This article argues that rolling admissions are likely to ignore the individuality of universities and deepen university serialisation. While rolling admissions reduces the cost of private education, rolling admissions risks expanding the market for private education, and emphasises the need for education policies that respect the autonomy of universities.
University admissions policies that don’t respect universities: the expansion of rolling admissions
Every year, more than half a million students analyse the admissions systems of the universities they want to attend and choose the system that is most favourable to them. Each university has a variety of admissions systems, including rolling admissions, rolling admissions, and equal opportunity admissions, and each system requires different qualifications and verification methods. While universities design their admissions systems to reflect the talent they seek, they cannot escape the reality of government-led education policies.
Recently, the Park Geun-hye administration announced a plan to simplify the university entrance examination system by expanding the SAT-oriented regular entrance examination and reducing various other entrance examinations, such as the essay and oral interview. In response, Seoul National University increased the proportion of regular entrance examinations by about 7%, which had been decreasing every year, and other universities are following a similar trend.
In my opinion, the government’s admissions policy is inappropriate because universities should take the lead in higher education, and expanding the number of entrance exams not only hinders the autonomy of universities, but also leads to a number of side effects. In particular, expanding the number of entrance exams does not respect the individuality of universities and may deepen the hierarchisation of universities.
University individuality and the limitations of rolling admissions
Firstly, the expansion of rolling admissions based on SAT scores does not respect the individuality of universities. Universities are key institutions that provide higher education in the final stages of primary, secondary, and tertiary education, and each university carries out specialised education based on its own educational philosophy and human resources. To achieve this, each university has different selection methods to select students. Since universities have different educational goals and philosophies, for example, students in arts-based majors are selected through practical assessments, while students in research-oriented majors are selected by assessing basic skills at the secondary education level.
Furthermore, even within the same major, different universities require different qualities from their students. For example, Hongik University’s design department uses a non-practical entrance examination to select students, while Chung-Ang University prioritises practical skills through practical tests. Each university uses different assessment methods to select the right talent, and these processes play an important role in realising the university’s personality and educational goals.
However, the expansion of rolling admissions ignores this uniqueness and forces universities to select students based on a single criteria: SAT scores. This approach fails to fully assess the qualities that universities are looking for, and can hinder their ability to achieve their educational goals. In the end, it costs universities more money to realise their educational goals, and students are less satisfied.
More rolling admissions and more hierarchical universities
Secondly, the expansion of rolling admissions could lead to further stratification of universities. Korean universities already have a hierarchical structure, and expressions such as ‘SKY’ and ‘Inseoul’ show the reality of the distinction between top and bottom universities. This hierarchy is largely due to the evaluation method centred on SAT scores. SAT scores provide a numerical representation of a student’s academic performance, making it relatively easy to rank universities.
As rolling admissions becomes more prevalent, the more colleges and universities are lined up by SAT scores, the more likely it is that they will become more stratified. Evaluating students based solely on SAT scores ignores the variety of evaluation criteria that are specific to each university’s characteristics and needs, and makes it easier to compare and rank universities. This, in turn, perpetuates university hierarchies and promotes hierarchy among students.
The relationship between rolling admissions and private education
Some critics of rolling admissions argue that it will expand the private education market and widen the gap between rich and poor. However, research shows that rolling admissions has actually reduced the cost of private education. In 2010, when private education expenditure fell by 3.5 per cent year-on-year, the proportion of rolling admissions centred on the SAT increased significantly, which had a negative impact on the private education market. This argument is also supported by studies that show no difference in private education expenditure between students who prepare for rolling admissions and those who do not.
On the other hand, the SAT-centred rolling admissions system has been pointed out as one of the reasons for the increase in private education expenditure. As the EBS SAT linkage policy has led to an increase in the number of SAT-centric entrance exams, students are more likely to use private tutoring to learn EBS materials and take advantage of additional learning content provided by private institutions, which is contrary to the government’s claim that EBS SAT broadcasting reduces the cost of private education.
Conclusion
In conclusion, policies that force universities to increase the proportion of rolling admissions may infringe on the autonomy of universities and lead to increased university hierarchisation. By insisting on a uniform assessment method centred on SAT scores, rolling admissions ignores the right of universities to select the talent they want and can lead to a decline in the quality of education. Furthermore, SAT-centric admissions policies have the side effect of expanding the private education market and forcing students to learn by rote.
Therefore, we believe that maintaining a variety of assessment methods through rolling admissions and allowing universities to select talented students autonomously is a better policy direction. University admissions policies should move towards a pluralistic assessment system that considers students‘ diverse abilities and potential, rather than simply evaluating students’ grades. This will contribute to improving the quality of education and providing students with broader opportunities.
