Upload
hubert-neal
View
223
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Human Capital Policies in Korea (I):
Education Expansion and bubble
I. The World’s Fastest Educational Expansion
II. Quality Problems of Colleges and Schools
III. Formation of Education Bubbles
IV. Labor Market Consequences of Education Bubbles
Outline
Korea’s Rapid Educational Expansion
The World’s Fastest Educational Expansion
① Educational Attainment: • Average Years of Schooling
② Educational Achievement: • International Achievement Tests
③ R&D Manpower• Number of Researchers
Average Years of Schooling (15-64 old) in Korea, Japan, USA, and China
Source: Barro, R. & Lee, J. (2010). A New Data Set of Educational Attainment in the World, 1950-2010, NBER WP 15902http://www.barrolee.com/ (2013.4. 12 retrieved)
1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 20100.0
3.0
6.0
9.0
12.0
15.0
K 15-64 J 15-64USA 15-64 China 15-64
Source: Barro, R. & Lee, J. (2010). A New Data Set of Educational Attainment in the World, 1950-2010,NBER WP 15902 http://www.barrolee.com/ (2013.4. 12 retrieved)
Average years of schooling (15-34 old) in Korea, Japan, USA, and China
1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 20100.0
3.0
6.0
9.0
12.0
15.0
Korea 15-34 Japan 15-34 USA 15-34
China 15-34
Average Scores of Reading, Math and Science in PISA
Number of Researchers (FTE) per Million Inhabitants
1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 20110
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
Korea Japan USA UK Germany France China
Source: UNESCO
Quality Problems in Korea’s Education
Not Number One in Quality
① Low Academic Ranking of Research Universities
② Strong Vertical Differentiation of Universities with respect to KSAT Scores of Entering Students
- Weak Horizontal Differentiation of Universities
③ Focus on Test Scores in Schools at the expense of Creativity and Character Skills
Academic Ranking of World Universities (2013)
Alumni: Alumni of an institution winning Nobel Prizes and Fields Medals (10%)Award: Staff of an institution winning Nobel Prizes and Fields Medals (20%)HiCi: Highly cited researchers in 21 broad subject categories (20%)N&S: Papers published in Nature and Science* (20%)PUB: Papers indexed in SCIE and SSCI (20%)PCP: Per capita academic performance of an institution (10%)
Alumni
Award
HiCi
N&S
PUB
PCP
0
50
100
Harvard University(1)The University of Tokyo(21)SNU(101-150)
Share of Papers and Citations by Countries
Source: Web of scienceNote: In full counting method
Vertical Differentiation among Universities : Education and Research Indica-tors (2013)
• According to PISA, Korean students study Math for 9.32 hours per week, much longer than OECD average(6.83), Finland(5.02)
– Korean students study Math at after school programs including private tu-toring for 2.28 hours per week, much longer than OECD average(1.07), Finland(0.37)
– Korean students study Math autonomously including homework for 2.31 hours per week, much longer than Finland(1.20 hours)
Long Hours of Study and Private Tutoring
Education Bubble
Concept of Education Bubble
• We call education bubble as a phenomenon of steady increases in spending on edu-cational investment that may not result in the effective increase in human capital
• Such phenomenon may involve
- Mushrooming of private tutoring to enter prestigious universities
- Rapid increase in students among low-quality universities
1965
1968
1971
1974
1977
1980
1983
1986
1989
1992
1995
1998
2001
2004
2007
2010
0.0
1.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
5.0
교육예산 등록금 (초중고대 ) 사교육비 (초중고 )
Educational Investment as a percentage of GDP
Govn’t Budget
Tuition Paymentby House-hold
Private Tutor-ing
(%)
What causes Education Bubbles ?
Private spending on education keeps increasing despite low rate of
return due to:
• Social psychological factors that put high values on the academic degrees
• Strong vertical differentiation in education
Institutional changes in education to enhance its quality and diversity occur
much slowly than the quantitative expansion
• Educational institutions fail to respond flexibly to the rapid increases in the de-mand for education
• Political economic factors that make education reforms much more difficult
than economic reforms
What causes Education Bubbles ?
Education Bubbles vs. Over-educa-tion
• Over-education
- Quantity of Education
- Labor Market Mismatches
• Education Bubbles
- Quality of Education
- Vertical Differentiation in Education
- Continuous Increase in Education Expenditure
Education Bubbles versus Financial Bubbles
• Financial Bubbles: - Prices in a financial bubble can fluctuate erratically and are vulnerable to a sudden burst
• Education Bubbles
- Increases in education expenditure are more persistent for a longer period
- More long-run adverse consequences on inequality and economic growth
Formation of Education Bubbles in Korea
Share of new graduates from high schools who enter universities had surged from 33.3% in 1990 to 83.9% in 2008Share of new graduates from vocational high schools who get jobs had plum-meted from 80.1% in 1991 to 16.8% in 2009Sluggish quality improvement and strengthened vertical differentiation in uni-versitiesEmployees of private tutoring institution increased from 69,000 to 317,000 which is equivalent to 77% of total number of school teachers
1
2
3
4
1965
1966
1967
1968
1969
1970
1971
1972
1973
1974
1975
1976
1977
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
0.0
10.0
20.0
30.0
40.0
50.0
60.0
70.0
80.0
90.0
100.0
general allvocational
Percentage of New High School Graduates who Enter Colleges (Advancement Rates)
Note: those enlisted were excluded from graduates. . Source: Statistical Yearbook of Education.
0.0
10.0
20.0
30.0
40.0
50.0
60.0
70.0
80.0
90.0vocationalallgeneral
Percentage of New High Schools Graduates Employed
Note: those enlisted were excluded from graduates. . Source: Statistical Yearbook of Education.
Percentage Change in Enrollment from 2000 by Decile Groups of Colleges
Source: National Business Survey by Statistics Korea, and Educational Yearly StatisticsNote: Teachers in elementary and secondary schools
Number of institutions and Employees in Private Tutoring Business
19931994199519961997199819992000200120022003200420052006200720082009201020112012 -
10,000
20,000
30,000
40,000
50,000
60,000
70,000
80,000
-
50,000
100,000
150,000
200,000
250,000
300,000
350,000
400,000
450,000
No. of institutions in private tutoring No. of employees in private tutoring
no
. o
f in
sti
tuio
ns
no
. of e
mp
loye
es o
r te
ach
ers
Korean Labor Market Analysis
Interpretation of Korean Wage Dynamics in Rela-tion to Education Bubble
Despite the massive increases in the graduates of higher education
institutions:
1
•Wage growth has slowed down since mid 1990s (the rapid ex-pansion pe-riod)
2
•Over-all wage in-equal-ity has risen
3
•College Premium in-creased but het-eroge-neously among the col-lege gradu-ates
4
•Within-col-lege in-equal-ity was the main driver of the in-creasing in-equal-ity
Compositional Change of the Workforce Toward Higher Education
0.2
.4.6
1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010Year
MS HS 2Y-C 4Y-C
Growth and Inequality of Korean Wage
1997 2008
.25
.3.3
5.4
Gin
i
13
13
.514
14
.5
Lo
g W
ag
e
1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010Year
Mean Gini
4-Year College Premium by Wage Decile Groups-.
50
.51
1.5
2
Rate
of R
etu
rn to
Colle
ge
Edu
catio
n
1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010Year
1st Dec. 2nd Dec. 5th Dec. 10th Dec. Top 5% Top 1%
Share of Wage-deficient Young 4-year College Workers0
.05
.1.1
5.2
.25
1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010Year
mean median
Among College Workers (Age<=34)
0.0
2.0
4.0
6.0
8.1
1990 1995 2000 2005 2010Year
mean median
Among Workforce (Age<=34)
Conclusions
• Human capital is an engine of economic growth, and human capital policy is major tool to combat inequality
• However quantitative expansion of education alone might not necessarily lead to the human capital accumulation
• Policy makers around the world should focus on education reforms to enhance the quality of education to cope with the negative consequences of education bubble such as mushrooming of private tutoring to enter prestigious universities and rapid increase in students among low-quality universities
Human Capital Policies in Korea(II): Education Diversification Reform
I. Education diversification as a goal
II. Specific reform agendas for implementing diversification
III. Reform strategies for implementing diversification
IV. Are We At An Inflection Point?
Outline
Educational Diversification as a Goal
Distribution of Schools and Colleges before and after Education Di-versification
Distribution of Schools and Colleges before and after Education Equalization
Education Diversification versus Education Equalization
Misguidance of the International Comparisons on Education Reforms
Reform Agendas
Reinforce Vocational Education Meister high schools initiatives
Strengthen career guidance
(employ new 4,500 career counseling teachers)
Introduce “Job-first, Diploma-Later” career path
for vocational high school graduates
Encourage changes in 350 specialized vocational high Schools
Reform 1: Foster Horizontal Differen-tiation
Teaching and Assessment for Creativity & Character Skills Introduce Admission Officer Systems for universities
Introduce Admission System for Self-directed Learning for
special-purpose high schools
Revitalize character education to combat school violence
(school sports clubs, student orchestra, social and emotional
learning)
Introduce smart education (digitalize textbooks)
Support Universities that Focus on Teaching and Coopera-tion with Industry Introduce supporting system for universities that teach well
- University Educational Capacity Enhancement Program (UECEP)
- Advancement for College Education (ACE)
Introduce supporting system to link universities and companies
- Leaders in Industry-University Cooperation (LINC)
- 2,000 I-U Partnership Professors
- Contract Majors
- World Class Colleges (WCC))
Strengthen the Autonomy of Schools High School Diversification 300 Initiatives
- autonomous private high schools
- boarding high schools
- autonomous public high schools
Introduce a system to recruit principals through
open competition
Reform 2: Enhance the Quality of Ed-ucation
Strengthen the Accountability of Schools Nation-wide information disclosure on schools
Pulling students out of underachievement based
on nation-wide assessment of all students
Evaluate teachers by students, parents, and
colleagues
3. Enhance the Quality of Research Universities Governance reforms for national universities
- corporatize SNU
- abolish direct election system of presidents of national universities
World Class University (WCU)
- invite 340 foreign scholars to 30 domestic universities
Double government support for research of university professors
- from 16% (2008) to 32% (2013)
Establish International Science Business Belt
- Institute of Basic Science (IBS)
- on-campus research centers at KAIST, GIST, DGIST, and POSTECH
- Heavy-ion Accelerator
Restructuring Universities Establish data-based framework for restructuring universities
Set up University Restructuring Committee (URC)
Announce annual list of universities that are subject to
limited financial support, limited subsidies for student loans,
even to be closed down
Reduce the Burden of Private Tutoring Expand After-School Class
Encourage local communities and industries for
active educational donation
Education Broadcasting System (EBS) provides
quality CSAT courses
Regulate through price ceiling and limited hours
of late-night private instruction
Reform 3: Reduce Private Burden Ed-ucation
“Half Burden of Tuition” Initiatives Launch National Scholarship Program through
Korea Student Aid Foundation (KOSAF)
Introduce Income Contingent Loan
Incentivize universities to reduce student’s burden
of tuition
Reform Strategies
Crisis-Management Strategies Building on earlier failed reform efforts
Obtaining an electoral mandate for education reforms
Pursuing evidence-based reforms with information disclosure
and solid research
Engaging teachers by mediating conflicting interests among
teachers
Transforming small crises into significant reform opportunities
Reform Strategies for Education Di-versification
Opening-Up Strategies
Open to industry
Open to parents
Open to new players
Open to countries abroad
Open to other ministries through “whole-of-government” approach
Are We At An Inflection Point?
The problems of rote learning and quantitative assessment based on mul-tiple choices have reached a crisis level
Are we at an inflection point?
Figure: Salaries and Self-efficacy of Teachers
50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100
350
400
450
500
550
600
SwitzerlandKorea
EstoniaPoland Germany
JapanFinland CanadaNetherlandsAustria
SloveniaDenmarkAustralia PortugalIrelandNew ZealandCzech Iceland
France UK SpainSwedenItalyIsraelSlovak
USAGreeceTurkey
Hungary
Chile Mexico
Shanghai-China
SingaporeHong Kong
Taipei
Macao
Latvia
RussiaCroatia
SerbiaRomaniaBulgaria
KazakhstanUAE Thailand
UruguayMontenegroAlbania
MalaysiaBrazilJordan
ArgentinaColombia
IndonesiaPeru
Qatar
Figure : High Scores by Unhappy Students (PISA 2012)
Math Scores
“I feel happy at school”
Percentage of students who report being happy at school
OECD countriesPartners
source: PISA 2012
From Multiple Choices to Performance As-sessment:Theory, Practice, and Strategy
Primary School(1st-6th grades)
Middle School(7th-9th grades)
High School(10th-12th grades)
Performance Condition
High K6, C9, E1
34% M2, E7 90% K2, E2, C3, S1
80%
Medium K2, M5, C4, S3
30%
Low K5, M4, E2, C2, S4
36% E1 10% E2 20%
Validity Condition
High K5, C9, E1
32% M2, E7 90% K2, E2, C3, S1
80%
Medium K4, M9, C4, S7
51% E1 10% E2 20%
Low K4, E2, C2
17%
Flexibility Condition
High K4, C4, E1
19% M2, E7 90% K2, E2, C3, S1
80%
Medium K3, M2, C7
26% E1 10%
Low K6, M7, E2, C4, S7
55% E1 10% E1 10%
Evaluative Authority Condition
High K5, C4, E1
21% M2, E7 90% K2, E2, C3, S1
80%
Medium K2, M2, C6
21% E1 10%
Low K6, M7, E2, C5, S7
58% E1 10% E1 10%
Findings
FindingsScience Performance Assess-ment Year 4 Class No. Name ( )
1. Write the names of the each parts of this spring balance in ( )
Weighing
Using a spring balance Activity
Subject No. Date
Evaluator
Performance
• Policy makers tend to have focused excessively on institutional changes such as the college entrance system and the national education curriculum.
• It needs to be questioned whether actual changes in the classroom be-came ignored amid such fierce dispute and conflict over institutional reforms.
Limitations of Top-Down Approach
• Hope can be found in face-to-face talks with teachers that have re-vealed teachers’ desire for change
• Korean students and classrooms have access to an immense amount of digital knowledge and information. - Such technology can be a powerful partner for assisting the changes in teaching and assessment methods.
Turning a Crisis into a Reform Opportunity
Gradual Bottom-Up Approach
• Establish a framework for putting the performance assessment into practice
• Establish a system to develop the performance assessment capacity of teachers
• Support the expansion of performance assessment among schools
• Introduce performance assessment in the National Assessment of Educational Achievement (NAEA)
• Pursue gradual changes with consistency in the college admissions system
Conclusions
• Balanced consideration of cognitive and non-cognitive skills is crucial in setting the goal of education diversification reform
• Reform agenda for education diversification include diverse policies designed to re-inforce horizontal differentiation
• Major strategies to overcome for education diversification reform are opening-up strategies and crisis management strategies
• Hopefully, goals, agendas, and strategies of education diversification reform dis-cussed during the seminar will contribute to the formation of a more balanced and wide-ranged consensus on education reform
Discussion
Thank you for your participation