Starting in the fall semester next year, around 100 teachers from India will be teaching English at elementary, middle and high schools nationwide, a high-ranking official with the Education Ministry said yesterday.
The ministry has recently confirmed a plan to “improve the system for assistant native teachers of English,” including hiring English-speaking Indians.
“The Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement signed between Korea and India last Friday has opened a 1.2 billion-strong Indian market. We expect a number of qualified English teachers from India will come here,” said the source.
We've read before that the Indians are coming, but they haven't yet turned up in large numbers to teach English. Indians have found work teaching English camps and teaching English over the phone, although Kang Shin-who has written that non-native English speakers have not had luck finding jobs. Who knows if there are definite plans in place to hire Indian teachers, seeing as the source is unnamed in the Joongang Ilbo. This seems like another case of reporting possibility as probability.
The ministry will recruit around 100 Indians early next year and if the trial is successful, it could raise the number to 300. The source said there is a high chance that those teachers will be dispatched to regions outside the Seoul metropolitan area where there is a shortage of native English teachers.
Korean schools introduced the so-called English Program in Korea project in 1995 for “globalized education” and set the goal of allocating one native English teacher for conversation with students for every class. Currently, there are 7,088 assistant native English teachers employed but they are from seven English-speaking countries - the United States, Australia, Britain, Ireland, Canada, New Zealand and South Africa. Their monthly salary ranges between 2 million won ($1,700) and 2.5 million won.
The ministry has spent more than 300 million won a year on hiring and training those teachers but experienced difficulty gaining sufficient “qualified” teachers, given that only 13 percent of them have official teaching certificates.
I wrote about the misuse of "qualified" and "unqualified" in the Korea Herald in June, and have addressed it many times on this site, to such an extent that I thought we moved beyond that misnomer. I guess it bears repeating, for those who missed it the last few times around, that it is Korea itself that determined a four-year degree and the right passport are the qualifications for teaching English here. It is safe to say that nearly all the teachers in Korea are thus "qualified," and those who aren't slipped by a sleeping immigration. I'll quote at length from that Herald piece, though since you all have been through this a hundred times, feel free to skip a bit:
It is confusing to hear politicians and government officials talking about "unqualified teachers." After all, the government itself decided that nothing more than a passport from one of seven English-speaking countries and a bachelor's degree is necessary to teach English conversation on an E-2 visa. Schools, presumably, would like teachers with impressive resumes, so what is stopping the government from raising the standards? What's stopping schools from hiring better teachers?
Supply and demand is one reason. With English hagwon all over the place, and with more and more public schools after native speakers - or at least the funding that accompanies them - it is impossible to fill all these positions with experienced and trained teachers from native-English-speaking countries.
The language barrier is another, as most schools lack the English ability or the know-how to make reference checks or evaluate resumes. Furthermore, schools and school districts aren't willing to pay for quality, with public schools only offering an extra 200,000 won ($155) per month for teachers with a master's degree. Of course, teachers don't enter the profession to get rich, but since Korean teachers are among the highest-paid in the OECD, experienced and trained native speaker English teachers should be rewarded for teaching such a high-priority subject.
There are a couple of other points that undermine the overuse of "unqualified." Even today there are schools in Korea that refuse to hire blacks, Asians or overweight teachers, demonstrating how important the appearance of a native speaker still is. Each year we read about non-native speakers busted for teaching English illegally, which tells us that either the school couldn't detect a non-native accent, or that it was so eager to hire a foreign face that it didn't matter whether their English was any good.
However, a big reason Korea hasn't hired more "qualified" teachers is that it hasn't decided what a qualified English teacher really is, and thus doesn't know what to look for. The ambiguity of the word "unqualified" is in part a product of the ambiguous role native speakers play in the classroom.
From the Joongang Ilbo again:
Regarding concerns that some Indians who are fluent in English speak with local pronunciation and intonation, which has led to the term “Inglish,” the ministry will pick only those with teaching certificates of English and scrutinize the screening process through written and oral exams.
Well, we read last month that the school board in Yeosu city, Jeollanam-do, isn't hiring blacks or Asians, and we know that many phone hagwon advertise that they do not use Indians or other Asians, so we'll see how this goes.
However, I'm sure these teachers come cheaper, and I consider their introduction more indication---together with the new domestic English test, the thousands of Korean English "lecturers," and the increased contract funny business by public schools---that South Korea is moving away from hiring native speakers from the Big 7. Though thousands of native speaker English teachers have been hired for public schools over the years, a near-total lack of planning and support on the part of co-teachers, schools, and education offices has prevented them from reaching their full potential and has essentially set them up to fail. I suspect it won't be too long until the NSET experiment is over.
30 comments:
It is difficult to know the timeline of the demise of the NSETs because the demand is driven by parents.
No matter how this turns out, a native English speaker from the United States or Canada who has a master's degree in an English teaching- or linguistics-related field, will always trump all and be paid accordingly. To a lesser extent, the other predominantly English-speaking countries' citizens (e.g., New Zealanders, Brits, Australians, etc.) will also fare well if they have such degrees.
I can't imagine that a system that is so obviously biased toward white North Americans will hire Indians who those same North Americans can't understand when they're on the other end of a call center.
I've had no more trouble understanding people taking my call in India than I've had understanding folks in the South somewhere.
Unless some major changes are made those poor teachers are going to have one hell of a time. :(
As long as the parents demand it, the government and most companies have an English requirement and Japan has a NSET program, there will be NSETs in Korea.
I don't see it changing for a while, but the next current generation of elementary school kids will speak much better English than ANY of the previous generations.
I doubt that NSETs will disappear entirely. For the foreseeable future, there will be status attached to having an NSET as one's teacher (or as one's employee). And English camps and festivals will, most likely, continue to want some "Western" faces to "show off".
But I agree that the "golden age" of someone from the Big 7 being able to apply online and begin the Visa application process 2 days later will come to an end eventually. I think we'll see the public school jobs dry up first, as hagwons will probably feel more pressure to hire NSETs in order to drum up customers. Salaries for NSETs will likely decrease as well.
I don't see how the Indian accent is an issue; Koreans already study with teachers whose accents are all over the map, I don't see what harm it would do to add one more accent into the mix. Besides, the majority of Koreans seem to only care about passing standardized written tests in English, so pronunciation is largely irrelevant to them.
I am seriously at a loss for words when the government says they have trouble hiring native English teachers with teaching degrees when all they offer is a salary of around 2m won. That's like only $500 a week.
Let me say that again, they are offering a mere $500 a week for someone who has come out of university with a specialised teaching degree. With teachers in current demand in their own countries, Korea will have to do better than that if they want to attract the qualified teachers to come and ply their trade here.
Sure there a some extra benefits like a housing supplement, and possibly paid flights. But there are also draw backs, such as a supremely broken system that is highly unorganised in the sense that it once their contract is up, it leaves teachers guessing until the very end if they will continue to have a job or not!
So I'll say it again, the reason why Korea is having trouble attracting the "talent", so to speak, is because their offer is not competitive enough in comparison to teaching jobs in their own countries.
But back onto the headline topic, having stayed in India for a while, I can say that while I had only a fairly moderate amount of trouble understanding Indians who have never lived overseas speaking English, I can see a problem when this is compounded by the fact that learning Koreans find it hard enough to understand native English speakers as it is.
I mean no disrespect to any Indians out there, but English being taught with an Indian accent to be taught to Koreans sounds like the makings of a strange new language barrier to me.
I mean, let's put the shoe on the other foot. If I was living back in Australia, and I wanted to learn any of the Indian languages, I'll either want to find a native Indian, or a qualified Australian teacher. What I wouldn't want is to have a Korean who has never lived in India to teach me Indian.
I am not sure how much better students will be in the future. I only see my classes once a week at the most. Only half of my school sees me anyway, so I don't even know why everything is such an isssue surrounding us sometimes. The best thing they could do (perhaps), is to organize their classes better and just have us teaching their most promising/ enthusiastic students. Why am I teaching a random distribution of kids? My co-worker even said that the public schools lie to education boards because the students are supposed to be organized into different English levels. Other teachers find that unacceptable (probably rightly so), and we don't end up teaching the way that would best utilize us. The least the schools could do for us is make an elective class that students could choose to take.
Last, I really hate how all of the Korean teachers take 3-5 minutes to go to their classrooms after class has started. At my high school, the class sizes are 40+ students and they are loud. I have to continuously kvetch to some of the kids about getting to class before the bell so that we can begin the class. Needless to say, our teachers in charge of discipline are being replaced at the end of the school year per the school inspectors.
One last interesting tidbit. At a recent staff meeting, one of the teachers said that they would report any of the teachers hitting (perhaps excessively?) students. That certainly raised a few eyebrows.
I think it is a good idea for Korea to go outside "the big 7" to find truly "qualified" and "professional" teachers. Yes, the Korean government doesn't put too many stipulations for qualification to teach English. I fault them for going with the false notion that only native speakers can teach English. Yes, native English speakers can provide a "model" for such things as phonology and syntax, but there are many Koreans (I have met personally) who speak fairly good English without even having the "privilege" of being taught by a native speaker. I lived in countries where native English speakers are not in plentiful supply and the locals still managed to carry on deep, meaningful conversations with me in English.
Recently, Dr. David Nunan, a well-respected authority in TESOL, made a comment a few weeks ago in an address in front of a large gathering at the International KOTESOL conference in Seoul: (Paraphrasing) "There is no reason, in this day and age, for an 'English teacher' to be hired solely for the fact that he or she is native speaker of that language, without having some qualifications and training." He also rejected the idea that a competent non-native English speaker (as opposed to a native English speaker) cannot be a good English teacher. These comments were met with uproarious applause from the conference participants. He then followed that with something is being said more frequently in the TESOL community: Would you want to be treated by a doctor who has not kept up on the latest techniques or who has never had any training at all? Why do parents send their children to be taught by people who have no training in the field?
As for "Big 7",I have a problem with South Africa (and not India, the Philippines, Ghana, Jamaica, etc.) being considered a native English speaking country when less than 25% of its population speak English at home. From a linguist point of view "native speaker" means that it is one's FIRST language (mother tongue). Most South African aren't bilingual, from a developmental psycholinguistic point of view: They did not simultaneously learn English along with another mother language as a child; many learned English LATER in school. Yes, SA is a former British colony, but so is India. English, along with many other languages form the list of official languages, in South Africa as well as in India. If South Africa is a "native speaking" country by virtue of English being an official language of that country, then there are many other countries that could qualify as "Native English" speaking countries. It is safe to say that racism could be involved because a significant amount of English speakers from the Caribbean, Africa, and Asia are not white. However, the South Korean government's push for non-white Indian (and Filipino) teachers from outside the "Big 7" maybe just a rejection of the ever-increasing numbers of self-entitled whites from core English-speaking countries, who from many Koreans point of view, come to Korea with their drugs, criminality, and their debased sexual mores.
I hope day come when the Korean government completely wise up and change its policies to, at least, "encourage" the native English teachers who come here practice a modicum of professionalism.
As Brian stated, the Korean government makes the rules, with their lax definition, about who is "qualified" to teach in Korea. Nevertheless, the government can at least "encourage' these marginally "qualified" teachers to be more "professional" when they come here. That comes by having the correct attitude and a constant honing of teaching skills. If a so-called teacher is unwilling to do that, he or she should be sent packing.
With "official" unemployment in the US at 10.2% (unofficially it is closer to 17-18%) and new pools of English teachers, we will see more competition for jobs, which from the Korean stand-point is much welcomed news. As with competition, this drives down costs. I think Koreans will overcome their supposed racism against those of darker skin and the overly exaggerated preference for whites, when they figure out they have the choice of having their children being taught by an inexperienced, unqualified (lacking any training or qualifications), wet-behind-the-ears (sometimes arrogant) Westerner and a trained, qualified (most of the time humble) non-white non-Westerner who has a competent grasp of the English language--especially when it will cost them less! One thing about Koreans, they usually let their pocketbook make the decisions.
Over time, with enough knowledge, perceptions and prejudices eventually fade. If you don't belief that, you should look at the US. After years of black slavery, near decimation of the native peoples, racism and segregation, the American people managed to elect a non-white to the office of President of the United States.
@Keith
Exactly how are the current NSETs "unprofessional"? Have you seen what "professional" behaviour is considered to be in this country?
In my school, "professional" means not showing up hungover and sleeping half the day.
The NSETs aren't the problem. The problem is the Korean government started a program with no idea how to properly use NSETs in the classroom or give them any support. Without the proper direction, tools and support it's hard for ANYONE to succeed. Even a "trained, professional teacher."
I am still shocked the Korean government is going to do this. How many stories have you heard of Irish or Scottish people having problems getting jobs because their accents are too thick? From my experience, Indian accents are much thicker than ones from the UK.
It will be interesting to see how this plays out.
Just slap some "whiteface" on 'em and give 'em blond wigs, and they'll do just fine here!
Well, it just looks like they're desperate to fill up spaces out in the sticks, where most sociable people wouldn't willingly go, at least not without a major salary increase.
This may be a good idea. Stuck in the middle of the boonies, Indians are a lot more likely to be appreciative of their Korean hosts. And the rural classes are less likely to give the Indians a cocky dose of the "dirty" rhetoric and attitude.
Keith:
Yes, there are many, many people from non-native English speaking countries that can speak great English.
The problem lies in the fact that the Korean educational system is doing this primarily to save money, that's really the bottom line. And when you scrimp and save too much, you lose quality.
So what might sound like good intentions, and certainly looks good in theory, I can foresee that in practice, this will devolve into hiring non-native English speakers on the cheap who end up having a harder time to teach English to Koreans.
Korean proposals like this are full of good intentions, and I see them trying so hard to fix the problem, but I think they are using cures, when the whole system needs prevention.
I'm just curious how Koreans will determine if an Indian is fluent enough? It took them how many years to figure out there's a french part of Canada? Will Indians have to present some kind of TOEC like test score?
This is going to be utterly hilarious. No principal I've ever met or heard of wants to hire anyone besides a matronly, submissive white woman in perfect health. This will fail, and even when a couple principals try out an Indian (almost certainly for financial reasons), there will be such outcry from the moms that it won't last.
And if this does catch on, it will just make the hagwon industry explode and create more media sensationalism as the papers have a new group of foreigners to blame for social problems.
Everyone wants to date supermodels... but very few actually do.
To anyone that thinks that the Korean government is asking more in qualifications from Indian teachers then take a look at the requirements posted by an Indian recruiter here.
http://bangalore.click.in/classified/jobs/education-teaching/1013785.html
The only difference is that the bachelors degree has to be an English or an education major.
Although for the level 3 all they need again is a Bachelors degree in any discipline and 1 years experience.
The demise of NSET by Indians? I will believe it when I see Apu on the streets of Seoul not selling Doner Kebab.
Mike--that is true. It is known that Bell Canada has lost many customers to Rogers simply because no one understands the former's tech support.
Do you see "Apu" on the streets of Seoul selling Doner Kebab now?
WORD VERIFICATION: deheatiz
As in "deheatiz on!"
kushibo: That's the point
The Indian school system is divided into 2 language mediums (media?): Hindi schools where English is taught - using very traditional teaching methods, and English medium schools where Hindi is taught as an additional subject.
Historically, English has been a language that was learned and spoken by most of the upper classes since the 19th century. I highly doubt that they are going to be importing the local chai stall guy or the lady you bargained with for that wall-hanging you bought when you went through India as a tourist. Strange, when I went through India, I was struck by how good, understandable English was more widespread than in Korea.
I think that a lot of the educational managers and English curriculum advisers that I am currently working with (not in Korea) would be slightly bemused to know that their almost-British accents and correct grammar would not be "understood" and would probably be offended to know that they are instantly associated with either a cartoon character or a call-center operator, just because they come from India... and this by people who might not differentiate between "it's/its" or "your/you're" and somehow find themselves teaching in Korean universities.
Stuart, that's a good point. And in the KT article I linked from January 30, 2009, you'll see the requirements they want are essentially the same as from NSETs now.
And to commenters here, knock off the "Apu" shit and the ignorant comments. First and last warning.
Indian-born winners of the prestigious Man Booker Prize for Fiction in the English language include: Salman Rushdie, Arundhati Roy, Kiran Desai, Aravind Adiga (and several others short-listed):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_winners_and_shortlisted_authors_of_the_Booker_Prize_for_Fiction
I know college students in Korea who are taught English Literature by Korean professors in English and they can barely understand them. I'd say Korean universities should start bringing in some English Literature professors from India as well, while they're at it - it would certainly be an improvement in many cases.
One of the most frustrating things about allegations of NSETs being "unqualified" is the hypocrisy of it. Many (if not most) Korean principals and hagwon managers simply COULD NOT CARE LESS what an NSET's qualifications are, as long as they're eligible for a work visa. NSETs are primarily for show.
This is why we see racist hiring policies, even within the "Big 7"; employers think (whether correctly or incorrectly) that parents, administrators, etc. want these foreign faces to be white. But if they can hire foreign teachers from non-Big-7 countries for less money, they may try it out, and then we'll see how much parents really care; if they complain a lot, it won't catch on, but if they don't make too much of a fuss, that might be it for the Big 7.
It's all about public perception, in my opinion: teaching credentials, and accents, really don't matter (at least not in the eyes of employers).
Post a Comment