In an article that said roughly half of SMOE public school teachers weren't renewing their contracts:
Lee Young-chan, an education Ministry official in charge of native teachers said it was not necessary to renew every contract. ``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.
I think it will be blog policy to post this once a month just so readers know exactly where you stand when the goddamn Ministry of Education official in charge of native teachers says you're fucking worthless.
22 comments:
I think we need to give examples of Konglish to show the world the real level of English that the average korean possesses. I've done that here.
The guy needs an attitude adjustment, as well as a course in diplomatic speech.
But if you get beyond that, there's something valid about what he's saying.
In short, what non-ROK nationals have to do to get into the educational system in Korea is extremely minimal compared to what a ROK national has to. Certification, passing exams, and all the work of essentially becoming a certified public servant.
That is an awful lot of work to get to that point, but it provides them job protection because of the assumption that they are certified and because of the investment the educational system has put into them as a hire. These are things which any assistant teacher, Korean or non-Korean, does not have.
When he says, they are not "regular teachers" that is what he is referring to.
When he says they cannot conduct classes independently, he is referring to administrative policy that has not been changed to hand over too high a level of authority to people who have not gone through the certified public servant process.
So the peripherally/externally hired native English teachers are at the "assistant teacher" level. And frankly, in California at least, most would have the qualifications to be only "provisional teachers" or "assistant teachers."
Where he is perhaps too undiplomatic is where he bluntly says that these people are not hired for their experience but for their native English qualities.
I think his conclusion is wrong, but rather than beating up on how he said it, I challenge the ATEK-esque community to work on this. What can be done to enhance the value of the native English speakers in this school system? Pushing for training that would lead them to be at a higher skill and administrative level would be one.
ATEK is barking up the wrong tree with their "human rights violations" nonsense. They need to turn English teaching into a respected profession.
But you know what, this would be something difficult. The system in Korea makes people go through hoops, lots and lots of hoops, to make sure that idiots aren't hired at entry-level positions (the problems in administration are mostly learned and/or institutional).
I don't know how many English teachers would be prepared to go through those hoops. My ex was, and she's doing better, but most secondary-level teachers would not be, not without more pay and/or more respect and/or responsibility.
But it's that chicken-or-egg thing where respect and responsibility have to be earned and displayed first. The "Shelton Teacha tired" mentality is not the way to earn it, but it's a common (if not dominant) work ethic amongst many English teachers who see this as a temporary gig rather than a noble pursuit (even a short-term noble pursuit).
The serious teachers need to understand that native English speakers who are going through the motions are dragging down their profession. The MOE and ROK govt authorities need to find a way to identify and reward teachers who take their jobs seriously.
Just be warned, taking one's job seriously in Korea is a time-consuming and energy-depleting role to bear.
I agree that we need to focus on making this a real profession. I was going to say that ATEK should work on that, but there's already KOTESOL . . . but from what I"ve seen they do little that's useful for the public school teacher trying to get by in a system that is designed to fail him/her.
Anyway, I'll be doing more on this next week. Suffice it to say I've ranted on these issues a lot on this blog, most recently yesterday and in the post I link to there.
I honestly don't know what KOTESOL does. My ex is part of it and she went to the meetings, but it seemed more like the focus was on individual skill enhancement and professional betterment, not a concerted attempt to improve the profession as a whole.
Not that I'm bashing them for that, since what they were doing serves a purpose (and my ex got a lot out of it).
And I do appreciate the rants. Were you not posting things like this, I would not be as informed about what's going on on the ground. And also I'm way up in Seoul, and it's always good to know how things are down in the provinces.
How do you expect for expatriate teachers to upgrade their skills when it is by whim that regulations and requirements change. If someone on the Korean side knew the direction they were heading, then I would invest in additional education. The only message I feel is that they are waiting to replace us or preferably kick all of us out of the country. They want Koreans to be able to teach English. There is little respect for teachers here (despite the myth), winter, propaganda for culture (sometimes), pollution etc. The wages aren't rising fast enough either, so they may not have to worry about too many teachers from America and Canada. They will have worse problems when they start getting Phillipine, Indian and Pakistani teachers (not from the teachers' fault, of course).
How much you wanna bet that this MOE official "in charge of [immigrant] Teachers" can't even speak English? I know most of the higher-up GEPIK people in charge of English teachers can't.
I was at a conference listening to the man who is in charge of us immigrant teachers, my boss, speak through a translator. Not even a, "Hello, welcome to Korea"
When selecting someone to manage non-Korean speakers, English ability should be a factor. Otherwise, you shouldn't get the job.
이영찬 아우트 나우!!!!!
Huge difference between training and educating. If they want me to train people how to speak English, yeah I'd be pretty much useless. That's most likely what this guy meant.
brent, you make a good point about the regulations and requirements changing. You may or may not be aware of this, but this is a huge complaint among Koreans, particularly as it pertains to college admissions and the 수능 exam (CSAT).
But getting a master's degree, for example, would be a positive move no matter what the regulations. I would imagine a certificate from a legitimate Korean or overseas university would generally be the same.
But this is where ATEK or KOTESOL needs to get involved. They need to genuinely listen to the needs of their constituents (not just force their own ideas on the constituents) and enter an effective dialogue with the powers-that-be in Immigration, the national and local Ministries of Education, politicos who make education and immigration policy, etc.
And drop the "human rights abuse" bullshit right now.
The only message I feel is that they are waiting to replace us or preferably kick all of us out of the country.
No, that's not true at all, certainly not the second part. I don't know how long you've been in Korea, but the expansion of English-teaching opportunities and the barriers that the government has brought down make this place night and day different from, say, ten years ago.
Ha ha... In the 1990s, "foreigners" were fighting in court to get into the National Health Insurance System, now some foreigners are fighting to be exempt.
They want Koreans to be able to teach English.
They want reliable people to teach English. There are some hard-working, clever, innovative, and enthusiastic native-speaking English teachers in Korea — lots! — but there are also some flaky-assed muther fuckers who make the whole lot of you look very, very bad, because when hiring schools look at a résumé it's a frickin' crapshoot as to which ones are going to be the guy or gal who doesn't show up on time, doesn't do lesson plans, comes to work hungover on Monday, takes drugs, puts more energy into weekend private tutoring than his/her visa-sponsored (and legal) job, etc., etc.
I've been in a position of hiring and taking care of "foreigners," and I've gotten really really fucked over by people who just didn't give a shit about their job. There was one person who was hired for a year-long contract and when she heard it might not be renewed started LYING about why she couldn't come in to work. When I confronted her about it, she said she didn't feel obliged because she wasn't going to get rehired — even though she had another two months on her contract and nobody told her she wasn't getting rehired (she was supposed to, but a final decision was not made because of budgetary constraints). Or the person who made me drop an entire day's worth of work and skip my own grad school classes because she'd lied to us about getting her visa paperwork done, forcing me to go and grovel to immigration, or the person who promised to be at a certain place at a certain time but then called in sick because she was actually hungover. Twice in two weeks. Or the person who walked out because the money wasn't being paid up front instead of at the end like everyone else was getting, while cussing out my superior because the Koreans were all trying to cheat him.
And that was just last week. ;)
And through all this, the native Koreans I work with are just standing there with a collective bewildered look of "WTF???"
And I and every foreigner working with us — Korean or White or Black — is just wanting to shoot these people because it is THEY that are making Koreans distrust foreign workers in Korea because it is such a crapshoot.
Do none of you work with flaky people like I described? Am I just incredibly unlucky in who we encountered? The experience of others I know says, "No," it's par for the course. I know that for each one of these flakes, there are several more who do a passable job, and at least one or two people who really go the extra mile, but there is an inherent insecurity about which ones will that be.
And THAT — plus the lack of time investment that an outsider has put into getting into his/her position — is why the Kwangju School Board or the Seoul Ministry of Education is loath to entrust a handful of "foreigners" (God, do I hate that word) with greater responsibility and authority.
It has to be negotiated and it has to be earned. Nobody, no organization, is really working on the negotiation part. That's what ATEK should be doing, that's what KOTESOL should be doing. Everybody should be returning English teaching to the professional status it once was. The backpackers and those with a non-invested backpacker mentality/attitude are eroding the profession. Not all of the, but a lot.
Trust, professionalism, seriousness, and dedication are what need to become the stereotypes of this profession. Whining about bad treatment is worthless (after a point). Figure out what you can do about you, or rather, what your group can do about your group.
Epic rant Kushibo. Epic.
I think your impressions about the people hired are fairly spot on, but I think a lot of it could have been avoided if the organization you were employed by took the time to do interviews and get to know the people you were bringing over.
My first year in Korea, I was actually interviewed before I was hired. I was interviewed because the academy I worked for had a guy to do it. A few months later, the guy left to finish his military service. The quality of the teachers hired dropped dramatically. Instead of weeding out the drunks and perverts, the academy was hiring them! I work a public school gig now. I wasn't interviewed at all. I sent my documents in and a week later I had a contract. They had no idea if I was competent or not.
There is little accountability when it comes to hiring foreign teachers in Korea. That's where the real issue is. Most hagwon owners and education offices either don't care or don't take the time to do a competent job when it comes to hiring.
matt wrote:
Epic rant Kushibo. Epic.
This is why I don't comment on Marmot's: I have a tendency toward the epic rant.
I think your impressions about the people hired are fairly spot on, but I think a lot of it could have been avoided if the organization you were employed by took the time to do interviews and get to know the people you were bringing over.
Interview? We were supposed to interview them?
Seriously, though, we did interview them. Each and everyone one of them, except for the guy who thought Koreans were cheating him by not paying him up front; he was recommended by someone I knew.
And that is another problem in the Koreans-versus-foreigner dynamic: there is a tendency whereby Koreans feel responsible if they recommend someone for a job (even to the point of troubleshooting if there is a problem) whereas Westerners would recommend whomever is available, and then assume they're doing you a favor (which they are).
There are loads of exceptions to this (I know plenty of Westerners who act very "Korean" about recommendations for important positions, and I know lots of Koreans who go against the Korean grain on this), but it's a good rule of thumb when it comes to understanding the different POV where Koreans and Westerners might be coming from.
My first year in Korea, I was actually interviewed before I was hired. I was interviewed because the academy I worked for had a guy to do it. A few months later, the guy left to finish his military service. The quality of the teachers hired dropped dramatically. Instead of weeding out the drunks and perverts, the academy was hiring them! I work a public school gig now. I wasn't interviewed at all. I sent my documents in and a week later I had a contract. They had no idea if I was competent or not.
Even though interviews are a highly imperfect process, it is better to do them than to not. There are types of people you will weed out in an interview that you wouldn't if you saw them just on paper. But narcissists and charisma men who do well in interviews can also be among the least dedicated to their job and workplace, so that's part of the crapshoot.
There is little accountability when it comes to hiring foreign teachers in Korea. That's where the real issue is. Most hagwon owners and education offices either don't care or don't take the time to do a competent job when it comes to hiring.
You are absolutely right about the lack of accountability, but I don't think it stems from "not caring." Rather, I think there is a fundamental problem of not knowing how to interview. They don't know what to ask for, what to look for, how to present their own company, etc.
I once consulted with a major chaebol about a program to hire engineers, and they were utterly clueless about what a foreign engineer would want or need in order to take the job, and they were almost as clueless about the need to demonstrate that their company was a good place to work. Fortunately, they were more than willing to listen to my suggestions, though I don't know if they were able to implement all of them (my connection with the company emigrated).
My two cents: in my 12 years in Korea, I have never seen any new program or official initiative that wasn’t poorly planned/organized, thrown together at the last minute & half-a$$ implemented, poorly monitored, and/or just mere window dressing and not actually accomplishing anything.
That is pretty describes every English education program I have been a part of or witnessed here.
When programs fail to meet expectations, as they often do, administrators blame the teachers for not working hard enough or not being qualified. While blaming your subordinates for failure is not a uniquely Korean habit, Confucianism certainly lends itself to the practice.
Blaming the teachers for programs that they plan & oversee is just a cop out.
Yes, there are some poor and “unqualified” teachers. The program administrators do not implement an adequate interview/hiring process. They set the qualifications as a ‘Bachelor’s in anything’ and hire almost anyone who applies for the job and then label most of us as “unqualified/inadequate” teachers.
Want better “qualified” teachers? Create better programs with better, more attractive conditions- better working conditions, more pay, better options for professional development and possible promotions & pay raises for excellent work.
Want better programs? Actually work together with certified teachers in creating successful programs. Administrators who have no idea how to teach English telling real teachers what to do doesn’t work.
Next, put people in charge of these programs who know how to speak English, know how to work with non-Koreans, and who actually want to do the job. The greatest example of this going wrong was when I worked at the central EPIK office at KNUE years ago. The guy they put in charge of overseeing all the native English EPIK teachers was a complete racist with no English skills. He hated non-Koreans and he hated his job. I know this too well because he reminded us of these two facts at every teacher’s meeting. Putting people who don’t work well with non-Koreans and don’t actually want to do that job seems to be the standard in these programs.
This ridiculousness about native teachers just being English speaking assistants while the Korean teachers do the real “teaching” is just icing on the cake. Does anyone believe that real co-teaching happens. When I was in EPIK, my co-teachers wouldn’t bother showing up. They took free time while I was the only teacher in the class.
Anyway, this is just another administrator making excuses for why a major program isn’t living up to expectations. Blaming subordinates is a coward’s cop out!
As long as they can continue to get away with it, they will do so!
Question for public school teachers:
How many minutes how many times a week do you teach?
"Want better “qualified” teachers? Create better programs with better, more attractive conditions- better working conditions, more pay, better options for professional development and possible promotions & pay raises for excellent work.
Want better programs? Actually work together with certified teachers in creating successful programs. "
Yep, but you get what you pay for. Korean public schools cannot or will not pay for teachers with native or native-like English and at least 3 years of regular K-12 teaching experience.
Long-term Korea needs to grow its own competent teachers. Good professional development is expensive but essential for improving teacher performance, and schools get a much higher return if they spend the money on teachers who will use what they're learning for many years rather than packing up their skills after 3-4 years.
What do you mean by
"How many minutes how many times a week do you teach?"
Good comments all around. I'm in the public schools and I had an interview with a regional director. I didn't think much of the interview but at least they tried. This was in the summer of 2007.
That year the Gyo Yook Cheong for the area in which I work seemed to do a blitz drive to get teachers in the city that I work in and got about 20 people for Elementary and Middle Schools. I think of about 10 Middle school teachers, 2 or 3 were retained. 2 of the people whose contracts weren't renewed were rumored to have had indecent relations with a highschool student. Students complained about one guy's hygene frequently, and one guy just wasn't very smart.
One of my co-teachers told me that I was one of the few not to have been cut, and thus I was rewarded with the opportunity to run a camp for two days on a weekend. It might not seem like a reward, but they threw me some extra cash for my efforts.
At any rate when I heard of the cuts, I got a little stressed out, but later I learned the details of the cuts and feel that they were a wise decision.
On the other hand I think that there should be a little more effort to make better training programs, and orientations. The orientations and meetings that I have attened have been pretty nice complete with sushi luncheons in pristine locations, yet the content of the programs have been a little unfocused.
One training program was on the Island of namhae, and we were treated to a 2 hour power point presentation by a Korean guy who lived in Oregon. After that all of the Koreans left the room, and the remaining 25 foreigners were told to "Come up with some ideas for making better English," for a half an hour. After that we had dinner.
On another meeting, foreigners and their co-teachers, listened to a foreign guy give a speach about his experience in Korea, after lunch we did some arts and crafts. All of these things were nice but not particularly helpful. Here are a few things that I would include in an orientation.
1. A clear job description for the native teachers. Administrators should give clear examples of how native teachers could be helpful, and clear reasons why so much money is being spent on us.
2. Clear examples of conversation classes. Demonstration classes I have witnessed have never really been about gathering ideas, but more about people trying to keep their jobs, but still the whole notion of the "conversation class" is a bit vague. It is pretty difficult to just walk into a classroom and just have a chat with 40 kids for 45 minuts every day.
I'll end here but there is much more to include. I think that the guy in the orginal post could have been a bit more diplomatic in his wording, but there is as Kushibo said, some truth to his words.
@Brian:
I mean, for example, one fourth grade class receives 40 minutes of instruction 3 times a week. I want to know how much English instruction per week is given to each class.
Have you forgotten about my question, Brian? I am curious to know how much English instruction Korean public school students receive per week?
Ooops, yes, I did forget your question, 미안해요.
Students at my school get English four days a week, 45 minutes per period. I see each class once every two weeks, or 12.5% of the time. At my other school I see each class once every three weeks.
4 days a week x 45 minutes is decent. Does a Korean teacher provide most of the instruction? Is there much team planning?
As an ESOL teacher at my school, I am a resource teacher. Language Arts instructional responsibilities are divided between myself and the classroom teacher. I do whole group instruction using a basal reader to teach reading comprehension, vocabulary, and language usage. The classroom teacher includes ESOL students in small group guided reading instruction.
I am wondering how you coordinate instruction with your Korean co-teacher.
One more question:
What materials are used? This information is probably available all over the place at Dave's, but I very, very rarely wade into that forum.
I do everything for my classes myself. I have one designated coteacher at each school, but there are eight other English teachers with whom I teach. When technology is available, I make a powerpoint to demonstrate the target vocabulary and patterns, and also create some activities and exercises on a worksheet. I give the coteachers a copy of my lesson plan and the worksheet a week in advance, with a "teachers' roles" section on the bottom with things we both should do in class, such as "walk around to make sure students are working in pairs," or "check to see that students understand the target vocabulary." That stuff goes without saying, but you'd be surprised at how many coteachers are unwilling or unable to jump in without explicit micromanagement.
Anyway, one of my coteachers---the designated one---will ask me for advice for her classes, and I'll sometimes ask for tips for mine. Other than that, the other teachers are not involved in what I do. I've been at this school for roughly 20 months and in the beginning I tried to sit down and talk things over with them, but because of time constraints that's not possible. Getting teachers to even show up for their mandated workshops and classes is hard enough . . . trying to meet with them in a free period proved nearly impossible. Besides, when I asked them how we should approach a particular lesson, they just said "it's up to you."
There are no real guidelines for co-teaching or team teaching. Given that I see each class so sporadically---some classes I see only three times a semester---I'd rather not waste any time by team teaching, sorry to say. The public school teachers did see a "team teaching" lesson that was a horrible introduction: the Korean teacher did all the instruction in his bad, bad English while the foreign monkey just repeated vocabulary and gave out stickers.
It's also logistically impossible to team teach much, without having more than one native speaker at the school. I mean, if they started team teaching at my school, instead of seeing each class 45 minutes every two weeks it'd get cut down to 22.5, including the time the Korean teacher talked in Korean during my class.
So, now I look at the main ideas for each chapter and design activities that get the students using the vocabulary and patterns there. I don't explicitly teach from the textbook, though; I did in years past but it didnt' go well.
For the Korean teachers they use a textbook. In elementary school it's government-mandated, and teachers all across the country have the same one. In middle school there are a handful they can choose from. There is a CD-Rom that accompanies it. Teachers will make vocabulary lists that translate words into Korean. Some teachers will type out substitution drills and reading activities, while others will just teach from the book.
My primary coteacher is excellent, don't get me wrong, and she shows a passion for the subject and for her job that no other Korean teacher I've met even remotely approaches. I do get cynical about co-teaching simply because it doesn't happen. However, when ti comes time to criticize English instructors, instead of blasting those who slack off, who sleep in the back of the class, or who can't be bothered to do their jobs as coteachers, the blame falls to native speakers who don't have any guidance or support to begin with.
Sounds dreadful. Thanks for taking the time to respond.
I have learned and grown so much during the last few years at my present school. I've thought about shopping my skills to the SMOE or its Gyeonggi-do equivalent as a summer teacher trainer. I have too many projects this summer, but next spring I may send off resumes and see if anyone bites.
I would like to have a word with this 양복입고있는 촌놈 as I am not certified and I successfully and independently run nearly all of my public school classes and with very discriminating translation of the English into Korean.
He clearly is surrounded by yes men who tell him whatever he wants to hear so that all face is saved and the paycheques keep coming in. Were he to get a whiff of the reality in the classrooms, he may be forced to reverse his statement
to read, 'most Korean teachers of English are worthless in the classroom as so many are not capable of independently running English classes' which is far closer to the truth. I'd like to make this a more congenial comment posting the mitigating circumstances but collegiality is going to be absent in the presence of such an obvious jackass as that guy. So many of them don't. I wonder if he knows what the dust of a Korean school even feels like under his patent leather shoes, or if he never makes it past the desk. What else could explain such ignorance of what's happening? Most of our foreigner co-workers' complaints are that they're left alone in the class. That's the how and why of my getting good at running my classes alone. I wish he would set up a spy camera in my class for just one week. But he probably doesn't really want to know. And that's why this program will progress at a snail's pace only. Thank goodness I'm far enough away from such back-scratching politics that I and our handful of dedicated Korean administrators can actually get some meaningful work done. It must be awful to be working under such as him.
Post a Comment