Reallocation of College of Education
by Kim Jong hee, Tribune Reporter
On August 29, tens of College of Education students demonstrated against a certain administration office policy. Students agitated for the settlement of the pending issue of the security of some student activity rooms at the College of Education Building #3. They contended that students had the right to use these rooms for the respective activities conducted therein. Eventually after some hours had passed, Lee Jong-baik (vice-dean of the College of Education) apologized about the hasty decision-making process on the part of the administration office.
The conflict dates back to the report, ‘Plan for Practical Utilization of Space’: This report submitted to the Main Office in December 2004 was designed to solve the long-standing problem of lack of space. Lee Ki-sae (Planning and Mediation section) said, “Even though the Main Office has continuously built new buildings, demand for rooms has increased. Therefore, supplementary spaces for newly-employed professors and an insufficiency of lecture rooms at the Biology Technology department have caused the Main Office to pursue a policy in accordance with this report.”
The most contentious point of the report was to collect tolls from certain departments which occupy more space than is standard, as indicated by the Ministry of Human Resource and Educations’ Ordinance of University Establishment Standard. . According to this report, the Main Office levied 5,000 won per excessive m2.
Pursuant to this policy, the College of Education returned #108 lecture room (69.9m2) and the basement (380.64m2) of the College of Education Building 1 rather than having to pay 4,675,000 won in levies to the Main Office.
There used be a Sarim (a room for the reserved), an A-court (tennis club), a pungmul (Korean traditional percussionists’ club), a students’ council room for the Dept. of English Education and the Home Economics Education Dept. in the basement in question. When the basement was returned to the Main Office, the students who used to use it had to move somewhere else. Instead of all these facilities being relocated in one place the administration office of the College of Education planned to relocate them in the following manner. The Sarim was scheduled to move to the students’ association room on the second floor of College of Education Building 2, the student council of the Dept. of English Education to the student council of the Dept. of Korean Education, and the Home Economics’ one to the material room of the Dept. of Infant Education onto the fourth floor of the College of Education Building 1.
The heated dispute between the students and the administration office arose out of this arrangement. The Administration office had pushed ahead with the relocation scheme without obtaining students agreement. In addition, it did not inform the A-court, the pungmul nor the student council personnel of the plan at all. Professor Lee Jong-baik said, “It is true that we did not discuss enough in advance to help students understood this issue. However, at that time, there wasn’t enough time for explanation or discussion.” He therefore admits that there were errors in the proposal.
In reaction to the situation, the College of Education students set up an emergency measure committee (EMC). They required the administration office to disclose the process of relocation, to make a public apology, to open up a channel of communication for discussion on the issue and to secure the right of students’ autonomy to these premises. Kim Hye-suk, vice president of College of Education, said, “We agreed on the relocation policy to share the extra space with other people or departments. And we know that Main Office can not continue to endlessly provide buildings due to the limitation of real estate. However, there can be no denying that there was no discussion in advance with students on the matter and that the administration office just served notice on the students to immediately vacate the respective premises.”
Fortunately, there was a hint of a solution. Six-party talks comprised of the presidents of the Planning and Mediation section, of Student Support, of the College of Education, of the College of Humanities, of the students’ council of College of Humanities and Education, plus the vice president of the College of Humanities were twice held at the Main Office, on Sept. 8 and Sept. 14 respectively.
Though there was a division of opinions, they came to an agreement albeit sketchy in content. According to mutual consent, the Main Office promised to exempt the students’ self-administration room from the reallocation plan. As regards the basement of the College of Education Building 1, the Main Office promised to give priority to College of Education students to use it. The Main Office also promised to offer a place to the Sarim and the pungmul.
This relocation conflict is a good example of the importance of proper communication. Exchanging and sharing information, imparting ideas, and the giving of adequate notice are all vital to effective and meaningful communication and dialogue. It is understandable that the Main Office wanted to enact the sharing-space-policy as quickly as possible and that the administration office of the College of Education did not have enough time to arrange the space to satisfy everybody. However, in enacting such a hasty policy these authorities only succeeded the wrath of students down on them. This reporter hopes that such proposals, will in future allow for proper consultation and dialogue with the relevant parties that may be involved.