In March of last year, the Ministry of Education (MOE) revealed the following evaluation criteria in the 2023 University Innovation Support Project basic plan: Recruitment Without Distinction Such as Major Or Department, Reorganization Of Departments In Consideration Of Community Demand, Guaranteeing Students’ Practical Choice Of Major, Operation Of Convergence Education Beyond The Walls Of Majors. In addition, the Glocal University 30 Plan revealed the following standards: a plan to completely reorganize the major system by Breaking Down the Walls Between Disciplines And Departments, Ensuring Student (Consumer) - Centered Major Choice, etc. In the same context as the previous announcement, Education Minister Lee Ju-ho announced last October that non-majors should be selected for approximately 30% of university admission quota. Next, in February of this year, they announced that they are considering a plan to require 25% of national universities to be selected as non-majors in order to receive incentives for the national university development project. Universities are actually accepting the implementation of the non-major system as an obligation, because the MOE announced that it will provide differentiated subsidies to universities depending on the implementation of the non-major system.

  MOE’s non-major system is divided into Type 1, which allows students to freely choose any major in the university, and Type 2, which allows students to choose a major within an affiliate or college. Type 1 allows students to choose their major autonomously, and Type 2 also guarantees autonomy or accepts students within at least 150% of the number of students in each department. However, medical and education fields are excluded from the scope of major selection. MOE plans to guarantee students the right to choose subjects without grade restrictions, even if applicants for a specific major are crowded.

  According to the 2025 University Student Quota Adjustment Plan that CBT received from CBNU through an information disclosure request, each college reduced and adjusted some of students from the existing recruitment quota to operate the non-major system. The number of students adjusted is as follows: College of Agriculture, Life & Environment Sciences (18 students), College of Human Ecology (3 students), College of Natural Sciences (11 students), College of Humanities (8 students), College of Business (18 students), College of Social Sciences (11 students), College of Engineering (77 students), College of Electrical & Computer Engineering (130 students). As a result, 13% (410 students) of next year’s admission quota (2,533 students) will be non-major students.

  According to data that CBT requested for information disclosure from CBNU, our university’s non-major system was first discussed at the academic affairs meeting on Feb. 13. Afterward, on Mar. 20, the statement titled “How much should the College of Humanities sacrifice? - Ahead of the implementation of the non-major system” was posted by the College of Humanities Faculty Association. According to the statement, “Ahead of the implementation of the non-major system, all members of our humanities college are anxious and worried about the survival of the department and the collapse of the humanities itself. MOE is promoting a non-major system under the guise of allowing students to choose freely, but in reality, it will accelerate the collapse of basic academics due to the focus on popular departments.” They requested that the College of Humanities, which consists of basic academic departments, maintain its existing quota.

  On Mar. 25, a meeting regarding student quota adjustment was held for college deans, and an information session was held for all department heads on the 28. In early April, a statement from the National Association of Agricultural College Deans was posted in CBNU’s College of Agriculture, Life & Environment Sciences. In the statement, “Exclude the field of agriculture, just like the fields of medicine, arts, sports, and education which are already excluded, from the student quota adjustment for the Undeclared Majors (non-major) promoted by the MOE. Establish a system to increase the influx of students for the agriculture field.” Subsequently, the CBNU’s professor union posted a banner saying, “We Oppose The Expansion Of Non-Majors, Which Destroys The Academic Ecosystem!” One after another, the College of Medicine, the CBNU Hospital faculty council, and the emergency response committee posted the following banners: “No Communication, No President! Medical Students Expansion Without Communication! University Integration Without Communication! Non-Major Without Communication!”

  On April 19, 21 days after the quota adjustment briefing session was held, the size of the student quota adjustment was confirmed. It took only 66 days for the non-major system to be discussed and the quota adjustment scale to be finalized. On May 8, the Office of Administration unveiled the plan to introduce the non-major system through an administrative notice. It was the very first-time students received information about the non-major system from the university. It has been 86 days since the discussions began. On May 23, as the University Council approved a plan to increase and establish a non-major system, CBNU will implement a non-major system in 2025.

  There is a saying that the education policy should look at least 100 years ahead and draw a big picture. However, it took only 100 days for our university to confirm the introduction of the non-major system.

  From April 22 to May 20, CBT surveyed the non-major admission system in 2025 via email from 754 full-time faculty members. 68 people responded to the survey, with a return rate of 9%, which is not sufficient to be representative. According to the results, 89.7% of respondents had a negative stance on the implementation of the non-major admission system in 2025. 80.9% of respondents answered that the non-major admission system is unnecessary at our university. 80.9% of respondents were found to have a negative stance on the university headquarters’ system implementation process.

  The professors’ biggest concern is the collapse of basic academics. Professor A of the College of Humanities said, “Under the current education system, it is difficult for new students to independently select a major and study. Similar systems such as double majors and linked majors are in effect, so there are many opportunities to guarantee major autonomy in addition to enrolling without a major. In the case of non-major, the application is concentrated on only a few special departments. If the non-major system is implemented in earnest, it is clear that it will lead to the reduction and abolition of basic protected studies and marginalized studies that universities have a responsibility to foster, so I am seriously concerned.”

  Student dropout is also a cause for concern. Professor A added, “What will happen to the affiliation of students entering the college without a major? There is no sense of belonging because there is no interaction with professors, seniors, juniors, who play a large part in college life. This will soon lead to dropping out.” Professor B of the College of Business responded, “It is a system that has already failed in the past, and even in private universities that have already introduced and implemented it, the dropout rate was found to be much higher than the dropout rate of students who entered by choosing a department.”

  It is confirmed that professors are very dissatisfied with the headquarters’ implementation process. Professor C of the College of Human Ecology responded, “Headquarters are not reflecting the opinions of the college and department, but they have changed to reflecting opinions to some extent.” Professor D said, “During the process of deciding on the number of people for Type 1 and Type 2, communication was established with members. I would like to ask whether it was a democratic process that caused confusion in the decision and conflict among members due to the delivery of inaccurate information.” Professor A of the College of Humanities responded, “I would like to ask about the specific implementation plan and problems regarding admission without a major. It is being promoted without understanding the response plan, etc.”

  Headquarters that focus only on incentives are criticized. Professor E of the College of Social Sciences said, “The headquarters claims that this is a policy for students and CBNU. I do not know whether it is really for the benefit of the students or simply to display a banner showing the headquarters’ achievements in receiving a certain number of incentives from MOE, all while pursuing a policy that can not be understood.”

  CBT conducted a survey of current students (113 respondents) from May 2 to 13 with the cooperation of the Student Steering Committee, which is composed of student council presidents from each department. Although not representative enough, the survey results showed that 76% of respondents were opposed to the promotion of the non-major system. 96% of respondents responded that the opinions of current students should be reflected in the process of promoting the non-major system.

  Similar to the concerns raised by professors, there is also controversy among students. Students pointed out that with the implementation of the non-major system, seats will be concentrated in specific departments, leading to the decline of basic studies and unpopular departments. As a side effect, a disruption in the educational environment was pointed out. Student A of the College of Humanities said, “Without a major, the quality of education education, as well as the concentration, concentration on specific departments, and unpopular departments decline. There is no solution to the problem of course registration and lack of classroom space. “If unpopular departments fall, I am concerned that our school’s value as a comprehensive university will be undermined,” he pointed out. Student B of the College of Electronical & Computer Engineering said, “I know this well because I am also from Interdisciplinary Studies, these Interdisciplinary people focused on specific departments. If the non-major system is expanded, more amounts will be concentrated in a specific department than now. Then, it will be more difficult to register for classes in the future, and the number of classrooms and courses needs to increase. These will inevitably become insufficient.”

  Students also pointed out that the no-major policy was geared to bolster science and engineering majors. Student C of the College of Humanities said, “In the end, it’s just a push for science and engineering. Even if there are limits, how will it be different from the current situation? We just need a reform of middle and high school education, not a reform of universities.” Student D of the College of Humanities, said, “I hope that the existing system will first be overhauled and then implemented. In particular, it is clear that this system, which is written as a non-major admission system and should be read as an expansion of the number of engineering students, will accelerate the extinction of the so-called humanities and social sciences departments. I hope they will think about measures to deal with this and promote the system.”

  Students pointed out that the purpose of the non-military major would not be maintained. Student E of College of Natural Sciences said, “I already had enough time to formulate my thoughts about my career path in high school or before. However, taking the time to find your own career path in college is a waste of time and money. The intention itself is good, but from a realistic perspective, it is certain that there will be more students who have already decided on a career and want to go to the department they want to go to than students who come for the opportunity to find a career, but who come in early because of insufficient grades. In other words, there will not be many students who fit the original purpose.”

  Some respondents raised the issue that the university headquarters did not collect opinions from current students and responded that the president and headquarters should listen to the opinions of students.

Student Council President Ahn Chae-hwan (Dept. of Management Information Systems, 19) said there were many concerns about the expansion of the non-major deduction system and pointed out, “There are concerns about the collapse of basic academics such as unpopular departments, and how support and management will be provided for freshmen without departments.” Also, “There are opinions that Interdisciplinary Studies students receive insufficient or difficult administrative/academic/research support compared to existing departments,” and that clear measures are needed. “I think there should be sufficient guidance not only for professors and staff, but also for students, and the opinions of students, who are the actual users, are very important,” he said. Moreover, he commented that the university did not hold briefing sessions for current students or discussed related matters, and that no explanation was provided to each student autonomous organization. Regarding this, he said, “The aspect of supporting new students from the student self-governing body must also be considered. “The opinions of the student self-governing organization, which closely assists and accompanies new students in their college life, including orientation, are also important.”

By Park Su-min

psm0129@chungbuk.ac.kr