``Speaking English fluently doesn't necessarily mean they can teach English well. Many foreign teachers lack teaching methodology and some of them are not ethically qualified to treat children. Also, children have difficulties learning from them, as they cannot speak Korean,'' said Koo Young-sun, supervisor of the education office. ``The problem in securing foreign teachers is another reason we have to work with Korean teachers for English conversation classes,'' she added.
Her last comment, thrown in there like it's no big thing, completely negates any validity her first two statements might have had. If you're going to bring up ethic qualifications of teachers, perhaps not a good idea to side with the demographic that beats students on a regular basis, the same one that frequently makes headlines for molesting and abusing children, or raises controversy for disrupting standardized tests and encouraging students to participate in anti-government political rallies. I think with a statement like Ms. Koo's I'll need to see some evidence of native speaker English teachers at public schools behaving badly. And that's without even addressing the education office's position in light of the whole "Korean English teachers often struggle with the basics of the English language" thing.
12 comments:
...what's wrong with encouraging students to participate in anti-government rallies?
This - the idea that Koreans who speak English as a second language - could and should replace native speakers is a bit worrisome and is something that has been coming up again and again - and with increasing frequency - over the past few years.
It used to be (like 7-10 years ago) quite a revolutionary idea that people would tentatively discuss (as in: maybe someday, yes, Koreans will be able to understand English speaking and writing and "culture" to the extent that there will be less (or no) native speakers needed) but I've noticed a dramatic increase in the number of people who believe that this is something that needs to happen and *can happen soon*.
I find it worrisome because I don't for a second think that the average native-Korean-speaking English teacher is academically, linguistically or socially prepared to meet the needs of English students if we agree that the primary goal of English education is to create students who are communicatively competent and culturally aware.
It's a bit scary because someone seems to have taught a lot of teachers that variation and diversity is normal and acceptable (and I agree!!) but they forgot to teach that a) there are still some standards to be maintained - i.e., essential pronunciation, superlatives and comparatives, basic punctuation (oh, like the comma and full stop, for example) and b) that teaching young Koreans how to interact (in a healthy way) with people who are *not* Korean is a tremendous gift that most Korean teachers can't give.
I actually agree with the popular Korean sentiment that there are some inexperienced and grammatically retarded buffoons here trying to pass as English teachers but I also wonder:
exactly HOW did they come to get jobs here?
and
exactly how much better are their Korean counterparts?
I think the answers to those questions are really important.
Anyway, sorry for chewing up your comment space! Cheers~
"Also, children have difficulties learning from them, as they cannot speak Korean" - argh. Simple solution to that: give salary increases to teachers that have achieved certain levels of fluency in Korean. Now teachers are motivated to learn Korean, understand the country better, and make more money and thus have less reason to leave. Turnover also falls, and less effort has to be expended to find new teachers year after year. Problem solved!
I agree with some of the comments, but they're still thinking of teaching as just a transfer of knowledge from the teacher to the student.
You don't need to know the nation's language to teach English.
I think that a lot of foreign English teachers see English as a skill, and would love to be able to teach the skills of English (as in what you can learn from experiences, and everything else you can't get from text books) but they can't. Koreans just want the knowledge to be regurgitated for their plethora of tests.
And that's what Korean English teachers seem to do - teach to the test. I'm sure that everyone has met some Koreans that say "I've studied English for X years, and I still can't speak English well".
A great exercise for the Koreans who criticise people coming half way across the world, who give the land of the morning calm a try out, would be to get them to teach Korean to a group of non-Korean speakers who don't give a shit about the language, and don't want to be in that class.
I'm sure we've all had students like that in our English classes. *^^*
I would also like to interject that all of the American coworkers I have worked with over the years have been fairly motivated to study Korean, and almost all of them studied at least an hour a day. The fact is, it is a bear of a language, and few teachers stay in the country long enough to develop much in the way of Korean proficiency.
"if we agree that the primary goal of English education is to create students who are communicatively competent and culturally aware"
I don't agree. In Korea, that is not the goal of English education at all. The goal is to pass a test and to get high TOEIC scores. Communication ability and cultural awareness happens only by accident, if at all.
There's a lot going on her besides a case of foot-in-mouth disease and the penchant for bureaucrats to say whatever's on their mind.
First of all, many foreigners here do try to learn Korean. But, Korean is not a requirement, and indeed in a lot of cases we're NOT SUPPOSED TO use it in class. I mean, the whole point of hiring native speakers is to create an English environment. The Korean coteachers are there to clarify directions and control students---in Korean---but since they can't be bothered to show up to class, well, there you go. I'm not saying Korean isn't a valuable skill in class, and it helps me a great deal in communicating with students who otherwise wouldn't speak to me, but you can't cite a lack of Korean as a fault of a native speaker.
And mithridates is right, how about set up a system where you're rewarded for Korean ability? I mean, you can have post-graduate training out the ass, but if you haven't a clue how Korea works, it's all for nought. I'm Level 2 according to the TOPIK test, so does that give me, say, an extra 200,000 per month?
Let's also think about an issue raised by Otto Silver a few months back: how many opportunities are there for teachers to learn Korean? In Suncheon there is a Korean class twice a week a few months out of the year, and sorry to say it's quite terrible. It's free so shouldn't expect much, but the type of instruction that goes on really provides some insight into what type of teaching goes on in the Korean English classroom. Listening and repeating poorly pronounced syllables, rote memorizing sentences out of context, and trying to follow along a teacher who himself is making mistakes really kills any motivation to attend the class in the first place. Anyway, there are such classes in Suncheon and Mokpo, and perhaps Yeosu. And the GIC has Korean classes several times a year. There are also intensive classes at two universities in Gwangju, but those are off-limits to full-time PS teachers. The classes in Mokpo and Suncheon are held in the evening, meaning hagwon teachers can't attend. That's it. Surely if learning Korean were a priority they'd set up more than two or three opportunities in the entire goddamn county!
And the line about being ethically qualified . . . again, Christ Almighty. Show me an example in the news of a public school native speaker teacher behaving badly. Now, find me an example of a public school Korean teacher behaving badly. Much easier, right? ANd that's without calling into question beating students or drinking habitually, sometimes even on school premises. I'll fully grant that a lot of foreign PS teachers are assholes, but being a dickhead doesn't mean one is a bad teacher or ethically unqualified.
And Melissa, you bring up a lot of good points . . . I'm happy to have my comment space full of them.
What Mokpo classes are you refering to? if you mean the classes at the foreigner's call centre--forget them. It's the same quality as "classes" taught at a church on Sundays.
I was refering to the classes I read about on waygook.org last year, so I guess those'd be it. Yeah, sounds about the same quality as those offered at the education office in Suncheon. But that's kind of my point.
In Japan just about every city has a community centre where you can find free classes (real classes) on the weekend, and so I was pretty surprised the first time I came here and couldn't find anything good even in the capital. The guy quoted in the op here is an example of that - Koreans on the whole don't think people can learn their language, and also have no idea why anyone would want to. When he says that foreigners don't speak the language he's just saying that people dropped in the middle of the country to teach with no resources and motivation don't learn the language within a year or two (after which most leave).
I think a pay increase of 100,000 to 300,000 depending on fluency would be a good idea. Even though you don't need to know Korean to be a good teacher, it makes living in the country that much easier and also gives teachers something to work toward, which would lower turnover.
Not that I think it would be implemented correctly here, mind you. I'm sure if it happened then a lot of bosses would try to use that pay increase as an excuse to avoid increasing pay for other reasons, so in Korea it's probably not realistic. In theory it would be nice though, and that's what the guy in the op needs to do if he *really* believes that teachers need to know Korean.
ROK HOUND said:
I don't agree. In Korea, that is not the goal of English education at all. The goal is to pass a test and to get high TOEIC scores. Communication ability and cultural awareness happens only by accident, if at all.
I probably didn't articulate my point very well: I KNOW that that that is not the goal of English education in Korea - but I think it should be. And in that eventuality (if the goal of education ever changes to one of communication and cultural awareness) then I think we would find the English teachers here to be even less effective than they are now. Gak.
Hope that was a bit clearer ... ?
Cheers~
I'm a public school teacher in Incheon. Most of the public school teachers that I've met have been fine, although a few of them have bordered on being a little unprofessional (and I'm not saying that some Korean teachers aren't.) But I do know a native teacher who was fired for being a little too enthusiastic (an understatement) with his female middle-school students. The thing was, it was other native teahcers who knew him who really had to put pressure on the board of education to take notice. We were really disturbed by his actions, but the Koreans for the most part paid little notice, and were extremely tolerant of his other (many) indiscretions. In the end he was 'asked' to leave with nary a fuss made. I suspect there may be other similar cases which people are not made aware of.
I think we need to be careful not to turn statements like this into an 'us against them' thing, even if some Koreans might. I don't really find fault with anything she has said, and I don't think she was being critical when she was referring to the fact that many English speakers can't speak Korean; just pointing out a valid issue.
I definitely think that the native speaker setup needs a bit (a lot) of refinement. The fact that is all a bit haphazard isn't good for anyone.
Post a Comment