|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Bruce W Sims
Joined: 08 Mar 2011
Location: Illinois; USA
|
 Posted: Wed Jul 06, 2011 3:43 am Post subject: |
 |
|
Ah....... at last.....
Thanks for a very well-written critique. It really gave me some insights.
Many thanks!
Best Wishes,
Bruce |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Old fat expat
Joined: 19 Sep 2005
Location: a caravan of dust, making for a windy prairie
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 06, 2011 4:14 am Post subject: |
|
|
good one shifty  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bruce W Sims
Joined: 08 Mar 2011
Location: Illinois; USA
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 06, 2011 4:23 am Post subject: |
|
|
BTW: I hear a lot of people refer to that "English Only" policy, but based on your post, Shifty, it does not seem to be kept very well. Would there be an uproar if one were to be more stringent about its enforcement? Thoughts?
Best Wishes,
Bruce |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
shifty
Joined: 21 Jun 2004
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 06, 2011 8:25 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Bruce W Sims wrote: |
| Would there be an uproar if one were to be more stringent about its enforcement? |
Well, GnB bosses are mostly hands-on and determined to succeed. They are primarily business people whose grasp of English is quite notional.
They therefore are reliant on a super-system such as the GnB one to provide a legitimate service and deliver the goods..
They could never enforce an 'English only' policy b/c they don't have a clue about teaching and the very word 'English' makes them flinch.
I think the GnB philosophy is derived from the inherent problems of EFL in Korea, since the problems I've already mentioned are typical in the wider sense also, not only of GnB.
It does fall short, no doubt, but everywhere there is similar lack of advancement. The long and short of it is that Koreans find English a damn pain in the ass to pick up.
The Korean teachers are very badly paid, yet have onerous workloads. They are forever on the brink of quitting, the situation always fluid. To now impose on them the extra burden of 'English only' in class would be the final straw. In any case so impracticable.
Is all smoke and mirrors, from top to bottom.
That said, the kids benefit from the minding, enhanced social life, discipline of rote-learning and a bit of English thrown in there somewhere.. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bruce W Sims
Joined: 08 Mar 2011
Location: Illinois; USA
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 06, 2011 8:46 am Post subject: |
|
|
Yer two-for-two, Shifty! Thats two great posts in a row. I like that you are able to provide context along with the information. Very much appreciated!!
Best Wishes,
Bruce |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
shifty
Joined: 21 Jun 2004
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 06, 2011 10:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Thanks guys!
Discipline can always be a bugbear at a kiddie's hakwon and GnB is no different. The native teacher represents the carrot and the K teacher the stick. Also there is a cultural bias against a foreigner ever lifting his hand to a member of the herren volk.
Normally there are 5 or 6 K teachers at a GnB and you the roving embassador entering their home classrooms. The K teachers have total responsibility for the performance of their respective classes.
So if you know how to work the system, discipline can also be made less problematic. That is, when a kid is wrecking a class, you repair to the staffroom and hail the K teacher. Who is trying to get to grips with a mountainload of paperwork or giving catchup class to a behindhand student.
She hears you out and goes into the class and beats the crap outta the miscreant's hand. All fixed in the wink of an eye. You can then give the misfit sitting in tears a triumphant smile.
The problem arises when the K teacher is under pressure and losing her grip and enthusiasm. Here you come to her with what she perceives to be your problem and dumps it on her underpaid lap. So you have to be judicious with the utility of this approach.
The K teacher is always rushed and she can only give you the agenda of her class at the very last few seconds before your class. Thus....at GNB, guess what? NO PREP! EVER!!
If you are sitting bored in the staffroom 20 mins before classes, you can make conversation with your fav K teacher, even if she's heck of a busy. Just take care not to show her up when the boss is around. That's the way the boss discerns her teachers' English holdings, by checking how they are able to respond to your chit-chat.
So if you gauge that your chat partner is going to have a bad moment and the boss is within earshot, then you reply to your own question or some such manoeuvre. Face is all important.
Conversely if you have a troublesome gyopo around that you need bring down to size, then you don't reply to your own intricate question. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bruce W Sims
Joined: 08 Mar 2011
Location: Illinois; USA
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 07, 2011 4:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
That does it, shifty....yer three-for-three. You get a prize. If and when I make it to Korea we have to compare notes!
I would like to ask a question.
Given the dynamics that you outlined for how the school relationships work, is it possible to build on this, or are the lines between teacher/co-teacher/director all very clear-cut and inviolate? Thoughts?
Best Wishes,
Bruce |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
definitely maybe
Joined: 16 Feb 2008
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 07, 2011 5:51 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Bruce W Sims wrote: |
BTW: I hear a lot of people refer to that "English Only" policy, but based on your post, Shifty, it does not seem to be kept very well. Would there be an uproar if one were to be more stringent about its enforcement? Thoughts?
Best Wishes,
Bruce |
Bruce,
What are your thoughts on the role of the L1 in L2 development? Are you really all for "English only?" |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
shifty
Joined: 21 Jun 2004
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 07, 2011 5:53 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Bruce W Sims wrote: |
That does it, shifty....yer three-for-three. You get a prize. If and when I make it to Korea we have to compare notes!
I would like to ask a question.
Given the dynamics that you outlined for how the school relationships work, is it possible to build on this, or are the lines between teacher/co-teacher/director all very clear-cut and inviolate? Thoughts?
Best Wishes,
Bruce |
Well, the first thing is, the boss is never your friend, even though you may imagine a rapport to have grown. You imagine a tie has been forged b/c foreigners see Koreans as fellow human beings and this gives rise to the misjudgement.
Koreans are inclined to see us as a race apart and somewhat inferior. Using your native tongue to earn a living doesn't help matters exactly.
Another rule is never to give opinion of the K teachers to the boss. He uses it even though you thought it confidential and in a clumsy deliberate manner, such that they know from whence it comes.
An example of myself: I had to teach the boss for an hour before regular class. He asks what so and so's English is like. The answer is that her English is between putrid and atrocious. So in all candour I say, 'um, not so good'. And thereby the stage is set for an all-out dissection of that particular teacher.
Always rather say: 'I never discuss other teachers, it's my rule.' It can be difficult, since you may become pally with him in the first weeks as he helps with various things eg, setting up internet and taking you to his home for a slapup dinner with his wife.
At the time you may not yet have become very intimate with the teachers, yet have a good idea of their professional skills. So it would seem churlish to be abrupt when he asks. Steel yourself.
Generally the K teachers are only doing the job till they find someone that will marry them. That's why they seldom use you for your English. Those that do reward you copiously within their means and it's only a pleasure helping them along.
Being at the coal face together does form a bond, though Koreans are able to focus on the future pretty quickly, once you are gone. I think we are more sentimental.
While you are there, the K teachers are extraordinarily generous and I really liked them as people. Little money, big hearts, lotsa fun.
Sometimes they hit on you in an oblique way, but only b/c they are desperate to marry. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bruce W Sims
Joined: 08 Mar 2011
Location: Illinois; USA
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 07, 2011 6:39 am Post subject: |
|
|
| definitely maybe wrote: |
| Bruce W Sims wrote: |
BTW: I hear a lot of people refer to that "English Only" policy, but based on your post, Shifty, it does not seem to be kept very well. Would there be an uproar if one were to be more stringent about its enforcement? Thoughts?
Best Wishes,
Bruce |
Bruce,
What are your thoughts on the role of the L1 in L2 development? Are you really all for "English only?" |
Ok....but before I say anything let me tell you right off the bat that I will probably get "roasted" (yet again) for being "out of touch". Its becoming abundantly clear that not a few classes are stuck back in the 1940-s with the "Cognative Approach" and, in all honesty, any language classes I had all through school tended to move in this direction. The emphasis on Grammar and written form is pretty understandable given the scholastic goals of the Korean Public School system as I understand it. That said, how about an alternate approach?
For myself, I am a proponent of Communicative Language Training (CLT) (see: Savignon; Univ of Illinois; 1972). From this perspective I am guided by the intended goals and intentions of the student. As such my "job" is to coach the students in how to negotiate meaning in a transaction. Here's where I get into trouble. 
The short answer is "yes", I believe in "English Only" instruction--BUT--- only within the context in which the institution has full control of the student. Such cases as institutions where the entire waking life of the student is conducted in the second language (IE. "immersion") this is feasible. In cases where the control of the student is limited the approach must be modified.
The single most successful approach to a modification I have found is for the students to develop a nexus between the two languages which I term a "tool-kit" but other folks have different names for. In this case, the tool-kit is a a small (12- 20 ) phrases which the student may use to negotiate meaning with me from the start. Among the common tools are "What does ______ mean?"How do you say ______ in English?" and, of course, the ever ubiquitous, "Is this gonna be on the quiz?" Growing from the tool-kit are a number of situational exchanges, usually generated by the tool "What do I say if......?"
Remember I said I was going to get into trouble? Well, here it is.
What I have just described is very labor intense for the teacher.
a.) The ESL teacher needs to be facile in at least classroom management skills in the students language. In very much the same way this is the "Teacher's Tool-Kit" and, like the student's is used to negotiate meaning. "Do you understand...? is better than "Does that make sense" though on a meta-communicative level the second works better for adults and the first for smaller children.
b.) The classroom needs to be a stimulus-rich environment. I have been in classrooms where the teacher NEVER put anything on the bulletin board. Ouch! Both auditory stimulus such as recorded books and speeches combined with visual stimulus---even kinethetic activities such as dance help generate situations for which meaning would then need to be worked-out.
c.) I believe that the use of the term "English Only" in a class where fully control of the students is not performed sends a mixed message to the students in much the same manner as two parents giving mixed messages to their children.
Kinda went off on a tangent there, but you asked so this is the direction I come from. FWIW.
Best Wishes,
Bruce
Last edited by Bruce W Sims on Thu Jul 07, 2011 8:11 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
definitely maybe
Joined: 16 Feb 2008
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 07, 2011 7:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Bruce W Sims wrote: |
| definitely maybe wrote: |
| Bruce W Sims wrote: |
BTW: I hear a lot of people refer to that "English Only" policy, but based on your post, Shifty, it does not seem to be kept very well. Would there be an uproar if one were to be more stringent about its enforcement? Thoughts?
Best Wishes,
Bruce |
Bruce,
What are your thoughts on the role of the L1 in L2 development? Are you really all for "English only?" |
Ok....but before I say anything let me tell you right off the bat that I will probably get "roasted" (yet again) for being "out of touch". Its becoming abundantly clear that not a few classes are stuck back in the 1940-s with the "Cognative Approach" and, in all honesty, any language classes I had all through school tended to move in this direction. The emphasis on Grammar and written form is pretty understandable given the scholastic goals of the Korean Public School system as I understand it. That said, how about an alternate approach?
For myself, I am a proponent of Communicative Language Training (CLT) (see: Savignon; Univ of Illinois; 1972). From this perspective I am guided by the intended goals and intentions of the student. As such my "job" is to coach the students in how to negotiate meaning in a transaction. Here's where I get into trouble.
The short answer is "yes", I believe in "English Only" instruction--BUT--- only within the context in which the institution has full control of the student. Such cases as institutions where the entire waking life of the student is conducted in the second language this is feasible. In cases where the control of the student is limited the approach must be modified.
The single most successful approach to a modification I have found is for the students to develop a nexus between the two languages which I term a "tool-kit" but other folks have different names for. In this case, the tool-kit is a a small (12- 20 ) phrases which the student may use to negotiate meaning with me from the start. Among the common tools are "What does ______ mean?"How do you say ______ in English?" and, of course, the ever ubiquitous, "Is this gonna be on the quiz?" Growing from the tool-kit are a number of situational exchanges, usually generated by the tool "What do I say if......?"
Remember I said I was going to get into trouble? Well, here it is.
What I have just described is very labor intense for the teacher.
a.) The ESL teacher needs to be facile in at least classroom management skills in the students language. In very much the same way this is the "Teacher's Tool-Kit" and, like the student's is used to negotiate meaning. "Do you understand...? is better than "Does that make sense" though on a meta-communicative level the second works better for adults and the first for smaller children.
b.) The classroom needs to be a stimulus-rich environment. I have been in classrooms where the teacher NEVER put anything on the bulletin board. Ouch! Both auditory stimulus such as recorded books and speeches combined with visual stimulus---even kinethetic activities such as dance help generate situations for which meaning would then need to be worked-out.
c.) I believe that the use of the term "English Only" in a class where fully control of the students is not performed sends a mixed message to the students in much the same manner as two parents giving mixed messages to their children.
Kinda went off on a tangent there, but you asked so this is the direction I come from. FWIW.
Best Wishes,
Bruce |
I think I just helped you prove that you're not just trolling.
It was interesting read as well. I'm not sure we'd see eye to eye on everything, but I certainly respect your point of view.
Don't push the gang on Dave's too hard. It's hard to develop as an educator with no formal training in the field and the constant reminder that many of your coworkers, etc., don't view you as a teacher. This is the reality that many NETs face, albeit to varying degrees. It's an uphill battle that many choose not to fight. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bruce W Sims
Joined: 08 Mar 2011
Location: Illinois; USA
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 07, 2011 8:15 am Post subject: |
|
|
Yeah, thanks. Maybe it would be good to back-off for a while.
Best Wishes,
Bruce |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CPT
Joined: 25 Mar 2007
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 24, 2011 1:34 am Post subject: |
|
|
Good general info here.
Any info specific to the Yeonsinnae branch? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bollocks
Joined: 12 Feb 2009
|
| Posted: Fri Aug 17, 2012 9:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Where do these guys recruit from?
If a person wanted to work for GnB in Seoul, who is it best to contact? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
