In Busan Haps writing about kimchi.

This textbook takes kimchi seriously.

Bobby McGill of the Busan-based English-language magazine Busan Haps asked me a little while ago to write about the myth of kimchi after, I guess, hearing one too many times that kimchi prevents swine flu or that kimchi will save you money on auto insurance. It appeared in this month's issue in the form of "Kimchi: Is it really all that?" To do a full write-up on that would take 800 paragraphs, not 800 words, and efforts are also hampered by most old articles being subscription only. Nonetheless, it was interesting to look at older descriptions of kimchi by westerners, and I couldn't help but coming to this conclusion:

I don't think it's a coincidence that the myth of kimchi grew at the same time South Korea did---back when it became more than just a country where people were stationed.

Earlier in the article I wrote, looking at earlier descriptions of kimchi by Americans:

Perhaps today's intense pride is an effort to counter how poorly-received it was by foreigners during an era of Korean poverty three generations ago. A 1953 article from the Associated Press said: "Kimchi is something that smells good to Koreans. To Americans, it just smells."

A US army captain was quoted in the piece: "Try to imagine Limburger cheese several stages decayed - and you'll get the idea." Other decades-old articles call kimchi "Korean sauerkraut," "spoiled cabbage," or "jellied, rotten cabbage," and describe it as "highly aromatic" or "pungent." An edition of Lonely Planet not too long ago called it "a reasonable substitute for tear gas."

A quick look at trying to retrieve those articles in a Google archive search shows me they're pay-per-view, nonetheless people with enough time, and ideally with access to articles via a university library, might be interested in tracing descriptions of kimchi in English and noting how kimchi went from merely being a staple of Korean meals to the cultural icon it is among Koreans today. One article I do mention by title in Busan Haps, and one article you should take a look at, is a 1987 New York Times piece, "No Two Kimchis Taste Alike," which should have some familiar-sounding passages; an excerpt:

Culinary authorities hail kimchi as king of the pickles, because it ferments of its own accord, without vinegar. Its fiery juices carry the nation's ''lifeblood,'' cultural historians say. Its glory was certified when the South Korean Government designated kimchi a national treasure. And now, in downtown Seoul, a whimsical 41-year-old scholar named Lee Moon Suk has opened the world's first museum devoted to kimchi - its meaning, its making and, especially, its tasting.

Any way you slice it - and there are hundreds - kimchi is fundamentally cabbage plus a handful of equally humble vegetables, seasoned with red peppers, garlic and ginger. But to people who say that cabbage is cabbage and wonder why this one deserves a museum, Mr. Lee offers only empathy and, perhaps, a sample from the museum's kitchen.

''As a young man,'' he said in a recent interview, ''I was blind to the secrets of kimchi. For years, I studied to be a Presbyterian minister until kimchi changed my life. Today, I am not a reverend but I am still reverent. I carry my gospel to the people in the form of fermented cabbage.''

I don't think it's a coincidence, I'll say again, that we're hearing more about kimchi and it's miraculous powers because we're hearing more about Korea. And I think "foreigners" started to hear more about kimchi and its powers from Koreans around the time Koreans started talking more about their kimchi: right before the 1988 Summer Olympics in Seoul.

Skywalkers go to school.

Saw on the news this morning that members of the Hyundai Capital Skywalkers men's pro volleyball team visited Bokja Girls' High School in Cheonan on Monday morning. You can find a short news clip here from MBC, and more photos from the Skywalkers' homepage. The man of the hour, pictured above and featured heavily in the MBC clip was 22-year-old Matthew John Anderson out of Penn State University, who held down a "Funny English Class."

In the Gwangju News writing about my site.

KoreaMaria asked me to put together some Top-5 lists about 2009. You can read the piece on page 9---click here and click again to get the .pdf file---but here's a taste of one:

Brian’s Top five personal favorite posts:
5) “McRefugees in Korea.” Looking at the differences between fast food cultures in Asia and the west.
4) “Another ‘ Foreigner’ fail.” One of the most commented-on posts of the year, looked at the use of the word “foreigner” by Koreans to refer to all non-Koreans,
even when those non-Koreans are actually in their native countries.
3) “Lee Charm being blamed for KTO’S old failures.” Two of my favorite topics: motels and bad journalism.
2) “Korean language evolves into Konglish?” Arguing that the overuse of English in Korea is a domestic phenomenon, and that, no, bad English is not an evolution.
1) “Watching test day.” Standing outside a local high school, watching as teachers and family cheer on students before they took the college entrance examination in
November.

I've had 1,145 posts this year, and it's hard to pick just five, but that's what I came up with. Actually, I was asked about maybe doing my five most-popular posts, but I don't really have a way of keeping track. Google Analytics does tell me what my most-visited posts of 2009 were, but not only do I think the numbers aren't accurate---the most-viewed page only had 6,173 visits in 2009?---but I don't really want to share with the fine citizens of Gwangju what my most-popular posts actually were:

1) my main page
2) "Google Korea is upsetting Victorian sensibilities again." - about Google making porn available to innocent Korean youths.
3) "Naked News anchors crying, still not naked."
4) The archive of August, 2008 posts.
5) "Table tennis not sexy enough." - I'm the #4 result for a Google image "table tennis upskirt" search (don't run that search at work).
6) "This delicious snack treat is a Korean-hater's wet dream." - The post about "Ricetard."
7) "'Boys Over Flowers' actress Jang Ja-yeon commits suicide." - The first English-language post on the news, I believe, so it was until that point my most-viewed post ever.
8) "Pretty hot Korean-American actress to star in ABC Family's 'Samurai Girl.'"
9) "'Naked News Korea' under review by standards council."
10) "Wonder Girls and Soulja Boy." - A post from December, 2007, is among my most-popular for two reasons: it was the first, I think, to be linked to by The Marmot's Hole, and it has a picture of the Wonder Girls wearing skirts.

I'm sure most bloggers in Korea find that their most-popular posts are ones with dirty language or sexy pictures, whether that's what their blog's about or not. On the topic of stats, I'll say that most of my hits come off Google searches for "Brian in Jeollanam-do" or something Jeolla- or Korea-related, so that's good. But if I check my stats when I wake up, when about the only visitors are people stateside, I see that most of my hits come off image searches that lead them to pictures of the Wonder Girls, or beach volleyball players, or upskirt table tennis players, or whatever.

In the Joongang Ilbo writing about Misuda's losers.

"Frankly speaking, short guy is the rujeojeu," she say like that. "I'm preety gull."

Today's piece in the Joongang Ilbo is compiled from comments to the November 12th post "Insecurity makes headlines again as short men are called "losers" on "Misuda" and a July 8th post about an episode bashing foreign guys, "Since those foreign girls put out so much, they might as well go fuck themselves."

This whole issue is, as I see it, less about women speaking up for themselves, and more about insecurity making headlines. It’s a show that’s been built on beautiful foreign women flattering Korean men over the years, yet a few words of criticism are what everyone’s talking about.

Deskwarming coming to Jeollanam-do public schools this winter.

Here's a bit of news from the NSET coordinator in Jeollanam-do, via Dave's ESL Cafe and a reader:

Last Friday there were meetings in Seoul with the national office discussing winter vacation and for once in Korea they have planned to do the same thing across the entire country. At least that's what the national office directed each provincial office to do.

For you this is not good as our province has always been the best in terms of vacation. You are still entitled to your 26 days vacation so don't worry about that. Where the change is, is when you are not on the 26 days vacation. They will ask you to attend your school to do English camps, extra classes or possibly even sit in your office for lesson prep, professional development (reading a book and sleeping). Thier goal is for you to do camps or high level classes but I'm sure there will be many cases where no students will be available and you may be stuck sitting around.

This is the really bad part. These camps or extra classes you work will not be extra pay as in the past. They feel this is within the contract 22 hours a week you are required to work when not on your 26 days vacation. If you work more than 22 hours you will be paid for the extra time.

Remarkable that when schools finally agree on something, it's this.

Public schools are closed for roughly two months in January and February, save for a few days for graduation. Teachers have often had this time to themselves, but were required to be in Korea when they weren't using the international travel time alloted to them by the contract. Some schools---and EPIK and GEPIK were notorious for this---made their teachers "deskwarm" (that is, come in to an empty school and sit at their desk for eight hours), though as the coordinator points out, Jeollanam-do and other provinces have generally been better about this.

In the past, too, you were generally paid extra for camps. My school in Gangjin never paid me for my three-week camp in 2007, but in Suncheon I was surprised to receive a nice bit of money for a week-long camp.

Teachers used to be able to get out of deskwarming by filling out a form that said professional development would be done at home. As I mentioned in the October thread on contract funny business in public schools---in which we learned schools were deducting pay from previous years---Korean teachers are expected to get work done over the breaks, so it's not unreasonable to expect foreign teachers to do the same: the difference is, of course, Korean teachers can get their work done from the comfort of their own homes. As a native speaker English teacher, though, it's difficult to get too much work done for the next semester, because teachers often don't know who their co-teachers will be and what classes they'll be teaching. Last March I was surprised to find a few new co-teachers on my first day, and the textbook wasn't chosen until a week after the start of the semester.

This latest decision is due in part, as far as I can tell, from schools having inconsistent policies on vacations. Some principals used to insist on deskwarming while others let their teachers have six weeks off. By mandating deskwarming and busy work, in cases where there often isn't anything to be done and where nothing has even been planned yet, places like Jeollanam-do are going to make it harder to attract applicants to rural areas, since that's been one advantage they've had over urban districts. They're also going to upset the teachers they already have by deciding they ought to come into work just in case somebody throws together a last-minute thing. This isn't done to get the most out of teachers, or to put them to work on well-developed programs, it's a knee-jerk reaction by schools who have no idea what to do with their NSETs, a problem that spawned the inconsistencies in the first place. It's hard to believe consistency and efficiency are important when it's decided only three weeks in advance.

Of course lengthy vacations oughtn't be the main selling-point of a teaching job, but this is just further evidence---along with the earlier contract funny business, the SMOE hiring/firing debacle, and salaries that haven't changed much in six years---that's it's no longer a native speaker English teacher's market.

Anti-English Spectrum makes Canadian news.

I should preface this, a few hours after it was initially posted, by picking up on something my commenters have said. Though I have objections to the way this article was written, credit must be given to the paper for picking up the story. I wish they would have done a little more homework, but now, thanks to them plenty of Canadians will learn about Anti-English Spectrum for the first time, and who knows, maybe other papers will have a look at the little Naver online cafe that, well, isn't so little anymore.

A reader tells me the Naver online cafe Anti-English Spectrum has attracted the attention of Canada's National Post; an excerpt from an article on the 6th:

A group in Korea is taking aim at Canadians and other foreigners teaching English in the country, claiming a high percentage of them have no morals, abuse drugs, rape Korean girls, molest children and spread AIDS.

Robert Brydon, a former Port Moody, B.C., resident who is married to a Korean and has taught in the country since 2005, said he's been stunned by the rhetoric coming from the Anti-English Spectrum Group that targets the 2,000 foreign English teachers in the country.

"I think a lot of Canadians do come to Korea and don't have any idea about the level of influence this group has in Korea," Mr. Brydon, 33, said in a phone interview.

And there isn't much the teachers can do about it: The claims aren't being challenged by the Korean government.

As much as I despite the group and what they do, this article is, unfortunately, another example of how incomplete or just plain wrong people can be when writing about South Korea from overseas. In fact, a little bit of time in front of Google will tell you more about the club and it's activities than two Canadian journalists, a random teacher in Korea, and an ATEK guy can. Just as Kang Shin-who, the worst journalist in Korea's English-language press, was wrong two weeks ago when he wrote there are 43,000 teachers with E-2 visas this year, so too are these journalists wrong when they write there are 2,000 foreign English teachers in the country.

It continues:

In fact, the Korean government recently imposed drug testing and criminal-record checks of foreign English teachers, including those who have lived in Korea for years.

The Korea Times reported that prosecutors are launching a special unit staffed by immigration officials and police detectives, which will specialize in foreigners' crimes.

Those measures started in late-2007, so perhaps recent for foreign observers, but not knew for "generations," so to speak, of teachers coming here. The National Post article doesn't make clear which Korea Times article it's talking about, though presumably it's this one from October 27th; an excerpt:

The Supreme Prosecutors’ Office said Tuesday it has launched a new investigation unit specializing in organized crime committed by foreign gangs.

The unit is to collect intelligence on ethnic gangs and other organized foreigners engaged in illegal activities, that have sprouted up around the country in recent years, and take countermeasures in cooperation with the police, tax agency and immigration office, it said in a statement.

The unit had its first meeting at the prosecution headquarters in Seoul, Tuesday morning, with senior officers from the Ministry of Justice, National Police Agency, Tax Agency and provincial prosecutors’ offices participating.

“This is a response to growing calls to make a unit against foreign offenders whose number is on the rise,” said Cho Young-gon, the senior prosecutor commanding the unit.

The Korea Times has essentially become a tabloid with noticably poor standards of journalism and editing, but it's worth nothing that while articles often take the opportunity to bash foreign teachers when crime comes up, this one doesn't. In fact the article was pretty clear it's not looking at teachers:

A source from the National Intelligence Service (NIS) said those from Nigeria, Pakistan, China, Taiwan, Vietnam and Bangladesh account for the majority of foreign criminal groups. The source added they collect funds by running illegal casinos and brothels, and by engaging in the drug trade and loan sharking.

The article continues:

The group's members recently started making death threats to teachers; he said he went to the police earlier this week to report a threat.

"It's getting a little ridiculous," Mr. Wurth said. "They're giving out a lot of bad information about foreign teachers. It's going to be a long fight."

It hasn't been made clear, however, that the death threats came from a member of Anti-English Spectrum. The group denies it, of course, and the original email refers to the group "Kill White in Korea." I'm not disputing that ATEK members actually received them, but I do question whether they actually came from a Korean or from another foreigner upset with both groups.

The Anti-English Spectrum is driven by hate and xenophobia, and is clearly not committed to raising the quality of education in South Korea. I don't follow the Canadian media and don't know what kind of reputation or influence the National Post has (Wikipedia makes it seem not much better than a tabloid). It's just a shame such an opportunity to introduce this group to Western media was hampered by lazy reporting in an article that doesn't even say what "the level of influence this group has in Korea" actually is.

I'll recommend these posts from the blog Gusts of Popular Feeling for background:

* "The achievements of Anti-English Spectrum"
* "How to make foreign English teachers an AIDS threat in 5 easy steps"
* "The 'undisclosed crimes' of potential child molesting foreign English teachers"
* "Puff piece about Anti-English Spectrum"

I provided my own summary in September. Here's another piece from Gusts of Popular Feeling providing supplemental information to the piece he wrote in the Korea Herald last month. Both that article and Adam Walsh's "Blurring line between hate, free speech," which ran in the Herald on the same day, would be good places to start for any overseas journalist looking for some background.

Assemblyman Hwang Woo yea on the cost of native speaker English teachers.

The other day Robert Koehler sent me an article from the local paper Gwangju Dream (광주드림) talking about the high cost, as one lawmaker sees it, of native speaker English teachers. Assemblyman Hwang Woo yea (lol, 황우여), the Secretary-General of the Grand National Party (한나라당) objects to native speaker English teachers taking up so much of the education budget:

영어 원어민보조교사 확보를 위해 쓰이는 비용이 영어교육관련 예산의 60%를 차지하는 등 원어민 보조교사 채용에 문제가 있다는 비판이 제기됐다.

He also goes on to say that there is the problem of them committing crimes after hired.

국회 교육과학기술위원회 소속 한나라당 황우여 의원은 1일 보도자료(2010년도 교육예산안 심의)를 내고 “현재 영어보조교사 확보에서 EPIK(교과부 산하 국립국제교육원)를 이용해 확보한 영어보조 교사는 18.8%에 불과하다”며 “이에 자질이 부족한 원어민 보조교사가 선발되거나 선발 후 범법행위를 하는 등 문제가 되고 있다”고 지적했다.

The Gwangju paper goes on to talk about Gwangju, saying there are 130 NSETs in Gwangju's public schools, among whom 89 are hired through EPIK. The ratio of native speakers to schools is 44.2%, much lower than other areas such as Seoul (101.3%), Gyeonggi-do (98.2%) and Busan (91.7%), though of course many teachers in Gwangju, Jeollanam-do, and elsewhere work at two or more schools. Statistics we saw in October said Jeollanam-do---not including Gwangju---has the fewest number of NSETs in the country, though we saw those stats were wrong.

The expense of using so many native speaker English teachers is a great burden on local education offices, the article says.

문제는 특정 지역에 원어민들이 몰려 있는데다 원어민 확보를 위한 교육청 비용 부담이 크다는 점이다.

　광주시교육청은 원어민 영어보조교사 한 명당 연 4000만~4500만 원가량 지원하고 있다. 여기에는 입·출국 지원금, 퇴직금, 주거비 등이 포함된다. 시교육청은 원어민 등급을 1+에서 3등급까지 등급을 나누는데 1+ 등급 원어민 영어보조교사는 한 달에 260만 원, 3등급은 190만 원 가량 받고 있다.

The yearly cost is 40,000,000 won to 45,000,000 won, according to the Gwangju Office of Education, with monthly salaries being between 1.9 million won and 2.6 million won. The article closes with Hwang talking about using Korean English teachers proficient in spoken English instead of NSETs because the latter have not fulfilled expectations:

황 의원은 “지역 교육청별로 영어교육 편차가 크고 원어민 보조교사 교육 형태와 기간도 달라 효과적인 연수가 이뤄지지 못하고 있다”면서 “원어민 강사 대안으로 영어회화에 능한 한국교사들을 확보해 활용하자는 의견이 대두되고 있다”고 주장했다.

Talking about native speaker English teachers in Korea requires more sophistication than is often shown by those who do the talking on the subject. For instance, the remarks on native speaker English teachers by Seoul National University of Education's Lee WonKey at the 2009 Global English Teachers Association International Conference last month---some of which I've typed out on the post "Are native speakers part of English here?"---bothered a lot of people, me included. The post has 46 good comments so far, objecting to Lee calling English an American language, to him talking about "unqualified" NSETs, to him saying NSETs don't want to go to rural areas, and to him wanting to replace NSETs with Korean English teachers.

He also brought up the expense of hiring so many, saying in the plenary session:

Employing native-speaking English teachers who are not sufficiently qualified to teach English in Korea is a lot more costly than training Korean English teachers to be competent in English and English teaching methodology. To employ one foreign teacher we need to pay expenses twice more than employing two new Korean teachers. In addition, to employ foreign teachers is a yearly task, because once they finish their contracts many go home (and some even do so before they finish!). In contrast, once Korean teachers are trained and qualified with some initial investment, they will not incur extra cost until they retire. Training Korean teachers is more economical. And well-trained Korean teachers can do better in ELT than most foreign teachers.

Lee didn't cite his source for that information, and in a discussion on English in general I don't think he should be expected to. However, talking about money vis-a-vis native speaker English teachers is a little tricky, and one that doesn't boil down to simply numbers.

In November 2007, in probably my first lengthy rant on this blog, I loooked at a letter to the Korea Times that was full of misinformation on NSETs. Kang Eun-hee*, a teacher at a middle school and at the time a student at Korea National University of Education---wrote a piece "Korean English Teachers" which spouted all kinds of bullshit and which demonstrates the profound ignorance many have of who NSETs are and what we do. Read the whole thing if you'd like---and my follow-up in the Times as well as my more explicit blog post---but here's the excerpt relevant for today's post:

In the long run, the expansion of intensive training programs for Korean English teachers is more urgent financially, than the employment of native English teachers.

Additionally, Korean English teachers are aware of the importance of the quality of English education and the emotional effect it has on the students.

We will probably waste the national treasury in the long term, unless the government invests a lot more in training Korean English teachers rather than depending on the temporarily employed native English teachers.

The yearly cost for employing one native English teacher is approximately 45 million won in our school. The amount is almost as much as the gross income of a 25-year veteran Korean teacher (excluding the pension).

American English teachers accept many financial preferences. They are exempted from income taxes for two years and the rate of the pension and the health insurance is lower than ours.

Even the overtime pay is different. While they earn 20,000 won per teaching session, we get only 6,000 won. This is comparable to the 13.5 million won a trainee at the Korea National University of Education (KNUE) gets for six months.

One year intensive English training programs seem to be enough because we've already learned a lot about the methodology, grammar and reading from our former education. That means only two-thirds of the expenses for one native English teacher can create high value.

Going tit-for-tat is a bad idea because there's really no comparison. From my blog post in November, 2007, which responds to Kang:

One day I started to wonder if the temporary employment of native English teachers could fulfill our expectations: I have arrived at the conclusion based on my experiences.

In the long run, the expansion of intensive training programs for Korean English teachers is more urgent financially, than the employment of native English teachers.

Yes, training Korean English teachers does make sense. Though I do work with some wonderful people this year, I have encountered my fair share of dumb-fuck English teachers in the past two years, and am convinced that these unqualified teachers---who do the lion's share of English teaching anyway---do much more damage than the comparatively few inexperienced foreigners.

Based on what one of my coteachers has told me, it looks like there will be more opportunities for Korean English teachers to have intensive language and education training. According to him (so not sure how true it is), teachers have the choice to spend a semester studying at a university in Seoul, or spending a semester abroad. For teachers in Jeollanam-do, they have the opportunity twice a year to spend a month attending a training seminar in Damyang county.

Additionally, Korean English teachers are aware of the importance of the quality of English education and the emotional effect it has on the students.

Oh shit, she all done up and done it. If I may be so bold, I will suggest that a vigorous public smear campaign against foreigners and foreign English teachers has been more detrimental to the emotional well-being of Korean students than any of their imagined offenses. Based on what follows in Kang's piece, I would also suggest that "emotional effect" is another way of saying "kids are afraid to speak English (because I will hit them) so don't make them talk."

We will probably waste the national treasury in the long term, unless the government invests a lot more in training Korean English teachers rather than depending on the temporarily employed native English teachers.

The yearly cost for employing one native English teacher is approximately 45 million won in our school. The amount is almost as much as the gross income of a 25-year veteran Korean teacher (excluding the pension).

*Sigh* No need for hyperbole. Hiring white people will not waste the national treasury. Building a cross-country canal will do that. Relocating the capital from Seoul to Chungcheongnam-do will do that. Hell, ridiculous and misguided spending on poorly planned English Towns will do that. A foreigner in every school probably won't do that.

I dislike talking about money and salaries, especially when it comes to comparing mine to my Korean counterparts. There are too many factors worth considering. I get free airfare. They get holiday and performance bonuses. I get accommodation. They sometimes do, too, and they earn a higher salary. I have less work (sometimes), but they have more vacation time. I don't know what she's talking about with the 45 million figure, but I'm almost positive it's wrong. Even if my apartment were to cost a staggering million a month---which it doesn't, thanks to 전세---and even if you factor in the cost of a round-trip ticket, that hypothetical foreigner would still earn $200 more per month than me, and $600 more than a rookie. (I didn't figure in deductions like health care.)

I suspect what happened is she included other aspects of the budget, including the cost of creating and maintaining a "language lab," into that figure. Every school I've been in has had a fancy language lab, filled with computers, books, different listening devices, and a big TV. (In all of my schools, though, the equipment in the lab has been inferior to that found in other rooms). Anyway, it's unfair to include the cost of a language lab or an English Camp when calculating salary, especially when so many contributors to a Korean teacher's salary are left out. I hate pissing contests like that, and I really wish it weren't such an interesting topic of conversation for some.

American English teachers accept many financial preferences. They are exempted from income taxes for two years and the rate of the pension and the health insurance is lower than ours.

Again, she has her wires crossed. I think any minor financial advantages are offset by things like not receiving performance bonuses, or adequate yearly salary increases, or not getting bribes, etc. And I'm not sure why she singles out American teachers. I have no idea about the pension or health care figures, though.

Even the overtime pay is different. While they earn 20,000 won per teaching session, we get only 6,000 won. This is comparable to the 13.5 million won a trainee at the Korea National University of Education (KNUE) gets for six months.

The 6,000 won figure is wrong. The 13,500,000 figure, when divided by six, is comparable to what a foreign teacher receives each month. At just over 2.2 million per month, that's more, in fact, than many experienced teachers stand to earn.

One year intensive English training programs seem to be enough because we've already learned a lot about the methodology, grammar and reading from our former education. That means only two-thirds of the expenses for one native English teacher can create high value.

Again, I agree that training Korean teachers is a smart idea. I'm not sure we can talk about value, yet, because it will be necessary to hire foreign teachers for these Korean trainees. What she's talking about sounds similar to what's already in place. Some foreign teachers in Jeollanam-do, for instance, spend 9 or 10 months a year teaching in a public school, then spend a month or two training teachers in Damyang county.

I don't want to be (too) mean, but let's not overvalue the training in methodology, grammar, and reading the Korean teachers have already received. I don't deny that some are very enthusiastic about their subject. But, with few exceptions, the methodology consists of reading aloud from a textbook, of translating the day's lesson into Korean, and of punishing students who happen to get in the teacher's way. The myth of the Asian grammar expert is unfounded, in my experience. It's true that Asians study grammar throughout their school years, but do they actually learn it? I have a decent understanding of grammar---I've forgotten a lot since college---and I've never met a Korean teacher who has stumped me or who has known something I have not. Hell, some of them have been studying English longer than I've been alive. Moreover, how many Koreans have you met that could produce even the simplest grammatically-correct sentence?

To get back to today's post, just looking at numbers is a bad idea, especially when they're incomplete. There are high costs associated with hiring native speaker English teachers, and when they're not used to their fullest potential they are inefficient. Moreover, if you ignore what supply-and-demand means to the business, it's easy to forget why the cost are what they are. But when talking about these high costs, if you're going to include airfare, housing, and severance when talking about NSETs, you'd also better include the costs of regular training programs, English-Only rooms, textbooks, and expensive toys like the eAMS-200** when talking about Koreans.

Discussions about training opportunities, as alluded to by Hwang, Lee, and Kang, came up in page four of this Dave's thread on the GETA International Conference. I mentioned, like I did in response to Kang, that in Jeollanam-do Korean English teachers do attend month-long intensive English sessions at the Jeollanam-do Educational Training Institute in Damyang county, and are able to attend sessions over winter and summer breaks. Moreover, teachers are able to do a half-year intensive program at Korea National University of Education, with a month of study at a university overseas. All of my former coteachers attended camps in Damyang, and one of my co-teachers capped a half-year session in Chungcheongbuk-do with a month at Michigan State University. I was also told that if teachers would like to obtain a Master's degree from a university in an English-speaking country, the government will pay half the cost.

When I posted about Damyang in December, 2007, I liked this quotation from another teacher down here:

So my last week of school and first week of holidays, I was at a camp teaching Korean English teachers how to teach English. Rather ironic considering they have had 4 years of Uni to learn how to do this and I have had none... but anyway.

I talked with coworkers about these Damyang sessions several times. It was a convenient discussion topic because sometimes these mandatory month-long sessions toook place in the middle of the semester. Anyway, though they found the training a bit inconvenient since they were away from their families five days a week, the teachers generally had a good time. However, everyone I talked to came to the same conclusion: the lessons weren't practical for their own classes because

1) Their students aren't interested in speaking English.
2) Their students' English levels aren't good enough to understand spoken English.
3) The activities they learned in Damyang can't be applied to large class sizes like those in public schools.
4) Teachers must follow and complete the textbooks and teach toward standardized tests, and don't have time to waste on speaking English.

That I heard the same thing so many times ought to tell you that if spoken English is to be taught in public schools, they need native speaker English teachers to do it.

Again, the biggest source of the challenges faced by NSETs and by those who hire them is the lack of planning and support that accompanies them, and a lack of vision for their success. It sure is inconvenient to import teachers every year with no idea what to do with them and no intention of using them to their fullest potential. Eventually it would make sense, as Lee suggested in his speech, to use NSETs mostly as teacher-trainers while Korean English teachers do the bulk of the work, but clearly we're not ready for that yet. Hell, don't forget Korean English teachers do the bulk of the work already: in Suncheon I saw each class once or twice a month. But just as it's bad to write-off NSETs based on ignorance and misinformation, so too is it wrong to champion these training sessions that haven't yet provided results. If you talk frankly with teachers you'll find they think these intensive programs neither convenient nor useful and that boils down to the same issues that plague the native speaker English teacher experiment: no planning, no support, no direction, and no vision.

* An example of a Korean with an unprofessional email address. If you're a Korean English teacher trying to argue that native speaker English teachers aren't effective, please don't use an email address like "fungus55."

** Not sure how much this costs when new, but I've found used versions for 400,000 won and 700,000 won while searching Naver. Not terribly expensive, but a lot to play for something that never gets used.

Korean champion weightlifter wants tall man, big fucking deal.

Looks like the Korea Times is trying to start shit by focusing on some comments made by Jang Miran (장미란), an Olympic gold medalist and multiple world record holder. Here are four out of the six paragraphs in a Korea Times article today:

Jang, who is a single, currently doesn't have a boyfriend. She attributes it to the lack of opportunity to mingle with people. Her daily training regime is very tight. But then, another culprit, she pointed out, is people's tendency to regard her as a "female weightlifter" first, and a woman second.

Jang, who is a pious Christian, wants to find a man who is a Christian as well. "Hopefully, he is taller than me," she said.

Jang's remark in the interview that she prefers a tall man, while otherwise a common sentiment expressed by females, comes at a sensitive time in Korea. Recently, a female college student made a guest appearance on the KBS2 TV talk show, ``Misuda,'' (Beauties' Chatterbox). She dropped a bombshell by calling short men ``losers,'' adding she would date one.

A torrent of furious letters stormed the broadcaster that aired the popular TV show. The Internet forums were full of enraged males.

According to Naver, she's 170 cm tall, 115 kilograms, or 5'8" 253 lbs. Hardly surprising that she'd want somebody taller, considering she's taller than most Korean men as it is.

Looks like the Korea Times, which I've noticed lately hasn't had the balls to put names to many of their articles, is trying to start controversy where there isn't any. For what it's worth, here's the Dong-A Ilbo article in question, and clearly the Times is cherry-picking with their headline "Jang Says Her Ideal Man Should Be Tall." The Times is of course refering to the thing last month where some random Korean college student called short guys "rujawjeu," thereby spawning a word sure to make my list of most-hated English words in Korea this year. While it is a little strange that Koreans obsess over height so much considering they've been historically short, I think most women you'd ask would like a man who is relatively tall. Regarding the "sensitive time" and "bombshell" mentioned in the Korea Times article, I don't want to waste much space here on the bullshit that has been the Misuda episode---more on that coming Tuesday---but I will just quote from another Times article last week:

In a popular television talk show, a tall college coed said, "Height is a measure of competitiveness. I think a man who is short is a loser." She added that a man must stand at least 180 centimeters in order to be a potential date for her.

As a result, short men walked with their heads bowed in shame.

Fuck that, I go about 5'8" 150, and am not going to be bowing my head in shame because of a no-name Korean woman using unnecessary English. The reaction to that episode says more about insecurity of the men who like the program, men who are used to being flattered by beautiful foreign women, than it does about women being more outspoken. I'm just waiting for the day when a white guy goes on TV and says he doesn't date Korean women without curves. I wonder if that'd require a warning to Americans from the US Embassy this time around:

Recently, inflammatory sexual content was posted to a website for English language teachers in Korea. That posting together with subsequent postings were taken by some to demean Korean women. We have noted recently, strong reaction in the form of web postings threatening attacks in the vicinity of Hongik University and the Sinchon area against Americans and other foreigners who speak English. All Americans and their families (especially young adults) are encouraged to exercise prudence and caution when visiting these neighborhoods. The Embassy advises that inappropriate social behavior in public may be seen as provocative by Korean nationals.

Foreigners excluded from Blue House tours because of swine flu.

An interesting post on Gusts of Popular Feeling, which shows that although the Blue House's English-language page says tours of South Korea's executive office are temporarily closed, the Korean-language page says the tours are still on but that children under the age of 18 and foreigners are not permitted to take it.



I've said elsewhere that I think South Korea has done a pretty good job of responding to swine flu. In April, when the Korean Centers for Disease Control announced preventative measures

The best method is prevention. Cover your nose and mouth with a tissue when you cough or sneeze. Throw the tissue in the trash after you use it. Wash your hands often with soap and water, especially after you cough or sneeze. Alcohol-based hand cleaners are also effective.

Avoid touching your eyes, nose or mouth. Germs spread that way.

Also, try to avoid close contact with sick people. If you feel sick, the government recommends that you stay home from work or school and limit contact with others to keep from infecting them.

I joked that there were no preventative measures available to Koreans since they never cover their mouths, never wash their hands, and never stay home when they're sick.

I quoted the blogger Places and Words in September about some "insanity" at her school which typified the scene in lots of places:

I'm not so sure what the feel is back in the states, but all of the Koreans around me are acting I-N-S-A-N-E. They are constantly worried about swine flue, but they aren't actively doing anything to prevent the spread of it, or even the spread of any other virus such as the common cold. There's still no adequate soap in bathrooms, none in the bathroom at my school. No one covers their mouths to sneeze or cough. I've never ever seen any of my students wash their hands at any time throughout the day. They brush their teeth at least ten times but never wash their hands. They share everything- lollipops, chopsticks, apples-which isn't a bad thing but when you're worried about a pandemic, well, I guess you should practice a bit more caution. There is mandatory quarantine for anyone who's left the country. That's 7 days one is supposed to stay confined to their homes. However, in my city at least, myself and all of my friends have confirmed that none of the Koreans have taken the quarantine and showed up to work the very next day after they returned from a trip abroad. My own co-teacher told me they don't have to worry as much because it is a virus from the Mexicans and not from Koreans. And she's an 'educated' woman! A friend emailed today to say they are temperature checking all of the students that walk through the front gate at his school, but they are not changing the cover on the thermometer.

In my experience people are still coughing on each other and occassionally still coming to work when sick, but there are hand sanitizers everywhere, signs encouraging people to wash hands, and public awareness campaigns about handwashing and staying home when sick. A big improvement of hygeine in a short time, and it's kept the number of deaths at a fraction of that in North America.

I've said that I think Korea has done a good job of responding to swine flu, but the catch is Koreans have done a poor job of responding to the threat of swine flu. It was at first treated as a foreigners' disease, as were the preventative measures aimed at them: a large hagwon chain wanted to take the passports away from its foreign teachers, another chain announced it didn't hire infected foreign teachers (yeah no shit), foreign teachers were considered swine flu targets, foreign teachers were being quarantined while Koreans were not, and in May I collected some responses from teachers asked about flu by their schools. From commentor Robot Mike:

Apparently some of the parents at my hagwon have been phoning up enquiring about us and swine flu even though we have been in the country for 11 months.
Then my really nice former workmate joked something about my love of Kimchi being the reason why I haven't got the flu yet.
It's like they think Korean people are naturally immune to it or something.

And from commenter Stuart:

I was also quizzed over the phone yesterday,They asked me if I had been out of the country recently.

They only asked me, not any Korean person in my school.

I have to seriously question the logic behind these checks.

I read on Facebook about a friend's school that let a Korean teacher come to work and teach even though his son was home sick with swine flu, and we read this story on Dave's:

My friend went to Thailand for summer vacation. Upon his return he was given a 3 day quarantine period by his principal. During the 3 days he was supposed to watch videos at home and make question sheets and tests for the teachers to use in class. Well, the principal didn't trust him to do the work at home, so she told him he had to come to school and do the work in one of the classsrooms. Then, while he was at the school working on these resources, he noticed one of the Korean teachers was there teaching her classes. He thought this was odd because he had seen her in Thailand when he was on vacation. He asked the principal why he had a "quarantine" and she did not need one. The answer; because she is Korean and ate Kimchi on her vacation, she can not be sick.

Be sure to read through all the comments on those earlier threads and to browse through the "Swine flu in Korea" category for more.

In November I posted about Chonnam National University posting this sign on their Language Education Center



barring entrance to people who had been overseas within the week. An understandable concern perhaps, though the sign was posted only on the Language Education Center building, one used most frequently by foreigners. I looked at follow-up preventative measures at the university, including use of an Automatic Thermal Imaging Camera and locking all other entrances to the building in order to require visitors to use the main entrance.



A measure not only dangerous but found only in this particular building, not in other high-traffic areas such as dorms, cafeterias, or the library.

The problem with considering swine flu a foreigners' disease and directing measures only at them is at this point, as I think most Koreans will tell you, you run the risk of getting it anywhere and from anyone. Many fall festivals were cancelled because the government encouraged organizers to cancel events that were to attract more than 1,000 visitors over two or more days, and posters all over the place encourage people to avoid crowds (ironic, of course, when you see the signs on city buses). As far as foreign teachers go, since the summer there's been more a risk of getting sick from their students---especially since students weren't staying home when sick---than from the other way around.

It would be reasonable to exclude foreigners who have arrived in-country within the past week. Rather than prohibiting all foreigners, why not simply make it a requirement to bring a passport with you when visiting and barring entry to those without it or to those, Korean or foreign, who have come to Korea within the past week or ten days? It sounds like somebody decided it would just be easier to keep out all the foreigners rather than checking documents and having to deal with foreign-language conversations.

Korean Google Korea is here.

The "more Korean Google Korea" is here, at Google.co.kr.

Rubber Seoul 2009 concerts on December 5th to mark World AIDS Day.

2009 Rubber Seoul promotional poster, from the official blog.

Jason of Kimchi Icecream tells me about Rubber Seoul 2009 happening at three Hongdae clubs in Seoul tomorrow, December 5th, to mark World AIDS Day. Below you'll find a Rubber Seoul press release and the musician line-up, but first is a short introduction from Paul Kerry's Korea Herald article:

To mark World AIDS Day, Little Travellers and Medi peace are holding three simultaneous rock concerts in Seoul tomorrow to spread awareness about the illness.

Last year saw a similar event. More than 1,000 people attended, raising 12 million won ($10,000) for the Little Travellers organization.

The event will be held at Jane's Groove, FF and DGBD, in Hongdae. The EV Boys, Rock Tigers, Gogo Star and Sotto Gamba will be among the dozen or so bands performing. Wristbands are 10,000 won.

The money will go to the Hillcrest Foundation, which helps women affected by AIDS in South Africa.

You'll find more information about the events, including a speech by Benjamin Wagner, in that article. The Rubber Seoul 2009 Facebook group has information about the performers:

10,000 Won will get you a Little Traveller doll as well as unlimited access to the clubs until the wee hours of the morning. ALL proceeds from the cover charge will go to support the Hillcrest AIDS Center in South Africa.

So, save the date on Saturday, December 5, 2009. It's gonna be an awesome night.

We have three clubs lined up, and here's the band line up:

JANE’S GROOVE (Doors open at 8:30 pm)

9:00 pm Brick Slipper
9:45 pm Bridget and the Puppycats
10:30 pm EV Boyz (Minus One)
11:00 pm Sotto Gamba

CLUB FF (Doors open at 9:00 pm)

9:15 pm The Koxx
10:00 pm Pony
10:45 pm Gogo Star
11:30 pm No.1 Korean
12:15 am U R Seoul
1:00 am - 6:00 am DJ Eddie's Super-Fun Rockin' Dance Party!

DGBD (Doors open at 11:00 pm)

11:15 pm Solitaire Love Affair
12:00 am Tacopy
12:45 am Rock Tigers

Get ready for a great time and to help some people out!
Don't forget to invite all of your friends.

And now an excerpt from the November 26th press release:

On the evening of December 5th the event “Rubber Seoul” will be taking place in Hongdae for its second year running. As well as to raise money the event is being held to remind people to have safe sex. This is a very important issue since the Korea Centre for Disease Control and Prevention reported that 99% of the new cases of HIV/AIDS found in 2008 were transmitted sexually.

What Rubber Seoul is offering is access into three of Hongdae’s most vibrant clubs: Janes Groove, FF and DGBD and be able to see some of Seoul’s hottest bands, all for a tiny 10,000 won. If that’s not enough, you will also receive a Little Travellers doll to take home with you. Last year over 1000 people came out in Hongdae to join in Rubber Seoul and we raised an astonishing 12 million Won. Which really helped improve women’s lives in Africa. So don’t miss out on this years event, come along have fun and help us to help others.

Also on December 5th Medi peace are offering an interactive discussion with expert opinions. Not only will they address the dangers and medical facts surrounding AIDS but also the wider social issues such as the discrimination that people with AIDS live with and how we can change the stigmas attached with AIDS. It is of pivotal importance that AIDS ceases to be ignored and viewed as an irrelevant problem in Korea if the steady spread of the disease is to be halted. So come along and join in the discussions.

GFN looking for input.

I'm posting this on behalf of Lee Joohyun with GFN 98.7FM, Gwangju's English-language radio station, who's looking for interesting people to talk to on her "City of Light" segment. She's looking for expats in the area "closely working with non-governmental organizations" or with experience working with and organizing with human rights organizations or community service programs. She invites you to email reporterj at gfn.or.kr or to call 010-6202-9799 if you're interested.

I'll open it up and add that GFN would like to hear from any expats doing interesting things in their community. I've made fun of GFN in the past for being more an English-practice station than an English-language one, working more toward making Gwangju look international than toward actually reaching out to an English-speaking audience. Hell, remember their slogan contest? But one way to combat that is to get more involved and make GFN more relevant to the community. A radio station won't be the main source of information for expats here, but that doesn't mean it can't be used to its fullest potential by gaining more participants.

Boseong Tea Plantation Light Festival, December 11th - January 31st.

The Boseong Tea Plantation Light Festival (보성차밭 빛의 축제) will run from December 11th, 2009 through January 31st, 2010. Here's a picture from the fields in December, 2005:



And another look at the fields covered in snow:



You'll find plenty more pictures here, though the ones from the 2010 festival are of course done on a computer. The fields will be lit up from 5:30 pm to midnight each day. According to the Gwangju bus terminal site, buses run frequently to Boseong:

6:10 6:40 7:15 7:50 8:30 9:00 9:30 10:00 10:30 11:00 11:30 12:00 12:30 13:00 13:30 14:00 14:30 15:00 15:30 16:00 16:30 17:00 17:50 18:40 19:15 20:00 20:40 21:40

If you live in Suncheon, you can use the same website but select 순천 from the drop-down menu. Buses run to nearby Boseong county pretty often. There are then buses from the Boseong-eup terminal, and from Boseong Station, to the tea fields, though the Boseong county website doesn't provide a timetable.

I saw Korea.net put something up on this a couple days ago---before I published this, but after I post-dated it---so let's see what wonderful news they bring:

Boseong, the green tea capital, will present the nation's largest green tea field tree, which will strike a beautiful image of Boseong into the hearts of all its winter guests. Those who visit the festival will wish to stay longer in Boseong and participate in all the events, rather than merely passing through.

I'll reuse last year's post and write that should the image of a tree strike your heart in some way, and should you want to spend the night and see the tea fields again in the day, there are a few motels in town, as well as a ton of more expensive pensions.

Are native speakers part of English here? Your thoughts on the 2009 GETA International Conference.

I saw this post on Dave's ESL Cafe last month, refering to the 2009 GETA International Conference held at Honam University in Gwangju on November 21, 2009:

Yesterday in Gwangju I attended the Global English Teachers Association (GETA) symposium. The title was 'Transforming Learners, Teachers, and the English Classroom.

This was recommended to me as a professional development conference. For Native English Teachers it was anything but.

From the first presentation to the last NETs were bashed. Within the first hour a reference was made to crimes being commited by NETs. There were a few laughs during the day at our expense, and the overall purpose of the day seems to be to make the argument that monies would be better spent training Korean teacher's rather than recruiting and hiring NETs.

One discussion group was held entirely in Korea (although it was an English conference.) The topic of that presentation? 'Transforming ELT in Korea.'

This was not a small break out group - this was one of two late morning discussion groups. Native English speakers who were already seated in the auditorium were told to attend the 'Transforming ELT in Asia' discussion panel.

The fact that the Transforming ELT in Korea panel was held in Korean shows exactly how much input NETs have in the discussion.

There were a few interesting presentation in the afternoon during the break out sessions. These were mostly by grad students presenting their research. But the overall theme for the day was that NETs are bad for the development of teaching English in Korea.

The original poster mailed the conference's booklet to me, and I've typed out the first part of the plenary session below. Titled "Transforming ELT in Korea" by WonKey Lee (이완기) of Seoul National University of Education, this portion is called "Transform, Transcend, and Reform":

A former head of the Samsung Group remarked that one should transform everything except one's wife and one's children. But today I wish to go one step further than he did. I will leave my wife alone, but I will argue that we do need to transform our children and their English learning, because English learning is going to be a more and more important part of transforming them.

Why transform our children? Briefly, because the world that our children will grow up in is growing up too. Like our children, the world is no longer stable, but rather meta-stable, like a bicycle in which every working part has been replaced many times, or like the human body itself. The body only remains what it is through a process of constant transformation. This constant transformation necessarily changes every cell of the body not once but many times. Similarly, in a meta-stable world, only constant transformation can ensure survival. Staying put, or hanging around, means decay and disappearance. As Dewey said, if we go on teaching today as we taught yesterday, we rob our children of their tomorrows. I will talk about this somewhat less briefly below.

But why transform English learning? Briefly, because learning English as a FOREIGN language in a world which is using English as an international language means staying put and hanging around, decay and disappearance. If we go on learning English as a FOREIGN language in a world where it no longer plays the role of a language spoken by American and British people in faraway places, then we rob our children of their tomorrows.

But what exactly does "transform" mean? As every English teacher knows, meanings are only exact in exact contexts. But exact contexts can be very hard to explain. This is why, of course, our teachers find it generally easier to replace an English word with a Korean one rather than to define an English word in English. The dictionary meaning of 'transform' is 'to change completely in form, appearance, or nature.'

Here I'm going to use my English word "transform" to mean both of the two other English words: "transcend" and "reform."

By "transcend", I really mean to totally demolish the existing system and make another different system by going beyond the limits of the current system.

For example, I mean teaching English as a global language and not as a FOREIGN language at all. Now, in our context, in the Korean context, that means that we need to think of English as a new Asian language, a trans-Asian lingua franca, and not as an American one. After all, English was not originally American either! But English was transformed from a European language into an American one, and now it is being transformed again. This transformation will mean demolishing the existing system of English, and of English teaching, and making a very different system.

And the word 'reform' is defined as 'to improve by changing or removing undesirable quantities. By "reform" I mean to partially add something new or change some parts of the existing system so that it can be regarded as different or improved from the previous system, like replacing the parts of a bicycle or replacing old cells with new ones.

For example, I mean that we need to replace "native-speaking English teachers" with Korean bilingual teachers. After all, we can't depend forever on those expatriate native- speaking English teachers for English teaching in Korea. When we replace "native-speaking English teachers" with bilingual Korean natives we will have teachers we can count on for life.

He mentions native speakers again, a few pages later:

As English becomes a lingua franca, or an international language, the status of English as a foreign language, that is, as the native language of a group of foreigners, will also diminish. That is, the status of English as a second language, or lingua franca, may keep increasing. As a result, "nativeness" in English accents may also decrease, and also the native English speaker as a model may also decrease in importance or status. That means competence in English is likely to be favored over nativeness. Thus, it becomes not important or necessary to try hard to resemble English native speakers in speaking English. Meaning-deliverability in a reasonably intelligible pronunciation, and meaning understandability will be essential for the use of English language for communicative purposes.

A variety of local accents in using English may be appreciated, and will be no problem if meaning delivery and meaning-getting take place successfully. Thus, competent bilingual speakers of English will probably increase, as more and more young learners start to learn English at their early ages. People may not need to go to English speaking Western countries to learn English, because they can have easier access to English and more opportunities to learn English in their own country or in their neighbouring countries.

And again a few more pages later:

There are a great number of native-speaking English teachers in all levels of schools as well as in private sector institutes across all Korea. Most of them have been doing a great job in teaching English in Korea, but some of them clearly have not met our initial expectations. Many, for example, do not want to go to provincial areas where they are really wanted because of the inconveniences of life there and the lack of cultural benefits. Chasing money or seeking pleasure in Korea instead of being dedicated to ELT is undoubtedly a problem. So now, it's getting more and more difficult to employ well-qualified teachers.

Employing native-speaking English teachers who are not sufficiently qualified to teach English in Korea is a lot more costly than training Korean English teachers to be competent in English and English teaching methodology. To employ one foreign teacher we need to pay expenses twice more than employing two new Korean teachers. In addition, to employ foreign teachers is a yearly task, because once they finish their contracts many go home (and some even do so before they finish!). In contrast, once Korean teachers are trained and qualified with some initial investment, they will not incur extra cost until they retire. Training Korean teachers is more economical. And well-trained Korean teachers can do better in ELT than most foreign teachers.

So, it is necessary and desirable to reduce the number of foreign teachers every year, and to invest more budgets in training Korean teachers in improving English proficiency and teaching methodology. We can't rely on native-speaking English teachers forever. We are planning to replace native-speaking English teachers with competent, bilingual Korean teachers of English in the long run. Then, only highly qualified native-speaking English teachers could be invited in a smaller number, and be used as teacher trainers of Korean English teachers.

Certainly it makes more sense to simply train local teachers rather than import thousands. And, if spoken English is to take a backseat to grammar and reading---which it does---if the skills NSETs are brought in to teach aren't considered important or highly-regarded---and they aren't---and if NSETs aren't respected and appreciated as professionals---'cause they aren't---then yes, it's simply more efficient to train Korean English teachers. Though I hate to see that conclusion arrived at by misinformation and distortions.

I will say again, not for my longtime readers but for the benefit of any Koreans who come here, that the biggest reason some teachers "clearly have not met our initial expectations" is because of the lack of planning and support that has accompanied them. Schools and co-teachers, now several years removed from the introduction of native speaker English teachers, still do not know what to do with them. I recall asking a co-teacher at the beginning of the semester what she would like me to teach, and she said "[the previous teacher] gave them candy." It's true that many NSETs are new and inexperienced, but remember that we are hired as native speaker assistant teachers, and are supposed to work in tandem with experienced Korean teachers. Then consider that these teachers are often not proficient or even basically competent in the language, and that some shirk their duties by not attending class with their assistant teacher and not attending the mandatory teachers' workshops.

Regarding attracting teachers to rural areas, as a person who spent a year in Gangjin county, I can attest that not even Korean teachers were happy about being there. In fact, when I was there the school chose not to use me, because it was phasing out native speakers in favor of using homeroom teachers to teach English, even though these teachers knew nothing of the language. And in some rural areas, there aren't even English teachers at all, and another subject teacher has to cover the English classes. The difficulties of attracting foreign teachers to rural areas has more to do with bureaucratic ineptitude than with the challenges of rural Korea.

For the benefit of Korean readers who have not visited my site before, I'll direct you to some links here where I've written more about the challenges native speaker English teachers face.

* (12/2/2009) In the Korea Herald, writing about mandatory culture classes for foreign teachers.
* (6/26/2009) Korea Herald: Just what makes a teacher "qualified"?
* (6/15/2009) Not enough applicants for those "English Lecturer" jobs.
* (6/5/2009) Seoul wants English classes to be taught in English, will give TEE certs out.
* (5/13/2009) Korea Herald: The media bias against foreign teachers.
* (5/6/2009) 12% of native speaker teachers in Ulsan not retained.
* (5/1/2009) Korea Times: Foreign teachers wrongly portrayed in Korea.
* (4/7/2009) Korea Herald: Stop the scatter-shot approach to English.
* (12/30/2008) Half of foreign teachers leave after one year? GREAT! That's an article that should be brought up every now and again, because a MOE official in charge of native speaker English teachers says

``They are neither regular teachers nor lecturers who can conduct classes independently. They are `assistant teachers,' hence their teaching experience doesn't matter much,'' he said. ``Rather, it's better for students to have more new teachers so that they can meet various kinds of foreigners,'' he added.

* (12/10/2008): Poor guy.
* (11/24/2008): EPIK in the news some more.
* (11/21/2008): 4,000 "English Lecturers" coming in 2010.
* (11/14/2008): A must-read: an account of teaching English in South Korea in the sixties.
* (10/6/2008): More money going into English education next year.
* (9/11/2008): More English-Only classrooms, more gimmicks.
* (6/23/2008): Pronunciation matters.
* (11/28/2007) A reaction to Kang-Eun-hee's "Korean English Teachers."

You'll find links to other articles within those posts. And that's without addressing schools who don't honor contracts.

I've exchanged a few emails with the original poster, and I quote, with permission, part of the reply:

It was as bad as I posted. The written stuff is tame. I am not exaggerating when I say that by the end of the first session a presenter had made reference to NETs committing criminal acts.

When the last presenter said, 'We shouldn't be so hard on the native English teachers, some of them are doing a good job.' I knew I had missed a bunch of NET slamming. Also, the break out session on improving ESL teaching in Korea was held in Korean - I wonder why?

I have never felt so uncomfortable at a gathering of academics in my life. And I have 10 years of working in a research environment under my belt.

It's been en vogue for a while to discuss the "myth of the native speaker" in literature on second-language acquisition, so I'm aware of the arguments against using native speaker English teachers. Indeed, at the TESOL Conference last month the plenary speaker there, too, referenced native speakers backpacking across Asia. The author makes a good point that English is a global language, and shouldn't be treated as a foreign one---thus one only studied as a subject not a language---but I don't like divorcing English from its speakers. I wonder if the "myth of the native speaker" turns up in literature on teaching other languages, or if it's written by "foreigners" that, say, disregarding polite speech in Korean or Japanese is appropriate.

Teachers here soon learn that English as we know it isn't taught in South Korea, but rather English is studied as a subject. It's a rude awakening to see just how separated English is from its speakers in Korea, and that native speakers in the schools seem more tolerated than valued. I can't say I'm surprised to see Koreans speaking out for the need to replace native speakers---after all, with the new tests, the new lecturers, and the Indians, the writing's on the wall---but I think it's inappropriate for an "academic" conference that, although I put it in quotation marks, had Korean professors from all over the country. Just as foreign attendees question "why am I here?" at discussion panel conducted in Korean, so too might native speaker English teachers as "why am I here?" in a system that doesn't seem to want them.

More hubs coming to Jeollanam-do.

"The southern coast of the Korean Peninsula will be developed into marine resorts and health hubs," writes the Joongang Ilbo.

Hallyeo Haesang National Park will gain an international resort complex, while Dadohae National Park will host a marine sports center, the ministry said. The two marine parks account for a fourth of the entire southern coastal area.

Gangjin, Boseong and Wando in South Jeolla will be developed into health and retreat centers, it said.

The article continues with plans for many other spots in the country.

There are a lot of plans in the works for the area---building a new capital in Muan, a "Tourism and Leisure City" in Haenam, Formula One racing in Yeongam county, the Expo in Yeosu, the International Garden Expo coming to Suncheon, Naju becoming an "Innovation City," 등---and all of the titles seem like a way to spread the development around. And in the spring the government said it will allow hotels to be built inside these national parks. Of course, the purpose of developing those island parks is to increase eco-tourism, something diminshed by increased development. Indeed, the development seems to run counter to the aims of the 2012 Yeosu Expo; from Korea.net last year:

The main reasons Yeosu's theme and bid appealed to judges is the growing sense that we humans are depleting the ocean's resources and causing rising sea levels and coastal disasters. Yeosu itself embodies harmony between development and conservation -- a beautiful port city surrounded by some 300 beautiful islands and the miles upon miles of picturesque coastline and seas within the vast National Hallyeosudo and National Archipelago marine parks.

I wrote "more" hubs in the title because not only is "hub" a popular buzzword in Korea, but Gwangju already calls itself the "Hub City of Asian Culture" and was designated the Global Hub of Kimchi Research (believe it or not there was some competition). Last September we read about another plan to separate the country into various hubs, each with its own specialty:



According to the Korea Times last year,

Southwestern Jeolla Province is to be developed as a center for culture as well as renewable energy development and other green growth-based businesses[.]

And before that there was talk of a "mega economic zone" down here; From the Chosun Ilbo last May:

The government will start building a mega economic zone on the south coast later this year by grouping Mokpo in South Jeolla Province, Busan and other southern cities. Tentatively named the Sun Belt economic zone, it will have as big a population and economic power as the Seoul metropolitan area. The government will subdivide the area into three zones: Busan, Mokpo and southern central zone, which clusters together six cities and counties in South Jeolla Province and South Gyeongsang Province. The economic zone will house industrial complexes and research and development parks.

And before that, seven development zones; from the Chosun Ilbo in January, 2008:

The plan is to group 16 large cities and provinces into five economic zones -- a central metropolitan zone (Seoul, Incheon and Gyeonggi Province), a Chungcheong zone (Daejeon and the Chungcheong provinces), a Jeolla zone (Gwangju and Jeolla provinces), a Daegu-North Gyeongsang zone (Daegu and North Gyeongsang Province) and a southeastern zone (Busan, Ulsan and South Gyeongsang Province) -- plus two special zones for Gangwon Province and Jeju Island.

Each zone will be managed by a headquarters with planning, coordination and financial supervisory authority and will get receive subsidies from central government for management of various projects and coordination of policies and programs with cities and provinces under its jurisdiction. This will create separate local economic municipalities.

The committee is thinking of making the central metropolitan zone a hub of international finance and state-of-the-art industries. The Jeolla zone would link the Saemangeum project with tourist, leisure and corporate cities on the southwestern coast, such as Gwangyang and Yeosu. The Chungcheong zone would become a science-technology-education-R&D-bio belt. The Daegu-North Gyeongsang zone would become an energy, electronic and textile industries hub, the southeastern zone a shipbuilding-machinery-maritime-cultural industrial area; the Gangwon zone a tourist and medical hub; and the Jeju zone a tourism hub.

Meanwhile, the committee said construction of the Jeolla regional section of the KTX bullet train line will be completed by 2012, a year earlier than previously scheduled, to galvanize the economy in this part of the country, and to start construction of a new international airport in the southeast, either in Milyang, South Gyeongsang Province or in Busan, as early as 2009. New third-generation ports will be built in Saemangeum, Gwangyang and Busan, together with highways linking the economic zones and highway belts around large cities.