The story of 'us'

Evaluation methods themselves are neutral and should not be judged on an ethical basis. The institutional context is responsible for any criticism, rather than the assessment methods themselves. Instead of blaming an inherently impartial evaluation system, we should question whether our assessments aim to understand and support student’s academic achievement or merely to rank them competitively.

The current state of relative evaluation in Korea suggests a troubling reality. It creates an environment where students wish for each other’s downfall, hoping that others might fall ill or study less so they can rank higher. Although this system is used worldwide, it is particularly pervasive in South Korean high schools and universities. Success is not based on how hard you studied or how much time you invested but on how others performed. Viewing this approach as a strategy to nurture students’ abilities is difficult.

Competition is constantly intensifying, leaving students in despair. They live each day in fear of a single mistake, knowing it could cast uncertainty over their futures. Isn’t that terrifying? Students undergo a process of internalizing their grades as if they were scars engraved on their hearts. Individuality fades away, and grades become the defining marker of life. At an age when students should be making precious memories with friends and family, they are instead burdened by the pressure that Korean society imposes.

To ease this burden, many adults and teachers tell students, "College is not everything." However, this advice is rarely taken to heart, as students’ primary focus remains on gaining admission to a prestigious university, just as their peers strive to do. In terms of friendships, it’s challenging to maintain the genuine camaraderie often portrayed in Korean media and on social platforms. Students report feeling a sense of identity confusion and bleakness in their relationships, as friends gradually turn into competitors.

It is important to recognize that the perceived benefits of relative evaluation—such as maximizing performance through competition or offering a fairer metric than absolute grading—are often overstated. As mentioned, both relative and absolute evaluations have pros and cons, and it is impossible to declare one as superior. Criticism should instead be directed at how the government and society manage these systems.