Is the constitutional right to education upheld by the legal policy of incorporating AI digital textbooks?
Korean Constitutional Law Asscciation, Jeong Ho CHOI · Korean Constitutional Law Association · 2025
The Ministry of Education introduced AI Digital Textbook (AIDT) in the first semester of the 2025 school year as a learning and education support software. The objective of this study is to demonstrate that the right to equal education in accordance with the capacity outlined in Article 33 of the Constitution is not being realized during the implementation of AIDT as a result of the government's legal policy, which is based on technological deterministic optimism, and the lean and agile strategy of technology companies. The following are the specific contents. Initially, the concept of personalized education contributes to the education system's dysfunction by utilizing the current entrance exam-oriented approach to education, rather than fostering the learner's proclivity and talent as “capabilities.” Secondly, AIDT may realize the right to receive education if it assists in the elimination of the education divide through problem-solving; however, the necessary technology is not yet available. Third, the implementation of the incorrect policy has led to the exclusion and discrimination of students with disabilities, as evidenced by the aforementioned limitations. Fourth, the implementation of AIDT is the result of the government's unilateral policy promotion, rather than the school community including teachers, which results in the loss of teachers' initiative in the classroom. This has a negative impact on the autonomy and professionalism of education. Fifth, the unconstitutionality of the introduction of AIDT unilaterally through government legislation, rather than through the legislative process of the National Assembly, which ensures openness and the potential for profit coordination, is a violation of the principle of legality in the textbook system. Furthermore, it was noted that the aforementioned issues should be resolved by concentrating on the identification of the Constitution's inherent values in the field of education during the introduction and dissemination of technology, rather than determining whether AIDT can be introduced by technically enhancing it. It is contended that the state should fulfill its obligation to safeguard the fundamental rights of the populace by pursuing appropriate technology for education, rather than the diffusion of new technology, when technology companies engage in a speed war to pursue profit. We aspire to re-establish and implement the principles of the Constitution that have been disregarded in education and AI policies thus far by this study, which critically examines AIDT, which is currently mired in confusion.