The 2026 Education Superintendent Election Should Be a Turning Point

Education in Jeonbuk has fallen into a long-standing swamp of distrust. Over the past 15 years, education in Jeonbuk has seen those who were supposed to teach the law casually crossing its boundaries, and power struggles within the educational community have repeatedly placed students and parents as the 'opponents'. At this point, educational administration finds it increasingly difficult to speak about education. The Jeonbuk Education Superintendent election scheduled for June 3, 2026, should be a turning point to break this vicious cycle.

Wrongdoings of Those Who Taught the Law, Leaving Only Cynicism

Former Superintendent Kim Seung-hwan was fined 10 million won by the Supreme Court for abuse of power and violation of the Local Public Officials Act for unjustly intervening in civil service promotions. The symbolic significance lay in the fact that an elected superintendent had tainted their appointment authority not with a 'fair process' but with 'personal intentions'. While the fine was upheld, what remained in Jeonbuk education was a cynicism that ultimately 'power goes unchecked'.

Former Superintendent Seo Geo-seok also faced legal issues during the 2022 superintendent election process, being fined 5 million won for spreading false information and having his election annulled by the Supreme Court, resulting in his removal from office. If a fine of over 1 million won is confirmed in the superintendent election, the election is invalidated. As a result, the Jeonbuk Education Office is currently operating under an acting capacity. Whether from a legal background or not, scenes where even those who 'know the law' undermine the spirit and purpose of the law erode trust in educational administration rapidly.

Competition Among Teacher Organizations, When Seen as 'Shares' Rather Than an 'Educational Community'

The presence of teacher organizations such as the Jeonbuk Teachers' Union, the Korean Teachers and Education Workers' Union, and others is necessary for safeguarding teachers' rights and discussing educational policies. The problem arises when the language of competition shifts from 'students' and 'quality of education' to 'our share'. When demands to correct imbalances in specific school levels or positions are interpreted as mere requests for "more of our people," educational office appointments and policies are perceived not as 'public' but as 'frontlines between associations'.

Even more concerning is the regressive mobilization methods seen in some teacher organizations or teacher groups. When labeling parents' concerns as 'malicious complaints', circulating hatred and ridicule in closed spaces to strengthen internal cohesion, the result is not an enhancement of teaching authority but a breakdown of public trust in teachers as a whole. Framing teaching authority and student rights, and parental rights as a zero-sum game ultimately turns schools into battlefields.

When Judicial Risks Become Routine, Education Descends into 'Defensive Administration'

On one hand, education superintendents face legal issues related to elections and appointments, while controversies surrounding surrounding personnel continue to surface. As a result, the Education Office has become entrenched in a structure that consumes its policy capacity in 'defense, promotion, and camp management' rather than 'student support'. Even after a leader has left, suspicions grow that the remaining personnel networks from past camps continue to exert influence through administrative organizations, deepening distrust.

An acting capacity should not merely linger on 'getting through unscathed'. It must take on the responsibility of resolving conflicts and restoring trust through 'transitional administration'. Administration must uphold the neutrality of laws and procedures, but should not repeat the cycle of responsibility avoidance and maintaining the status quo in its name. Confronting distrust and establishing institutional mechanisms that enhance transparency and fairness is the minimum duty of an acting capacity.

The Electoral Course the New Superintendent Must Navigate

While criticizing the legacies of law violations, ethical controversies, groupism, and judicial risks, it should not be acceptable for those aspiring to the superintendent position to rely on those very forces for their election. The superintendent should not be a supporter of specific unions, factions, or camps, but a 'public representative' trusted by students, parents, and educational staff alike.

The Principles the New Superintendent Must Uphold Are Clear

First, the selection criteria should be someone who possesses 'law-abiding, ethical, and conflict resolution abilities'. A track record of disregarding laws in appointments or an attitude of avoiding reflection and responsibility in the face of judicial risks undermines one's candidacy.

Second, teacher organizations should shift their thinking from being 'teacher-centric' to 'education community-centric'. Framing students and parents as enemies, and using hatred and ridicule to solidify internal bonds is not the way to safeguard teaching authority. Teaching authority can only be sustained on the basis of student learning and growth, and the trust of parents and the local community.

Third, the Education Office should not simplify conflicts into a mere dichotomy of 'complaints vs. teaching authority', but prioritize student safety and learning rights. A school democratic model based on mutual respect and responsibility must be reestablished. Designing conflict resolution systems, parent-student participation structures, and teacher support systems with precision is the role of the Education Office.

If groupism, law violations, and judicial risks are not addressed, Jeonbuk education will continue to repeat elections where the choice is not about "who is the better educator" but "who is the lesser problem". This is an unfortunate choice for students, parents, and educational staff alike.

The 2026 Jeonbuk Education Superintendent election should mark the first scene in breaking this vicious cycle. Citizens must scrutinize candidates with courage and discernment, and candidates must prove themselves not through words but through concrete backgrounds and responsible actions. Education should not be a political and factional spoils, but a public good that shapes the lives of the next generation, a common sense that must be clearly upheld in this election.