Korean Job Discussion Forums

Maugrim · Joined: 10 Nov 2003

Not to steal RR's thunder, but here's an interesting op-ed piece from the Korean Herald.

The author makes some good points.

Food for thought anyway.

http://www.koreaherald.co.kr/SITE/data/html_dir/2006/03/22/200603220043.asp

korian · Joined: 26 Feb 2004

the author states what most of us know about the korean education system - that english isn't used as it should be in aiding people.

but what i don't get about his hypothesis is why english is maintaining the staus quo and further segregating the elite from the masses. if english was needed to climb the social ladder, and english was exclusive to a mere few with the necessary resources, then i could understand his point.

but every little park, kim and lee studies english in korea. it's not exclusive. almost every kid goes to a hagwon, learns the technical grammar he speaks of and crams for english exams.

so what has english got to do with widening the classes when it is accessible to everyone?

Moldy Rutabaga · Joined: 01 Jul 2003 Location: Ansan, Korea

German universities have a reputation for tepid blandness and career students. Not sure they're a model to be emulated.

The central problem with the argument, as I see it, is that he blames English learning for making class distinctions worse. Firstly, as the previous poster says, it's hardly true when English is accessible to all in countless hogwans across the country. Secondly, I'm not sure blaming English is the correct target, but rather the country's elites themselves. If English was no longer a competitive tool, wouldn't these supposed elites just replace it with another mark of class?

Is this article a translation? Is the author just moaning about English because he can't be arsed to learn it?

Ken:>

peppermint · Posted: Thu Mar 23, 2006 2:40 pm Post subject:

korian · Joined: 26 Feb 2004

even if you're right peppermint - and i don't claim to have any stats on the matter - 60% is still hardly a minority. the elite come from the chosen few, not 60%.

as you say, perhaps it's another case of blaming something else rather than looking inward. perhaps not. i'll let others decide

crazylemongirl · Joined: 23 Mar 2003 Location: almost there...

Comparing it to the court language of astroractic europe is bollocks. It's the most widely spoken second language in the world. If Koreans want to take part in the global world they need to learn english. The fact that their eduction system is geared towards hagonws is what causes the class system, not english itself.

the_beaver · Joined: 15 Jan 2003

Ya-ta Boy · Joined: 16 Jan 2003 Location: Established in 1994

I agree with peppermint.

I didn't see a need for the guy to go to 19th Century Russia for his example. Chinese was used here by the elite and hangeul was used by women and anyone else who was literate.

He's blaming the wrong thing. Korea is and always has been hierarchical, with a very peculiar strand of egalitarianism thrown in. Family background, school and province are also important factors. Where else can you get out of a traffic violation ticket if you and the cop are from the same province?

Success on English grammar tests is only one way where some people are selected for success here, albeit an important one. From what I've seen in class, teachers have no qualms about ignoring a kid who is not doing well. No doubt that is why bribing teachers is so common.

I was especially struck by this sentence: "But although students may be able to speak and read in English, it is arguable whether this structure provides a more value-added skillset - the ability to think analytically, as opposed to information recapitulation." English is a tool of communication. What is communicated in the language should not be used as a criticism of the tool. The school system as a whole is not geared to teach analytical thought. In fact, I think the guy's whole article demonstrates this failure.

My reading of the article leads me to conclude Mr. Jasper Kim is one of the 'progressives' who object to SK's association with the West and wants a closer relationship with China, based on a much more socialistic economic system.

seoulsucker · Posted: Thu Mar 23, 2006 4:41 pm Post subject:

billybrobby · Joined: 09 Dec 2004

I think a lot of you are agreeing with this guy while superficially saying you disagree with him. Maybe because he's attacking your livelihood. But he's not arguing against English, or even learning English. He's just pointing out that English does tend to seperate the haves from the have nots. You'll note in his proposed solution that nowhere does he recommend learning less English.

Koreans are always telling me "Oh, I'm studying for the TOEIC." Why? "To get a good job." In what field? "As a Fireman." ...well, ok, it's not this outrageous, but a lot of Koreans learn english for no other reason than to look good for schools and employers, not because they need it to accomplish some task. And despite our (english speakers) boundless sense of self-importance, English is basically unnecessary for about two thirds of Koreans.

peppermint · Posted: Thu Mar 23, 2006 5:46 pm Post subject:

How could anyone disagree with the idea that English is used on a purely superficial level here?

He certainly puts the idea out there, but doesn't really discuss that, just how it's used as a class divider.

korian · Joined: 26 Feb 2004

billy brobby i agree with what you say, and would hazard a guess that more than 80% don't really need the kind of english they learn at school or hagwons - after they get the jobs that require the toeic score. exactly the same in japan too.

what i can't understand is how you extrapolated from the responses that we surreptitiously agree with the guy. where did you get that from?

billybrobby · Joined: 09 Dec 2004

korian · Joined: 26 Feb 2004

double post

korian · Joined: 26 Feb 2004

just as an aside to that quote, what does taking part in the global world mean exactly? i am referring to the average korean guy or girl, or even the average guy or girl from any non-english speaking country. how will they participate in the global world?

most will have their native language, they will go to school, perhaps univ, graduate, get a job, work, have a family, and set up a home. if they travel, you can certainly get by without english - though of course it's easier to have.

i am of course talking about more developed countries, but what does 'participating in the global world' actually entail for the average joe or jane from a non english speaking country? and do they need english to do that?