Widespread use of “shadow education,” is a major policy issue in East Asia, especially South Korea, where officials view it as harmful to educational and fiscal equity. Although previous research emphasizes functional explanations, this study takes an institutional approach, exploring how students’ desire for prestigious matriculation influences their parents’ spending on shadow education. It is around that that “prestige orientation” (1) significantly predicts parent spending, especially among students of lower socioeconomic status, and (2) yields strong impact among students with the least likelihood of prestigious matriculation. Such findings indicate that Korean shadow education serves purposes that are as much symbolic as instrumental.
BakerDavidAkibaMotokoLeTendreGeraldWisemanAlexander. 2001. “Worldwide Shadow Education: Outside-school Learning, Institutional Quality of Schooling, and Cross-national Mathematics Achievement.” Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis23:1–17.
2.
BakerDavidLeTendreGerald. 2005. National Difference, Global Similarities: World Culture and the Future of Schooling. Palo Alto, CA: Stanford.
3.
BrayMark. 1999. The Shadow Education System: Private Tutoring and Its Implications for Planners. Paris: International Institute for Educational Planning, UNESCO.
4.
BrayMark. 2006. “Private Supplementary Tutoring: Comparative Perspectives on Patterns and Implications.” Compare36:515–30.
5.
BroadedC. Montgomery. 1997. “The Limits and Possibilities of Tracking: Some Evidence from Taiwan.” Sociology of Education70:36–53.
6.
ChoiSang-KeunKimYang-BoonYuHan-GuKimH.LeeHyunjin2003. Analyzing the Reality and Expense of Private Tutoring in Korea [in Korean]. Seoul: Korean Educational Development Institute.
7.
HamiltonDavid. 1983. [Review of the Book, Conspicuous Consumption: A Study of Exceptional Consumer Behavior]. Journal of Economic Issues17:91–9.
8.
HyunJuLeeJae-BoonLeeHyeyoung. 2003. A Study on the Education Fever of Korean Parents [in Korean]. Seoul: Korean Educational Development Institutes.
9.
JooChul An. 2000. “The Entrance Examination System.” Pp. 89–107 in Higher Education in Korea, edited by WeidmanJ. C.ParkN.. New York: Falmer Press.
10.
KimDong-Seok. 1998. A Logical Analysis of the Policy Argument Embodied in “the New College Entrance Screening System” [in Korean]. Doctoral dissertation, Seoul National University.
11.
KimHyunjin. 2004a. “Analyzing the Structure of Variables Affecting Private Tutoring Expense” [in Korean]. Journal of Educational Administration22:27–45.
12.
KimHyunjin. 2004b. “Analyzing the Effects of the High School Equalization Policy and the College Entrance System on Private Tutoring Expenditure in Korea.” KEDI Journal of Educational Policy. 1:5–24.
13.
KimKi Seok. 2005. A Longitudinal Study of the Impact of High School Equalization Policy on Students’ Achievement(Research Report RR 2005-3) [in Korean]. Seoul: Korean Educational Development Institute.
14.
KimKwang Ok.KimD.SuhY. J.RheeC. Y.. 2003. “Change of College Entrance Policy (Who Enters Seoul National University?)” [in Korean]. Korean Social Science Review. 25:3–187.
15.
KimKi Su. 1991. “A Statist Political Economy and High Demand for Education in South Korea.” Education Policy Analysis Archives7(19):1–25.
16.
KimTaejongLeeJu-HoLeeYoung. 2003. Empirical Analysis of High School Equalization Policy on the Effect of Student Achievement(CEPRI Research Report) [in Korean]. Seoul: CEPRI at the KDI School of Public Policy and Management.
17.
KimYoung-Hwa. 1992. “Educational Enthusiasm of Korean People” [in Korean]. Journal of Educational Research. 30(4):97–173.
18.
KimYoung-Hwa. 1999. “Recent Developments in Korean School Education.” School Effectiveness and School Improvement10:55–71.
19.
KimYoung-HwaLeeH. In-HyoParkHyun-Jeon. 1993. A Study on the Educational Enthusiasm of Korean People(KEDI Research Report RR 93-21) [in Korean]. Seoul: Korean Educational Development Institute.
20.
KohHyung YeelLeeDoo Hyoo. 2002. “A Study of the Restructuring of Education for Reducing Extra-curricular Expenses Related to University Entrance Competition” [in Korean]. Korean Journal of Sociology of Education12:1–42.
LeeChong Jae. 2005. “Perspective: Korean Education Fever and Private Tutoring.” KEDI Journal of Educational Policy2:99–108.
23.
LeeJu-HoHongSungchang. 2001. “Schooling Versus Private Tutoring: Choice and Equality in Korean Education” [in Korean]. Korean Economic Review49(1):37–56.
24.
LeeKi-Bong. 2003. The Best of Intention: Meritocratic Selection to Higher Education and the Development of Shadow Education in Korea. Doctoral dissertation, The Pennsylvania State University.
25.
LeeMi Na. 1991. “A Study on Employment and Education of Youth” [in Korean]. Studies on Korean Youth1:135–52.
26.
LeeSoojeongShouseRoger. 2008. “Is Education Fever Treatable? Case Studies of First Year Korean Students in an American University.” KEDI Journal of Educational Policy5:113–32.
27.
LeTendreGerald. 1994. “Distribution Table and Private Tests: The Failure of Middle School Reform in Japan.” International Journal of Educational Reform3:126–36.
28.
LucasSamuel R.2001. “Effectively Maintained Inequality: Education Transitions, Track Mobility, and Social Background Effects.” American Journal of Education106:1642–90.
29.
MeyerJohn. 1977. “The Effect of Education as an Institution.” American Journal of Sociology83:55–77.
30.
MeyerJohnRowanBrian. 1977. “Institutionalized Organizations: Formal Structure as Myth and Ceremony.” American Journal of Sociology83:340–63.
31.
Ministry of Education & Human Resources Development. 2003. Education in Korea [in Korean]. Seoul: Author.
32.
OOok-whan. 2000. Education Fever of Korean Society [in Korean]. Seoul: Kyoyukgwahaksa.
33.
SangKyong-Ah. 2005. The Effects of Private Tutoring on High School Students’ Achievement in Mathematics [in Korean]. Doctoral dissertation, Seoul National University.
34.
ScottW. Richard. 1992. Organizations: Rational, Natural, and Open Systems. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
35.
SelznickPhillip. 1957. Leadership in Administration. Evanston, IL: Row, Peterson.
36.
SethMichael J.2002. Education Fever: Society, Politics, and the Pursuit of Schooling in South Korea. Honolulu: University of Hawaii.
37.
SongSanghoon. 2006, June8. “Private Tutoring Expenditure of the Family with 2 School Children Is 22% of Their Income” [in Korean]. JoongAng Daily. Retrieved November 19, 2010 (http://article.joins.com/article/viewaid.asp?aid=2734452).
38.
Statistics Korea. 2010. The Survey of Private Education Expenditures, 2009. Seoul: Author.
39.
StevensonDavidBakerDavid. 1992. “Shadow Education and Allocation in Formal Schooling: Transition to University in Japan.” American Journal of Sociology97:163–57.
40.
SungKi-Sun. 2004. “A Hierarchical Linear Modeling on the Effects of High School Equalization Policy on High School Students’ Achievement” [in Korean]. Korean Journal of Sociology of Education14:87–106.
41.
TsukadaMamoru. 1991. Yobiko Life: A Study of the Legitimation Process of Social Stratification in Japan. Berkeley: University of California Press.
42.
VeblenThorstein. 1937. The Theory of the Leisure Class. New York: Penguin.
43.
YunChung-il. 1997. A Study on the Reality of Private Tutoring [in Korean]. Seoul: Institute of Education Study of the Seoul National University.
44.
ZhouMinKimSusan S.. 2006. “Community Forces, Social Capital, and Educational Achievement: The Case of Supplementary Education in the Chinese and Korean Immigrant Communities.” Harvard Educational Review76:1–29.
