Even though I lived in South Korea for seventeen years, I know embarrassingly little about its college application system. I spent all three years of high school (yes, it's three years in Korea) preparing for the SATs instead of the Korean college admission test. I had no trouble naming all fifty states of the United States, but I could not name the top five universities in Korea.
But my lack of knowledge is only part of the reason why I decided to research this topic. The other part is that every time the government administration changes, the college app procedure seems to undergo significant changes as well. It has changed so many times that even the journal articles written about it a few years ago are already outdated. My goal is to find out why. Is the system improving? If so, what were the problems with the old systems? If it is not improving, what was the government's motivation behind coming up with a new system? How can it become more efficient and stable?
Admittedly, this research is for an Econ class I'm taking, but I always try to convince myself that nothing that I do is merely for a class or, more in general, just for the sake of doing it. I want to learn more about this and I'm sure I will.
So here's a very rough outline.
A brief intro to the intro (5% of paper)
INTRO
Differences between the US system and the Korean system (10%)
- In Korea, it is customary for students to re-apply again and again until they get into schools that they want.
- Students' preferences are less flexible in Korea. Choices are much clearer. College rankings are fixed from year to year and are rarely disputed.
- Schools' preferences are also much objective and standardized. Extra curricular activities are not big in Korea. Admission is more based on GPA and exam scores.
- Others
Why the differences matter from market design perspective (10%)
- What are the implications of clear-cut preferences?
- How are market stability and efficiency affected by the characteristics listed above?
- Provide at least some mathematical reasoning for each point I make.
Brief conclusion of the intro (and an even more brief intro to the real stuff) (5%)
THE REAL STUFF
Detailed analysis of the system (15%) --> Break down into sections
- Provide some numbers.
- How many people apply each year? How many are rejected?
- How are the schools grouped together? By what mechanism? How does that affect students' preferences? What would the preferences be if there were no categorization?
- Discuss early action, early decision, and regular decision. Any pattern in which schools offer which? (e.g. top schools only offer regular decision, lower ranking schools only offer early decision, etc.) Are these strategies government-induced, or are they chosen by individual schools? How does this affect students' preference listings?
- What happens to the reapplicants? Do they only need to provide their admission test scores, or do they need their GPAs as well?
Link the above analysis to efficiency and stability (15%)
Comparison between the current system and some of the systems in the past (18%)
- List the changes
- Any institutional/political constraints/reformations that brought about those changes?
- Is the current system more stable or efficient? Why and how?
Suggestions for improvement (20%)
- Maybe focus on strategy-proofing the system?
- Talk about how to reduce the number of reapplicants, which is extremely high at this point.
CONCLUSION (2%)
- Make this short. Just a few sentences.
Any help or feedback would be greatly appreciated.
No comments:
Post a Comment