Korean Job Discussion Forums :: View topic - Don't Teach Korea

Speak Korean Now!

Teach English Abroad and Get Paid to see the World!

Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"

FAQ

Memberlist

Usergroups

Profile

Don't Teach Korea - Internet Crusade
Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4 Next

Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index -> Job-related Discussion Forum

View previous topic :: View next topic

Author

Message

iggyb

Joined: 29 Oct 2003

Posted: Thu Jul 19, 2012 9:25 am Post subject:

Quote:

Difficult concepts

Unless it is preparation for some standardized test, difficult concepts are probably best learned through practice with the language rather than trying to explain it --- and are mastered only over time and usage - with usage meaning reading as well.

That has been THE primary problem with ESL education in Korea forever...

Before native speakers were brought in, so many Koreans spent years and years learning ABOUT the language and failing miserably at learning the language.

And regardless of how inexperienced and untrained the average NSET is, and no matter how different from real classroom learning the hakwons and public school ESL classrooms are --- bringing in all those native English speakers has had a noticable impact on the general English ability in Korea.

I could tell somewhat of a difference between the first time I was there (1996-2000) and this latest stint (2009-2012)....

b-class rambler

Joined: 25 Mar 2009

Posted: Thu Jul 19, 2012 4:27 pm Post subject:

nautilus wrote:

This country is an acquired taste, it's not for everyone.

Yes, absolutely fair comment.

But so is every country anywhere.

TheUrbanMyth

Joined: 28 Jan 2003
Location: Retired

Posted: Thu Jul 19, 2012 7:51 pm Post subject:

ontheway wrote:

Teaching students in English only, with no Korean whatsoever, is absolutely the best way for students to learn, from ABCs on up, even when they arrive not knowing a single word in English.

We have been doing it for years with great success. There is no need to translate ever...

I disagree. Primarily in English...but when the students don't know a word instead of spending five minutes in pantomime or have them search in their dictionaries I say it in Korean and move on. It keeps the flow of the lesson and makes the students feel more comfortable. (see the link above). I keep track of the words (usually 2-3) that I say in Korean and at the end of the lesson assign homework which consists of writing each word out ten times with the Korean translation next to it as well. Believe me they know that word come next class without the Korean translation.

That said I disagree with the poster who said that bilingualism should be necessary.

Not only is English the target language but you'd have very few NETS over here if that were the standard...probably less than a thousand.

Zyzyfer

Joined: 29 Jan 2003
Location: who, what, where, when, why, how?

Posted: Thu Jul 19, 2012 8:51 pm Post subject:

sml7285 wrote:

I'm not stating that I think that NETs should be proficient Korean speakers. I just think that they should know enough Korean to 1) explain difficult concepts in Korean and 2) to restart stalled conversations.

Point 1, that's why pretty much any teaching job here that involves children also involves Korean co-teachers. The native speakers are there to provide opportunities for students to maximize their practice, and under ideal circumstances, the Korean teachers explains grammar and usage concepts. Not to mention, I couldn't imagine a low or intermediate level of Korean sufficing for the explanation of difficult concepts.

Point 2, not sure how knowing Korean would help, as extremely low-level English students will not be carrying on complex conversations anyway, and a teacher with a decent understanding of running the conversational portion of a lesson really should have a few simple bones to throw out in English that can help restart conversations.

Other posters responded to your points with good counterpoints of their own, so I won't really reiterate all of that. But essentially, I think the system is already set up in such a way that it's not vital that native English speakers can also speak Korean, although being able to certainly doesn't hurt.

Quote:

I guess I did cause some confusion with my "fluent" comment. I guess "conversational" would be a better description. Of course the better the students are at English, the less proficient at Korean a teachers needs to be.

And I don't really mean to harp on you. I've just noticed you going on about how foreigners in Korea need to learn Korean (specifically in that MBC thread) to achieve their goals in certain scenarios. It struck me as a sticking point for you. Which is fine I suppose, whatever, but in the classroom, the dynamics are complex enough that I think it would be detrimental to make a regulation that native speaker English teachers are required to have a particular level of Korean ability.

Anyway, like I said, others addressed the points I had introduced in my last post. I'm no pedagogic expert, but there are certainly different schools of thought on the matter of language teachers needing to be fluent in their native tongue and, er, proficient to some level in the L1 of the students.

edwardcatflap

Joined: 22 Mar 2009

Posted: Thu Jul 19, 2012 9:03 pm Post subject:

Quote:

Alternatively you could say that the teacher explaining an item of vocabulary in the target language and the students understanding is a genuine communicative process which will give the students a sense of achievement and more confidence in real life interaction. When the teacher checks the students understanding through concept checking questions that is more comprehensive input and not a waste of time at all. It is part of the lesson not an interuption. Additionally getting the students to look in their dictionaries is important learner training which will equip them better to deal with situations when an interpreter is not around. Having said that it does depend on the word and the students� level

sml7285

Joined: 26 Apr 2012

Posted: Thu Jul 19, 2012 9:20 pm Post subject:

Zyzyfer wrote:

I guess we'll agree to disagree. I actually came to my point of view years before I even thought about moving to Korea, when there was a movement in my state to consider incorporating Spanish into street signs and other public areas by law. I was stupefied by the concept that people coming into the country could not pick up on enough English to even navigate or work. How I feel in Korea is merely an extension of the beliefs I formed a few years ago in the States.

soomin

Joined: 18 Jun 2009
Location: Daegu

Posted: Thu Jul 19, 2012 9:26 pm Post subject:

ontheway wrote:

Soomin, I'm sorry for your difficulty in teaching beginners, but you are completely off base.

Teaching students in English only, with no Korean whatsoever, is absolutely the best way for students to learn, from ABCs on up, even when they arrive not knowing a single word in English.

We have been doing it for years with great success. There is no need to translate ever. If you design a teaching program with this method in mind from the outset, it will work, and the students will learn to talk, read, write and perform in an all English classroom in a short period of time - far faster and more proficiently than with any other method.

I like teaching in only English~ But the classes that are like that are of a much higher level than most of the ones I've had to teach and have text books. I taught at an English-immersion kindergarten and we never spoke Korean and were chastised if we said anything, even like "야" or "헐." BUT, we had text books and games and activities and so on that were used. In my current situation, I have nothing but paper, glue, crayons, Jenga and Twister. Then throw in kids who barely even know Korean and ask them to have a "conversation class" all in English... it's not going to happen. I study the ABCs with them and play games and make crafts, but they're not really learning much and they're not going to. But again, not my responsibility at this hagwon. Can you teach only in English? Yes, of course. Will the students learn without books and/or without supplementary classes with Korean teachers or a background in English? Hmm... not likely, imho.

TheUrbanMyth wrote:

iggyb wrote:

he sad thing is that you can get by in hakwons and public schools without learning much about teaching. You can get by without it. In fact, the schools pushing you to focus on entertainment rather than progress, and other factors, tend to encourage you to do the minimum...

Which makes Korean ESL not too attractive if education is your career.

It might be good for a couple of years but not longterm....

I agree... When I teach students and see them learning and improving, I feel great! I love those classes... but having your boss tell you to be a clown all day... there just isn't a real sense of accomplishment or self-worth in that kind of situation...

I guess I should just do what my boss told me last week... "Maybe if you did some b-boy dancing, the students would really like you!" >.<

ontheway

Joined: 24 Aug 2005
Location: Somewhere under the rainbow...

Posted: Fri Jul 20, 2012 7:19 am Post subject:

soomin wrote:

ontheway wrote:

I like teaching in only English~ But the classes that are like that are of a much higher level than most of the ones I've had to teach and have text books.

I taught at an English-immersion kindergarten and we never spoke Korean and were chastised if we said anything, even like "야" or "헐." BUT, we had text books and games and activities and so on that were used.

In my current situation, I have nothing but paper, glue, crayons, Jenga and Twister. Then throw in kids who barely even know Korean and ask them to have a "conversation class" all in English... it's not going to happen. I study the ABCs with them and play games and make crafts, but they're not really learning much and they're not going to. But again, not my responsibility at this hagwon. Can you teach only in English? Yes, of course. Will the students learn without books and/or without supplementary classes with Korean teachers or a background in English? Hmm... not likely, imho.

So, it seems that you are confirming what I wrote.

When you have an immersion program, designed to teach children who haven't learned a single word or letter in Korean with all the appropriate study materials, books, games, library, videos, cds, dvds, a program that integrates all of these things with classroom hours and study hours, an interdisciplinary approach, no Korean allowed, no Korean teachers at all, small classes, grouped very strictly by level, this will result in the fastest possible progress in English and no Korean is ever needed either inside of class or even outside of class.

We have found that having any study time at all with a Korean teacher outside of class will retard progress of the students, due not only to poor pronunciation, but incorrect translations and faulty grammar on the part of Korean teachers. Likewise, the use of K/E and E/K dictionaries will not only slow the students, but it will confuse them a great deal since these dictionaries have such a high percentage of incorrect translations. It is better not to use any translations nor any Korean/English dictionaries. We only allow the use of standard English dictionaries designed for the appropriate level, not only in class, but outside of class and at home.

TheUrbanMyth wrote:

While I disagree with using any translation, the use of an occasional word, once a month or so, won't have any discernable negative effect and will have the postive effect of showing the students that their teacher cares enough to have learned some Korean.

It is useful and humanizing to show the students that you are learning their language just as they are learning English, that you care about them and their country, that you understand how it is difficult, frustrating and humorous sometimes and that you understand what they are saying in Korean (at least some of it).

However, I feel that all translations and explanations should be done in English and that concepts that are beyond explaining in English are beyond the class level and should find their place in your teaching program at an appropriate higher level.

edwardcatflap wrote:

Zyzyfer

Joined: 29 Jan 2003
Location: who, what, where, when, why, how?

Posted: Fri Jul 20, 2012 7:36 am Post subject:

sml7285 wrote:

Well, rather than bang on my drums, check the thread out. I haven't read every last bit but it's a good insight, your personal experiences as mentioned in your quote aside.

If you've been reading everything, my apologies.

iggyb

Joined: 29 Oct 2003

Posted: Fri Jul 20, 2012 9:01 am Post subject:

Quote:

no Korean is ever needed either inside of class or even outside of class.

I'm on the same time as you, but you are taking it to an extreme that doesn't match practicle reality - except in a ESL (not EFL) setting and with pre-schoolers only -- and I think TESOL theory has moved away from that extreme since the 80s.

Even with middle schoolers and I'd say elementary school students, once they have learned their native language, trying to eliminate the use of that L1 99% (just a few words per month) ends up making the class less efficient than an appropriate use of it.

--- Students naturally refer back to their L1 when trying to comprehend English langauge usage. Trying to force the class into 100% English - banning even language dictionaries - ignores that basic fact but doesn't eliminate it.

No amount of "immersion" is going to eliminate that...

northway

Joined: 05 Jul 2010

Posted: Fri Jul 20, 2012 9:12 am Post subject:

sml7285 wrote:

Keeper wrote:

I looked at one those sites. It looks similar to many "reviews" of schools done by disgruntled people. I went to one story which was a link to a story about the lack of teaching positions.

Some woman lost her teaching job in the States so she came to Korea. Her Korean contract is not being reviewed so she needs to find work elsewhere. Her quote which stuck out in my mind, �I am happy to be here, and I don�t want to leave.�
Seoul�s English teachers shocked at getting axed
http://koreajoongangdaily.joinsmsn.com/news/article/html/533/2946533.html

The title of the article sounds depressing which is why it was used as a link but it kind of destroys the main concept of don't teach in Korea.

What sticks out the most is that the students preferred Korean teachers because they could not understand the English teachers. I think that teaching a foreign language in that foreign language is the best way to teach. However, a teacher needs to have a strong grasp of the languge that their students speak to be fully effective. Have you ever had a language teacher in the States who could not communicate in English?

Honestly, I think that being bilingual in Korean and English needs to be a requirement to teach. Any person can go into a classroom and talk for an hour at a time about any old subject. Very few can do so and effectively educate students when they don't understand.

1) My Spanish teachers in high school would not communicate with us at all in English. They were highly effective.

2) You need to make a distinction in job types here. What you're saying makes sense for the larger classes you deal with in a public school, but doesn't really make sense for an immersion kindergarten. Knowing Korean is largely unimportant when the students are receiving solely English instruction. Though it an help, it's hardly a necessity.

3) Having never taught, maybe you're missing this, but it's not necessarily the teacher's fault if the students don't understand them. If the students haven't received good instruction in the past, yet have continued to be pushed on to more difficult material, it's awfully difficult to make cohesive lessons that the students will actually get anything out of. You answer to your boss, there are things you have to teach, regardless of whether the students have a strong enough foundation to understand the new material.

TheUrbanMyth wrote:

I think it depends on age and the amount of time you have for instruction, here. With younger kids in a proper immersion environment where they'll be getting four hours or more of English every day, I think you can take your time and accomplish more. With older kids who are only going to have a few hours of English a week, you don't have the time to waste and you're looking for maximum absorption in that short time.

ontheway

Joined: 24 Aug 2005
Location: Somewhere under the rainbow...

Posted: Fri Jul 20, 2012 9:17 am Post subject:

iggyb wrote:

Quote:

no Korean is ever needed either inside of class or even outside of class.

Korean/English language dictionaries have such a high rate of incorrect translations that their use is automatically harmful.

Our experience is that children can learn faster at all levels and ages with no translation into Korean.

some waygug-in

Joined: 25 Jan 2003

Posted: Fri Jul 20, 2012 10:34 am Post subject:

Korean/ English and English/ Korean dictionaries often translate obscure or seldom used meanings of words and the student has to sort through 5 - 10 different meanings and try to figure out which one is right for the context. (if it's even there) It's a pretty daunting task even for a trained interpreter. Those little electronic dictionaries are just as bad, sometimes worse.

CaliUSA

Joined: 30 Jan 2011

Posted: Fri Jul 20, 2012 2:44 pm Post subject:

sml7285 wrote:

Keeper wrote:

I disagree with sml7285, and I think he's turning a class issue into a cultural identity issue. His argument seems to be: English is the baseline language in the USA and Spanish teachers can communicate in English; therefore, it doesn't make sense to have monoglot English teachers in Seoul who can't speak Korean (this would be as absurd as Spanish-language road signs in the USA for people who can't speak English).

This has a logic to it, and the world sml7285 is imagining might or might not be more fair than this one. But in this world, for better or worse, English is the global language of business and science. Maybe Chinese will challenge it decades from now, but right now, the global language is English--not Korean, and not Spanish, which is why I find the references to the use of Spanish in the USA irrelevant and confusing. Spanish teaching in America involves a different social context than EFL instruction in Seoul. For one thing, Spanish learners in the USA generally aren't learning Spanish so they can go to top-notch universities in Latin America, which will give them better job prospects in the USA, and globally.

In my view, the "English immersion" versus "bilingual teachers" debate that sml7285 has started is a distraction from the main issue. Seoul's wealthy and privileged kids will continue to get top-notch English-language instruction. They'll have the money for private lessons, and they're more likely to study abroad. The situation for Seoul's less fortunate seems to be getting more grim, and for me, this is the passage in the article that stuck out the most:

"The teachers are disappointed. They said they believed in the Lee Myung-bak administration�s policy of improving Korean students� English, started in 2009, which was also supposed to diminish the gap between rich and poor students by giving good English education in public schools, especially in the capital."

I would summarize my point by saying that the policy was designed to give Seoul's public-school kids a chance to achieve the cosmopolitan privilege that sml7285 enjoys. But of course, if you would refer to a middle-of-the-road liberal like Paul Krugman as a "lunatic neo-Communist nutjob," then you probably wouldn't care very much about this issue of social class.

sml7285

Joined: 26 Apr 2012

Posted: Fri Jul 20, 2012 3:05 pm Post subject:

CaliUSA wrote:

sml7285 wrote:

Keeper wrote:

Here's the thing: Someone brought up my views from a previous thread where I stated that misunderstandings (legal, cultural, etc) would be almost fully eliminated if foreigners in Korea had a conversational knowledge of the language. My road signs example was me explaining why I think this (actually fairly unrelated to this topic).

With your references to the Seoul's poor, I seem to be getting the vibe that you believe that in education, something is better than nothing. I, however, am a part of the school of thought of "if you're going to do something, do it right." Yes - the truth is that many of the less fortunate people in Korea don't have access to the same educational sources as the more wealthy. But is throwing a 22 year old graduate of a minor state university with absolutely no teaching experience and an inability to communicate with students the right course of action? Also - trying to state that Koreans try to learn English to get a better global job is laughable. Koreans try to get a higher TOEIC score so that they can get a job at Hyundai or Samsung where they will occasionally get an English email, but never spend any time speaking it.

Also - I was trying to be humorous when I was describing Krugman in a thread a while back. I studied the man's economic theories in school - they are amazing. The man though is hired by NYT to be a jarring personality. He is the Skip Bayless of the news world and he positions himself further and further left to create controversy.

Display posts from previous:

	Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index -> Job-related Discussion Forum	All times are GMT - 8 Hours Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4 Next
Page 3 of 4

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

TEFL International Supports Dave's ESL Cafe