Understanding the Achievement Gapinlower Secondary Education

Understanding the Achievement GapinLower Secondary Education:

The Case of South Korea

Kyung-keun Kim

KoreaUniversity

Soo-yong Byun

The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill

Title footnote:

This paper is to be presented at theannual meeting of the Comparative and International Education Society (CIES), March 22-26, 2009, Charleston, South Carolina, USA.

Direct correspondence to:

Kyung-keun Kim

Professor, Department of Education, KoreaUniversity

1, 5-ka, Anam-dong, Sungbuk-ku, Seoul, South Korea, 136-701

E-mail: ; Phone: 82-2-3290-2300; and Fax: 82-2-3290-2300

ABSTRACT

Although increasing social polarization since the economic crisis of 1997 has called attention to the issue of the achievement gap across social classes and regions in South Korea, few studies have examined this issueempirically.Using nationally representative data from the Korean Education Longitudinal Study (KELS), this study examines the achievement gap in lower secondary education in South Korea. Multilevel modeling demonstrates that indeed parents’ socioeconomic status (SES)and region play an important role in explaining the achievement gap among South Korean ninth-grade students with respect to English and math achievement. Results also show that while SES has a greater effect on English achievement than on math achievement, the average SES of the student body within a school has an effect on both English and math achievement above and beyond the effect of individual-level SES. This finding suggests that students in rural and low-income urban areas may be at greaterrisks of ‘double jeopardy’ (i.e., the first ‘jeopardy’ is coming from a low SES family and the second one is attending a low SES school), given socioeconomic challenges that many rural and low-income urban areas face.

Key words: Achievement gap, educational inequality

INTRODUCTION

South Koreahas accomplished remarkable economic and educational development during the last few decades. From an economic perspective, for example, it achieved rapid economic growth, with per capita income rising from under US$100 in the 1950s to approximatelyUS$17,000 in 2002 (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), 2005). From an educational perspective, when the Japanese occupation (1910-1945) came to an end in 1945, the participation rates of young people in primary, secondary, and postsecondary education were approximately 65 percent, 20 percent, and 2 percent, respectively (MOE, 1998). A half century later, however,the enrollment rates of school-aged studentsare almost 100 percent in primaryand secondary education andnearly 70 percent in postsecondary education,as of 2007 (MEST, 2009a) (see Figure 1).

[Insert Figure 1about here]

In this dramatic process ofeconomic and educational transformation, many South Koreans have received significant benefits from the expansion of educational opportunities. As a result, the majority of South Koreansbelieve that they and their children can achieve upward mobility through education if they work hard. This meritocratic belief is strongly embeddedin all social classes, ranging from urban elites to rural farmers (Seth, 2002). Hence, many parents are willing to sacrifice whatever it takes to provide their children with a good education. However, with recent economic prosperity, an emerging inequality in income distribution and in educational opportunities threatens this meritocratic belief. Especially since the economic crisis of 1997, increasing social polarization has highlighted the issue of the achievement gap between children from high-income and low-income families and between children in large cities and rural areas (Kim, 2006).

Despite a growing concern about the achievement gap, few empirical studies have been conducted due mainly to a lack of data. However, recent efforts made by the Korean government and other agencies (e.g., Korea Education Development Institute)to collect and release data have allowed researchers to investigate the achievement gap across social classes and geographical regions. Using the most recent data (i.e., Korean Education Longitudinal Study), we examineto what extent the achievement gap exists at the lower secondary level in South Korea, focusing on the role of family background and region. The findings of this studysuggest that middle school students from high socio-economic status (SES) families and from large citiesoutperform students from low SES families and from rural areas, indicating the nature of rural and low socio-economic disadvantage. We beginby introducing a brief historyof lower secondary education in South Korea. Next, we describe the study’s methodology. We then estimate the effects of SES and school locationon student achievement using multilevel models and then discuss the results.

BACKGROUND

A Brief History of Lower Secondary Educationin South Korea

Educational opportunities dramatically increased for children in the decade following the end of the Korean War. For example, the enrollment rate for primary school increased from 60 percent in 1953 to more than 90 percent in 1965(MOE, 1998). However, during the late 1950s andthe 1960s, only a small portion of primary school graduates were able to advance to middle school because of a lack of middle schools. For example, only about 45 percent of primary school graduates advanced to middle school in 1956-57, while 66 percent of primary school graduates advanced to middle school in 1970 (MOE, 1998).

Prior to 1970,both lower (grades 7-9; ages 13-15) and upper (grades 10-12; ages 16-18)secondary education was based on a free, competitive system; that is, individual schools selected their students through entrance examinations at each level of education. In those days, a few elite schools selected only students in the upper exam tier. As a result, there were serious inequalities between the elite schools and the remaining schools in terms of student academic ability, parental support, facilities, and the quality of teachers (Park, 1988). Thus, hundreds of thousands of young students suffered tension and stress due to these entrance examinations, which had a negative effect on their mental and physical health, a condition often called ‘examination hell’ (Lee & Larson, 2000).

Under these circumstances, the Ministry of Education (MOE)[1]proposed the Middle School Equalization Policy (MSEP) in 1969 and the High School Equalization Policy (HSEP) in 1972, whose main provisionswerethe elimination of entrance examinations and the introduction of random school assignment (MOE, 1998). The MSEP was implemented in Seoul (the largest city of South Korea)in 1969, in other major cities in 1970 and finally nationwide the following year. On the other hand, the HSEP was implemented in Seoul and Busan (the second largest city) in 1974 and since then has been gradually expanded to many, but not all, cities across the country (MOE, 1998).As of 2004, more than 23 cities—including 728 general high schools (57.2 percent of all general high schools) and 856,087 general high school students (71.9 percent of all general high school students)—had implemented this policy (Kang, Yoon, Lee, & Kim, 2005).

As a result of the nationwide implementation of the MSEP in 1971, there wasa dramatic increase in theadvancement rates of primary school graduates to middle school in the 1970s.For example, approximately 77 percent of primary school graduates advanced to middle school in 1975 and more than 95percent of primary school graduates advanced to middle school by 1980 (MEST, 2009a) (see Figure 2).In 1984, the free compulsory education law that affected the lower secondary level was enacted. However, lower secondary education did not becomefree nationwide until 2004 due to a lack of public resources[2] (MEST, 2009b).

[Insert Figure 2 about here]

As of 2008, there were 3,077 middle schools across the nation; of these, 78% were public and 74% were coeducational (Center for Educational Statistics, 2009). As of 2006, the average class size at the lower secondary level was approximately 36, which is the highest among the OECD countries (the OECD average is 24) (OECD, 2008, Table D.2.1) (see Figure 3). Nonetheless, South Korean youth, like other East Asian students, are well-known to outperform their counterparts in other countries in international achievement studies,including the Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS) and the Program in International Student Assessment (PISA). For example, in PISA 2006,[3] the average science achievement of South Korean 15-year-old students was 522, much higher than the OECD average (i.e., 499) (OECD, 2007).

[Insert Figure 3 about here]

Features of Lower Secondary Educationin South Korea

Uniformity of Curriculum and Standards

Since the abolition of the middle school entrance examinationin 1971, middle school bound students have been assigned to middle schools within their residential area by random lottery. This random school allocation has helped to reduce disparity between schools especially in terms of student academic ability (MOE, 1998), even though schools in wealthy areas tend to outperform schools in poor areas.[4]In addition, because private schools are to a large extent subsidized and controlled by the government, there is relatively little variation between private and public schools in terms of school resources and curriculum.[5]

Specifically, regardless of whether they are private or public, most middle schools offer six 45-minute long lessons a day[6]and teach Korean, English, math, social studies, andscienceas core subjects. Unlike in the United States,most middle schoolstudents spend most of the day in the same homeroom classroom with the same classmates, while teachers for each subject move from classroom to classroom.[7]In addition,with a few exceptions (e.g.,intellectually gifted and academically talented students), most middle school students are taught at the same pace and promoted from grade to grade with their same-age peers regardless of academic achievement. In fact, neither tracking nor grade retention is common at the lower secondary level in South Korea.

Long Hours of Study

South Korean middle school students’ lives are different from those of primary school students in many aspects. For example, some aspects of middle school students’ lives, such as dress and grooming, are much more controlled than for primary school students. More importantly, middle school students are expected to put far more effort into school work than their primary school counterparts because the middle school grade point average (GPA) and records,especially during the final two years, become important for entering a certain typeof high school (e.g., specialpurpose high school).

Unlike the middle school assignment, the high school assignment proceduresvary by region (i.e., region implementing the HSEP vs. region not implementing the HSEP) and school type (e.g., general vs. vocational vs. special purpose high school). For example, for general high school, middle school studentsin a region implementingthe HSEPare screened on the basis of their school standing,unless they are admitted to a vocational (often considered less desirable) or specialpurpose school (often considered most desirable). Screened students are allowed to apply to several general high schools within their school district and then are randomly assignedto one of these schoolsby a computerized lottery system.

On the other hand, in a region not implementing the HSEP, general high schools are allowed to select their students mainly on the basis of their middle school academic records. In a region not implementingthe HSEP, a few popular schools, often regarded as elite schools, tend to emerge and take the top students. As a result, there is inequality between theelite high schools and the remaining high schools; competition for these elite schools is severe.

Under these circumstances, the majority of middle school students living in a region implementingthe HSEP may feel less pressure to maintain ‘good’ grades, given that in this HSEP region (1) students can enter a general high school as long as they meet the minimum performance requirement, (2) there is less disparity between high schools, and (3) students who are assigned to one school are not considered to be “less able” than students who are assigned to another within a given school district. On the other hand, middle school students living in a region not implementing the HSEP may feel greater pressure to maintain ‘good’ grades, given that in this non-HSEP region (1) a few elite general high schools tend to take the top tier students, (2) there is more inequality between high schools, and (3) students who attend a less desirable school are often considered to be “less able”.

It is important to note that decisions about whether or not one region adopts the HSEP are made by the Local Office of Education on the basis of agreement among the members (e.g., parents and teachers) of a community. The contrasting situation between the HSEP region and the non-HSEP region illustrated above is the most important reason why members of a community want to implement the HSEP. In fact, the HSEP is mainly implementedin Seoul, other metropolitan cities such as Busan and Daegu (the third largest city), and some of the small- and medium-sized cities such as Bundang, Anyang, and Goyang (all of them are satellite towns of Seoul)—regions where educational and social problems caused by intense competition for elite general high schools had been most severe.

Meanwhile, special purpose high schools, such as foreign language and science schools, are allowed to select their students on the basis of their middle school academic records and other criteria (e.g., written essays and in-depth interviews) with no geographic restrictions.[8]Although these special purpose high schools are established for the purpose of foreign language or science instruction, they tend to have college-preparatory programs like general high schools andoftenare regarded as the most prestigious and elite schools. As a result, many high school-bound students, especially high achievers, want to go to special purpose high schools. Hence, competition for these high schools is also severe, resulting in a situation in which many high achieving middle school studentsspend long hours preparing for school examinations, which is similar to the situation prior to the introduction of the HSEP in 1971.

Shadow Education

In the situation described above, hundreds of thousands of parents and students participate inso-called shadow education.[9] The single most important reason for children’s participating in shadow education is to do well on a series of school examinations—from the mid-term and final-term examinations to the university entrance examinations, which provide access to prestigioushigh schools, selective universities, and ultimately, prestigious jobs as top-ranked corporations and government ministries (Byun, Schneider, Kim, & Kim, 2008). According to Byun’s (2008) study, approximately 7 out of 10 seventh grade students participated in shadow education for mathin 2005. Two years later, when the majority of these students were in ninth grade, a similar portion participated in shadow education, suggesting that a considerable portion of students participate in shadow education during the middle school years(Byun, 2008).

More importantly, there is a gap in shadow education opportunitiesbetween children from high-income families andfrom low-income families. For example, in 2007nearly 80percent of the ninthgrade students who came from households with income in thetop quartile participated in shadow education for math, whereas only about half of thestudents who came from households with income in the bottom quartile participated in shadow education (Byun, 2008). With respect to family shadow education spending, in 2007families who had household income in the top quartile spent on average approximately 460,000South Korean Won (KRW)(approximately US$495)[10] per month for their ninthgrade child, whereas the corresponding expenditure of families who had household income in the bottom quartilewas approximately 170,000KRW (approximately US$183), suggesting that high-income familiesspend approximately three times moreon shadow education than do low-income families (Byun, 2008).

The gap in shadow education opportunities also exists between children in urban and rural areas. For example, almost 8 out of 10 ninth grade students in Seoulparticipated in shadow education for math, whereas only about half ofstudents in rural areas(known Eup and Myeon) received shadow education in 2007 (Byun, 2008). In addition, more than half of ninth grade children in Seoul attended a preparatory cram school (Hagwŏn) for math, whereas only about 3 out of 10 children in rural areas attended a preparatory cram school in 2007(Byun, 2008). With respect to family shadow education spending, in 2007families in Seoul spent on average approximately 400,000KRWper month for their ninth grade child, whereas the corresponding expenditure of families in rural areas wasapproximately180,000 KRW, suggesting that families in Seoul spend more than twice as much on shadow education as do their counterparts in rural areas (Byun, 2008).Given that families in rural areas are more likely than families in urban areas to live in poverty, this finding suggests that rural and poor families are at a disadvantage regarding shadow education opportunities.[11]

METHODOLOGY

Data and Sample

To examine the achievement gap across social classes and regions, we use data drawn from the 2005-07 waves of the Korean Education Longitudinal Study (KELS). Conducted by the government-funded Korea Educational Development Institute (KEDI), KELS is the most recent longitudinal effort to examine student achievement and attitudes, educational resources and support, and organizational structureof middle schools. The surveyis based on a two-stage stratified random sample of students nested within schools. In the base year of 2005, a nationally representative sample of seventh graders (N=6,908) were questioned about their school experiences, family resources and support, and educational and occupational aspirations. A survey was also separately administrated to the students’ families, classes, and schools to collect a wide range of information.Follow-up surveys for students, their family, and schools were then made in 2006 and 2007. For analysis, only those students who completed both the initial survey and the two follow-up surveys and took both English and math tests administered by KEDI are included in our sample, which consists of 6,096students in 150 middle schools.

Variables

Dependent variables