A write-up in the Joongang Ilbo of EPIK proportions.

The Joongang Ilbo looked at teachers entering the English Program in Korea [EPIK]. It says 650 arrived this August. It's your typical write-up, with some statements true on paper but that can be disputed in real life. No sense in being needlessly cynical, but it's important to provide some balance:

“[Korean] students are excellent test-takers,” shared Kim Dong-Hee, an EPIK team supervisor. “But when it comes to conversational communication [in English], their level is not nearly as good as it should be.”

Korean students are frequent test-takers, not necessarily excellent ones. The numbers don't tell the whole story, but it's worth pointing out that even though Korean students study English almost entirely toward standardized tests, they rank among the lowest in the world in English exam scores. South Korea has the most TOEFL iBT takers in the world, but scores near the bottom. In fact, in spite of all the money spent on English and on cram schools here, South Korea's TOEFL scores are only slightly better than North Korea's. Also last year we learned that the International English Language Testing System ranked South Korea 19th out of a possible 20 countries in English-language ability. One of the more frustrating things is that, in spite of all the time devoted to studying for these English tests---classes consist of studying test preparation booklets and doing practice problems---students on average do quite poorly.

As I alluded to up there, of course one reason the numbers are so low is because so many South Korean students are taking these exams. Incoming teachers will need to be mindful of the role standardized tests play in South Korea, how much time will be devoted to them, and indeed how that shapes the way English is seen and taught. English is not a language in Korea, but rather simply a subject, one made all the more challenging to study because of the difference between English and Korean, the ambivalent aims of improving both test-taking and speaking skills, and a popular culture that render the language and its speakers ridiculous.

The article continues:

In order to offer the young Korean population the best English language education, the qualifications to teach for EPIK are strict.

That's news to me. How strict?

The program only recruits from a pool of applicants who are citizens of the United States, Canada, the United Kingdom, Ireland, Australia, New Zealand or South Africa.

All prospective teachers must satisfy further criteria. For example, they must have been a resident of one of those countries for at least 10 years, have studied there at or above the seventh-grade level, and hold at least a bachelor’s degree.

Administrators then review applications of those who meet these prerequisites and choose whom to enroll based on further qualifications. The current session admitted teachers from several different backgrounds, but more importantly, with real aspirations of teaching specifically in Korea.

So, as always, the qualifications are a passport from an English-speaking country, and a degree from a four-year university.

Despite their enthusiasm, however, most teachers enter the program without a background in education.

Newspapers frequently lament how "unqualified" its native speaker English teachers are.

Thus, EPIK makes it a point to familiarize the teachers with Korea’s culture and distinctly formal education system at orientation before placing them in schools.

“Right now, EPIK teachers are assigned to Korean co-teachers. Because they don’t necessarily have a master’s in education, there can be problems when teaching kids. Also, culture shock can also be an issue we hope to reduce [through orientation],” Kim said.

Orientation programs are an excellent idea, and this is one area where public schools---well, the programs that have orientations anyway---are superior to hagwon, or cram schools. Teachers have a week to not only rest up from jetlag, but to meet other teachers both new and experience, to acclimate themselves to Korean food, and to learn a little about teaching skills. The orientation I attended in 2006 spent a little too much time on dry, hard-to-comprehend speeches about Korean musical instruments and other aspects of Korean culture through Koreans' eyes and not enough time on actual classroom skills, though that seems to be changing.

And while co-teaching is all right on paper, incoming teachers need to be aware that many times co-teaching only exists on paper. Far too many teachers no-show classes without explanation, present excuses to skip class, or sit in the back of the room and don't participate. The native speaker English teacher must design ways to include an otherwise disinterested co-teacher, but this prospect is intimidating for newly-arrived foreigners who are, after all, designated assistant teachers. While the good co-teachers I've had take prominence in my memory over the bad, I still shake my head at those who had the gall to sleep in class, to study for their own courses at the university, or to do anything else but participate. But with no real accountability, that practice will continue. For rookie teachers coming here under the impression that they'll have a Korean's help at all times when teaching classes of 35 to 40 non-English-speaking students, finding out they're alone is a real shock. And for me, the thought of teaching such a huge class on my own is one reason I chose a hagwon for my first year in 2005.

“I don’t believe Korea is just looking for just native speakers, I believe they need ... expert English educators,” Forbes said. “A native teacher is someone who can simply teach the language based on experiential knowledge. But to be more effective in the classroom, teachers must give the students useful tools that equip them for competence, confidence and proficiency in mastering the language and communicating well.”

After working in Korea for over 10 years, Forbes noted how privileged and fortunate current EPIK participants should feel because they are well equipped with teaching instruments they can use in their classrooms.

Korea does need expert English educators, both foreign and domestic, though I don't know if it's necessarily looking for anything beyond native speakers. Things are changing, however, and with more teachers coming to South Korea, perhaps schools and programs can be more choosy.

The article did look at one complaint:

Although the EPIK orientation is well structured, the one improvement a few teachers suggested is that they be informed what age group they will teach further ahead of time. As it is now, new teachers are not informed of that until the end of orientation.

“It’d be a bit more of an ease because you can take what’s important [during lessons]. So if you’re in elementary, you’ll take in all the information about elementary,” Khaira said.

And through the years this has been one big complaint against EPIK, a program that has accumulated a poor reputation over time.

Native speakers coming to Korea to teach English is no new concept. Hagwon, or private tutorial institutes, in particular have hired many foreigners and offered exceptionally generous salaries.

EPIK's salaries have been frozen for nearly half a decade.

How EPIK appears to differ from these institutions is its true immersion into Korean culture.

By assigning its teachers to public schools, EPIK allows these new instructors to truly gain insight into a foreign country’s education system.

Looking back, being able to experience South Korea's public school system was a real treat, even though I didn't spend as much time with the students as I would in a hagwon. I saw each class on average about once a month, so that limits what a teacher can do and is willing to try. The line about "true immersion into Korean culture" as a difference between EPIK and hagwon, though, is just some fluff to fill up the page, because hagwon culture is as Korean as kimchi.

Stories about EPIK in the newspaper tend to be overwhelmingly positive, and as a government-run organization, that's understandable. On the contrary, stories about EPIK in the blogs and on Dave's ESL Cafe are often critical or downright negative. Teachers will learn that it's hard to speak in generalities about Korea or its teaching programs, and that "it depends" is still the most common answer. But they would benefit from tempering both the positive and the negative with a little balance.