Think about being a parent and having children; do you honestly, sincerely think your kids would be better off literally studying the entire day, and during most of their childhood? The answer is no. Studying is important to an extent, but so is enjoying childhood and doing other things than studying all the time.
Korea only recently reduced the maximum legal working hours per week from 68 to 52. Korea also has an above average suicide rates in the 10s, 20s, and 30s (and much higher elderly suicide rate, since there are few programs for them). The outcome of the 수능 exam is so important for determining one's future that planes don't fly at that time, and workers head to work at a later hour than usual.
What's happening in Korea currently is a hyper rat race that looms over one's life from a young age. Nobody wants that, but it's inevitable due to the difficulties of finding a job in this economy.
I am not discussing whether or not work should equal reward. I'm saying there should be no need at all for this ridiculous amount of studying. The current system is fundamentally broken.
User intertextuality proposed that maybe the SAT should be adjusted so it "doesn't reward excruciating studying and working systems". My point is that firstly, many people find studying to a deadline to be excruciating so let's dispense with the dramatic adjectives, and secondly, what kind of replacement for the SAT scheme would not reward hard work and study? Would it even be an exam at all? In any conceivable testing regime people who study and work harder to succeed will, on average, do better. That seems fundamental. Without changing it so much it's not an exam anymore, Koreans will seem to have a cultural advantage over other less hard-working cultures and why should they not? In America they are not forced to work crazy hours, by law or the economy or culture or anything else.
It's entirely possible for the SAT to remain exactly as it is, in a way that rewards study, without implying a Korea-style deathmarch cultural ethic.
I do think standardized testing is fundamentally broken, but for mass-grading of people there's no other real alternative I suppose. However, I don't think the SAT's job should also be trying to account for systemic issues in America and life.
Instead, college admission boards should look at background as well as SAT scores. I believe they do this already, but SAT scores should be even less emphasized. Beyond a very minimum level I don't think it's a really good indicator of a person at all.
