As debates over regional integration gather pace across South Korea, an unexpected group of political actors is stepping into the limelight: provincial and metropolitan superintendents of education.
Education chiefs are increasingly positioning themselves as central stakeholders in negotiations over potential mergers between Daejeon and South Chungcheong Province, and Gwangju and South Jeolla Province.
Their growing involvement reflects concerns that integration could alter the structure of local education governance in ways that weaken the authority of superintendents.
“The political momentum behind regional mergers is accelerating,” Seoul Education Superintendent Jung Geun-sik said Wednesday. “At the same time, serious issues are emerging around the status of superintendents, educational independence and educational autonomy.”
Education chiefs and a separate power base
The assertiveness of education chiefs stems from the distinctive design of Korea’s local education autonomy system. Established in 1991, the framework deliberately separates education offices from general municipal and provincial administrations.
Superintendents are directly elected and operate independently from governors and mayors, giving them an individual democratic mandate and control over budgets, personnel and curriculum.
The system was intended to guard education from undue administrative interference and anchor policy decisions in professional rather than political priorities.
That structural independence has gradually translated into political confidence -- especially in areas where education policy intersects with social welfare, local finance and labor issues inside schools.
Integration as a new fault line
Regional integration has now created a new source of tension. A merger would require decisions about whether the combined administrative unit should maintain one superintendent, adopt multiple deputies or redesign the authority altogether.
Several education chiefs have warned that integration plans risk treating education as a secondary administrative concern.
One superintendent criticized proposals being advanced “without consulting the education sector or allowing sufficient input from the educational community,” arguing that such an approach would “only create confusion in schools” and lack democratic legitimacy.
They have also pushed back against provisions floated in earlier drafts of integration bills, including changes to superintendent election methods and expanded audit authority for local governments over education offices.
Officials argue such measures undermine the foundations of educational autonomy.
“The direct election of superintendents, independent audit authority and control over education finance are the core pillars of educational self-governance,” one education official said. “These principles cannot be compromised.”
Why this matters now
The political stakes are rising ahead of the 2026 local elections and as population decline accelerates across the country.
Falling birth rates are already forcing school consolidations, teacher reassignments and budget restructuring -- decisions that often generate strong local resistance.
Education chiefs are tasked with implementing politically fraught measures such as school mergers and teacher reassignments. Regional integration plans risk amplifying public backlash by layering administrative uncertainty on top of already unpopular reforms.
Meanwhile, teachers’ unions and education officials have warned that poorly designed integration could weaken accountability and blur decision-making authority across regions.
“The demands of city-oriented education and countryside-oriented education are fundamentally different,” said Jung Sang-shin, head of the Daejeon Future Education Research Association. “Even after integration, there must be institutional space to mediate and coordinate regional education policies.”
Too much politics?
Although the Korea Education Development Institute notes that the superintendent system was intentionally designed around direct elections to strengthen independence, some critics argue that the arrangement has produced a different kind of politicization.
Former Seoul Education Superintendent Kwak No-hyun has argued that implementing direct elections while banning party nominations has not removed politics from superintendent elections, but instead driven it underground.
In his view, informal candidate coordination and “dark elections” have proliferated, while voters lack sufficient information to compare candidates’ educational philosophies and policy agendas.
Kwak has called for reforms such as holding preliminary primaries to expand voter choice and restore clearer chains of political accountability after elections.
Supporters of reform also argue that education policy itself is inherently political.
“Schools today grapple daily with issues such as all-day care programs, labor conditions for cafeteria and safety staff, dispute resolution, budget allocation, and the boundary between student rights and protecting teachers’ authority,” said education expert and elementary school principal Jung Yong-joo. “These are political questions that cannot be resolved by administrative capacity alone.”
seungku99@heraldcorp.com
![[Exclusive] Ateez to return in November](https://wimg.heraldcorp.com/news/cms/2026/09/02/news-p.v1.20260902.76162fb0ba55493aad1c076f240d0750_R.jpg?type=h&h=120)