Debate Over Expanding Elementary School Hours: Education or Childcare Shift?

The National Education Commission is facing significant pushback as it considers plans to extend school hours for early elementary students. Educators and parent groups, including the Korea Elementary School Principals Association and teachers of first and second graders, argue that the proposal shifts the responsibility for failed childcare policies onto schools, exacerbating stress and fatigue for young students. The debate over the validity of this policy is drawing attention across the education sector.

On September 3, the National Education Commission, the National Assembly Future Research Institute, and the Korea Educational Development Institute held a policy forum at the National Assembly Library to discuss the necessity, expected benefits, concerns, and prerequisites for expanding class hours for early elementary education. Various issues were addressed, including the burden on teachers, school staffing and space, and the financial support needed for implementation.

During the forum, five panelists, including teachers and representatives from parent organizations, unanimously stated, "What children truly need is not a longer school day, but a better day that allows for safe and meaningful growth." They emphasized that imposing uniform class hour expansions on all students to address the social issue of childcare gaps is not the solution. They called for essential measures to be taken before extending hours, including increasing the number of teachers, reducing workloads, securing safe play areas, and legally separating responsibilities for regular education and after-school care. They also stressed the need for social responsibility, such as reducing parents' working hours.

In the first presentation of the forum, Hwang In-hyuk and Seong Mun-joo, associate researchers at the National Assembly Future Research Institute, pointed out that the annual regular class hours for first and second graders in South Korea are 581 hours, which is 234 hours (28.7%) less than the OECD average of 815 hours. The researchers noted that early dismissal (around 1 p.m.) leads to a "childcare gap," forcing parents to rely on private education or parental leave, which increases economic burdens for low-income families and contributes to a lack of play and deteriorating mental health for children. They suggested gradually increasing class hours for first and second graders to OECD levels, utilizing the available teaching resources due to declining school-age populations, and providing stable education and childcare like Germany's all-day schools.

Lee Hee-hyun, head of the Student and Parent Research Office at the Korea Educational Development Institute, emphasized the need for a cautious, phased approach rather than simply extending dismissal times. He drew a clear line against merely increasing academic subjects like Korean and math, proposing instead to fill the additional time with "growth experiences" such as literature, arts, physical education, play, and exploration. He outlined a two-phase roadmap: first adjusting class hours to the level of third and fourth graders (657 hours annually, an increase of 3.35 classes per week) and then, based on the results, considering a second phase to expand to the level of fifth and sixth graders (725 hours annually). He stressed that essential prerequisites include a "team education system" to avoid overburdening individual teachers, utilizing unused classrooms for "space innovation," and legally separating responsibilities for regular education and after-school care.

The subsequent panel discussion provided sharp critiques and in-depth alternatives to the researchers' diagnoses and solutions. Kim Sun, vice president of the Korea Teachers' Union and a teacher at Gyeonggi Dunjeon Elementary School, cautioned against simply comparing class hours with the OECD average. She noted that first graders already struggle with five classes and emphasized that rather than expanding mandatory classes for all students, the focus should be on providing quality support for those in need of childcare. She suggested that prerequisites such as reducing class sizes, deploying support teachers, and securing rest areas should be implemented as independent policies before considering the need for additional class hours. She also called for clear "suspension criteria" to halt expansions if the policy fails.

Jo Jang-woo, an organizing committee member of the National Parents' Association for Equal Education, pointed out logical inconsistencies in the first presentation. He argued that while the "childcare gap" is a problem, it is unconvincing to suggest that increasing regular class hours is the solution. He noted that keeping children in school longer does not reduce reliance on private education, emphasizing that what matters is not how long children stay in school, but how that time is spent. He proposed key alternatives, including legalizing elementary childcare and improving the treatment of childcare staff, expanding community-based childcare facilities, and creating a supportive home environment through reduced parental working hours.

Park So-young, policy director of the Teachers' Labor Union and a teacher at Daejeon Baeul Elementary School, criticized the policy's impracticality, citing survey data from the field. She revealed that 82.5% of elementary teachers view the policy as a shift of childcare responsibilities to schools for dual-income families, with 60.6% fearing increased risks of student safety incidents and unfounded child abuse allegations due to extended hours. She stated that 95.2% of teachers do not receive adequate break time, making it difficult to even use the restroom. She strongly urged that before discussing expanding class hours, there must be legislation to ensure appropriate teaching loads, protections for teachers against false allegations of abuse, and a complete separation of teaching and administrative duties.

Kim Jae-wook, head of the Jeonbuk branch of the National Teachers' Union, also emphasized that expanding the state's childcare responsibilities and regular education hours are distinctly different policies. He advocated for a "universal right and a support system that allows for choice," arguing that the available teaching resources due to declining school-age populations should be directed toward reducing class sizes and supporting basic academic skills rather than simply increasing class hours. He proposed six execution conditions for redesigning the early education curriculum: prioritizing children's rights to development, rest, play, and education; clarifying the roles and responsibilities of regular education and childcare; aligning teacher staffing and placement; investing in space and facilities; transitioning to a publicly operated system centered on local governments and education support offices; and conducting pilot programs and comprehensive evaluations.

Sim So-hee, a parent from Gyeonggi Songgok Middle School, focused on financial efficiency and practicality. She criticized the approach of applying expanded regular class hours to all children as misaligned with the goal of addressing selective childcare issues for dual-income and vulnerable families. She particularly advocated for significantly supporting flexible, choice-based programs that can respond to actual demand, such as the after-school vouchers being introduced in 2026, rather than rigid staffing increases that are difficult to reverse. She called for transparent comparisons of the financial reach of the regular class hour expansion proposal and the voucher support plan to be made public. Additionally, she insisted that before any policy decisions are made, the opinions of early elementary students, the primary stakeholders, must be solicited.