Korean Job Discussion Forums

[demitri]

Hi Guys,

I used to work in Korea and like many people soon got fed up with the whole thing, not least of all the tediousness of the job.

Now I live and work in Greece and I can't stress how much more serious and satisfying the job is here. We are actually expected to teach. We have to follow a syllabus, give and mark homework, give tests, and prepare them for standardised European exams like IGCSE and FCE. I have to sit and learn English grammar myself so I can teach it! The thing is, I can't imagine being able to do much if I didn't speak Greek (I'm half Greek). It would be impossible to teach them if I couldn't communicate with them in their language.

As a result, despite there being a greater workload for less pay than I got in Korea, I find the job a thousand times more satisfying. I actually feel good about it, something I never felt about the job in Korea.

However, due to the economic situation here I am considering a return to Korea next year. I am telling myself that maybe the job is not as tedious as I remember. Undoubtedly for some, the low hours, workload, and lack of responsibility are satisfying, but personally the appeal of that faded quite quickly for me. I want to really teach and feel like I'm doing something.

Some might say that everyone makes their own decision about what kind of teacher you'll be out there and that if we want to do the job properly we can. But the way the system is there, can we really teach? Is it really possible/feasible to teach English when we can't communicate with the students in their language?

Sorry for the rant. Just feeling a bit torn about going back to that kind of 'teaching'.

[UknowsI]

I come from Northern Europe and we had an American English teacher in middle school. His classes were only in English and it works out really well. He was my favourite teacher actually. He also thought some other classes such as physical education, where he tried to speak the native language, but it would have been easier for everyone if he just stuck to English. But my point was, he was treated just like any other teacher even though he was American. His classes and what we expected from him was exactly the same as it would have been if he was native.

[edwardcatflap]

I taught in Greece for a year, (well 9 months as they don't pay you over the summer holiday) a long time ago and it was a pretty similar experience to what I hear about hagwans on this board. Small scale school, long hours, badly behaved kids, studio flat supplied, slightly lower pay of course, no training, the boss had not much idea about education and I had no idea what I was doing - I'd just done the CELTA but had no clue about how to teach kids. The main difference was the level of English was much higher - there were kids of 15 and 16 doing the Cambridge Proficiency exam, which would be tough for a lot of native speakers, and a lot of the young kids were pretty good too. There was absolutely no need to use Greek in any of my classes and in fact the Greek teacher there was told off by the boss when she lapsed into Greek on occasion and the parents heard about it.

[happiness]

Why is it bad to just admit Korea is for the money? If you find the love of your life or have the time of your life, awesome.

Ive always felt there was a reason that the govt allows e2 teachers to save/earn so much money (even though they try to make it difficult sometimes), they know their system is seriously hampering, but if it wasnt for the foreign teachers, maybe they wouldnt be as far as they are now, in regards to English.

I have noticed some recruits in their ads say things likes "close to Japan and Thailand" or "lots of time for travelling."

[sulperman]

I've always wondered about this...surely there are enough English teachers in most of Europe who speak and teach English well enough that schools wouldn't even need to consider bringing in outside help. Right? Am I wrong?

[edwardcatflap]

Wrong. As in Korea there's still a lot of value, rightly or wrongly, put on having a native speaker teacher.

[demitri]

[quote]There was absolutely no need to use Greek in any of my classes[/quote]

I don't get this. Maybe if you're teaching students who already have a good proficiency of English but what about those who don't (the majority). For one, how do you teach a student grammar if you can't explain it to them in their language? And if you weren't expected to teach grammar (I'm sure you was) what about passages/texts/vocabulary?

Please elaborate. I just don't see how it is even remotely possible to teach properly if you can't explain things in a language the students can fully understand (unless dealing with students who can already communicate to a very high level in English)

[Louis VI]

How to teach English to absolute beginners using only English:

Don't explain, use.
Don't tell, show.
Model and engage, demonstrate and practice.
To learn a language is to gain a skill not a body of knowledge.
Knowing-how is more important than knowing-what.
There is absolutely no need to know anything but the target language, according to contemporary ESL research; in fact, babbling in the local language just creates a horde of grammar-wielding nonspeakers, like Korea has produced with its outdated translation method, vocabulary lists and grammar lessons.
Many an ESL waygook newbie has tried to teach a word with all its meanings instead of teaching a speech act using that word among others to do things (comparing, inquiring, shopping, complimenting, etc). Some experienced ESLers still try to do the former to the neglect of the latter.

[edwardcatflap]

[demitri]

With all due respect that sounds kind of naive. It's just not the reality of how things work. I am curious about what the experts have to say on this matter.

The esl seminars I've been to which had speakers from the UK and the USA said that realistically it's not feasible to teach a language if you can't communicate with a student in theirs. Hence the reason why language learning programs that you can buy (nearly all of them) communicate with the learner in the target language and their own. (Please don't point out Rosetta Stone as it's not really very good at all)

I guess it it would be your natural inclination to have that view as you're an English teacher in Korea who can't speak Korean (I presume). But, I ask, how can you be so sure about it if you haven't taught on both sides of the fence to see what a huge difference there is? I mean, taught English to a group with whom you can fluently (or near enough) communicate with in their language? That's what I'm doing now.

I can't imagine you trying to teach a passage from one of our student books. After you've gone through a given text and you're bombarded with questions about what this and that means how would you explain if you couldn't speak Greek? Showing a flash card doesn't cut it at elementary/intermediate levels. The same principle applies anywhere.

Further on in the unit when you get to the grammar. Oh my God! Please please please tell me how to explain all the principles and workings of the present perfect/modals/comparative & superlatives etc etc etc. There is so much more to just explaining that we make the perfect with 'have/has + PP'. The rules that go with them have to be taught and understood. Again, diagrams don't cut it.

If you have a secret to how such is done without speaking Greek or whatever other language it may be please share it with me.

[crossmr]

diagrams are perfectly acceptable. I often use time lines when explain PP and things of that nature to students.
A good majority of basic language can be visualized. It's how children learn. If you need to teach an adult like a child because they don't know any of the target language and you don't speak theirs, so be it.

The experts often use diagrams, pictures, time lines, etc to explain concepts perfectly in english with no target language. Take a look at any ESL book that is not targeted at a specific language, like say any of the "in Use" series. They're full of that stuff.

[Steelrails]

Beer.

[edwardcatflap]

I've taught in countries whose language I've been fairly fluent in on a couple of occasions and rarely needed to use the L1. There's no secret but there are hundreds of books on the subject and courses you can do to get up to date on the latest methodology. Which seems to be that generally that you should be teaching students almost exclusively in the target language.

Korean public school teachers are currently being trained in that methodology in a programe called TEE (teaching English in English) and it will shortly become the norm in Korean schools. As I mentioned previously my school in Greece followed this method and that was years and years ago. It sounds like either you are working at a very old fashioned type school (pedagogically) or you are just doing your own thing regardless of the school's methodology.

I wouldn't consider myself an expert but I've attended and presented at a few conferences and have never heard the view that you can't teach English if you don't know the students' target language. I hear occasionally that beginners need some L1 but most of what I hear is too much L1 is bad again and again.

[/quote]You're probably teaching beyond their level and that is your fault, not theirs or the methods.[quote]

This is true and related to what I said above. Of course if you are allowing students to ask questions in L1 they will think up as many questions as they can to avoid having to practise English. Talking and passively listening to explanations in Greek is dead time - completely un challenging and a great excuse to take a rest. Anything carried out in the target language requires concentration and hard work

[demitri]

[quote]You're probably teaching beyond their level and that is your fault, not theirs or the methods.[/quote]

Actually, it's the school's fault not mine. Friend, if you have significant experience you would know that students being placed in classes beyond their level is the norm and is probably the case in the majority of schools. Another reason why teaching English solely in English isn't so feasible.

Your comments seem so far-gone from the reality of the esl industry. I agree that English should be used the majority of the time but not solely. I can't help feeling that maybe you're viewing this very subjectively because it suits your circumstances, in that you're teaching in Korea and I assume can't communicate with students in Korean.

Of course there is nothing wrong with diagrams (I use them all the time for grammar) but to explain the workings and rules that come alongside the diagrams (for which you can't draw a simple diagram) an explanation in L1 is absolutely necessary.

As for the criticism of the school, that's not justified friend. I'm at one of the better schools in the capital. And with all due respect you are teaching in Korea. I'm familiar with what you're doing out there, even if it's a university, and we really shouldn't pretend it's serious teaching. (I don't mean that as an insult to you).

Let's discuss an example. Each unit in the students book begins with some text. Perhaps a dialogue/short story, whatever. This text deliberately presents new phrases/vocabulary/phrasel verbs etc. After having read this text students understand the story but want to know about this new vocab/phrase etc. What on earth do you suggest? Please don't say dictionary. We are talking about a significant amount of new vocab. and wasting the hour scrambling through a dictionary is not the answer. Ok. Some things you could explain using alternative words in English that they might already be familiar with. SOME. And for the rest? The answer is L1. It's the only realistic way.

After they've been explained various points in L1 they would be expected to go on and make use of it in English in the exercises/essays that follow so it's not just a pointless translation. They go on to use it and they do so successfully (mostly).

Please share your thoughts about effectively and efficiently teaching the above without L1. How about phrasel verbs? Some phrasel verbs we can express in simpler language but like I said with the above, SOME.

If you honestly do speak something other than English how did you learn that language? Imagine learning Korean with a Korean teacher who couldn't speak English. I mean seriously learning Korean, not just learning to mumble a few phrases.

[edwardcatflap]

Do you really want advice on how to teach vocabulary properly or do you just want to big yourself up about not being in Korea?

I agree with one thing though, I'd be back in Greece like a shot if the economy wasn't f**ed and I could get the same job and salary package as I can here.