Private Universities Oppose Government's Free Tuition Policy for National Universities

by BAEK DUSAN Posted : August 28, 2026, 16:52Updated : August 28, 2026, 16:52

The push for a 'full free tuition' policy for national universities has sparked significant backlash from private universities in South Korea. The Korea Association of Private University Presidents (KAPUP) has criticized the government's plan, arguing that concentrating full national scholarships on specific types of institutions fosters discrimination among students and is inherently unfair. They are calling for a complete redesign of the policy.


From August 20 to 24, KAPUP commissioned Research & Research to survey 500 high school seniors across the country regarding the '2027 Free Tuition Support for Regional National Universities.' The results were released on August 28.


The survey revealed that 64.5% of respondents believe that full national scholarships should be available regardless of whether the institution is public or private. In contrast, only 25.0% disagreed. This sentiment was consistent across different types of universities students hoped to attend, indicating a strong demand for equitable scholarship support.


The impact of the free tuition policy on university choice was also evident. After presenting the full scholarship conditions, the percentage of students wishing to attend 'regional national universities' increased from 27.6% to 31.9%. Conversely, interest in 'regional private universities' dropped from 6.6% to 4.4%, raising concerns that the free tuition initiative could skew student enrollment toward national universities. Additionally, 73.6% of respondents predicted that this policy would lead to a shift toward national universities.


Despite the substantial financial incentives, the preference for universities in the capital region remained strong. Students identified 'reputation and recognition' (57.1%) and 'employment prospects' (54.5%) as the most important factors in their university choice, while 'tuition and scholarships' (25.8%) ranked lower. Notably, 62.5% expressed a willingness to incur costs to attend a university in the capital region, suggesting that free tuition alone may not be sufficient to prevent talent drain from regional institutions.


KAPUP issued a statement on the same day, urging the government to reconsider its policy direction. They acknowledged the intention to reduce the financial burden on local youth and support regional universities but criticized the approach of providing full support to national university students regardless of income while excluding private university students. They argued that this is not a fair system.


KAPUP pointed out that tuition at national and public universities outside the capital region is already about 54% of that at private universities, and the scholarship rate per student is over 20 percentage points higher. They expressed concern that if the government fully covers tuition at regional national universities, it would create a stark disparity, effectively resulting in 'zero tuition for national universities and hundreds of thousands of won for private universities,' which could severely impact student recruitment at regional private institutions.


KAPUP also emphasized that new funding sources, such as the 'Future Response Fund' from the restructuring of local education financial grants, should be distributed equitably.


The association's presidents proposed three key demands to the government: 1) redesign the 'regional balance scholarship' based on students and regions rather than the type of institution; 2) ensure equitable investment of the Future Response Fund in the infrastructure and quality faculty of private universities; and 3) institutionalize a stable and continuous national investment system for higher education.


Hwang In-sung, KAPUP's Secretary General, stated, 'Regional development should not be limited to the advancement of certain universities but should involve the growth of all students and institutions in the region.' He urged the government to center its policies on students and regions rather than the type of institution when redesigning scholarships and higher education financial policies.





* This article has been translated by AI.