Prevalence and Determinants of Participation in Shadow Education in Four East Asian Societies

Abstract

  Although East Asian societies are well-known for the pervasive use of shadow education, there is a dearth of research comparing the societies within the region. This paper examines the prevalence and determinants of participation in shadow education in four East Asian societies: Hong Kong, Japan, Korea and Taiwan. The study uses cross-national data from Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) 2006, which captures the use of shadow education for 15-year-old students. I apply Ordinary Least Squares (OLS) equations to investigate the extent to which family background is associated with intensity of participation in each society, and whether or not the effect remains significant when adding student’s ability and school participation rate in shadow education to the model.

  With the exception of Korea, student participation in shadow education in East Asian societies is not exceptionally high at the age of 15, and there is considerable variation throughout the region. The participation rate in Korea is almost twice that of Japan and the average hours of participation in Korea is three times higher than that in Japan. In all four societies, families of higher socio-economic status (SES) invest more intensively in shadow education, controlling for student’s ability and other key factors, suggesting that shadow education may serve as a mechanism to exacerbate social inequality. Across societies, the use of shadow education by other parents in the school is a determinant of how much a parent invests in shadow education, which suggests that parent’s sense of competition is also an important factor to consider.

  The present study yields three research implications. First, the study highlights the importance of examining the variation within East Asian societies in regards to participation in shadow education. Future studies need to consider the variation in purpose and forms of shadow education as well as government responses to shadow education across societies. Second, the study underscores the need to look across grades and transition points though comparative study. The large difference between Korea and Japan in respective prevalence rates raises questions as to whether or not university entrance examinations serve as watersheds across East Asian societies. Third, the extent of disparity is likely to be underestimated in this study, as the PISA question on shadow education includes after-school programmes held at schools without charging tuition. Future research should also compare household expenditure on shadow education, which would grasp some aspect of disparity in the quality of shadow education.