Starting this year, schools are required to have their school operation committees (school committees) review software to be used during classes, creating confusion in education sites ahead of the new semester. The administrative burden has surged because even programs used routinely, such as Hangul (HWP) and YouTube, have all become subject to review.
With schools having to examine hundreds of software programs one by one, concerns have been raised that if the programs available vary by school, it could lead to educational disparities. Some teachers noted that legal revisions intended to regulate artificial intelligence (AI) digital textbooks have produced unintended side effects.
◇ Teachers face "confusion" over software reviews… "There are too many targets"
According to the education community on the 2nd, an amendment to the Elementary and Secondary Education Act led by the Democratic Party of Korea passed the National Assembly in Aug. last year. The amendment added a provision defining "learning-support software using intelligent information technology" as "educational materials." Under the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, all educational materials must undergo school committee review.
In line with the legal revision, the Ministry of Education last month classified software that processes student personal information or was developed and distributed to support curriculum operations as subject to review. Accordingly, before the semester begins, each school must accept software to be used in classes, examine functions such as personal information protection, and obtain school committee review.
Frontline schools say their administrative workload has "increased significantly." An elementary school teacher in Seoul said, "Even during the winter vacation, I'm busier than during the semester organizing documents."
What teachers worry about most is that it may become difficult to use new software in classes during the semester. Usually, teachers learn new educational programs through artificial intelligence (AI) or Edtech training during the semester, but they cannot apply them in class until the school committee meets.
In addition, teachers newly appointed or who moved schools through transfer will, in effect, find it difficult to apply for new educational materials if the review has already been completed before March.
There are also concerns that if available software varies by school depending on school committee reviews, it could lead to infringements on learning rights or educational disparities. An elementary school teacher in Daegu said, "The school committee meets on a fixed cycle, so no matter how good an educational software is, we can't apply it right away," adding, "If different software passes at each school, that alone can create educational gaps."
There is also considerable dissatisfaction that the review targets are excessive. Even "Hi-Class," used for checking home letters and notices, "Entry" for coding education, and "Ddokddok Math Explorers" made by the Ministry of Education are all subject to review.
The quiz platform "Kahoot," which can be accessed via QR code without separate sign-up and requires only a one-time nickname, is no exception. About 10 Google services—including Google Docs, Forms, Sheets, Classroom, Maps, and YouTube—must also each undergo review.
◇ School committees lack expertise… Reviews fall short in effectiveness
Questions are also being raised about whether school committees can adequately examine specialized issues such as AI technology by software and methods of handling personal information. According to the Enforcement Decree of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, school committees at general public elementary schools consist of teachers, parents, and community members. Parent members account for 40% to 50% of the total.
A teacher in Gumi, North Gyeongsang Province, a person surnamed Lee in her 30s, said, "Even now, school committee reviews often devolve into a formality where the proponent explains for 5 to 10 minutes and members call for passage," adding, "I doubt that lengthy explanations to parents who are non-experts in education or personal information will lead to substantive review."
◇ Pushing digital education, then backpedaling… Ministry of Education says it will "supplement the system"
Observers say the change stems from side effects that arose while regulating digital textbooks. The stated reasons for the amendment included unresolved concerns about AI digital textbooks infringing on personal information, lowering literacy, and fostering addiction to smart devices. In the process, the scope expanded to require prior review of all learning-support software.
An education insider said, "In the process of institutionalizing concerns about digital textbooks, the scope appears to have become excessively broad."
There is also criticism that this does not align with President Lee Jae-myung's policy line emphasizing AI education to prepare for the "robot era." An elementary school teacher in Incheon said, "The government has been encouraging the use of Generative AI, yet it tells us to get every piece of software used in class reviewed one by one, leaving the field in confusion."
Because prior review of software is a legislative matter, there are limits to how much the Ministry of Education can respond. The Ministry of Education said it is guiding metropolitan and provincial education offices on measures to streamline procedures within the bounds of the law, such as allowing written reviews and providing simplified forms and checklists.
A Ministry of Education official said, "The review process can also serve as a safeguard to prevent individual teachers from being blamed when issues such as personal information leaks occur," adding, "If difficulties and opinions from the field are raised after implementation, the legislature may continue discussions to supplement the system."