|
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 |
ddeubel
Joined: 20 Jul 2005
|
 Posted: Sun Jun 18, 2006 8:31 am Post subject: Early English Education -- undermining Korean identity???? |
 |
|
I read with disgust an editorial in the weekend JoongAng Daily. Full text pasted below. But what in particular I found simplistic and blatantly wrong and smallminded was the following paragraph where the author sums up his thoughts.........
| Quote: |
| But the larger reason I am against early English education is that it will produce human beings without nationalities by obstructing the establishment of the identity of our future generations. |
What shocks me, is not that people might have this opinion. Small mindedness and ignorance, even in seemingly educated professionals is common the world over. What shocks me is that a newspaper would even consider to print such a view, even as an editorial. To legitimize it, in some way.......
I think Koreans have to rid themselves of the notion of "purity" and that anything foreign dilutes their "identity". Does learning a second language well, mastering it -- make one less Korean????? In my opinion , it makes oneself even a better Korean. One who is more intelligent, with a wider world view, one with perspective and the ability to represent what Korea means to the wider world. A second language broadens and expands Korean sensibility and creates a stronger , more dynamic Korean.
That said, it shouldn't even be framed in nationalistic / racist terms like this......any opinions on this neandrathalic view.????
DD
PS. Please note the author is a professor of English education. He should be called on the carpet and beaten with a wet copy of his editorial.....shame, shame...
| Quote: |
Ineffectual English policies
They say that seven out of 10 primary school students receive private English education these days.
And according to a recent Internet survey, 53 percent of 1,218 parents said they started to teach their children English before the age of 3; many even said that they started exposing their unborn children to English speech.
The average tuition for toddlers at private English education institutes is about 400,000 won ($417) to 700,000 won per month, and the tuition for classes taught by a native English-speaking teacher is said to be well over 1 million won a month. The number of private English education institutes has doubled in the past ten years, and the market has grown about 10 times, to 10 trillion won per annum. (Compare the amount with the 2006 budget of the Ministry of Education and Human Resources Development, which is about 3.2 trillion won.)
Also, the number of primary through high school students going abroad for further study exceeded 7,000 for the first time last year. On top of that, if we take into account the reality in which people have their children's tongues operated on to enhance their English pronunciation, all Koreans seem to suffer under stress caused by early English educational zeal and waste a lot of national energy.
The phenomenon of energy waste on national level that we see now has resulted from English education that starts in primary grade 3, a change made in 1997. The curriculum, one hour per week of English education, is no help for foreign language education; that requires intensive learning, and the policy change only resulted in an expansion of the private education market.
Last month the Education Ministry announced the names of 50 primary schools selected as model English education schools, where first- and second-grade students will attend English classes. Just like in 1997, the ministry announced its new education plan without going through the process of collecting public opinion in advance. The reason for the implementation of the plan is said to be the social demand to give English education some substance. Moreover, the ministry claims that the expanded reach of early English education will provide opportunities for English education to students in agricultural villages or urban slums that are now blind spots for English education, and alleviate social polarization. In fact, it is trying to conceal the failure of early English education that started ten years ago.
But the expansion of early English education will only aggravate the gap between social strata, because the ineffective one-hour-per-week English education will increase reliance on private education and ultimately reproduce the situation where parents' financial capability decides their children's English ability as time goes on.
But the larger reason I am against early English education is that it will produce human beings without nationalities by obstructing the establishment of the identity of our future generations.
What we need in this age of globalization is an attitude of standing firmly on our land while thinking globally. This is the reason that almost all countries that teach English as a foreign language make efforts to overcome the language imperialism that they confront in the course of English education.
Even linguists differ in their opinion on foreign language education, and there is no theory that proves scientifically just how a foreign language is learned.
For example, in the 1940s and 1950s, behavioral scientists considered language a habit, and so they believed that learning a foreign language early would make it habitual more quickly. But nativists and rationalists in the 1960s and 1970s claimed that people were naturally born with skills for acquiring languages, and learn languages through a cognitive process.
The constructivist scholars of today say that since languages develop centering around the functions of the language that it wants to express, the learner of a language uses it by reconstructing the information input accordingly. Aside from the behaviorist theory, no other theories emphasize the effectiveness of early education.
We have to stop making the whole Korean population feel frustrated with English. We must give intensive English education according to when it is required. According to 2004 data, the Korean language skills of our people were less than 30 points out of 100.
We urgently need to abolish ineffective and wasteful primary school English education and establish an English education system that concentrates on conversation and oral English in middle school, on basic grammar and reading and writing in high school and on one's major field in university education.
* The writer is a professor of English education at Sangmyung University. Translation by the JoongAng Daily staff. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Howard Roark
Joined: 02 Feb 2003
Location: Canada
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 18, 2006 2:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
On a similarly incredulous note...
I have an adult student who says he will not be enrolling his 5 year-old daughter in any kind of English classes. He honestly thinks if she attends English class for an hour 3 times a week she "won't learn Korean properly".
He also thinks a lot of studying is "bad for your brain" and therefore would prefer not to have his daughter attend any kind of after-school study. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
poet13
Joined: 22 Jan 2006
Location: Just over there....throwing lemons.
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 18, 2006 3:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Well, good on that parent for not forcing his child to attend 4 different hagwons a day plus regular school. His rational for not learning english is funky though. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
angiejsm
Joined: 24 May 2006
Location: Not exactly sure.
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 18, 2006 3:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Is this paper a reliable one, or the Korean version of a sordid tabloid?
I ask because this article and the other published in tandem with it are invaluable for the thesis I'm writing this year, however if the paper is not reputable, the article is unusable. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ddeubel
Joined: 20 Jul 2005
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 18, 2006 3:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| Is this paper a reliable one, or the Korean version of a sordid tabloid? |
http://joongangdaily.joins.com/ A member of Korea's leading Newspaper Group.....
i wish it were a "sorid" tabloid. That might excuse them printing such illfounded and backwards opinions of professors remaining in the 14th century of intellectual inquiry........
But it aint so Sam......use them if you wish...
DD |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Yu_Bum_suk
Joined: 25 Dec 2004
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 18, 2006 4:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
What about the tens of thousands of Korean kids who go to kindergartens largely staffed by foreigners? (where they run around like monkeys and probably don't learn much English anyways). That must deeply disturb the author.
I think that part of the reason for all the silly excuses is that they want the grade 1 to 4 homeroom teachers to teach English as part of the dam-eam sunsaengnim's curriculum, and some of these teachers have a lower level of English than some of their students who go to English hogwans. It would be a bit like telling me that I have to start teaching high school mathematics. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
identity
Joined: 22 Apr 2006
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 18, 2006 7:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
i don't think narrow-minded liberalism is any better than narrow-minded conservatism.
if you found this statement in a historical newspaper from 200 years ago and they were talking about french, would you still feel so strongly? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ddeubel
Joined: 20 Jul 2005
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 18, 2006 8:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
i don't think narrow-minded liberalism is any better than narrow-minded conservatism.
if you found this statement in a historical newspaper from 200 years ago and they were talking about french, would you still feel so strongly? |
You bet I would! Label what you wish but it isn't narrow-mindedness to be on the side of science.
It is beyond a doubt shown (even though the mechanism involved is in dispute) that those who learn multiple languages at an early age grow up to be more intelligent, more prescient, more expansive and thoughtful human beings. Countries in Europe such as Holland and Denmark which have experimented wholly with early second language immersion have benefited profoundly by expanding their "human " capital.
Science would also have something to say about "nationalism" being a good and healthy human relationship -- given all the evidence the last century afforded us. But I still think you can be a good and proud patriotic citizen and learn a mirade of languages at a young age. For a professor to say otherwise is just poppycock and backward, Now or 200 years ago.
My god where did the enlightenment go??? we haven't come very far in all that time, really and truly.
DD.
PS. I do agree that better teachers have to enter the education system. I talked to people developing programs in the government and they are looking into granting letters of approval to non certified teachers - to work in the system (so to better harness all the fluency Korea does have out there) and also to offer bonuses and perks to those who DO teach English as a second language. This will help immensely if it gets done.
I also agree that shoving dead tired kids into hogwans is just not productive or "humane". But I don't agree that Koreans should turn their back on the wider world..... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
identity
Joined: 22 Apr 2006
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 18, 2006 8:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| i don't think that was his argument at all. i know that learning second languages is a healthy thing, as i'm not retarded, but having your culture swallowed whole isn't, which you didn't even acknowlege as an argument, you were so busy trying to tell the world how smart you are. i mean, honestly, why aren't the majority of these kids learning chinese? before you respond, ask yourself this, "do you always answer rhetorical questions?" |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ddeubel
Joined: 20 Jul 2005
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 18, 2006 10:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I answer rhetorical questions when they need to be addressed sure..........
Culture DOES NOT get swallowed hole and the best way to destroy a culture is to keep it in a glass house. It is dynamic and changing, my own degree in anthropology taught me that much (yes, look at me, how smart I am).
Please review these same debates in many countries (Sweden , Belgium, Czech Rep. , Chile, even Hong Kong) and how near sighted all the cultural protectionists were -- first and foremost about 20 years ago in Quebec, suggesting French culture would be swallowed up by English being allowed to be studied . Never happened, with culture, the best defense is a strong, self-confident offense and acceptance/absorption of the best others have to offer......
Korea has nothing to fear from the "English " language world. That is Peter Pan pedantics.....Anthropologists would agree and so would Newton and his 2nd law of thermodynamics, entropy -- as to the ancient principal of "change" being inherent in all matter......
DD |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
identity
Joined: 22 Apr 2006
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 18, 2006 11:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| blech |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
anyway
Joined: 22 Oct 2005
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 19, 2006 12:45 am Post subject: |
|
|
Howard Roark Posted: Sun Jun 18, 2006 2:08 pm Post subject:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On a similarly incredulous note...
I have an adult student who says he will not be enrolling his 5 year-old daughter in any kind of English classes. He honestly thinks if she attends English class for an hour 3 times a week she "won't learn Korean properly".
What's worse....my students are public school English teachers and many of them hold the same opinion.
I think that the Koreans have to look no further than their own obsession with English to see why they feel so threatened. Why do they use Engish in advertisements and on billboards? Because of the "prestige" factor, of course. Never mind that it doesn't make a bleeping bit of sense...
What really cracks me up is when some of my students (remember, public school teachers) will maintain that everyone goes abroad ONLY to learn English. There is no other reason for a Korean to enroll in another country's school system. None.
When will the government wake up and realize the class sizes of 40 are ludicrous?
Personally, I would like to see better teachers "exit" the education system...
[/quote] |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ya-ta Boy
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
Location: Established in 1994
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 19, 2006 1:23 am Post subject: |
|
|
About a hundred years ago Koreans were having the same basic argument. What is foreign is to be distrusted. That approach worked out really well for them. 
The writer does have a point, though. If you define 'Koreanness' as narrow, blinkered and xenophobic then yes, bringing in thousands of foreigners to teach your kids and hundreds of thousands to work in your factories might well present a threat to your concept of Koreanness. Giving kids exposure to the outside world is threatening if you only want them to know about a very specialized version of the world.
However, if you define Koreanness as something based on a confident, flexible society that can absorb foreign philosophies/religions, like Confucianism and Buddhism and become even more Confucian than China, and borrow 70% of your vocabulary and STILL be Korean; borrow 20th Century technology and transform society in 30 years, then there is nothing to worry about.
To me, the writer of the article is revealing not his pride in Korea, but his false pride that stems from his profound insecurity about his country and its place in the world. He really believes Korea and its culture is weak, not strong. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
flotsam
Joined: 28 Mar 2006
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 19, 2006 1:29 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Ya-ta Boy wrote: |
About a hundred years ago Koreans were having the same basic argument. What is foreign is to be distrusted. That approach worked out really well for them.
The writer does have a point, though. If you define 'Koreanness' as narrow, blinkered and xenophobic then yes, bringing in thousands of foreigners to teach your kids and hundreds of thousands to work in your factories might well present a threat to your concept of Koreanness. Giving kids exposure to the outside world is threatening if you only want them to know about a very specialized version of the world.
However, if you define Koreanness as something based on a confident, flexible society that can absorb foreign philosophies/religions, like Confucianism and Buddhism and become even more Confucian than China, and borrow 70% of your vocabulary and STILL be Korean; borrow 20th Century technology and transform society in 30 years, then there is nothing to worry about.
To me, the writer of the article is revealing not his pride in Korea, but his false pride that stems from his profound insecurity about his country and its place in the world. He really believes Korea and its culture is weak, not strong. |
Ba-da-bing.
Nicely stated. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Juregen
Joined: 30 May 2006
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 19, 2006 2:37 am Post subject: |
|
|
As a Belgian I think I can comment on it.
In Belgium (10 million people), about 4 million are French speaking, about 6 million speak Dutch, and less then 400.000 speak German.
It is quit necessary for any Belgian to speak at least 2 languages, people with university background at least 3, in order to get a decent job/social life.
What this person says in the above is complete boulderdash. Language alone does not decrease national identity, knowledge of one language does not decrease the knowledge of another. I would even say the more languages you know, the better you know the others, because you have better understanding.
What is a problem is Konglish. Konglish stems from the fact that English is mixed with Korean, mostly by people who do not speak/write proper English.
Thus the opposite is true imho, it is the fact that some people do not properly speak a second language, that there is bound to be a strong influence of the second language on the first. Especially in Korea where everyone is class conscious, and they like to boost they know some English, even though it may be far fetched.
The current evolution of Koreans wanting their sons/daughters to be able to communicate in English is commendable and 'market efficient', people know that those who can compared to those who cannot have a huge advantage.
IMHO Koreans can learn something from the Belgians in the sence that we have found a way dealing with a multilinguistic country, and it is because of this 'strength' that Belgians prosper in the EU as it is.
Sorry if i made a spelling mistake, it's too long for me wanting to check it 
I have ofcourse not investigated all of this, i speak merely from my own experiences |
|
| 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
