"Told to Teach Student Who Sent Sexual Letter": Ineffective Separation Sparks Criticism Over 'Single-Teacher' Subjects

A teacher who suffered a violation of teaching rights—receiving a letter containing sexual expressions from a second-year high school student she homeroom-taught—is still required to continue teaching the student in question, prompting teachers' unions to appeal for countermeasures.

The teachers' unions urged that the reality where victims are ultimately forced to leave the classroom—due to a failure to achieve practical separation between the student and the victimized teacher despite a formal determination of rights infringement—must be fundamentally improved.

According to the Gyeonggi Teachers' Union yesterday (August 19), Teacher A, a homeroom teacher for a second-year class at a high school in the province, received a letter containing sexual content from Student B, a student in the same class, on June 22.

The letter omitted honorifics when referring to the teacher's name 34 times and included statements to the effect of, "I imagined everything possible related to sexual desire with the teacher."

Along with the student's unilateral expression of affection, the letter also contained a number of threatening phrases demanding the same feelings in return from the teacher.

Days before delivering the letter, Student B also disobeyed legitimate lifestyle guidance, following Teacher A all the way to the staff room despite her intervention after homeroom and blocking her from leaving work.

The Hwaseong Osan District Office of Education's Regional Teaching Rights Protection Committee, upon receiving a report from the victimized teacher, deliberated and acknowledged these facts on July 16.

Consequently, the committee recognized Teacher A's reported case as an infringement on educational activities and imposed measures on the student, including a class transfer and 8 hours of special education.

However, even though Student B was transferred from Teacher A's homeroom class to another class, a practical separation between Teacher A and Student B within the school was not achieved.

This occurred because Teacher A is the only instructor in charge of the subject she teaches, leaving her in a situation where she must continue teaching Student B, who was moved to a different class.

Ahead of the semester opening for the second semester, Teacher A reportedly requested alternatives from the school—such as allowing Student B to change elective subjects, take the course through online supplementary education programs, or hiring a substitute teacher—but these requests were not accepted.

Ultimately, Teacher A was unable to go to school when the semester opened yesterday (the 18th) and had to take sick leave.

In a phone interview on the same day, Teacher A expressed her suffering, saying, "After reading the letter, I felt sexual humiliation and disgust, and suffered severe mental and physical stress, including dry heaving for a while. I had calmed down a bit with the hope that the teaching rights protection committee's decision meant I wouldn't run into the student, but after finding out that I would have to teach that student, the dry heaving started coming back up."

She emphasized, "Even though I was recognized as a victimized teacher, the perpetrator's rights were prioritized in this situation. Unreasonable systems like this, where single-subject teachers like me have no way of being protected other than a forced transfer even if our teaching rights are infringed, must be fixed."

She added, "The fact that separation measures for perpetrators and victims depend largely on the discretion of individual school principals is also a blind spot in the teaching rights protection system. Because the committee deliberations have concluded, I feel abandoned and unprotected by any institution—the school, the regional education office, or the provincial office of education."

An official from the Gyeonggi Teachers' Union pointed out, "This incident clearly exposes the gaps in the current victimized teacher protection system," and emphasized, "Legal and institutional reinforcements that reflect reality, such as separating class routes, must be implemented."

Educational authorities have decided to assign a dedicated teaching rights protection officer to the victimized teacher in this case.

An official from the Gyeonggi Provincial Office of Education stated, "Following the inauguration ceremony for teaching rights protection officers on August 22, we plan to urgently assign a dedicated officer to the victimized teacher next week to provide assistance."
※ Please note: This article was translated by AI and may contain errors.