Developmental State Policy, Educational Development, and Economic Development: Policy Processes in South Korea, 1961-1979
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper explores two inter-connected issues – the state’s role in educational development and educational contribution to economic development – in the policy processes entailed by the South Korean state’s pursuit of economic development during the Park Chung Hi era, 1961-1979. It disputes the statist view that South Korea’s economic development was the outcome of a strong state’s imposition of developmental policies. It also denies the human capital account that central to the South Korean state’s education policy was the skills formation agendum. In this paper’s process analysis, educational contribution to economic development was made most importantly in the entrance competition-swept schools by virtue of their equipping South Koreans with basic knowledge and intellectual skills and the most important educational asset for economic development was those schools’ explosive growth. The latter took place as an unexpected effect of the state’s developmental policy of containment which aimed to secure scarce funds for strategic developmental projects. This policy intensified entrance competitions, boosted demand for education, and provoked public call for state commitment to educational expansion. The legitimacy-deficient regime responded politically and compromised on the developmental education policy from one level of formal schooling to another. The image of the developmental state thus portrayed is quite contrary to that provided by the statist-human capital perspective.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".