Imagine studying for years, only to face an English exam so brutal that only 3.11% of students achieve the top score. That’s exactly what happened in South Korea’s 2025 Suneung (College Scholastic Aptitude Test), sparking widespread outrage and a major overhaul of the exam’s creation process. But here’s where it gets controversial: Was this a one-time fluke, or a symptom of deeper systemic issues? Let’s dive into what went wrong and how the Ministry of Education plans to fix it—with a little help from AI.
The Suneung, a high-stakes exam that determines college admissions, has long been a source of stress for Korean students. But the 2025 English section was unprecedented in its difficulty. Typically, around 7% of students achieve the highest score (Level 1), but the drastic drop to 3.11% raised alarms. This isn’t just about grades—it’s about fairness. Since English is graded on an absolute scale, even slight shifts in difficulty can dramatically impact college admissions, leaving students and parents questioning the system’s reliability.
So, what caused this debacle? The Ministry of Education launched an investigation into the Korea Institute for Curriculum and Evaluation (KICE), the body responsible for crafting the exam. Their findings were eye-opening. A staggering 19 questions in the English section were rewritten at the last minute, compared to just one in Korean and four in math. These rushed revisions left reviewers with insufficient time to assess difficulty or ensure alignment with the public education curriculum. As one ministry official put it, ‘The review process, which is crucial for evaluating questions, was disrupted due to time constraints.’
But that’s not all. The investigation uncovered a troubling imbalance in the test-writing team. Only 33% of English test writers were active teachers, compared to an average of 45% across other sections. The rest were professors or external experts. This lack of classroom representation made it harder to gauge students’ actual learning levels. Additionally, the selection process for test writers, which has been random since 2024, lacked proper verification of expertise. And to top it off, questions were written in private facilities over 40 days, creating an unstable environment with limited access to tools like AI due to security concerns.
And this is the part most people miss: The Ministry’s reforms aren’t just about fixing past mistakes—they’re about reimagining the future of test creation. Starting with the 2028 pilot, AI will play a central role in writing and reviewing Suneung questions. An AI-based English passage generation system will streamline question development, reduce copyright issues, and eventually predict difficulty levels and check for question similarities. By 2030, a dedicated test-writing facility, tentatively named the Education Assessment and Test Development Support Center, will provide a stable environment for writers.
Human resources are also getting an upgrade. The ministry will strengthen post-selection screening of writers’ expertise and expand the talent pool to include those with prior test-writing experience. For the English section, at least half of the writers will be active teachers, ensuring a better connection to students’ learning realities. A new Question Review Committee will consolidate existing review processes, making difficulty assessments more efficient. As the ministry official explained, ‘This integrated body will combine multiple review levels into a cohesive system.’
But here’s the controversial question: Can AI truly replace human judgment in crafting fair and accurate exams? While AI promises efficiency and consistency, some argue it may overlook nuances that only experienced educators can identify. What do you think? Is this the right direction, or are we risking the integrity of the Suneung?
Education Minister Choi Kyo-jin emphasized, ‘Stable test setting is essential to building trust in the college admissions system. Through these improvements, we aim to create a predictable and trustworthy Suneung system, ensuring students who work hard within public education are evaluated fairly.’*
As the Suneung evolves, one thing is clear: the stakes are higher than ever. Whether you’re a student, parent, or educator, this is a conversation worth joining. What’s your take on the reforms? Share your thoughts in the comments—let’s keep the debate going!
