students falling below basic proficiency and vaguely places responsibility on students and parents. The core of guaranteeing basic academic proficiency is for schools and teachers to do their best to educate so that no students fall below basic proficiency, and for the state to take responsibility and provide support once students below basic proficiency are diagnosed and selected.

Efforts to guarantee basic academic proficiency are the responsibility of the state and local governments, but efforts to reduce the number of students below basic proficiency rest with schools and teachers. Mandating basic academic proficiency diagnostic tests, reverting academic achievement assessments to census evaluations, and disclosing test and evaluation results are the first steps toward guaranteeing basic academic proficiency.

Song Ki-chang, Professor Emeritus, Sookmyung Women’s University

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