Korean Job Discussion Forums

[iggyb]

One key point I mean to say - the Korean teachers, like the ones I work with, are just doing what they think is best for the students. They aren't trying to be lazy or anything. They think how they want to teach is the right way and better than the way I suggest...

And this is Korea. This is their school (though switching teachers around every 5 years makes it much less "their school" than you would find in the US). So, it's their class....That is how they treat it.

[Ramen]

[iggyb]

Well, it seems that you do have nothing better to do than piss on people.

I'm not going to respond to any more of these pot shots.

Read into what I write whatever you want...

[LongShiKong]

Interesting thread. The problem of Korean English teachers refusing or not knowing how to teach CLT is not restricted to Korea. It's an Asian thing:

1. CLT assumes the teacher has (near-)native fluency not only to model but also guide communication in L2. Here in China, many Chinese English teachers have such poor English* or even believe they do that language learning never even gets past the vocab & pattern drilling stage.

2. Teachers are under tremendous pressure to have their class perform well in standardized tests and/or during peer observations which don't test fluency.

3. Effective CLT teaching is a skill not akin to regular content-level teaching. I don't know about Korea but primary schools in China don't have separately qualified teachers to teach English and if they do, their only added qualification is their ability to speak English.

4. Effective CLT requires resources most Asian schools lack, even private language schools.

5. To misquote G. Stein: Teaching teaches that teaching teaches. Text-based learning still rules in Asia as it has for 2500 yrs. Asians probably view western K and pre-k 'play-based learning' as a euphemism for incompetent teaching.

6. In Asia, education isn't the profession it is in the west, particularly 2nd language acquisition. Oh, there's some token research but that's about it.

[happiness]

Hmm..these are awesome ideas, but theyre idealistic, and it would really depend on the group you have. They want useful expressions because Korean is made up of stock expressions that everyone absolutely uses in the same way everyday, and theres no variation on it (well, a bit), I have taught all kinds here and Im also a Korean speaker. I do listen and repeat and a script alot of the time to show them a basic idea of how you should do things (in the situation, you say this, etc). I now its not the way real things work, and people dont speak like that, but they are studying in their OWN environment. Meeting one foreigner in their OWN culture and environment, so I now they will switch it off the minute the walk out the door.

I think it needs to fit into their frame of reference, and while they may say they want American slang and whatever. It mostly wont fit into their methods of learning.

I do teach the kids expressions but its always situational and one way, like oh my goodness, and the like, something that doesnt need a response..

[some waygug-in]

It shouldn't be an "either or" decision.

It should be a combination of both techniques, using the listen and repeat

in short segments to help students practice new material and new

grammar patterns. Then switching to communicative activities to apply

what they have learned and practiced.


Easier said than done, yes I know. But that should be the ideal you

shoot for.

[LongShiKong]