With the June 3 local elections roughly 10 days away, the chronic problems of the direct election system for education superintendents are being repeated yet again. A total of 58 candidates have entered the superintendent races across 16 cities and provinces this time. In Seoul in particular, both the conservative and progressive camps failed to consolidate their candidates, resulting in a record-high field of eight contenders. From the voters' standpoint, this amounts to being forced into a "blind vote." According to one regional survey, the situation is so serious that 60 percent of respondents said they "do not know" the superintendent candidates or are "not interested" in them.
Another problem that cannot be overlooked is that the superintendent election has degenerated into low-grade politics. The direct election of education superintendents, introduced through the 2006 revision of the Local Education Autonomy Act, prohibits party nominations of candidates with the aim of guaranteeing independence from political power. In practice, however, progressive candidates routinely campaign in blue jackets (the Democratic Party of Korea), while conservative candidates wear red jackets (the People Power Party). Political neutrality has become little more than a sham. Despite the principle of "political neutrality of education," absurd practices have even become widespread in which former lawmakers, ministers and presidential aides run for superintendent posts to extend their political careers. The populist pledges flooding out from both progressive and conservative camps rival those of the political arena. Student transportation subsidies, various education vouchers and cash handouts are being doled out indiscriminately. The situation is bad enough that even the education minister has voiced concerns about the feasibility of some of the pledges.
The authority and role of education superintendents are formidable. They hold the power to establish and close schools, manage personnel matters for teachers, and oversee curricula and budget execution. In Seoul alone, the superintendent is responsible for 800,000 students and a budget of 11 trillion won. Yet it is questionable whether the current education administration system is suited to an educational environment undergoing rapid change due to the declining school-age population and the spread of artificial intelligence (AI). Educational tasks that need to be addressed, including student rights, the strengthening of teachers' authority and future-oriented educational innovation, are numerous. Education is a nation's grand plan for the next 100 years (baengnyeonjidaegye). In that respect, it is irresponsible to keep repeating a direct election system for education superintendents that has already lost public interest and trust without overhauling it. The time has come to seriously discuss and implement alternatives, such as having metropolitan mayors and provincial governors appoint superintendents with the consent of regional councils, or electing superintendents jointly with metropolitan and provincial chiefs.
