Site Search:
 
Speak Korean Now!
Teach English Abroad and Get Paid to see the World!
Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

SMOE cutting almost all Mid/high school positions by Feb
Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index -> Job-related Discussion Forum
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Hoost



Joined: 12 Nov 2008
Location: Seoul

PostPosted: Sun Jul 29, 2012 11:07 pm    Post subject: SMOE cutting almost all Mid/high school positions by Feb Reply with quote

http://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/news/nation/2012/07/117_116228.html

The Seoul Metropolitan Office of Education said Monday it will pull out nearly all English-speaking assistant teachers from the city's middle and high schools by next February, considering that secondary schools put more focus on reading and grammar than speaking.

In an effort to enhance students' English skills through public education, the education office introduced the native-speaking teacher policy in 1995 in the country's primary and secondary schools.

Only 20 to 30 out of 180 native-speaking teachers in city's high schools will remain at Seoul Global High School and 10 other schools designated for special English education by the end of next month, with all but four native speakers of the 260 to be withdrawn from the city's middle schools by next February, according to the city office.

The native speakers who hope to stay in the country will be relocated to the city's elementary schools, where the system will be put in place after an evaluation process, it added.

The move is based upon its decision that the policy is not cost-effective enough in the secondary schools where the focus of the English education is put on reading and grammar, in contrast to elementary schools with speaking-based curriculum, according to the office.

It also cited the results of the survey it conducted last year, where 62.2 percent of some 11,900 parents said they favor "Korean teachers who have a good command of English speaking and teaching" over native speakers as desirable English instructors.

"Scrapping the policy won't lower the quality of public education, as we see an increased number of young Korean teachers who have overseas experience, and we have the so-called 'Teaching English in English' certification system of English teachers," a city official said. (Yonhap)[/url]
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
iggyb



Joined: 29 Oct 2003

PostPosted: Sun Jul 29, 2012 11:54 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

We've know this since the spring.

Quote:
where 62.2 percent of some 11,900 parents said they favor "Korean teachers who have a good command of English speaking and teaching" over native speakers as desirable English instructors.


That's the monolith of the KSAT talking. Everybody hates it, but it won't die. I never could have imagined seeing something so universally hated all the way around that simply will not die or fundamentally change.

Parents want Korean teachers in secondary school for the KSAT and native speakers in the hakwons.

Quote:
Scrapping the policy won't lower the quality of public education, as we see an increased number of young Korean teachers who have overseas experience


That city official and any Korean parents who actually do believe Korean teachers can replace native speakers in terms of learning English (outside of the KSAT grammar crap) are delusional.

I haven't seen many teachers who share an L1 with the students who have had the discipline not to overuse that common language to the great detriment of the class. Whether we're talking about Korean teachers or ESL with Spanish teachers where I live or my experience studing French and Korean with several teachers who used English way too much - to the harm of our class.

I know from having lived in Korea at the start of the NSETs in hakwons and then again recently ---- the untrained, inexperienced NSETs, with all the legitimate limitations they have to benefitting a classroom fully, have nonetheless improved the overall standard of English usage in Korea...

Stopping the NSETs after elementary school will not see the level of usage drop back to what it was when I first arrived: The number of native speakers in the hakwons will remain so much greater than it was then.

And the 3-6 years in elementary school will help prevent it.

But, this move will cause the level to slide back significantly.

If the Korean government could somehow force TEE, and promote placement of Korean teachers with communicative English skills in the secondary schools, then this wouldn't be much of an issue.

But, they won't TEE.

And it will hurt the students.

The Korean teachers don't believe in communicative teaching techniques.

Secondary teachers don't believe students will do just as well (even better) on the KSAT if they don't focus exclusively on grammar.

I've told classrooms of Korean secondary teachers that a stupid native speaker will do very well on the KSAT English section but won't be able to explain at all why the correct answer is the correct answer. They have a native's "feel" for the language.

And a Korean student in a communicative classroom will not get to that level, but they will have a better feel for the language than someone forced to memorize grammar and use outdated methods. And they'll do better on the test...

They don't believe it. Because of the KSAT KSAT KSAT KSAT, they don't care what TESOL theory around the world has to say...

Some will say that they know what TESOL theory outside of Korea says, and that they believe in it, which is why they'd send their kids to hakwons, but they say it just doesn't work in Korean secondary schools because of the KSAT...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
viciousdinosaur



Joined: 30 Apr 2012

PostPosted: Mon Jul 30, 2012 12:25 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Ok, first of all, this is old news. And, really, good riddance. The maturity isn't there yet to have foreigners working at public schools.

But the part that ticks me off is how native speakers are portrayed as only being useful for speaking! As if the only trick to being able to speak good English to mime the accent of a Californian! Have your seen Koreans write? Atrocious! Speaking can be forgiving. You need not be perfect to be understood, but writing, that's much different. For school and for business, anything less than perfect writing is frowned upon (Unless you're on Dave's).

If anything the current policy should be the complete opposite. Let the Korean teachers teach the little ones ABC and have the natives teach the big kids how to do advance English. That would be putting people in their proper place.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
YTMND



Joined: 16 Jan 2012
Location: You're the man now dog!!

PostPosted: Mon Jul 30, 2012 12:59 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

The parent spiel is just to make people not complain. Exactly, who did they survey? I know this is Seoul, but let's look at the chances someone in a poorer part of town can't go to a good school with a Korean teacher who taught "English in English" (whatever that means I don't know, but it sure seems to have appeased the masses).

We are actually approaching a rebound I think. When there is a significant lack of native teachers in Seoul, and results don't improve after they try this "Korean teacher who teaches English in English" idea, they will come back to hiring native speakers.

There will be an improvement until someone decides to standardize it. And we will have 5 more years of successful employment until the same argument is made.

The problem lies in how they can justify removing teachers across the board instead of hiring more qualified teachers. Maybe the blonde haired and blue eyed college graduate in their early 20's without any teaching qualifications isn't the best choice when selecting a native English teacher.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Dodge7



Joined: 21 Oct 2011

PostPosted: Mon Jul 30, 2012 2:52 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

This probably isn't a bad thing for the kids. I think Korean kids learn more from their Korean teacher than from us: they are better behaved, more focused and the Korean teacher can explain things in a way that we native teachers can't. I think they may actually see somewhat of an increase in test scores--IF they hire and replace these native teachers with qualified, GOOD English speaking Korean teachers.
Face it.. We are a show. They do most learning inside Korean teachers English classes than ours. Results may vary slightly, but overall, we are a joke.



I know it hurts.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Dodge7



Joined: 21 Oct 2011

PostPosted: Mon Jul 30, 2012 2:58 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

viciousdinosaur wrote:
Ok, first of all, this is old news. And, really, good riddance. The maturity isn't there yet to have foreigners working at public schools.

But the part that ticks me off is how native speakers are portrayed as only being useful for speaking! As if the only trick to being able to speak good English to mime the accent of a Californian! Have your seen Koreans write? Atrocious! Speaking can be forgiving. You need not be perfect to be understood, but writing, that's much different. For school and for business, anything less than perfect writing is frowned upon (Unless you're on Dave's).

If anything the current policy should be the complete opposite. Let the Korean teachers teach the little ones ABC and have the natives teach the big kids how to do advance English. That would be putting people in their proper place.

I'm a licensed teacher back home (for what that's worth) and I've been saying this for a long time. Totally, 100% agree.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
PatrickGHBusan



Joined: 24 Jun 2008
Location: Busan (1997-2008) Canada 2008 -

PostPosted: Mon Jul 30, 2012 4:08 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

[quote="viciousdinosaur"]Ok, first of all, this is old news. And, really, good riddance. The maturity isn't there yet to have foreigners working at public schools.

But the part that ticks me off is how native speakers are portrayed as only being useful for speaking! As if the only trick to being able to speak good English to mime the accent of a Californian! Have your seen Koreans write? Atrocious! Speaking can be forgiving. You need not be perfect to be understood, but writing, that's much different. For school and for business, anything less than perfect writing is frowned upon (Unless you're on Dave's).

If anything the current policy should be the complete opposite. Let the Korean teachers teach the little ones ABC and have the natives teach the big kids how to do advance English. That would be putting people in their proper place.[/quote]

Agree with the bolded part IF and only IF the foreign teachers hired to teach at these schools are actually qualified otherwise it would be a huge mistake.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
tideout



Joined: 12 Dec 2010

PostPosted: Mon Jul 30, 2012 5:17 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

[quote="PatrickGHBusan"]
viciousdinosaur wrote:
Ok, first of all, this is old news. And, really, good riddance. The maturity isn't there yet to have foreigners working at public schools.

But the part that ticks me off is how native speakers are portrayed as only being useful for speaking! As if the only trick to being able to speak good English to mime the accent of a Californian! Have your seen Koreans write? Atrocious! Speaking can be forgiving. You need not be perfect to be understood, but writing, that's much different. For school and for business, anything less than perfect writing is frowned upon (Unless you're on Dave's).

If anything the current policy should be the complete opposite. Let the Korean teachers teach the little ones ABC and have the natives teach the big kids how to do advance English. That would be putting people in their proper place.[/quote]

Agree with the bolded part IF and only IF the foreign teachers hired to teach at these schools are actually qualified otherwise it would be a huge mistake.


Agree, Agree, Agree.

I have to laugh a bit about the TEE theory. While it's nice - in theory, I wish I had a 1000 Won note for every time I've heard a KT give instructions in English that I can't understand. Or as my KT requests of me, "can you check the pronounce?"

Frankly, I think some of the grammar explanations given in Korean and followed up with practicing it in in English with the NET has been as effective as anything.

Unfortunately, I see the problem in even worse terms. What I don't see is any interest in what could be called pedagogical thinking. I'm not talking about super technical ways of thinking about language teaching either. I can't tell you the number of times I've seen a known activity out of an Oxford publication or even one of the better exercises in the textbook only to be effectively botched because there really isn't any thinking about what the exercise is working on. Frustrating, as in a sense, the thirsty horse found the well and can't see the water right in front of it.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
iggyb



Joined: 29 Oct 2003

PostPosted: Mon Jul 30, 2012 9:53 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I disagree with the other comments in general.

The problem with English teaching in Korea and East Asia is that they spent the bulk of their time learning about the language rather than learning the language.

So whenever I read an expat talking about how Korean teachers would be better at explaining things and are more qualified than the average NSET I start shaking my head.

For decades, Koreans doing ESL have tried to produce grammar experts who are great at memorizing, and they churned out generation after generation with little to show for 4+ years effort.

In Korea, they say they must do this for the KSAT, but it's BS.

The KSAT English section isn't a grammar test with questions written in Korean based on 1 example English sentence or phrase.

The test aims to check English usage like most other ESL standardized tests. --- If they would teach the students using English and focusing on communicative language practice common in TESOL theory, they would produce students who can use the language --- and who would do better on the KSAT than the grammarians they have produced for decades.

I know it is hard for people who dislike the ineffective nature of the hakwons and public school NSET positions to accept, but having all those untrained, inexperienced, and limited native speakers come to Korea in the hakwons starting in the mid-1990s and then in the public schools --- has --- significantly improved English in Korea.

Why? Because Korean teachers refuse to teach how they should.

And they still refuse today --- ESPECIALLY at the high school level.

The younger Korean teachers do have many more among them who can use English well enough to do TEE than in the past - if they wanted to. If they had the desire to do it and the discipline to follow through ---- but they don't. Few of them do.

The bulk fo them still won't teach English in English -- especially at the high school level.

To learn a language, you need contact hours with it.

You need to focus on communication. You need more focus fluency over accuracy and practice, practice, practice.

The fact having untrained, inexperienced NSETs with a general lack of motivation has nonetheless significantly increased English ability in Korea since 1995 ---- is a clear sign that how Koreans teach English doesn't work.

And the Korean teacher mindset and practice of language teaching has not fundamentally changed.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
iggyb



Joined: 29 Oct 2003

PostPosted: Mon Jul 30, 2012 10:01 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
Let the Korean teachers teach the little ones ABC and have the natives teach the big kids how to do advance English. That would be putting people in their proper place.


The earlier students are engaged in communicative language learning, the better.

The younger they are, the better equipped they are to absorb and internalize a foreign language - if they have enough contact with it.

The above quote might make sense if the focus is on the comfort level of the teachers and students, but it doesn't match language teaching theory or what I've experienced teaching all ages in Korea and the US.

The younger they are, and the more exposure they have, the better.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
iggyb



Joined: 29 Oct 2003

PostPosted: Mon Jul 30, 2012 10:46 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

http://www.amazon.com/Teaching-Principles-Interactive-Approach-Language/dp/0133282201

I agree with most things in this book on language teaching. The bulk of it matched my experience working with Korean students.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
edwardcatflap



Joined: 22 Mar 2009

PostPosted: Mon Jul 30, 2012 3:04 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
I disagree with the other comments in general.

The problem with English teaching in Korea and East Asia is that they spent the bulk of their time learning about the language rather than learning the language.

So whenever I read an expat talking about how Korean teachers would be better at explaining things and are more qualified than the average NSET I start shaking my head.

For decades, Koreans doing ESL have tried to produce grammar experts who are great at memorizing, and they churned out generation after generation with little to show for 4+ years effort.

In Korea, they say they must do this for the KSAT, but it's BS.

The KSAT English section isn't a grammar test with questions written in Korean based on 1 example English sentence or phrase.

The test aims to check English usage like most other ESL standardized tests. --- If they would teach the students using English and focusing on communicative language practice common in TESOL theory, they would produce students who can use the language --- and who would do better on the KSAT than the grammarians they have produced for decades.

I know it is hard for people who dislike the ineffective nature of the hakwons and public school NSET positions to accept, but having all those untrained, inexperienced, and limited native speakers come to Korea in the hakwons starting in the mid-1990s and then in the public schools --- has --- significantly improved English in Korea.

Why? Because Korean teachers refuse to teach how they should.

And they still refuse today --- ESPECIALLY at the high school level.

The younger Korean teachers do have many more among them who can use English well enough to do TEE than in the past - if they wanted to. If they had the desire to do it and the discipline to follow through ---- but they don't. Few of them do.

The bulk fo them still won't teach English in English -- especially at the high school level.

To learn a language, you need contact hours with it.

You need to focus on communication. You need more focus fluency over accuracy and practice, practice, practice.

The fact having untrained, inexperienced NSETs with a general lack of motivation has nonetheless significantly increased English ability in Korea since 1995 ---- is a clear sign that how Koreans teach English doesn't work.

And the Korean teacher mindset and practice of language teaching has not fundamentally changed.


I agree with a lot of this. Korean teachers face a lot of difficulties in the class room. Mixed abilities, sleep deprived kids, poor text books and nonsensical tests. A lot of younger Korean teachers know all the theories about communicative teaching and can put it into practice when they want to, but the simple fact is, as IggyB says, it's a lot more comfortable for both teachers and students to conduct most of the lessons in L1. That's why it annoys me so much to see NETs using too much L1 in the class room in an attempt to fit in with their coteachers and be more culturally aware. The idea was that NETs, not having the language, would be forced into using L2 all the time and this would have a positive effect on the kids but a lot of NETs too are finding it more comfortable to use L1 for class room management and general interaction. This is partly because in order to teach effectively in L2 you need a lot of training which most NETs don't have. When the KETs see their co-teachers using Korean, it reinforces their views that it's ok to teach mostly in L1 and nothing changes.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
viciousdinosaur



Joined: 30 Apr 2012

PostPosted: Mon Jul 30, 2012 3:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

iggyb wrote:
Quote:
Let the Korean teachers teach the little ones ABC and have the natives teach the big kids how to do advance English. That would be putting people in their proper place.


The earlier students are engaged in communicative language learning, the better.

The younger they are, the better equipped they are to absorb and internalize a foreign language - if they have enough contact with it.

The above quote might make sense if the focus is on the comfort level of the teachers and students, but it doesn't match language teaching theory or what I've experienced teaching all ages in Korea and the US.

The younger they are, and the more exposure they have, the better.


But I think you're ignoring the reality of the situation. Sure, it would be ideal to have a native teacher in every English classroom, who understands how to teach, and who knows Korean well too. That's the gold standard.

But that's not what we have here. We have a motley crew of Westerners, some who can teach and most who can't, and cast of Korean teachers, all of whom know the very basics of English, but almost none that can't speak and write at the advance level.

So, if the choice is between having native teachers at either the high school or elementary level, because of "budget" constraints, it makes the most sense to place the foreigners in the high schools, since the Korean teachers would simply be wasting the students' time. At the very least, the Koreans are capable of teaching phonics and spelling, which is just rote memorization anyways.

I often groan at having to teach phonics, not because it's difficult, but I wonder to myself why I had to fly around the world to teach five-year-olds how to pronounce "fun".
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
byrddogs



Joined: 19 Jun 2009
Location: Shanghai

PostPosted: Mon Jul 30, 2012 3:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

iggyb wrote:
Quote:
Let the Korean teachers teach the little ones ABC and have the natives teach the big kids how to do advance English. That would be putting people in their proper place.


The earlier students are engaged in communicative language learning, the better.

The younger they are, the better equipped they are to absorb and internalize a foreign language - if they have enough contact with it.

The above quote might make sense if the focus is on the comfort level of the teachers and students, but it doesn't match language teaching theory or what I've experienced teaching all ages in Korea and the US.

The younger they are, and the more exposure they have, the better.


I agree with this. I teach in the primary dept. at a grades 1-12 Korean school in China. I think we have a pretty good system in place. The amount of native teachers is twice that of the K teachers. We use a leveling system and try to maximize exposure to the natives at each level. We focus on the 4 main components (reading, writing, speaking, listening).

For example:
Let's say this is grade 3; this is the breakdown of classes for the students each week. They have English 6 times per week, btw. (N=native, K=Korean, C=co-taught)

3A- 3K, 2N, 1C
3B- 4N, 2K
3C- 5N, 1K
3D- 6N

It's up to the co-teaching teams to decide what each one's role is for the classes. Usually it works out that the K teachers teach grammar (go figure), as that is what they are most comfortable with.

Our native teachers are more qualified than most to teach ESL and the Korean teachers have to be certified in Korea as English teachers. The younger K teachers do a better job at using the TEE approach than the older ones do, which is to be expected I guess.

All students, regardless of level, have a fair amount of exposure to the native teachers. It isn't a perfect system but it works well.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
iggyb



Joined: 29 Oct 2003

PostPosted: Mon Jul 30, 2012 3:55 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I've taught in Korean hakwons and private school - all ages and levels.

I'm just speaking from my experience and from what I later read about TESOL theory.

It would be ideal if the average NSET was trained in TESOL and had some experience (and couldn't speak Korean or had the discipline to use it rarely in class). That isn't realistic.

But, I think if the average NSET cares about being effective to a minimal degree, they will do so by the end of their first year.

Even if you have TESOL training, it takes about 6 months of experience before you're at least earning your pay. That's true for teaching any subject and age level.

Even more, I'm not sure how long it takes language teachers who haven't faced a survival or low beginner level class to get a good feel for language teaching - if ever.

The same is true for teachers who spend their career teaching students with whom they share a L1.

I think the best experience for future language teaching is to have to teach a full class of survival level students (who you don't share an L1 with). You learn the importance of simplifying what you are teaching, how to prepare activities that you can get started without extensive explanation, the importance of bodylanguage, and so on.

If phonics, basic vocabulary, and set situational sentences are what they are ready for ---- that is what you should teach.

You shouldn't break into Korean hoping to speed up their learning, because it slows them down.

I like focusing on the simple past and future tenses. You can get the lowest level classes doing basic communication with you in not too much time. Teaching them words and things they want to say or that they can use frequently because they cover things you do every day.

I think the bottomline is: Contact hours.

All those untrained, inexperienced NSETs, and even the unmotivated ones, have dramatically increased the amount of contact students have with English.

The Korean government isn't getting their money's worth, perhaps.

It would be best if they'd aggressively push having Korean teachers with English skills ---- and aggressively force them to teach in English 90% of the time in class.

But as is, without the native speakers (in public schools and hakwons), the English ability in the country would collapse.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index -> Job-related Discussion Forum All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9  Next
Page 1 of 9

 
Jump to:  
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


This page is maintained by the one and only Dave Sperling.
Contact Dave's ESL Cafe
Copyright © 2018 Dave Sperling. All Rights Reserved.

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group

TEFL International Supports Dave's ESL Cafe
TEFL Courses, TESOL Course, English Teaching Jobs - TEFL International