|
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 |
nero
Joined: 11 Mar 2009
|
 Posted: Fri Jan 25, 2013 8:39 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
I agree with Mr Blackcat.
worked a part time job as did all my friends from when I was fourteen. That job is how I paid for things. Very rarely did my mum lend me money and I would've been embarrassed to ask.
I worked at a supermarket stacking shelves and on the checkout. When my high school work increased I had to change shifts to the weekend in order toget my homework/studying completed during the week. I also played sports and had guitar lessons (which I paid for).
Korean students work long hours, but like most things here it is all quantity and no quality.
Like most things here it is all about the appearance rather than the reality. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
newb
Joined: 27 Aug 2012
Location: Korea
|
| Posted: Sat Jan 26, 2013 5:05 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| Like most things here it is all about the appearance rather than the reality. |
I love the multimedia system and electronic gadgets in my classroom. They look good. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Steelrails
Joined: 12 Mar 2009
Location: Earth, Solar System
|
| Posted: Sat Jan 26, 2013 7:07 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Actually the appearance is that it is all for show. The reality is that given the economy that Korea has developed, the rise in English scores, and the surprising overall level of English proficiency (when one looks at the situation without prejudice) it is clear that their studying isn't for show but has produced very tangible results, likewise the assumption that many of us are 'English Monkeys' is ridiculous as well. Clearly we have had an effect, and quite a positive one as well. I think both sides are shortchanging the accomplishments of each other, and ironically are shortchanging their own accomplishments. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
some waygug-in
Joined: 25 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Sat Jan 26, 2013 8:36 am Post subject: |
|
|
Those that do show interest and do the extra work necessary have
remarkably good English skills. Those who rely on the teacher to do
everything for them, fall behind and end up getting frustrated/angry.
It's the same in Canada with French. Most English speaking Canadians don't learn French (eventhough they study it in school) because they have
no real interest in learning it. Those who do have interest do learn it because they are willing to put in the effort necessary to learn.
Without some genuine interest in learning a language, there is very little
hope of success.
As a side note, I supsect that "many Koreans are angry" not because they
haven't learned English, but because they were forced to study it in the
the first place. You can't force people to learn something they don't want
to learn. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bailsibub
Joined: 22 Dec 2006
|
| Posted: Sat Jan 26, 2013 9:03 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Steelrails wrote: |
| The reality is that given the economy that Korea has developed, the rise in English scores, and the surprising overall level of English proficiency |
However, your opinion of reality is markedly different from those who have actually studied how to teach languages. Modern applied linguistics programs have been promoting communicative competence for quite some time (after Chomsky conceived the idea of linguistic competence), with the latest development being intercultural communicative competence. You use a red herring (increasing test scores) to draw attention away from the widespread inability to interact and negotiate difference.
The only thing that is 'surprising' is your arrogant use of the phrase "when one looks at the situation without prejudice," which should really be directed towards yourself. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Steelrails
Joined: 12 Mar 2009
Location: Earth, Solar System
|
| Posted: Sat Jan 26, 2013 3:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Bailsibub wrote: |
However, your opinion of reality is markedly different from those who have actually studied how to teach languages. Modern applied linguistics programs have been promoting communicative competence for quite some time (after Chomsky conceived the idea of linguistic competence), with the latest development being intercultural communicative competence. You use a red herring (increasing test scores) to draw attention away from the widespread inability to interact and negotiate difference.
The only thing that is 'surprising' is your arrogant use of the phrase "when one looks at the situation without prejudice," which should really be directed towards yourself. |
And yet somehow, Korea is able to communicate with the rest of the world and develop global leaders in Electronics, Automobiles, Construction, Nuclear Power, Shipping, Telecommunications, etc.
If Korea's communications were so ineffective, common sense would dictate that those industries would be stuck in a rut and Korea would floundering on the rocks of global interaction. Certainly it would not be an entertainment dynamo in Asia with expanding global reach.
The results justify the means. If it works, it may not be the best, but it certainly isn't broken. Of course, ivory tower theory may disagree and certainly there is room for improvement, but as has been shown, Koreans are always tweaking their system to make it better.
You dismiss test scores, and yes, at times tests do not always indicate competence. But the thing is that someone who is competent will get a good test score as well. You seem to think that all of those who score well are truly really bad at English and just playing the test. Are those perhaps the exception? A perception based on stereotype. Some people who score well on a test played the test, MOST who score well are truly talented.
| Quote: |
| he only thing that is 'surprising' is your arrogant use of the phrase "when one looks at the situation without prejudice," which should really be directed towards yourself. |
Look at the results and ask again. Where exactly is this evidence that their system is a failure? Take it out of an academic setting and look at the practical results.
Don't be a dinosaur joking about how Hyundai and Samsung are utter jokes (like in 1995-2000) and continue with that belief into 2012. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bailsibub
Joined: 22 Dec 2006
|
| Posted: Sat Jan 26, 2013 5:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Steelrails wrote: |
| Where exactly is this evidence that their system is a failure? |
Here.
The Hong Kong Political and Economic Risk Consultancy rated South Koreans as having the lowest English communicative competence across Asia (SERI, 2008).
In 2005 South Korea lagged behind all East Asian countries in luring global companies. Hong Kong and Singapore had drawn 1,167 and 350 regional headquarters respectively, whereas South Korea attracted only 11 according to reports by SERI (2008), spurred by the fear of foreigners of an inability to communicate with South Koreans.
from Hadzantonis, 2010, Negotiating Spaces, Routledge
This is empirical research, which is very different from opinion (what you are writing). But go ahead and keep on ignorantly posting about things you know nothing about. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Captain Corea
Joined: 28 Feb 2005
Location: Seoul
|
| Posted: Sat Jan 26, 2013 5:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
But does that show FAILURE?
I mean, it shows a certain low score... and gives a couple of possible reasons, but that doesn't scream failure to me.
I seem to recall another thread on here about learning Korean. About how Korean was ranked the hardest for English speakers to learn. Now, are those Westerners' low scores a failure? Or is it simply just that the two languages are so far apart? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
newb
Joined: 27 Aug 2012
Location: Korea
|
| Posted: Sat Jan 26, 2013 7:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Captain Corea wrote: |
But does that show FAILURE?
I mean, it shows a certain low score... and gives a couple of possible reasons, but that doesn't scream failure to me.
I seem to recall another thread on here about learning Korean. About how Korean was ranked the hardest for English speakers to learn. Now, are those Westerners' low scores a failure? Or is it simply just that the two languages are so far apart? |
For me Korean was very easy to learn. However, knowing Korean is worthless outside of Korea. It's almost like learning Navajo. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Steelrails
Joined: 12 Mar 2009
Location: Earth, Solar System
|
| Posted: Sat Jan 26, 2013 7:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Bailsibub wrote: |
| Steelrails wrote: |
| Where exactly is this evidence that their system is a failure? |
Here.
The Hong Kong Political and Economic Risk Consultancy rated South Koreans as having the lowest English communicative competence across Asia (SERI, 2008).
In 2005 South Korea lagged behind all East Asian countries in luring global companies. Hong Kong and Singapore had drawn 1,167 and 350 regional headquarters respectively, whereas South Korea attracted only 11 according to reports by SERI (2008), spurred by the fear of foreigners of an inability to communicate with South Koreans.
from Hadzantonis, 2010, Negotiating Spaces, Routledge
This is empirical research, which is very different from opinion (what you are writing). But go ahead and keep on ignorantly posting about things you know nothing about. |
Yes because English scores in 2005 (back before you could easily find cheese, for example), comparing them to two city-states that were former British colonies? and are hubs for international finance?
You do realize that you can't compare city-states that were former colonies to a full-fledged nation, right?
But go ahead and keep calling me ignorant. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
newb
Joined: 27 Aug 2012
Location: Korea
|
| Posted: Sat Jan 26, 2013 7:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
comparing them to two city-states that were former British colonies? and are hubs for international finance?
You do realize that you can't compare city-states that were former colonies to a full-fledged nation, right?
But go ahead and keep calling me ignorant. |
Isn't Korea a colony of the United States of America?  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bailsibub
Joined: 22 Dec 2006
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 27, 2013 12:46 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Steelrails wrote: |
You do realize that you can't compare city-states that were former colonies to a full-fledged nation, right?
|
Apparently, some educated and powerful Koreans have no problem with it. SERI is the economic research arm of Samsung. And as you point out, Samsung is no joke! Nevertheless, it's your lot that are making the comparison; I'm sure you'll jump in and reiterate the ignorance of such a comparison because you "can look at the situation without prejudice."
| Steelrails wrote: |
But go ahead and keep calling me ignorant. |
I never called you ignorant, and I'm sure you're not an ignorant person. I said that your action was ignorant, i.e. being ill-informed on a serious issue but still making claims as if you are an authority. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bailsibub
Joined: 22 Dec 2006
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 27, 2013 1:09 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Captain Corea wrote: |
But does that show FAILURE?
|
No, it's just empirical evidence (produced by Samsung, no less) indicating that Koreans have the lowest communicative competence in Asia and that it, in turn, is markedly affecting large amounts of investment from foreign companies. But that's no biggie, right?
BTW, I love that lycra suit. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Steelrails
Joined: 12 Mar 2009
Location: Earth, Solar System
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 27, 2013 5:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| Apparently, some educated and powerful Koreans have no problem with it. SERI is the economic research arm of Samsung. And as you point out, Samsung is no joke! Nevertheless, it's your lot that are making the comparison |
You didn't address the issue- Is it appropriate to compare two city-states, which are former British colonies and trade hubs (city-ports) with the sizable nation of Korea?
I don't give a hoot if Samsung thinks it is appropriate.
| Quote: |
| I said that your action was ignorant, i.e. being ill-informed on a serious issue but still making claims as if you are an authority. |
And who are you? The Lord High Executioner of English Education?
| Quote: |
| No, it's just empirical evidence (produced by Samsung, no less) indicating that Koreans have the lowest communicative competence in Asia and that it, in turn, is markedly affecting large amounts of investment from foreign companies. But that's no biggie, right? |
As mentioned- The study is dated, the two countries cited in the comparison are city states, all of which have had far longer ties with Western nations either in trade or as colonies, furthermore there aren't that many nations in NE Asia. Saying Korea is 'dead last' could be rephrased as "in 6th place".
Also, I'd submit that it is foreign business barriers that are far more of a reason for companies not to invest here than "Koreans not speaking in English". Frankly, that Samsung article sounds like something of piece designed to push a certain directin.
Lastly, they are so deterred that the FTAs were signed last year. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
nicwr2002
Joined: 17 Aug 2011
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 28, 2013 7:20 am Post subject: h |
|
|
| I asked my g/f about this and her immediate response was because of the college entrance exam 수능 test. She started preparing for the test in her first year of high school. So I"m guessing students have to focus more of their time on passing that test before studying English. |
|
| 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
