The Jeonbuk Office of Education is once again under fire for alleged favoritism in its overseas training program for teachers, raising concerns that little has changed since similar controversies a decade ago. Critics point to tailored selection criteria, relaxed eligibility rules, and lack of transparency in the selection process as evidence of a system designed to benefit specific individuals.

The program in question, titled “2025 Digital-Based Teaching Innovation Capacity-Building Overseas Training”, will take place from July 29 to August 7 in Germany and Austria. A total of 50 participants — including 30 teachers, 14 administrators, and 6 education specialists — will explore topics related to AI-powered digital textbooks and innovative teaching practices. However, concerns over the fairness of participant selection have overshadowed interest in the training itself.

On June 19, the Jeonbuk branch of the Korean Teachers and Education Workers Union (KTU) issued a statement claiming the program was “designed structurally to reward certain individuals under the guise of performance incentives.” The union criticized the secrecy surrounding participant names and evaluation scores, and noted that the program heavily favors those with prior involvement in digital education initiatives such as AIDT training, field support teams, or digital innovation support groups — making it virtually inaccessible for most teachers.

Eligibility requirements were also relaxed. The original condition of "no overseas training within the past 10 years" was changed to "no training within the past 2 years." This change enabled teachers who participated as recently as 2023 to reapply, and in some cases, individuals whose two-year period had not yet elapsed by the end of August were still selected. The KTU condemned this as a “classic case of favoritism through relaxed criteria.”

This latest controversy echoes past scandals under previous superintendents. In 2014, a superintendent faced heavy criticism for repeatedly selecting teachers he had previously worked with for overseas ICT training programs and national education awards. The education office at the time responded with personnel measures, pledging to address the issue.

However, the structural similarities between the past and present cases suggest that systemic problems remain unaddressed. Some speculate that individuals implicated in the 2014 case may still be involved in organizing the current program. Teachers have voiced suspicions of an entrenched “cartel” continuing to influence program selections behind the scenes. The Jeonbuk Office of Education has yet to provide a clear explanation regarding potential personnel links between past and present programs.

There is also a growing call for self-reflection among selected participants, who are being urged to consider whether their selection truly reflects merit or privilege. Ultimately, responsibility for any resulting criticism will rest with the individuals themselves.

The KTU has called for immediate action, including:

Public disclosure of participant names and evaluation scores

Termination of arbitrary criteria and favoritism

Transparent auditing of training budgets and educational outcomes

Institutional reforms to ensure equitable training opportunities for all educators

As the Jeonbuk Office of Education once again faces a familiar scandal, the public awaits to see whether meaningful reforms will finally be implemented.