|
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 |
sojusucks
Joined: 31 May 2008
|
 Posted: Wed Aug 08, 2012 4:19 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| The big money is no longer in the English market. Now, it's in school lunches. Next time, follow the money. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
edwardcatflap
Joined: 22 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 08, 2012 5:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
Now to your point of that protocol ever being considered here...Koreans would rather cut off their arm than admit they are wrong and/or a foreigner could possibly do something better...like teach their own native language.
You get my point. I know you do. |
The Korean government are investing in Korean teachers because it makes more enconomical sense in the long run to train their own teachers up to be able to deliver in the class room than to keep hiring foreigners from outisde, with all the potential problems that entails. However, the in service and intensive training prorgammes here and abroad that will achieve this, are all mostly designed and delivered by foreigners. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Squire
Joined: 26 Sep 2010
Location: Jeollanam-do
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 09, 2012 1:49 am Post subject: |
|
|
Classes should be divided into grammar lectures and speaking classes. The grammar classes can be taught by the Korean teacher and perhaps largely delivered as a lecture, then the other classes can be taught by the NET which is more speech and activity based and entirely focused on practicing English and using the grammar that has been taught in Korean. Have the KET teach the grammar class alone (no need to have a NET there) and abandon the idea of TEE. Then the NET will only teach the speaking classes, in which the KET may or may not be present.
1 grammar class taught in Korean for 2 speaking classes taught in English. In theory the NET is being used a third less, so can then be teaching elsewhere. Perhaps one of the conversation classes for a different grade. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
edwardcatflap
Joined: 22 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 09, 2012 3:00 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
Classes should be divided into grammar lectures and speaking classes. The grammar classes can be taught by the Korean teacher and perhaps largely delivered as a lecture, then the other classes can be taught by the NET which is more speech and activity based and entirely focused on practicing English and using the grammar that has been taught in Korean. Have the KET teach the grammar class alone (no need to have a NET there) and abandon the idea of TEE. Then the NET will only teach the speaking classes, in which the KET may or may not be present.
1 grammar class taught in Korean for 2 speaking classes taught in English. In theory the NET is being used a third less, so can then be teaching elsewhere. Perhaps one of the conversation classes for a different grade. |
How could a teacher spend a whole lesson lecturing kids on grammar and make it at all interesting? Why would they need to spend that long explaining stuff anyway? When I teach adults in English I maybe spend 5 minutes maximum in a lesson actually explaining grammar to them and that's only when they can't work it out for themselves. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
iggyb
Joined: 29 Oct 2003
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 09, 2012 3:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
edwardcatflap,
The problem is the willingness of Korean teachers to teach in English.
The current president has been pushing TEE hard and gotten little to show for it.
Removing the foreigners will greatly -- greatly -- lower the amount of contact they have with English in use....
...which will greatly retard their ability to learn the language. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
edwardcatflap
Joined: 22 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 09, 2012 3:23 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
edwardcatflap,
The problem is the willingness of Korean teachers to teach in English.
The current president has been pushing TEE hard and gotten little to show for it.
Removing the foreigners will greatly -- greatly -- lower the amount of contact they have with English in use....
...which will greatly retard their ability to learn the language. |
You're right, I think you mentioned earlier about trying to enforce the teaching of English through English in the class room. If you're going to invest in training I agree you have to follow it up by making sure they practise what they've learned. Regular observations, ongoing on the job training by the better English speaking Korean teachers etc... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
some waygug-in
Joined: 25 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 09, 2012 5:27 am Post subject: |
|
|
I've worked with many co-teachers who were fluent in English, but yet they chose to teach mostly in Korean.
When asked about this, they would
inevitably reply, "they won't understand me unless I speak Korean".
This is probably the greatest problem Korean teachers need to overcome.
They don't seem to grasp the importance of using English as much as
possible in the classroom.
They don't seem to realize the stumbling block they are setting up for
their students. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Squire
Joined: 26 Sep 2010
Location: Jeollanam-do
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 09, 2012 7:50 am Post subject: |
|
|
| edwardcatflap wrote: |
| Quote: |
Classes should be divided into grammar lectures and speaking classes. The grammar classes can be taught by the Korean teacher and perhaps largely delivered as a lecture, then the other classes can be taught by the NET which is more speech and activity based and entirely focused on practicing English and using the grammar that has been taught in Korean. Have the KET teach the grammar class alone (no need to have a NET there) and abandon the idea of TEE. Then the NET will only teach the speaking classes, in which the KET may or may not be present.
1 grammar class taught in Korean for 2 speaking classes taught in English. In theory the NET is being used a third less, so can then be teaching elsewhere. Perhaps one of the conversation classes for a different grade. |
How could a teacher spend a whole lesson lecturing kids on grammar and make it at all interesting? Why would they need to spend that long explaining stuff anyway? When I teach adults in English I maybe spend 5 minutes maximum in a lesson actually explaining grammar to them and that's only when they can't work it out for themselves. |
A whole lesson would be excessive, but the general idea is that a NET doesn't have to be around when new language, sentence structures and target vocabulary are being presented. The KET could do that and the rest of that class could be used memorising the material so that when it is time to apply it in the NET's English class that time can be used purely for practice. It's just an idea to find a way to use both Korean and foreign teachers more effectively than they are now |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Imanaznguy
Joined: 25 Nov 2008
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 12, 2012 8:07 am Post subject: Anyone interested in speaking your opinions on local radio? |
|
|
Hello everyone, I'm a reporter with a local English radio station based in Seoul, tbs eFM 101.3.
We're doing a feature on the Seoul Metropolitan Office of Education's recent decision to let go of its English TA's at its public middle and high schools. We'd like to get some opinions from teachers who are currently working in Seoul, or any English teachers in Korea, so if you're interested, I'd like to conduct some brief interviews with you individually. Please email me for more information.
[email protected]
Daniel Shin |
|
| 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
