Private universities have pushed back against the government's plan to make tuition free at regional national universities. The Korean Association of Private University Presidents stated that if the policy takes effect ahead of the 2027 academic year's early admissions cycle, it will deal a blow to student recruitment at regional private universities. The Ministry of Education said it would respond by increasing scholarship support for private universities. The related remarks and position statements came in succession between August 29 and 30.
University presidents drew a line, saying they do not oppose free education at regional national universities, but argued that support should go to "students" without distinguishing between national and private institutions. The point is that if funding is divided according to which sector a university belongs to, young people of the same age living in the same region will bear different burdens depending on which university they attend.
Another proposal raised was to use depopulating regions as the criterion. The argument is that to serve the original aim of regional balance, more support should go to universities located in areas at high risk of extinction, regardless of whether they are national or private.
The rate at which high school graduates advance to higher education institutions stands in the 70 percent range. That means roughly seven out of ten go on to university, and changes in the tuition burden affect household finances across an entire cohort. For students born and raised outside the capital, the question of whether they can commute from home or must move to Seoul is layered on top of that.
A different view came from regional national universities. The president of Kunsan National University said on August 29 that regional national universities can serve as key hubs of regional innovation. His explanation was that regional national universities provide education to young people while forming the foundation that keeps them in the region, and serve as a conduit linking them to local governments and public institutions.
University presidents also called for the Future Response Fund to be invested in higher education. While projections suggest a portion of the fund will be directed toward higher education, the scale and proportion of the allocation are still under discussion. Once the size of the funding is set, whether support is bundled by university or released by student will be decided along with it.
Some voices called for widening the scope of the discussion. A figure referred to as Chairman Lee said policies and support are also needed for young people who have not gone on to university, and for those situated between higher education and lifelong education. If the advancement rate is in the 70 percent range, the rest fall outside the scope of this policy. The point raised is that people have repeatedly been left out of discussions on youth support simply because they do not attend a school where tuition would be waived.
The 2027 early admissions cycle is now a little over a year away. By then, along with the amount of support, what unit the support will be counted in must also be decided. Count by university, and the size of the burden is determined by where the application was submitted; count by student, and the criteria become where a person lives and what they can afford.
