본론: Pedagogical Barriers and the Case for Enrollment Caps
Imposing institutional caps on English-medium instruction (EMI) enrollment is essential to preserve academic rigor and prevent the pedagogical marginalization of domestic undergraduates. Proponents of unrestricted EMI expansion argue that maximizing English-taught course offerings directly accelerates university internationalisation and enhances institutional prestige in global ranking frameworks ("South Korean Higher Education," 2023; "English-Medium Instruction," 2024). From this viewpoint, universal exposure to English immersion prepares graduates for transnational labor markets while expanding international student intake. However, this market-driven imperative overlooks substantial instructional friction, where uncalibrated enrollment mandates generate profound comprehension deficits, reduced classroom interaction, and cognitive fatigue among learners facing steep linguistic thresholds ("South Korea: Student Attitudes," 2024). When higher education institutions prioritize aggressive enrollment quotas over communicative feasibility, disciplinary depth is inevitably sacrificed, reducing complex subject matter to superficial lectures ("English-Medium Instruction," 2024). Introducing structured enrollment caps and department-specific criteria does not impede globalisation; instead, it establishes an indispensable quality-control mechanism that aligns curriculum delivery with student readiness. Capping EMI enrollment thereby reconciles international ambitions with equitable educational outcomes, ensuring that academic rigor remains uncompromised.