"The envelope has been opened, opened."
During the 1980s, back in elementary school, while parents were quietly conversing with teachers in the hallway, the mischievous giggles of children could often be heard inside the classrooms. The exchange of 'envelopes' between teachers and parents was a familiar sight to everyone. Yet, looking back on the time spent in elementary school from first grade to sixth grade as adults, there are surely teachers we want to meet again and express gratitude to, and beloved teachers who still hold a special place in our hearts.
During that time, schools were particularly authoritative. Teachers were absolute figures, and parents seemed infinitely small in front of the school. The village donations and contributions were gradually accepted under the name of 'education,' and it became entrenched as a practice that had to be endured as if it were a matter of course. Inside the classrooms, corporal punishment was common, and outside the classrooms, parents' burdens were a daily occurrence. Even though schools were the foundation of public education, within them, the shadows of long-standing personal relationships and hierarchies were deeply ingrained.
Entering the 2000s as parents and facing schools again as members of school operation committees, the landscape seemed to have changed, but the essence remained largely the same. While small village donations that used to be exchanged discreetly disappeared, in some schools, illegal contributions became more organized and systematically demanded from parents. Parent associations, operation committees, various events, and money collected under various pretexts were justified as being 'for the school.' In an atmosphere where it was difficult to refuse, and with a fear of potential repercussions for their children, many parents eventually remained silent, constantly watching each other's reactions.
However, winds of change began to blow gradually. Especially in Jeonbuk Province, after Kim Seung-hwan took office as the Superintendent of Education in 2010, the eradication of illegal contributions was strongly pursued. Although not all outdated practices disappeared at once, with the firm determination of the education office, the atmosphere within schools also changed. Collecting money in schools was no longer accepted as a natural practice, and the perception that it was a 'problem' also spread. With progressive-minded superintendents appearing nationwide, words like 'school democracy,' 'student rights,' 'free education,' 'innovative schools,' and 'accountable education' entered the classrooms.
This change was by no means small. The violent and authoritative classroom scenes seen in the movie "Silenced" had become scenes of the past. Corporal punishment lost its institutional place, and the perspective that viewed students solely as subjects of control and punishment noticeably weakened. The commitment to 'not giving up on a single student' became one of the important values of schools. Ultimately, public education should not be a place that screens out and pushes students away but a space that remains by their side until the end, supporting and taking responsibility for them.
However, it is worth asking at this point. Has the school structure really changed to take responsibility for each individual student?
As pleasant as the term 'accountable education' sounds, sustainable education cannot be based solely on the dedication of teachers without the support of systems, personnel, budgets, and collaboration with the local community. In some small rural schools, a few dedicated teachers tightly hold the hands of students and create real miracles. There are indeed touching stories like that. However, just because such cases exist, it cannot be said that it is universally achievable in all schools. It is impossible to change an entire school based solely on goodwill and sacrifice.
Accountable education should not be just a virtue of teachers but a commitment of the entire public education system. It should be equipped with specialized personnel to support students with poor basic academic skills, counseling and therapy for students in emotional or behavioral crises, tailored support for students with disabilities or borderline intelligence, and a local welfare network that embraces families in crisis or poverty. Only when all these elements come together can accountable education go beyond being a slogan and become a reality. Otherwise, the cry of 'not giving up on a single student' will end up as a slogan burdening frontline teachers alone.
However, as we entered the 2020s, the focus on the school scene began to shift direction. The language of accountable education faded, and under the banner of 'educational authority,' the logic of exoneration and defense gained strength. Of course, it is necessary for teachers to have an environment where they can teach students comfortably. The legitimate educational activities of teachers should be protected, and the reality that accountable education directly leads to legal responsibility for teachers is far from the essence of accountable education.
The problem is that the pretext of protecting educational authority can at some point degenerate into a logic of avoiding educational responsibility. Rather than pondering how to understand and help students with problematic behavior, there is a growing atmosphere of subtly avoiding the question of 'who will take responsibility.' The debate on how far schools should draw the line and intervene with crisis students is becoming more prominent. It is time for us to reflect on whether the language of education is moving away from recovery and support towards exclusion and separation.
Public education is fundamentally a system for accountability. Regardless of where a child is born, whether they have a disability or not, whether they learn quickly or slowly, schools should provide every child with opportunities for learning. When schools relinquish this responsibility, the first ones to be pushed out are not the children from strong households. They are the poor children, children with disabilities, children lacking care, emotionally unstable children, and children who do not receive sufficient support from their families or society.
In the 1980s, the problems in schools were about authority and money. The authority of teachers was distorted by envelopes, and parents' anxieties were subtly exploited. In the 2000s, these distorted practices became entrenched in an organized manner. The school changes in the 2010s were a process of removing such shameful practices under the name of public education. So, what is the biggest problem schools are facing in the 2020s? Perhaps it is the phenomenon of accountability gradually drifting away.
The envelopes have disappeared. Corporal punishment and the authoritarian school culture of the past have now greatly diminished. However, it is still difficult to answer whether a deep sense of responsibility has truly taken root in their place. Instead, schools are wavering in the face of the most fundamental question of 'who will take responsibility for the child.' Teachers appeal that they cannot handle it alone, and schools say it is difficult due to institutional limitations. The education office and the government step back, saying it is the responsibility of the field. In the meantime, the most vulnerable students are once again pushed out.
Protecting educational authority and accountable education are not opposing values. Teachers must be firmly protected to fully take responsibility for students, and schools must be places where students can be held accountable so that teachers' educational activities gain meaning and legitimacy. However, if educational authority becomes a pretext for exoneration and accountable education deteriorates into a slogan demanding only sacrifices from teachers, then both will ultimately fail. We do not want schools that shield teachers as shields or schools that only see students as problems. Above all, we need a robust public education structure that does not pass on responsibility to a single person.
It is time to ask again. Who does the school exist for? What is the real responsibility that public education must bear? Is the promise of 'not giving up on a single student' still valid for us?
In a school where the envelopes have disappeared, what we must now protect is responsibility. If the school has moved away from the fences of money and authority, it should not transform into a space of exoneration and avoidance. Public education earns its name only when it is a system that truly takes responsibility. A school that does not take responsibility for students, a school that pushes out the powerless children first, a school that returns problems to students and their families, no matter how clean it may appear on the surface, can never be a good school.
Beyond the era when envelopes were exchanged, schools have changed gradually, albeit with difficulty. Now, the school doors must not close again. Instead of envelopes exchanging money, the door of responsibility must remain open. All students should be able to enter through that door, and that is the standard that public education must uphold until the end.
📝 Brief Summary:
The article discusses the evolution of the education system in South Korea from the 1980s to the present day. It highlights the changes in the relationship between teachers, parents, and students, focusing on the shift from authoritarian practices to a more accountable and supportive approach in schools.
🗣️ Natural Korean Translation:
이 기사는 1980년대부터 현재까지 한국의 교육 시스템의 진화에 대해 논의합니다. 교사, 학부모 및 학생 간의 관계의 변화를 강조하며, 학교에서 권위주의적인 관행에서 책임감 있고 지원적인 방식으로의 전환에 초점을 맞춥니다.
❓ Comprehension Questions:
1. What were some common practices in schools during the 1980s that have changed over time?
80년대 학교에서 흔히 볼 수 있었던 실천 방식은 무엇이었습니까?
2. How did the role of teachers and parents change in South Korean schools over the years?
한국의 학교에서 교사와 학부모의 역할이 시간이 지남에 따라 어떻게 변화했습니까?
3. What is the main concern regarding accountability in schools in the 2020s?
2020년대 학교에서 책임감에 대한 주요 우려는 무엇입니까?
💡 Vocabulary Learning:
1. authoritative (권위적인, adjective)
- having the power to give orders and make decisions
- 권한을 행사하고 결정을 내릴 수 있는 힘을 가지고 있는
- The principal's authoritative tone made it clear that his decision was final.
- 교장의 권위 있는 어조는 그의 결정이 최종적이라는 것을 분명히 했다.
2. entrenched (굳히다, verb)
- established and unlikely to change
- 확립되어 있고 변화하기 어려운
- The tradition of celebrating the harvest festival is deeply entrenched in our culture.
- 수확 축제를 축하하는 전통이 우리 문화에 깊게 뿌리박혀 있다.
3. eradicate (근절하다, verb)
- to completely destroy or get rid of something
- 완전히 파괴하거나 없애다
- The government is working to eradicate poverty in the country.
- 정부는 그 나라에서 빈곤을 근절하기 위해 노력하고 있다.
4. deteriorate (악화되다, verb)
- to become worse
- 악화되다
- If the situation continues to deteriorate, we may need to take drastic action.
- 상황이 계속 악화된다면, 우리는 강력한 조치를 취해야 할 수도 있다.
5. prominent (두드러진, adjective)
- important and well-known
- 중요하고 유명한
- She is a prominent figure in the field of medicine.
- 그녀는 의학 분야에서 두드러진 인물이다.
💬 댓글 (0)
댓글을 작성하려면 로그인이 필요합니다.
로그인첫 댓글을 작성해보세요!