Korean Job Discussion Forums

[jacl]

If we're talking about learning English in Korea, the hagwon environment is the best. Kids simply learn and practice more English in smaller classrooms.

[Old fat expat]

indytrucks asks:

[indytrucks]

OFE,

I apologize for the tone of my post ... I was a bit grumpy this morning when I read it.

I do not agree with your assessment of Brown as a 'hack'. I think the audio-lingusistic method is indicitave of characteristics of behaviourism, and while consensus may not necessarily be truth, the opinion is not completely from left field either.

[Old fat expat]

indytrucks:

[ontheway]

So much effort to defend the government schools in Korea. 40 kids in a class studying English one hour per week. The kids learn next to nothing. These kids come to me for interviews every week. Their mothers beg us to teach the kids. Several mothers have cried, because we don't have a spot for their kid.

Why? If the government schools, with their huge budgets, were teaching the kids, would these mothers be crying, begging, and waiting for months on our waiting list?

The government schools are a failure precisely because they are run by the government. Yes, there are good professional teachers there. They are not encouraged and generally not allowed to teach. Those teachers should start their own private schools. In a free society, in any country, they could and would. Being private and run for a profit means that the good schools would survive and the bad one's would fail. Anyone who has studied accounting would tell you that even so called "non profit" organizations are run for a profit. Non profits that don't make a profit go bankrupt just like for profit businesses.n Every individual and family is run for a profit. That only means they balance their checkbook and don't go in the red. Everyone gets paid. If they can't do that, they can and should go bankrupt.

With government it's different. They don't have to make a profit. That means they don't have to satisfy anyone or provide a quality service or product. They just go to the taxpayers and steal more money. And when families want to opt out for private alternatives, the government just assassinates the competition legislatively. Government operates like the mafia, only legally.

With government schools sucking up huge percentages of every family's monthly income, it's difficult for families to come up with the additional cash needed for a private education. Yet, in Korea, most families do that. But, because it is nearly impossible to start a full time private school, most people must settle for hogwans. That is the fault of government regulations. And if the government would get its hands off private hogwans and private schools, they would drive the government schools out of business.

At my hogwan, we teach very bright kids. Most are at the top of their class in the government schools. At our hogwan, they study math, science, social studies, reading, writing - all in English. But, when they come to us, they are almost all below their grade level in math when compared to America - even in Korean. I have to teach them how to add, subtract, multiply and divide. I've had several Korean middle school kids who couldn't divide. Why? The government schools in Korea suck. It's a big government failure.

And yes, the government could attack the hogwans. In fact they do. It's the parents who fight to keep them open. The parents know the schools teach nothing. The government schools are just giant babysitting, testing machines. So, the kids have to learn the material elsewhere.

It's funny to have some posters defend the government schools here, the same people who brag about how few hours they actually teach, movie days where they don't work, surfing the net while on the clock and weeks of vacation or worse sitting-around-at-school-doing-nothing time. Real professional.

The government schools exist so that kids can be fed the government line in every country, the teachers' union is happy, and a large group of political activists can be kept in a job with no work so they have time to keep the socialists in control.

And yes, the correct definition of socialism should be "anything done by the government." Education is an industry where the government has nationalized the means of production, and has secured this system through high, regressive taxation.

Many parents have pleaded with us to expand our private program. They want us to start a complete private school. Kindy through High School. If the government would leave us alone, we would. Give us 10 years with a free market in education and every government school in Korea would be out of business.

[vox]

[ontheway]

Vox,

Your description of the arts non profit is almost exactly the same as any for profit orgainization.

They "alloocate any extra funds towards earmarked projects/presentations fo the next year, thereby affecting how much support they can ask for in that coming year."

In other words, they are reinvesting their profits in order to make more money the next year. Making more money allows them to become bigger and allows the executives to pay themselves higher salaries.

And on the inside, the accountant's point of view as well as that of the management is that they must earn a profit. Revenues must exceed expenditures. Successful non profits generally have a higher profit margin than for profit businesses. Hitting zero is not their goal, only on paper to make it look good. If it doesn't look like zero, who'd give them more money. If they were really hitting zero they'd look like failures and their donations would dry up.

The legal rules for non profits concern how they must handle their profits. Their "product" is some charitable cause. They may not distribute profits to the owners, they can spend it however or reinvest in their cause and get bigger.

That's all to the good though. It's much better than losing money and then stealing to cover your loss. (like the government)

[ontheway]

It seems there is a great deal of confusion about profits here. Businesses make a profit when revenues exceed expenditures, non profits are the same. Most US businesses make only 5% or so on sales. The first 95% goes to costs of labor, rent, materials and supplies, taxes etc. The workers and other providers of goods and services must be paid. But the investors also have to be paid. They provide the investment funds for the machines, equipment, buildings etc. that let the business exist. If you borrowed that money from the bank, you'd have to pay it back with interest. The bank depositors want their interest. But someone has to take the risk of failure, banks generally won't and shouldn't, so investors do. The investors cut is quite small. The result is that businesses compete and products get better and better. This happens in the non profit world, too.

Governments, on the other hand, have no incentive to be efficient or productive. They produce less and less and get fatter and fatter. If you don't like the product and decide not to pay anymore, they put you in jail.

[vox]

[vox]

[Old fat expat]

Vox, thanks for your feedback. You asked:

[ontheway]

Vox, your experience with arts non-profits is a good point. There are many non profits struggling to get enough donations to keep going. Many of their managers are working for something they believe in. Maybe they will fail one day. Maybe they will struggle along for years with little or no income. This is just like many struggling for profit businesses where the owners or managers make little or no money for years, struggling.

I managed a tiny non-profit for 3 years in addition to my regular job. It was a thing of love. Everyone was a volunteer. Survival, however, depends upon growing to the point of having a paid staff. Small, all-volunteer groups often die as the energy of the volunteers dries up.

I have many years of accounting and fundraising experience with large non profits (over 30 years in accounting and finance). I worked for large non profits where the execs made 6 figure incomes. There were hundreds of thousands of donors. We did oversight on the responses from direct mail appeals of 10 million letters in one drop. Yes, there is a board of directors of major donors and glamorous individuals for the PR benefit. They gladly approve the high salaries and perks of managers at the big charities when they produce results. That too is like the for-profit business world.

Fundraising is operated completely on a business basis. Every mailing list is tested and analyzed on a profit and loss basis before rolling a to the full list. Standard rules of thumb of the industry have been verified by statistical analysis and computer modeling to insure effective profitable fundraising. I participated in the data gathering and analysis in one major study with math faculty from a major university and accounting staff provided by a 20 billion dollar company.

The major non-profits are professional businesses providing a heart tugging charitable sounding product. They are as professional, hard driving and profit oriented as any for-profit business.

[vox]

[ddeubel]

Old Fat Expat and Indytrucks,

Many good points but rather steamily stated..........

Have either of you read "The Butter Battle Book"? You both are full of empty language (indy less so.....) and remind me of cardinals arguing about how many angels can dance on the head of a pin. (and it actually was a long debated issue.). You both should take a word or two of advice from one of your pontificating patriots , Wittgenstein. He said, "philosophy is language idling.......". Slow down and speak English. Or step out of your ivory, glassed tower..........

and I don't give a damn if you label me "Structuralist" or "Behaviouralist" or "Anti-Brownist" or unable to chomp on Chomsky. He'd of smacked you both for the lack of clarity and the stiflying institutionalism of your own language use....

You can't talk about language acquisition in such dry terms and black/white. People learn / acquire in many, many ways.....it is all a mystery and will forever remain so. To end again with your Faustian comrade "Language is a part of our organism and no less complicated than it." Tell me what is life and I will be a believer . Until then, no more ......isms.

DD

PS. I did think you both made a lot of salient points. My arguement is not with the "WHAT" but that always more important and grace filled thing - "HOW". Also I do have my degree in behavioural and life sciences, I practice it every day. Like you both, I am an expert, there is nothing human, foreign to me.

DD