Korean Job Discussion Forums

[tomato]

Here are some arguments for putting a skill to immediate practical use:

■ A student could lose valuable time by postponing any practical experience until after the rite of passage.

Korean English students seem to regard English instruction as a savings account. Attend enough classes, study enough vocabulary words, and memorize enough grammar rules, and you eventually trade all this in on the right to speak English.

Unfortunately, since the students never practice the language during all this class time and study time, that glorious day never comes.

■ Those in authority could abuse their power by blocking out whoever they want to block out.

There is a small corps of scientists who advocate Creationism. They complain that they cannot get their written work published because of the Evolutionist majority which is in power.
Maybe they have a point.

It has been said that composers wishing to compose in a conservative style are out of luck. A group of modern composers is in power,and they hold the keys. And I heard that from a modern composer!

It has long been a pet peeve of mine that public school education is dominated by behaviorists. I once knew a humanist who got certified, but it wasn't easy for him.

■ Those in authority could inhibit upward mobility by allowing certification only to those who could afford an expensive education.

My grandfather earned a law degree by studying at home rather than attending law school.
Apparently, when he took the bar exam, he did at least as well as those who DID go to law school.
I think it is unfortunate that this is not allowed today.

■ There could be some question about what is a legitimate skill.


There is considerable debate about which alternative healing arts, such as chiropractery and curanderismo, are legitimate. For that matter, a Christian Scientist could question that orthodox medicine is legitimate.

■ Certified workers are not necessarily better.

I used to know a local government official who was in charge of licensing day care homes. She resented persons with lofty degrees who looked down on her licensees, and questioned that those with their noses out of joint were really more skilled in working with children.

■ Some skills can be proven by demonstration more than by certification.

That is why musicians are tested by auditions, and that is why athletes are tested by competitive games.

■ The point at which to set the rite of passage may be difficult to define.

John Holt, the celebrated author on education, took cello lessons during the last years of his life. He could not understand the phrase "learning to play the cello," so he wondered when he was going to stop LEARNING to play the cello and start PLAYING the cello.

■ Training without any short-term practical experience could result in loss of motivation and morale.

A criticism often levelled against traditional math instruction is that the students add and subtract only on paper, but never add and subtract in real life. Seeing no purpose in this ritual, they naturally become bored.

■ Learning together could be a joyful experience.

When I was taking first year French, my fellow students conversed in French when we met each other throughout the day. In effect, then, we had not only a certified teacher, but several uncertified teachers as well.

■ A skill could depend on creativity as well as knowledge.

As a TESL-trained teacher, I would say that my own ideas have benefitted me far more than did my TESL training.
If you are not also TESL trained, and if I ever happen to talk down to you for that reason, remind me that I said that.

■ A skill could depend on personal attributes as well as knowledge.

This is certainly true in the teaching profession.

■ It is questionable how well a student's performance in training can predict that person's performance on the job.

There was a very slow Spanish student in Bolivia. In his 6-month training at the Maryknoll School in Cochabamba, he covered only half the material normally covered. Yet he was reputed to speak Spanish very well once he was out on the field.

A more extreme example is that of Thomas Edison, whose first grade teacher sent him home with a note saying that he was ineducable.

■ Even certified people often say that they have learned more on the field than in class.

"I've learned more English (Korean) (Spanish) (any other language) by practicing it here on the field than I did in all my years in the classroom. In the classroom, I didn't learn zilch!"

Have you ever heard this? I have too.

. . . and here are some arguments for postponing practical use:

■ Some skills imply responsibility for the safety of others.

Immediate-practical-use advocates often get asked questions such as, "Would you go in an operating room with an uncertified doctor?" or "Would you get on an airplane with an uncertified pilot?"

■ Training could be a necessary prerequisite for experience.

Perhaps the foreign language student learned more in the field than in the classroom, but that leaves the question of how much the student would learn on the field if it were not for attending class beforehand.

■ Practical experience can be supervised--and perhaps should be.

"When you were a baby, you had to take your first step by yourself. Nobody else could take that first step for you."

You have no doubt heard this immediate-practical-use cliche. However, that first step could be disastrous if a supervisor is not close at hand. Maybe that's the reason why God endowed us with the Oedipus complex.

What's YOUR opinion?

[cbclark4]

Your over thinkin' it.

[Juregen]

Some good points there.

Now to see if they are of practical use .