'3 p.m. dismissal' plan upends classrooms: 'Why must every 8-year-old study more?'

Proposal to extend classes for grades 1 and 2 draws fierce backlash

Government eyes adding arts, physical education and English activities

Teachers say care and compulsory instruction are not the same thing

Critics question evidence base and decision-making process

Should children's class hours be extended to fill gaps in childcare? Resistance from schools is growing over a proposal to keep first- and second-graders in class until 3 p.m. [Generated with ChatGPT]

"If children need care, we should provide more care — not extend compulsory class hours for every 8-year-old in the country."

A proposal to keep first- and second-graders in elementary school until 3 p.m. is drawing fierce pushback from teachers and parents alike. The plan is intended to ease the childcare burden on dual-income and single-parent households. But teachers argue that providing care to students who need it is fundamentally different from extending mandatory instruction for all students. Many parents share the concern about childcare gaps but urge caution about applying a uniform later dismissal time across the board.

The process behind the proposal has also come under fire. Teacher unions say a policy that was never formally deliberated at a plenary session of the National Education Commission was nonetheless included in a draft long-term national education development plan. The unions have held a series of press conferences demanding that the initiative be halted and that the deliberation process be made public.

More classes, 'education teams' proposed — but staffing and costs remain unresolved

The National Education Commission, the National Assembly Future Research Institute and the Korean Educational Development Institute held a policy forum on Sept. 3, presenting a plan to gradually extend class hours for first- and second-graders — first to the level of third and fourth graders, then to that of fifth and sixth graders. In practical terms, the first phase would add roughly three class periods and the second phase six, with each period currently running 40 minutes.

The additional time would be filled with reading, arts, physical education, inquiry-based activities, play and rest. The second, expanded phase also envisions introducing English and language-culture activities. Lee Hee-hyeon, head of the student and parent research division at the Korean Educational Development Institute, said the intent was "not subject-based English instruction, but providing an experience of language and culture."

A central question is who would teach and supervise students during the added hours. Because homeroom teachers in the lower elementary grades handle most subject instruction and student guidance, expanding school hours without additional staffing could concentrate the burden on them. Researchers at the Korean Educational Development Institute estimated that 5,430 additional teachers would be needed in the first phase and 10,290 in the second to avoid increasing homeroom teachers' workload. The additional annual personnel costs would be approximately 520 billion won ($389 million) and 980 billion won, respectively.

To address this, the researchers proposed an "education team" model in which homeroom teachers, subject teachers and support teachers share instructional and supervisory duties — not abolishing the homeroom system, but distributing the work among multiple educators. Responsibility for regular instruction and after-school care would also be divided: school principals would continue to oversee the regular curriculum, while a proposed "after-school principal" role would manage after-school and care staff, student safety and parent complaints.

Lee said the proposal "is not about keeping children at school longer, but about providing better public education," while acknowledging that securing teachers and funding, clarifying specific duties and establishing clear lines of accountability in the event of accidents must all follow. Teachers on the ground, however, worry that if staffing falls short or responsibilities remain unclear, the added workload will ultimately fall back on homeroom teachers.

Students in a third-grade classroom at Yeongdeok Elementary School in Yeongtong-gu, Suwon, Gyeonggi Province, show off their new textbooks after returning from summer vacation. [Joint press corps]

Care is optional, class is not: 'Some children can barely last 40 minutes'

Teachers say the developmental stage and freedom of choice of younger students must come first. Even if the added time is structured around play, arts and physical education, extending the regular curriculum would require all students — including those who do not need childcare — to attend.

Kim Su-min, organizing director of the South Chungcheong Province Teachers' Union, said she had spent years as a second-grade homeroom teacher watching children struggle to get through a single 40-minute period. "If children have to stay at school until 3 p.m., why does that time have to be formal instruction?" she said.

There are also concerns that students receiving special education could see reductions in the therapy, rehabilitation and rest time their conditions require. Kim Seong-hui, head of the teachers' rights division at the National Special Education Teachers' Union, said students with disabilities may find it physically taxing to maintain the same posture for extended periods, and that accumulated fatigue and sensory overload can lead to physical and emotional distress and behavioral crises.

Critics also warn that extending class hours without expanding teaching staff and support personnel could erode the quality of education. One elementary school teacher, identified only as A, said: "Whether the class is fun or not, if children have no choice, it is compulsion — and that wears out both teachers and students."

Others pointed out that a 3 p.m. dismissal alone would not close the childcare gap. If parents' working hours and the after-school care system remain unchanged, the result may simply be that children head to private tutoring institutes — hagwon — an hour or two later than before. A 17-year veteran elementary school teacher, identified as B, said: "If there is no guardian at home, children will leave at 3 and go straight to a hagwon. The policy would extend class hours while leaving the childcare gap intact."

Teachers also expressed frustration that students and educators had not been adequately consulted during the policy discussions. They warned that expanding school hours before teachers and facilities are ready would ultimately push the burden back into the classroom. An 11-year veteran elementary school teacher, identified as C, said: "A policy made without listening to the people in the classroom will ultimately be borne by the classroom. What children need is not a longer school day — it is a better one."

Students learn to play acoustic guitar at Wondong Elementary School in Osan, Gyeonggi Province. [Joint press corps]

'Play instead of study?' Parents divided over uniform dismissal time

Parents are split over what many call a "childcare cliff" — the abrupt shortening of the school day when children enter elementary school. Some say the state can no longer leave families to manage on their own; others argue the problem is not simply about dismissal time.

Supporters say the 3 p.m. dismissal should not be seen purely as a policy to add more study time. The idea, they say, is to give children adequate time to rest, play and experience arts and physical activities at school — and to narrow the gap in educational opportunities that currently widens depending on a family's circumstances.

Lee Yun-gyeong, former chairwoman of the National Parents' Association for True Education, said the proposal "is not about studying more," adding that it could be structured to give children more rest, ensure sufficient lunch breaks and expand play, physical education and arts activities in line with their developmental stage.

She said that if children are coming home tired, "our job is to make a school where they are not tired." She noted that most parents who cannot take parental leave or reduce their working hours currently rely on grandparents or shuttle children between multiple hagwon to fill the hours after dismissal.

Parents opposed to the plan, however, said that even if the state takes on greater responsibility for childcare, applying a uniform dismissal time to all students warrants caution. Because childcare needs vary by household, they argued, the solution should be optional care for those who need it — and it should extend beyond 3 p.m. to close the gap that follows.

Parent Shim So-hui said she welcomed and supported the National Education Commission's proposal in principle, but hoped "the approach would focus not on keeping children at school longer, but on caring for them better and allowing parents to get home to their children sooner."

Some observers said the debate should go beyond school dismissal times to address broader measures, including securing more parental leave for working parents and guaranteeing flexible working arrangements.

The Teachers' Union Federation holds a press conference outside Government Complex Seoul on Wednesday to oppose the proposed 3 p.m. dismissal policy. [Provided by the Teachers' Union Federation]

From OECD comparisons to a panel with no teachers: the controversy deepens

Education circles have also questioned the evidence cited for extending school hours and the process by which the proposal was developed. The National Education Commission and its researchers pointed to data showing that South Korean first- and second-graders receive 581 hours of regular instruction per year on a 60-minute basis — 28.7 percent below the average of 815 hours among comparable countries — as justification for expanding class time. They also argued that longer school hours could support child development and reduce parents' childcare and private tutoring costs.

Teacher unions rebuffed that argument, saying school systems, the number of school days, methods of calculating instructional time, the scope of what counts as rest, play and care, and school conditions all differ from country to country, making it impossible to conclude from raw numbers alone that South Korea's instruction time is insufficient. Kim Han-na, chairwoman of the Busan Teachers' Union, said citing the German all-day school model as a basis for expanding regular instruction time was "a distorted approach that fails to adequately compare how that system actually operates with South Korea's childcare and after-school framework."

The internal decision-making process has also drawn scrutiny. According to multiple sources within the National Education Commission, the 3 p.m. dismissal proposal was never placed on the formal agenda of the commission's plenary sessions, where members convene to deliberate on major education policy. Yet the draft national education development plan included a specific rollout schedule — extending the policy to first-graders in 2031 and second-graders in 2032 — meaning an implementation timeline was set before any official commission-level discussion had taken place.

The composition of the integrated support panel tasked with drafting the plan has also sparked controversy. The panel, which consolidates input from the commission's subcommittees and earlier draft plans, comprises 16 members: 11 current and former university professors, four officials affiliated with the Korean Educational Development Institute and one middle school vice principal. Critics note that while a school administrator was included, not a single active classroom teacher from kindergarten through high school was represented — a fact that has fueled accusations of teachers being sidelined in the process.

Teacher unions are calling for disclosure of how the proposal was included in the draft and release of supporting materials, a review of the panel's composition, and an open deliberative process that includes active classroom teachers.

Cha Jeong-in, chairwoman of the National Education Commission, opens the commission's ninth plenary session of 2026 at Government Complex Seoul in Jongno-gu, Seoul, on Wednesday. [Yonhap]

Commission says 'nothing has been decided' and vows to start draft over

The National Education Commission said it has never decided to pursue the 3 p.m. dismissal policy and announced it would restart work on the leaked draft national education development plan from scratch. The commission said the draft "appears to have been leaked while only partially written" and that "the leaked version will be reviewed and rewritten from the beginning," stressing that the policies and implementation schedules contained in the draft should not be treated as finalized plans.

Commission Chairwoman Cha Jeong-in drew a line at an extraordinary session on Wednesday, saying: "News reports that the National Education Commission is pushing a 3 p.m. dismissal policy are just that — news reports. The commission is not pursuing this."

A commission official said the policy forum "was not an event premised on introducing the policy, but a venue for hearing a range of views," adding that the researchers' proposals on expanding class hours, increasing teacher numbers and restructuring school operations "are not policies the commission has adopted."

Cha echoed that position, describing the forum as "a very important occasion to examine in a balanced way the necessity and expected benefits of expanding instruction time for lower elementary grades, as well as the concerns and prerequisites." She said she hoped the discussions would "contribute to charting a policy direction that the public can support and trust."

On the criticism that no active classroom teachers were included in the integrated support panel, a panel official said the panel's role and the broader structure for gathering opinions needed to be considered together. The panel's function, the official explained, is to consolidate input from the commission's subcommittees and earlier draft plans. "We are working to build a structure that reflects input from the field," the official said.

brunch@heraldcorp.com