Korean Job Discussion Forums

[Keepongoing]

I like the article--but if my classes fail to be fun and interesting then I fail as a good teacher in Korea. In my recent University discussion class we were using a text (required by the school) the unit was on politics and controversies and my students were dead silent and showed no interest and verbalized such. Then the following unit was on Geography; again the same thing. Now, with the earlier units: movies, music, pop culture, they were all ears and loved it. I know a "good" teacher needs to make the class interesting, but sometimes the students have already decided against the topic. I can teach my own stuff, but then we might as well discard the book. At times it seems like "Cotton Candy English" to me. Oh, I learned that the students were unhappy via a "Teacher Days Card" Well that is ok it looked miniscule amongst all the other stuff.

I am not complaining and I know this topic is no stranger to this board. Anyway, I read and like this article but I am not sure the students would buy it?????


Here is the link


http://www.singaporeangle.com/2007/05/myths_about_education_edutainm.html

[VirginIslander]

Balance.

[ddeubel]

Thanks for posting that. First rate and thought provoking.

I stand by many of his comments and would add that it is mostly about "atmosphere". That the proper tone is set. Motivation and the ability to motivate students standing in as the most prominent note in that musical score.

Reminds me of the adage, "fun is what you make it". Not the cpre but the affect of a lot of things....

DD

[Hater Depot]

He makes a great point about students needing the ability to understand different kinds of fun.

[Yu_Bum_suk]

What ever happened to the basic concept of making education 'interesting'? 'Fun' is such a subjective thing. I have students who think it's fun to try to come up with original sentences. And then I have students whose idea of 'fun' would be running around the classroom screaming.

I wonder if a lot of the thought process that's gone into edutainment is a reaction to a Confucian system that is decidedly not fun, and hence its appeal in so many Asian countries. It will be interesting to see what people think of it in ten years ago when it's a demonstrable failure, and Koreans still have to leave Korea to get any worthwhile English education.

[steroidmaximus]

great article. I've often derided what passes as education in many hogwons; teachers acting as clowns all the time do their students a great disservice, not to mention reinforce negative stereotypes of foreign teachers as only Mr. / Mrs. Fun and Friendly Yuk Yuk. If you want kids to take English and learning seriously, you can't be a clown all the time, plain and simple.

Too bad most Korean hogwon's work on the assumption that it has to be fun all the time, since otherwise Mommy will sign little Min Suk up at the school next door.

[ddeubel]

Yes, balance........

Teaching is so multi faceted and you have to adopt methods which depend on so many things: audience/students, time of day, curriculum/material/topic, specific goals, learning types, your own teaching style(s), classroom management issues, admin, textbook, classroom set up/technology and a million more (i'm writing/thinking fast).

So I don't think we should condemn anything carte blanche. Rote or Regis. But students should be offered balance and especially, teachers should always filter their lesson with a few basic questions as:

Does this lesson truly engage the students and allow them to take ownership of the knowledge in question?

Can I make this lesson more creative and relevant to the student's own world, given the above?

Did the lesson truly show students they are learning, going from A to B? Or was I just filling time?

Fun, interest, engagement can all be part of that.

The writer of the post qualified some of his statements which also make for even better clarification. I've pasted it below.

I'm a firm believer not in the "What" but the "How", it is not what method but how that method is presented. Like comedy. Even a good comedy can make a seemingly dry statement seem very, very funny.

Kishore: I think what u refer too as fun is charisma. Or the capacity to come across as an engaging character. You make it sound as if it is easy to be fun or charismatic. I really dont think you understand what it means to be a first class educator.

Charisma is certainly one way/method/tool to come across as fun. But my argument is more complex than you've interpreted it to be. Let me try again

1) Let's focus on 'come across as fun' as the outcome, regardless of whether it's by being charismatic or by using other methods (ICTs, games, etc). My argument is that we shouldn't cultivate an entire generation of students who yearn to be entertained (for reasons that I presented in the post). Because if that's the case, you'll need too many people who are 'born charismatic/entertaining presenters' to pull it off (i.e. audience's expectations are too high). I'm talking about the system as a whole (not an individual class/lecture).

2) My point is in fact the opposite of what you said I said (which means both of us actually agree on the same point!). I was saying that it's not easy to find educators who are 'born (charismatic/fun/whatever) presenters', and so MOE has to devote more effort and also make sure that teachers have more time on hand to make the necessary preparations, to make classes fun. And precisely because it's not easy to find such educators, we need to manage audiences' expectations (re point 1). I quote reader Shoestring's comment above, for s/he said it well:

"So, like expectations, thresholds for gratification are also constantly rising and people fall victim to the upward-spiraling vicious cycle of an endless surge of adrenaline. Teachers' jokes are no longer funny but lame, lessons boring, pranks are kids' stuff, smoking is cool, shoplifting becomes a thrill...

3) While 'charisma' is part of 'fun', in my post, I really wasn't referring to charisma alone. But anyway, my point is this: it's not healthy to cultivate a culture of 'focusing on form rather than substance', in which entire generations of students only like fun/entertaining/charismatic/whatever teachers/lecturers. In fact, one of the main arguments of my post is precisely that a first-class educator should NOT be defined as a necessarily charismatic one, and more generally one who can 'come across as fun' (using whatever methods, e.g. ICTs, games, visual aids, etc). You can have very charismatic presenters who teach nothing of substance, don't you think so?

[Keepongoing]

Ddeuble I like what you posted. One observation I have had is that students expect a completely different education practice from foreigners than they do from their major professors. English learning is the side-dish, or better the dessert and their major studies the entree. Desserts are suppose to be pleasant to the palates at all times

[Yu_Bum_suk]

[ddeubel]

[Keepongoing]

I totally agree-at some point a language learner must become an independent learner and we need to teach them skills that points them toward becoming independent learners. In the end they will not become proficient in English merely through study. That is why in Thailand you can find fairly proficient English speakers with little study time. They learn by interacting with English speakers.

I once talked to a young Chinese girl who had never seen a foreigner (over the internet) she contacted me through the directory. Her English was amazing. I asked her why. She said she mimiced people while watching English DVD's. She had even watched a British film and was able to produce a cute British acccent. She had a lot of intrinsic motivation and was quite clever.

At some point English learning must leave the classroom and even traditional studying.

[Jizzo T. Clown]

Agreed-it's best that teachers get away from a teacher-centered classroom, and the sooner the better!

Someone once said "The person who does the work is the ONLY one who learns." So if the teacher is the only one working, guess who's learning?

I think that after a day at school, it should be the students who are tired, not the teacher.

[ddeubel]