|
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 |
duhweecher
Joined: 06 Nov 2013
|
 Posted: Mon Dec 23, 2013 6:00 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| nate1983 wrote: |
| duhweecher wrote: |
Final update: He had 10 min left over to review the intermediate writing section and says that it was super easy. After consulting with him he informed me that his answer to the question if there was something you could not do in life explain why and so forth. I'm assuming his essay was simply ignored as off topic because he choose to write a very introspective response that required reading to the end, which I realized while reading the one he rewrote for me. I'm pretty sure that's the problem too. He showed me how he answered the other parts and I didn't find much wrong with his responses. |
I don't get it. If he's fluent, why is he taking the intermediate exam? I'm certainly not fluent and cleared level 5 very easily, almost got level 6. Any "fluent" speaker should be consistently 90+ on any section of the intermediate exam, excepting writing which is inherently subjective.
It's pretty easy to prepare for the vocab/grammar, and if you're truly fluent the reading and listening should be pretty easy. I couldn't think what to write about, so the writing section was my worst and I can understanding someone just sort of flaking out on that. |
The part of his contention is the writing part. I'm still disturbed that he lodged a formal complaint and they didn't even reply. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
duhweecher
Joined: 06 Nov 2013
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 29, 2013 4:47 am Post subject: |
|
|
We have a response from the checkers:
So another update on this score issue. Which, now I can affirm is truly flawed. (And as I mentioned before 100% susceptible to discrimination due to the requirement of having to give a picture that identifies race and/or colour to the authorities. Imagine if we made a country we don't like in the US do that and allow American to check their test. It's too weird and there's really no reason for it. ID checks should suffice just like any other standardised test, to maintain fairness.)
But to the score issue:
The breakdown of the essay scoring is as follows: (direct translations)
1st part: Contents & task performance broken down into: whether the topic was answered; are all individually asked requirements present; and is there expression variation.
2nd part: Essay structure broken down into: is the essay suitably linked from beginning to end; is the essay broken into clear paragraphs that convey the point in a structured fashion; are the paragraphs connected in a natural way.
3rd part: Vocabulary usage broken down into: did the respondent uses elementary, intermediate, or advanced level expressions and a variety of grammar constructions; are these different levels of expressions used appropriately.
*****4th part: Use of "sociolinguistic function" broken down into: did the respondent use any specialised terms or sentence constructions in the essay.
Each part gets apparently one score by two checkers. The max combined score for each part being 30. (Didn't explain what they do with this score later since it doesn't even add up to 100. I'm assuming they lower the 4th retardation).
Reaction:
I have checked for standardised tests like TOEFL in the US, and I will tell you that this system of scoring is perhaps the worst that I have ever seen for the primary reason that these 4 parts absolutely do not deserve equal treatment for understanding whether a person is able to answer a question using fluent and even highly functional language skills. It's way too much of a linguistic approach for answering questions like: If you can change something in the past, what would it be? This system really does belong on tests like the SAT; it's totally inappropriate way for checking people taking intermediate level (and to some extent advanced level) language tests.
I have nothing further to say on the matter, but wow, what a crappy test if the government or even schools are backing this horribly created scoring method all I can honestly say is...
 and then... 
******4th part: Are they kidding? Equal weight as the other components? Or even close say....20? For such simple questions.
BTW: I asked for a breakdown of scores from the officials by race or even nationality. They said they don't have that information. So if there were discrimination...well...who would know? 
Personally, I learned how to write by some of the best in Korea (and I'm Korean). Good writing is simple and precise. Usually the language only employs long sentences on very few occasions. Some of the masters of writing in Korean literature know this.
This test is designed for people who show off, not for good writers. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
PeteJB
Joined: 06 Jul 2007
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 29, 2013 2:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| This is a problem and the top-down approach would be much more effective than simply saying 'Oh, it must be that one guy's problem'. Or are you perhaps missing the whole point with these messages? |
I agree, I dislike the way Korean tests are administered and if I was writing TOPIK papers I'd write them to cater to everyone, rather than just those who study for it.
But it must be an entire continent that has it wrong, because I've known students from all over Asia that have had no problem taking the TOPIK with sufficient study. And no, language ISN'T about plain old skill - you have to understand the culture that comes attached with that language if you hope to learn it properly. You can't seriously compare an English test with a Korean one. English is the language of commerce and should not be treated the same way. If Korean was a language used throughout the world I'd agree with you, but it just doesn't compare to English (or Chinese for that matter). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
happiness
Joined: 04 Sep 2010
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 29, 2013 7:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I speak Korean rather well (Japanese as well, but my Kanji is near non-existent), and I just want to say Ive never taken any of these tests, I just never saw the need. If you were going to work in a Korean company, maybe since the documents they love to print up (lol official statements), but otherwise, it seems like money down the drain (unless you like test-taking)
For me, I was rather make sure my speaking was up to par (I guess it is) and I could read and write, but why would anyone want to write a thesis/whatever in Korean, for what reason?
Ive gotten every job and benefit here because I can speak correctly. Ive always felt that was more important.
Just saying... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
littlelisa
Joined: 12 Jun 2007
Location: Seoul
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 29, 2013 9:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| happiness wrote: |
I speak Korean rather well (Japanese as well, but my Kanji is near non-existent), and I just want to say Ive never taken any of these tests, I just never saw the need. If you were going to work in a Korean company, maybe since the documents they love to print up (lol official statements), but otherwise, it seems like money down the drain (unless you like test-taking)
For me, I was rather make sure my speaking was up to par (I guess it is) and I could read and write, but why would anyone want to write a thesis/whatever in Korean, for what reason?
Ive gotten every job and benefit here because I can speak correctly. Ive always felt that was more important.
Just saying... |
Common reasons why people need TOPIK: study at a Korean university, visa reasons, scholarship reasons, when applying to jobs outside of Korea to prove your proficiency is what you say it is, for job applications in Korea who might require it, especially anything that includes writing or reading skills. Some people take it optionally as a way to either see what their level is, or to use it as motivation to study more. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
duhweecher
Joined: 06 Nov 2013
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 29, 2013 11:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| PeteJB wrote: |
| Quote: |
| This is a problem and the top-down approach would be much more effective than simply saying 'Oh, it must be that one guy's problem'. Or are you perhaps missing the whole point with these messages? |
I agree, I dislike the way Korean tests are administered and if I was writing TOPIK papers I'd write them to cater to everyone, rather than just those who study for it.
But it must be an entire continent that has it wrong, because I've known students from all over Asia that have had no problem taking the TOPIK with sufficient study. And no, language ISN'T about plain old skill - you have to understand the culture that comes attached with that language if you hope to learn it properly. You can't seriously compare an English test with a Korean one. English is the language of commerce and should not be treated the same way. If Korean was a language used throughout the world I'd agree with you, but it just doesn't compare to English (or Chinese for that matter). |
Yes...you need to understand the culture for such a test. Said clearly by someone who has no clue why they revamped both the TOEFL and SAT in the past...
Sounding "logical" and elegant doesn't make an argument correct. Yes, an entire country, continent, and even the world can be wrong, thus the revamping mentioned above.
You're 100% wrong. (And no, it's not even logical reasoning...from English being the language of commerce to saying if another language were spoken all over the world...you make no sense whatsoever)
It's called a STANDARDIZED test. Do you even know what that means? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
hiamnotcool
Joined: 06 Feb 2012
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 30, 2013 9:51 am Post subject: |
|
|
| duhweecher wrote: |
| PeteJB wrote: |
| Quote: |
| This is a problem and the top-down approach would be much more effective than simply saying 'Oh, it must be that one guy's problem'. Or are you perhaps missing the whole point with these messages? |
I agree, I dislike the way Korean tests are administered and if I was writing TOPIK papers I'd write them to cater to everyone, rather than just those who study for it.
But it must be an entire continent that has it wrong, because I've known students from all over Asia that have had no problem taking the TOPIK with sufficient study. And no, language ISN'T about plain old skill - you have to understand the culture that comes attached with that language if you hope to learn it properly. You can't seriously compare an English test with a Korean one. English is the language of commerce and should not be treated the same way. If Korean was a language used throughout the world I'd agree with you, but it just doesn't compare to English (or Chinese for that matter). |
Yes...you need to understand the culture for such a test. Said clearly by someone who has no clue why they revamped both the TOEFL and SAT in the past...
Sounding "logical" and elegant doesn't make an argument correct. Yes, an entire country, continent, and even the world can be wrong, thus the revamping mentioned above.
You're 100% wrong. (And no, it's not even logical reasoning...from English being the language of commerce to saying if another language were spoken all over the world...you make no sense whatsoever)
It's called a STANDARDIZED test. Do you even know what that means? |
You make a good point, In my opinion the test is flawed for native english speakers for two main reasons.
1. It isn't intermediate level, the word "intermediate" does not properly describe the test. It is not worth studying and passing a test that puts you at the advanced level in the West if you can only put "intermediate" level on your resume or tell people you are intermediate when you return home. If you tell people that you are intermediate in the USA they are going to think you can introduce yourself and stumble through a few questions.
2. It isn't a standardized test. It is designed for people who have spent time studying Korean culture as well as the language. Only studying the language is not going to allow you to pass it. I guess it could be done, but it would be extremely hard. And from the Essay grading scheme it becomes obvious you must study the culture to get a good score.
But then you have to understand someone like PeteJB is never going to back any of this up. And nothing will come of it. I don't really see a point in trying to pass the TOPIK if you can't come to terms with this. I don't agree with what PeteJB says, but I acknowledge that he is expressing the dominant approach in Korea and I am not going to change that any time soon. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
nate1983
Joined: 30 Mar 2008
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 03, 2014 10:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| hiamnotcool wrote: |
You make a good point, In my opinion the test is flawed for native english speakers for two main reasons.
1. It isn't intermediate level, the word "intermediate" does not properly describe the test. It is not worth studying and passing a test that puts you at the advanced level in the West if you can only put "intermediate" level on your resume or tell people you are intermediate when you return home. If you tell people that you are intermediate in the USA they are going to think you can introduce yourself and stumble through a few questions.
2. It isn't a standardized test. It is designed for people who have spent time studying Korean culture as well as the language. Only studying the language is not going to allow you to pass it. I guess it could be done, but it would be extremely hard. And from the Essay grading scheme it becomes obvious you must study the culture to get a good score. |
1. I passed the intermediate test (score of 52, so eeked a level 3) when I had been learning the language for 8 months during my free time in graduate school. I had never been to Korea (was hoping to do a Fulbright research grant), so I had no clue about the culture or any practice with speaking. I did a lot of online language exchange chats, so I could write okay, but I'm sure I could have barely put a sentence together if I had to talk.
2. The intermediate test is intermediate. Pass the advanced test if you want to call yourself "advanced" - plenty of people do this every year, so if you want some certificate that says "advanced" then you should learn more of the grammar/vocab they test and sharpen your other skills. I took it after cramming with practice tests and by this point had lived in the country less than two years. I passed level 5 and was close to level 6, except I did really bad on writing (50). I would hesitate to call myself "advanced" at that point.
3. The main "culture" on the exam is the stupid little proverbs or idioms they expect you to know. However, that's part of the language, and you can't separate it totally from the culture. I'm not aware of the TOPIK asking who 웅녀 was or how many 냥 equal one 근, or what season is best for making kimchi.
4. I agree the essay's tricky (writing was my worst section both times), but buckle down and nail the other sections and you're fine (as long as you get as least 40/50 on writing). I know an American guy who got 100 on advanced listening, and my Korean's pretty shaky but I managed 70+ on advanced vocab/grammar and reading.
5. You don't have to be good at Korean - just work on getting good at taking the TOPIK if that (for some reason) is your goal. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
World Traveler
Joined: 29 May 2009
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 03, 2014 10:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| nate1983 wrote: |
| I passed the intermediate test (score of 52, so eeked a level 3) when I had been learning the language for 8 months during my free time in graduate school. |
You make me feel really stupid. I've been studying harder than anyone I know for three years and still probably wouldn't be able to pass it. How long had you been studying Korean before that? Did you major in Korean in undergrad? I simply do not know how someone could advance that far that quickly. Most lifers I know (in Korea for 15+ years, married to a Korean, Korean kids, etc.) would NOT be able to score low intermediate or anywhere near that. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
salutbonjour
Joined: 22 Jan 2013
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 03, 2014 11:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
duhweecher is still being an idiot.
The essay is 30 points because there are other questions in the writing section. Such as 10 multiple choices and short answers.
Though the 4 components might gain from being split differently, they are all important. How hard can it be to throw in a couple of 그래서 or 오히려 to make your essay better?
I ate kimchi. Kimchi was good. Kimchi is made in autumn. I made kimchi with my host mother. I live in boarding house. The host mother is really kind.
Even this essay filled the requirements in terms of topic and doesn't have grammatical errors, it is cringe-worthy. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
nate1983
Joined: 30 Mar 2008
|
| Posted: Sat Jan 04, 2014 9:11 am Post subject: |
|
|
| World Traveler wrote: |
| nate1983 wrote: |
| I passed the intermediate test (score of 52, so eeked a level 3) when I had been learning the language for 8 months during my free time in graduate school. |
You make me feel really stupid. I've been studying harder than anyone I know for three years and still probably wouldn't be able to pass it. How long had you been studying Korean before that? Did you major in Korean in undergrad? I simply do not know how someone could advance that far that quickly. Most lifers I know (in Korea for 15+ years, married to a Korean, Korean kids, etc.) would NOT be able to score low intermediate or anywhere near that. |
I went to Mexico a few years ago to study Spanish, and despite going to class, looking at grammar books, and the fact I speak French, I can't put together anything more than a very, very basic sentence (only present tense).
I didn't have any prior experience with Korean, but since I was interested in doing research there I signed up to audit the only Korean class at my university that my schedule allowed - a third year course. About two months before school started, I resolved to just spend a few hours a day on it. I used YouTube videos called something like "Let's Speak in Korean," and I bought the first four books (two beginner, two intermediate) of the Integrated Korean series.
By the time school rolled around, I had made it somewhere into the intermediate books, and our class used the fifth and sixth books in the same series. I was the only non-gyopo, and I basically just tried to avoid having to say anything. Although I was auditing the course, I still tried to do well on the tests (mostly memorizing vocab I think) and I wrote the required essays, no matter how difficult that was. In the months leading up to the TOPIK, which I had decided was my "goal" to validate my efforts, I went through lots of old tests and even paid a Korean grad student $10/hr to help explain stuff to me. I also discovered Livemocha (since bought and destroyed by Rosetta Stone), where I was able to spend a couple hours per day doing language exchange chats in Korean - that helped immensely.
I've always been a good test taker, and as a mathematics major the "logical" structure of Korean was something that I was able to pick up on. But the difference with Korean - as opposed to the failed attempts with other languages that I've tried to learn as an adult - was that I was also fairly dedicated, and I was lucky to find a great textbook series that fit my learning style (I've never come across anything like Integrated Korean books 1-4 before).
I really did just eek out a pass with something like a 52.5 - and I think I scored a 70 on vocab/grammar, so without that I would have failed. By the way, I met a guy (Chinese) who said he passed level 6 after one year studying the language/living in Korea - and that is many magnitudes harder than level 3 - so I don't think given the time and effort I put in it was anything remarkable. |
|
| 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
