[보도]Solutions to Rampant Diploma Falsification Cases

A diploma forgery scandal sparked by a young artist has quickly escalated into a social problem. A number of celebrities and high profile people have since stepped out to confess that their academic records were also false, revealing that diploma forgery is indeed far more rampant and serious than it appears in our society. In the light of a mounting public outcry for rigorous government countermeasures, prosecutors and police have launched a sweeping investigation into suspected cases.

Many people blame our cultural climate that highly appreciates one's academic record as the root of the problem. No one would raise an objection to this analysis. Forgery is by definition done for something valuable.

Such a diagnosis is not a useful basis for a prescription though. No counteractions will substantially discourage the temptation of a showy diploma and change the long-standing practices of relying on one's academic performance when assessing ability and expertise.

The fundamental function of educational institutions is to teach students. In the real world, the credentialing function that proves someone has received an education there is equally important. Those who are cynical about the effectiveness of public education system may say the credential is the most vital.

The importance of formal accreditation stems from the fact that the function reduces information cost by a significant degree. Without credentials in the form of a diploma and proving documentation, it would cost huge resources to assess an individual's ability and knowledge.

Given the social functions of accreditation, a case that hurts the authenticity of a credential undercuts society's efficiency. In this context, it's highly desirable to boost the credibility of a diploma by blocking any chances of forged academic records.

Before tackling the problem, we need to understand that our overdone agitation may have a hazard greater than its appearance. As in other matters, we first need to carefully calculate the benefits and costs. We should make sure that the benefits from measures to enhance the credibility of diplomas will indeed be greater than the costs of such measures. Trying to prevent similar frauds with harsh and costly regulations is worse than doing nothing. Diploma forgery is one of the social evils that are trivial but hard to eradicate.

According to the Korea Development Institute, respondents who entered universities in 1994 reported that the graduates from the nation's top five universities received 2.33 million won in monthly salary on average, far exceeding those from second-tier schools who earned 1.78 million won per month. The discrepancy is good evidence that the gains from fake college degrees are pretty substantial.

Therefore, the realistic solution is to change the social environment in a way that the costs of diploma forgery far outpace the benefits. At the same time, we need to abolish the current practices of excessively admiring one's academic background while reducing any benefits for fake diplomas and raising the costs with higher chances of detection.

The tradition of highly appreciating one's academic background is too deeply rooted to remove in a short period of time. One's academic record is the most accurate and objective yardstick to assess ability and expertise at the lowest cost. Against this background, we have to rely heavily on one's academic records when assessing ability. However, our society apparently puts too much weight on one's academic performance rather than career or ability, a long-standing practice that is hard to change overnight.

What makes matters worse is the fact that this practice is deeply established in our society. This largely stems from our history. In old society, the ruling class maintained their dominant power through a strict and tightly defined class system. Their grip of power largely hinged on the monopoly of education and knowledge.

The state examination system to select high-level government officials was the nation's representative accreditation process that lasted for 1,000 years. As the test was critical to maintaining the class system, people easily forgot the fact that the test was part of the process to give credentials to an educational performance. The passage of the test itself became the people's ultimate goal.

The fact that universities have been so negligent to the quality of such a critical asset means that there has been virtually little competition in the market. They take limited protests from customers over what they are selling. Therefore, they can stick to unprincipled practices, instead of employing the best talent as professors. We can easily suppose that this corrupt practice is more common in the arts and sports areas where the objective assessment of professors' abilities and their output is relatively difficult.

If universities are deeply concerned about their competitiveness, they will surely work hard to find the cream of the crop. At the same time, like private enterprises that strive hard to maintain the reputation of their brands, universities will also put more focus on their reputations by ferreting out the liars saying that they are graduates of certain schools. Then, chances that people may get a job or promotion with false college degrees will sharply decrease.

There is only way to transform universities _ to set the education industry free from the virtual command economy system and return it to the free market economy. Universities should compete with another by allowing students and parents, the consumers of education, freedom of choice.

To reform our education industry, which has been distorted by the government's irrational intervention and control, we need to liberalize it. Nothing is now more urgent and critical in our society than this reform. We realize this is the ultimate solution to the problem of fake diplomas. It is the universities who have provided tempting ground for the fabrication of academic records under the protection of the government. Given this flawed system, the expectation that a liberalized education market will eliminate the ill effects appears to be not unreasonable.

By Bok Ko-hill eunjo35@naver.com

This article appears on the Web site of www.cfe.org., the center for free enterprise, an affiliate of the Federation of Korean Industries.