|
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 |
El Bandito
Joined: 07 Oct 2013
|
 Posted: Tue Dec 10, 2013 10:18 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| Coltronator wrote: |
I didn't say it was a waste. I said it is being wasted. They are a great resource for the students. However, class sizes of 30 at the lower end and 50 at the higher end. With situations where the class is almost universally in my experience aimed at the middle 10-15 students abilities while ignoring the challenges the weaker ones are facing while being useless for the stronger ones. (conversations with 30 or so public school teachers, when I meet a new one and we start chatting I always ask about this situation) For those 15-20% of students in each class the lesson is a complete waste in the vast majority of cases. Their parents pay taxes the same as everyone else and have a valid reason to wish the money diverted elsewhere.
While having a lazy co-teacher is no excuse to not be productive and useful, it does mean that continued training of the foreigner to better the situation is left in the hands of someone who is now on their own to better it. As you said for many having a lazy, overworked, inexperienced, or uni-lingual co-teacher is the norm.
Maybe my statements of useless and needing an overhaul were extreme. Instead lets say that the is a great deal of improvement that the public NET situation could use and are far less useful than they could be. So, while not needing an overhaul, they would greatly benefit from adjustments to improve teamwork, efficiency, and overall usefulness. |
Some really good points there.
I think another problem that they have in their program is forcing students to learn English when many of them have no interest in learning it whatsoever. I've always thought that the class should be optional, but in lieu of English, an equally difficult class should be offered.
Also, one 40 minute class a week with the NET isn't enough to advance their speaking skills, other than getting them to memorize a few songs, chants, and classroom expressions. By offering the option of taking English then you could teach smaller classes 2 or 3 times a week, with the same students.
Third, in my experience, those after school classes with the advanced students are a joke. I should be more specific-with the 3rd grade students, it's a joke. The 4th, 5th and 6th grade students studied really hard, whereas the 3rd grade kids played grabass all class.
I really think there are students that have a sincere desire to learn English, but their parents couldn't afford the hogwan fees, so they never got to attend. With the low fees of the afterschool program, there should also be options for students who will have to be taught from scratch. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
jvalmer
Joined: 06 Jun 2003
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 10, 2013 10:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| El Bandito wrote: |
| Coltronator wrote: |
I didn't say it was a waste. I said it is being wasted. They are a great resource for the students. However, class sizes of 30 at the lower end and 50 at the higher end. With situations where the class is almost universally in my experience aimed at the middle 10-15 students abilities while ignoring the challenges the weaker ones are facing while being useless for the stronger ones. (conversations with 30 or so public school teachers, when I meet a new one and we start chatting I always ask about this situation) For those 15-20% of students in each class the lesson is a complete waste in the vast majority of cases. Their parents pay taxes the same as everyone else and have a valid reason to wish the money diverted elsewhere.
While having a lazy co-teacher is no excuse to not be productive and useful, it does mean that continued training of the foreigner to better the situation is left in the hands of someone who is now on their own to better it. As you said for many having a lazy, overworked, inexperienced, or uni-lingual co-teacher is the norm.
Maybe my statements of useless and needing an overhaul were extreme. Instead lets say that the is a great deal of improvement that the public NET situation could use and are far less useful than they could be. So, while not needing an overhaul, they would greatly benefit from adjustments to improve teamwork, efficiency, and overall usefulness. |
Some really good points there.
I think another problem that they have in their program is forcing students to learn English when many of them have no interest in learning it whatsoever. I've always thought that the class should be optional, but in lieu of English, an equally difficult class should be offered.
Also, one 40 minute class a week with the NET isn't enough to advance their speaking skills, other than getting them to memorize a few songs, chants, and classroom expressions. By offering the option of taking English then you could teach smaller classes 2 or 3 times a week, with the same students.
Third, in my experience, those after school classes with the advanced students are a joke. I should be more specific-with the 3rd grade students, it's a joke. The 4th, 5th and 6th grade students studied really hard, whereas the 3rd grade kids played grabass all class.
I really think there are students that have a sincere desire to learn English, but their parents couldn't afford the hogwan fees, so they never got to attend. With the low fees of the afterschool program, there should also be options for students who will have to be taught from scratch. |
After-school programs should be 100% optional. The problem is they make it mandatory, and if the ones that students are really interested in are all full, English is usually the least favored subject for most students. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
El Bandito
Joined: 07 Oct 2013
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 10, 2013 10:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| jvalmer wrote: |
| El Bandito wrote: |
| Coltronator wrote: |
I didn't say it was a waste. I said it is being wasted. They are a great resource for the students. However, class sizes of 30 at the lower end and 50 at the higher end. With situations where the class is almost universally in my experience aimed at the middle 10-15 students abilities while ignoring the challenges the weaker ones are facing while being useless for the stronger ones. (conversations with 30 or so public school teachers, when I meet a new one and we start chatting I always ask about this situation) For those 15-20% of students in each class the lesson is a complete waste in the vast majority of cases. Their parents pay taxes the same as everyone else and have a valid reason to wish the money diverted elsewhere.
While having a lazy co-teacher is no excuse to not be productive and useful, it does mean that continued training of the foreigner to better the situation is left in the hands of someone who is now on their own to better it. As you said for many having a lazy, overworked, inexperienced, or uni-lingual co-teacher is the norm.
Maybe my statements of useless and needing an overhaul were extreme. Instead lets say that the is a great deal of improvement that the public NET situation could use and are far less useful than they could be. So, while not needing an overhaul, they would greatly benefit from adjustments to improve teamwork, efficiency, and overall usefulness. |
Some really good points there.
I think another problem that they have in their program is forcing students to learn English when many of them have no interest in learning it whatsoever. I've always thought that the class should be optional, but in lieu of English, an equally difficult class should be offered.
Also, one 40 minute class a week with the NET isn't enough to advance their speaking skills, other than getting them to memorize a few songs, chants, and classroom expressions. By offering the option of taking English then you could teach smaller classes 2 or 3 times a week, with the same students.
Third, in my experience, those after school classes with the advanced students are a joke. I should be more specific-with the 3rd grade students, it's a joke. The 4th, 5th and 6th grade students studied really hard, whereas the 3rd grade kids played grabass all class.
I really think there are students that have a sincere desire to learn English, but their parents couldn't afford the hogwan fees, so they never got to attend. With the low fees of the afterschool program, there should also be options for students who will have to be taught from scratch. |
After-school programs should be 100% optional. The problem is they make it mandatory, and if the ones that students are really interested in are all full, English is usually the least favored subject for most students. |
The school I was at had optional programs. The first year, the class had 4th, 5th, 6th students. The second and third years, because of increased demand, two classes were offered 3rd/4th and 5th/6th. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jvalmer
Joined: 06 Jun 2003
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 10, 2013 10:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I work in a different province and the first thing I'll say, is that they over-hired. Virtually every school in the main towns have a NET. And others cover the rural school. They even have NET's in the technical schools (got to wonder why?). But there are lots of teachers not even teaching the full 22-hours. Some schools even have two NET's. Right there it would be easy to cut a bit of fat.
No point having NET's in technical High schools. And instead of having a teacher in every single school, have them teach at two schools (one urban, one rural/HS). That right there would reduce the payroll more than half. I kind of agree not having NET's in high schools, because they are under-appreciated in HS and students only care about the tests. Maybe have a NET in a elementary/middle school have a HS as their secondary school.
And only send NET's to school that really want one, as in apply for one. Instead of forcing one on them. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
World Traveler
Joined: 29 May 2009
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 10, 2013 10:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| El Bandito wrote: |
| Also, one 40 minute class a week with the NET isn't enough to advance their speaking skills, other than getting them to memorize a few songs, chants, and classroom expressions. |
You think, man? Korean kids get a TON of English instruction. We are a supplement to that and just one part of the puzzle (though an important one).
| Quote: |
Kelly Choi is an 11-year-old entering fourth grade in Seoul’s Gangnam district. She spends some 10 hours studying in seven English classes every week — more than three-fourths the class time of all her other subjects combined, not counting homework.
Statistically, Kelly (her English name) is behind her classmates. She began studying English in first grade, but half her Gangnam peers started before kindergarten. And when they get to middle and high school, they will spend more than 15,000 hours studying the language. |
http://groovekorea.com/article/koreas-efl-education-failing |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jvalmer
Joined: 06 Jun 2003
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 10, 2013 10:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| El Bandito wrote: |
| The school I was at had optional programs. The first year, the class had 4th, 5th, 6th students. The second and third years, because of increased demand, two classes were offered 3rd/4th and 5th/6th. |
Optional as in their parents want them in there, not what the students want? Got to wonder... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
El Bandito
Joined: 07 Oct 2013
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 10, 2013 10:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| jvalmer wrote: |
I work in a different province and the first thing I'll say, is that they over-hired. Virtually every school in the main towns have a NET. And others cover the rural school. They even have NET's in the technical schools (got to wonder why?). But there are lots of teachers not even teaching the full 22-hours. Some schools even have two NET's. Right there it would be easy to cut a bit of fat.
No point having NET's in technical High schools. And instead of having a teacher in every single school, have them teach at two schools (one urban, one rural/HS). That right there would reduce the payroll more than half. I kind of agree not having NET's in high schools, because they are under-appreciated in HS and students only care about the tests. Maybe have a NET in a elementary/middle school have a HS as their secondary school. |
This was when I taught in Gyeongi-do. Our school was big enough that I taught regular classes of 24 hours + the afterschool classes.
My buddy who lived in the same apartment complex, however, worked at 3 smaller schools, so in some situations, they do ship the teachers out to other schools to cover the classes/hours.
But, yeah, there are some places where NETs aren't needed. Technical/industrial schools and automotive repair schools being two that I can think of off the top of my head. I was going to say fashion/design and culinary, but with those two professions English can help you succeed internationally. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
World Traveler
Joined: 29 May 2009
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 10, 2013 10:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| jvalmer wrote: |
| But there are lots of teachers not even teaching the full 22-hours. |
Korean teachers generally teach way less than that. Have you seen their schedules?
The lowest I've seen is 11. The highest I've seen is 18. On average, they teach far less than the NET. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jvalmer
Joined: 06 Jun 2003
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 10, 2013 11:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| World Traveler wrote: |
| jvalmer wrote: |
| But there are lots of teachers not even teaching the full 22-hours. |
Korean teachers generally teach way less than that. Have you seen their schedules?
The lowest I've seen is 11. The highest I've seen is 18. On average, they teach far less than the NET. |
Yes I have seen Korean teachers schedules. I get a nice spreadsheet of them every year.
You do know that some Korean teachers aren't full-time? Some are interns, others are contract. And I know often the 'discipline' teacher (or whatever a better term is) is given a lighter load. And for homeroom teachers, their homeroom time is added to their schedules too (that's 5 extra hours/week). 20-ish minutes in the morning and 20-ish in the afternoon. Most of the full-time teachers in all the schools I've been at are in that 20-hour range. I've even seen some teacher go to multiple schools (usually the music, arts, and PE teachers) to get them to that 20-hour mark.
I'm not in Seoul though. Wonder where you teach? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
World Traveler
Joined: 29 May 2009
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 10, 2013 11:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
20 hours is the max for K-teachers. 22 is the max for NETs. For some strange reason, NETs get hours closer to the 22 mark than K-teachers get in relation to the 20 hour mark.
Also, those K- teachers are getting paid more than you and get better benefits than you (like retirement money, no extra unpaid camps during vacation, etc.). Not sure why you're trying to make it sound like they have it so hard and we have it so easy. You sound like The Urban Myth. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
El Bandito
Joined: 07 Oct 2013
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 10, 2013 11:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| World Traveler wrote: |
| El Bandito wrote: |
| Also, one 40 minute class a week with the NET isn't enough to advance their speaking skills, other than getting them to memorize a few songs, chants, and classroom expressions. |
You think, man? Korean kids get a TON of English instruction. We are a supplement to that and just one part of the puzzle (though an important one).
| Quote: |
Kelly Choi is an 11-year-old entering fourth grade in Seoul’s Gangnam district. She spends some 10 hours studying in seven English classes every week — more than three-fourths the class time of all her other subjects combined, not counting homework.
Statistically, Kelly (her English name) is behind her classmates. She began studying English in first grade, but half her Gangnam peers started before kindergarten. And when they get to middle and high school, they will spend more than 15,000 hours studying the language. |
http://groovekorea.com/article/koreas-efl-education-failing |
You'd be surprised when you get out into the sticks, the number of students who DON'T go to an English hogwan. Their only exposure to a NET is at their public school, and if they're really motivated, internet use. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
El Bandito
Joined: 07 Oct 2013
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 10, 2013 11:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| World Traveler wrote: |
20 hours is the max for K-teachers. 22 is the max for NETs. For some strange reason, NETs get hours closer to the 22 mark than K-teachers get in relation to the 20 hour mark.
Also, those K- teachers are getting paid more than you and get better benefits than you (like retirement money, no extra unpaid camps during vacation, etc.). Not sure why you're trying to make it sound like they have it so hard and we have it so easy. You sound like The Urban Myth. |
Not only that, but based on the amount of time they have teaching, they also get the Lunar New Year/Chuseok bonuses as well. Any of that stuff they do during vacation is either for extra pay or "points" to use for moving to a different school or moving up to be the head teacher for one of the grades.
I'd say they have it pretty easy. That's one of the reasons it's such a highly desired and highly competitive job. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jvalmer
Joined: 06 Jun 2003
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 10, 2013 11:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| El Bandito wrote: |
| World Traveler wrote: |
20 hours is the max for K-teachers. 22 is the max for NETs. For some strange reason, NETs get hours closer to the 22 mark than K-teachers get in relation to the 20 hour mark.
Also, those K- teachers are getting paid more than you and get better benefits than you (like retirement money, no extra unpaid camps during vacation, etc.). Not sure why you're trying to make it sound like they have it so hard and we have it so easy. You sound like The Urban Myth. |
Not only that, but based on the amount of time they have teaching, they also get the Lunar New Year/Chuseok bonuses as well. Any of that stuff they do during vacation is either for extra pay or "points" to use for moving to a different school or moving up to be the head teacher for one of the grades.
I'd say they have it pretty easy. That's one of the reasons it's such a highly desired and highly competitive job. |
Have you ever had to deal with an irate mother who threw her hot coffee at a young teacher just because she wouldn't give her son an extra 10% on his English final?
Saw it personally, and that's when I knew my ct deserves every single bonus down to the won. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
World Traveler
Joined: 29 May 2009
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 10, 2013 11:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| The teacher cannot sue the mother? Hot coffee. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jvalmer
Joined: 06 Jun 2003
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 10, 2013 11:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| El Bandito wrote: |
Any of that stuff they do during vacation is either for extra pay or "points" to use for moving to a different school or moving up to be the head teacher for one of the grades.
I'd say they have it pretty easy. That's one of the reasons it's such a highly desired and highly competitive job. |
They don't use up points moving schools. They have to move school every certain number of years. But do get extra points going to un-desirable schools.
And they have to deal with parents, police, and students when they get into trouble. Guess who goes to the police station, or hospital, if a student gets into trouble? The homeroom teacher. Yes, some are lazy, and some aren't. But have you actually seen them their whole career of teaching? A lot are very very jaded and basically 'given up' and just want to coast to retirement without causing a ruckus. |
|
| 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
