In this blog post, we examine whether scholarships and military service benefits are realistic solutions to the trend of students shunning STEM fields.
South Korea is currently facing a crisis in STEM fields. Korean newspapers and broadcasters report on the phenomenon of students avoiding STEM majors in college. Universities lament that top talent is leaving STEM fields, leaving them with a shortage of skilled professionals. Industries are struggling because they cannot find qualified workers despite needing manpower. Society refers to this as the “STEM crisis.” Some argue that this crisis in STEM is exaggerated, claiming that a sufficient number of students are entering STEM fields, that employment is relatively easy, and that some even belong to high-income occupational groups. If so, why is the STEM crisis being discussed everywhere? This is because the focus of the STEM crisis lies not simply in a shortage of numbers, but in the outflow of top-tier talent. In fact, STEM is not the only sector struggling in the current economic climate. With the exception of medical and law schools, few fields are faring well. Nevertheless, STEM is singled out because it accounts for a high proportion of university students and has a significant ripple effect on society and the economy. Before discussing solutions to the STEM crisis, let’s examine its background alongside economic trends.
As of 2025, South Korea’s economy is assessed to have avoided the worst-case scenario. After weathering the 1997 IMF crisis, the Korean economy rebounded but had to overcome numerous hurdles. Since the IMF crisis, there have been many internal and external challenges, including the credit card crisis (2003), the dot-com bubble burst (1999), and the global financial crisis triggered by the subprime mortgage crisis (2007). As an economy driven by exports, South Korea is inevitably sensitive to global economic conditions, and it is currently navigating a long tunnel with no end in sight due to the difficult global economic situation. S&P and Moody’s have upgraded South Korea’s credit ratings, noting that the country is managing the crisis relatively better than other OECD nations despite concerns over the European economic crisis, declining U.S. consumption, and fears of a soft landing for the Chinese economy. However, the suffering of individual citizens remains significant. The surge in “self-help” books flooding bookstores is a testament to this. Companies are shifting to emergency management systems in preparation for next year’s uncertain economic outlook, and news of workforce reductions is coming from all quarters. In particular, research personnel with science and engineering backgrounds—who make up a significant portion of the workforce—are being targeted for cuts.
During an economic downturn, the first group to experience job losses in the industry is research and development personnel, namely those with science and engineering backgrounds. This job insecurity has become ingrained in society, and the younger generation, having witnessed cases of science and engineering graduates losing their jobs during every economic crisis, has naturally come to avoid these fields. High-achieving students prefer relatively stable professions such as doctors or lawyers and flock to related departments. This phenomenon is clearly evident in college admissions; at Seoul National University, for instance, the CSAT scores of science and engineering applicants are lower than the average for medical school applicants. Even top students who enter STEM fields often go on to medical school, law school, or study abroad after graduation. As a result, outstanding talent remaining in STEM fields is extremely rare.
To address the crisis in STEM, the government, businesses, and universities are proposing various solutions. First, there are scholarship programs designed to reduce the financial burden on STEM students by providing financial aid, thereby encouraging them to stay in their field rather than switch to other majors. A prime example is the Korea Student Aid Foundation’s STEM scholarship, which fully waives tuition for students with outstanding admission scores who maintain a certain grade point average. However, despite these scholarship benefits, top students are still leaving for the fields of medicine and law. This indicates that scholarships alone cannot resolve the STEM crisis.
Next is the military service exemption program. This system grants military service exemptions to those who work as specialized research personnel at domestic STEM universities or related companies, with the aim of encouraging male students to pursue STEM fields and preventing them from studying abroad. Thanks to this system, the number of students pursuing master’s and doctoral degrees without military service has increased; however, there are still many cases where students choose to study abroad despite being required to fulfill their military service obligations.
Additionally, an engineering accreditation program has been proposed. Operated by the Korean Accreditation Board for Engineering Education, this program was launched with the intention of enhancing the social value of engineering graduates by granting engineering accreditation to those who meet certain requirements. However, the program’s effectiveness is limited. This is because society and the industry do not recognize the value of engineering accreditation. In addition, various other measures have been proposed, including research funding support, improvements to research environments and working conditions, the relaxation of unnecessary regulations, and systematic management of science and technology personnel.
Although these various measures are being implemented, they have not led to a fundamental resolution of the crisis in STEM fields. This is because the proposed measures fail to address the core issue of the crisis: job instability. To resolve the crisis in STEM fields, outstanding students must view a career in STEM as a path to success and be able to anticipate a stable future. The reason students are currently flocking to medical and law schools is not due to tuition fees or military service exemptions, but because a stable life afterward is guaranteed.
The key to the solution lies in regulating the supply of STEM talent. Given that the supply of STEM graduates far exceeds the demand from Korean industry—and considering the resulting low wage levels—it is necessary to reduce the supply in order to raise wages. Doctors and lawyers have no fixed retirement age, and professors typically retire between the ages of 60 and 70. However, for STEM professionals working in the private sector, career lifespans are short. Due to the rapid pace of technological change, STEM graduates are prone to losing their jobs at a young age if they fail to keep up with professional development. In contrast, doctors and legal professionals have long career spans and can remain economically active for extended periods. For this reason, a system must be established that allows STEM professionals to earn higher incomes during their relatively short working lives, and to achieve this, a reduction in university STEM enrollment quotas is necessary.
There is also criticism that such supply control is difficult to implement in reality. This is because consistent government policy and support are required to reduce university enrollment quotas, and because it is not easy for universities themselves to reduce quotas when they rely on tuition revenue. In particular, the industrial sector is likely to oppose a reduction in the supply of science and technology personnel, as it could lead to increased costs, such as higher research and product development expenses. However, regulating the supply of STEM personnel is a necessary measure to restore the quality of life for science and technology professionals who were sacrificed during Korea’s economic development and to establish a sustainable economic development model.
In addition, concentrating research funding support can be proposed as a realistic alternative. We must discontinue the current practice of dispersing research funding and instead promote qualitative advancements in research by providing full support to a select few research institutions and talented individuals with promising prospects and the potential to create value. Through this, researchers will be able to produce sustained results based on a satisfactory standard of living and research environment, and society will come to recognize the value of the lives of those engaged in technology R&D.
In short, to resolve the crisis in the STEM fields, the quality of life and income levels of STEM graduates must be improved.
