Book Description

For the last two decades, a particular interest has been paid attention to Shadow Education in the international perspective. The interest specifically has been given to the case of South Korea because of the extreme scale and intensity at which shadow education has taken hold in the country, as well as the policy responses which have followed from the South Korean government to reduce educational inequalities that have resulted from the rise of shadow education. Drawing on a range of secondary data, this thesis starts with its theoretical foundations for the explanations of the rise of shadow education. This thesis indicates that a degree of opportunity for social mobility and social reproduction in a given society is determined by levels of human, social, cultural, and economic capitals that people endeavour to build on. Therefore, the rise of shadow education is well explained as a way of increasing levels of capitals. This thesis mainly explores three issues. First are the factors that have led to the rise of shadow education in South Korea. Four different explanations are identified 1) cultural reasons, 2) changes in international labour market, 3) high-stake examination, and 4) perceptions about the quality of public mainstream schooling. The thesis then moves to explore the educational and social inequalities which have resulted from the rise of shadow education in South Korea. Two key issues are identified. One is unequal access to shadow education, which is dramatically influenced by income of family, parents' educational level, gender difference, and regional differences. The other is a widening inequality of the achievement gap amongst students, largely along with socio-economic lines, which is the result of this unequal access to shadow education. Lastly, the final issue of this thesis examines is the history of South Korean governmental policy responses to deal with the growth of private tutoring. This thesis argues two main educational patterns of the South Korean government towards private supplementary tutoring; one is to reduce 'supply' of private tutoring and the other is to reduce 'demand' of private tutoring. By illustrating evidences of failures of such governmental responses, this study offers alternative ways of governmental educational policies for the future in Korea.