A three-year-old kid reads fluently, memorizes the multiplication table up to 19, and solves algebraic equations. Even in the eyes of a KAIST student surrounded by science prodigies on campus, this is astounding. Baek Gang-hyeon, often dubbed “the gifted boy” by the media, entered Seoul Science High School this year at the age of ten. However, Baek announced his withdrawal from the school on August 18, only halfway into his first year. He claimed, “I was memorizing math formulas when I suddenly felt that I was becoming a machine for solving problems,” and that he had trouble conforming to the school system, especially in team projects. Controversies around the possibility of school bullying aside, the fact that such a clearly “gifted” student was unable to adjust to the educational environment makes it evident that gifted education fails to fulfill the needs of its very subject. 

Korea has multiple institutions for gifted students, especially in science and math, which includes Seoul Science High School and Korea Science Academy of KAIST, among a few other Science High Schools. On the surface level, the curricula at these schools are designed to deviate from the traditional method of schooling — students are able to choose from an expanded number of subjects ranging to university-level courses, many classes are based around the discussion between students, and research requirements are implemented. Nevertheless, any Korean education system seems to inevitably tend toward putting its students in the best position for university applications. Competition within gifted schools is no less fierce; every assignment, every exam is ultimately a step toward being admitted into a prestigious university, and therefore, better prospects.

The distorted aim of education creates the most fundamental issue for young prodigies’ learning environment. Korean students are expected to follow the set system. This is not always possible for those who decide to enter school early; there might be concepts that they have not encountered, but no extra explanation would be given regardless of their ability to understand them. Nor would other classmates have the leisure to look out for them amid their preoccupation with their own studies. However, to allow exceptions to younger students just because of their relative age may seem unfair or disruptive to their peers, and this is justifiable — after all, they have been accepted under the assumption that they would be able to follow the curriculum as everyone else in these gifted schools. 

Moreover, the age gap with their classmates is a factor that certainly cannot be ignored. School is also a crucial place for social interaction and development. While the academic interests of gifted students, younger or older, may align, it is hard to say the same in the psychosocial aspect. Students are likely to be careful or reluctant to bring children that are much younger than them into their social circle, and as much as Koreans are culturally sensitive to age, the issue might be further complicated. Does that mean gifted students should be forced to stay at a level of education that does not interest them?

This is where the need for a more robust education system for gifted students comes in. Korea’s Gifted Education Promotion Act describes a gifted person as someone with exceptional talents who requires special education to develop their innate potential” and allows them to receive education at a higher level. However, the criteria for identifying whether a child requires alternative schooling is vague, and thus it is difficult for actual support to be provided. The most feasible way around this might be to expand upon existing policies, such as admission into gifted education centers through the observation and recommendation by accredited teachers. Of course, this would also require an increase in better-structured training programs for gifted teaching certifications. As a chain reaction, more student-individualized programs could also be formed if the number of certified teachers increases.

But these are prospects for the future. Expansion of gifted education through government support is not to be anticipated because of the small number of children innately possessing intellect to that degree. At this point in time, gifted education must rely on the commitment of those willing to teach young prodigies. Taking a look at relatively well-known cases of gifted children, Terence Tao, the 2006 Fields medalist, was taught by Garth Gaudry at Flinders University, who spared some of his time every week to meet with Tao. Sho Yano, an American physician, was homeschooled with the assistance of various teaching materials for homeschooling and support systems for parents in the US, such as seminars by the Illinois Association for Gifted Children. The availability of these types of resources should be improved for students to go through the education curriculum at a pace that satisfies their academic curiosities. In addition, using the leftover time to try activities outside their studies and interact with others could help students find new interests and become socially integrated. 

Ultimately, it must not be forgotten that child prodigies are what the words spell: a prodigy, but at the same time, a child. Skipping a few grades or getting a college degree early is definitely remarkable, but it is not a measure of success. If it is driven by the motivation of the student, no problem; but simply becoming famous for an achievement that is considered reputable in the social norms might, in fact, lead to continuous pressure to prove their intelligence. Education, whether it be for gifted students or not, should encourage the exploration of interests and preparation for the future at a level that is right for each individual. Perhaps this is a time to reconsider education systems to truly aid the development of children and help them reach their full potential.