English education and teacher education in South Korea

While I was reading the paper I thought it was very informative and through about what it takes to become a school teacher in Korea. There were 2 parts of the article that I thought were thought provoking. First on page 375, when it mentioned the amount of English education elementary school children are receiving. I could help but think, “How can 1-2 hours of English per week make any difference?” It is just 34-68hrs per year. It seemed like the MOE is just giving lip-service to wanting to promote English for communicative purposes. When it was announced that English education would be offered from the 3^rd grade, I would imagine everyone thought that the students would get an hour a day, everyday not an hour a week. Also, these curriculum makers know that learning a 2nd language is best achieved during the critical period before puberty. So, how can they justify just 1-2hrs per week? It doesn’t make sense. I think parents and teachers should insist on at least an hour a day, everyday.

There was also mention were 2 pilot programs: one to introduce English into the 1^st grade and the other for an English immersion program in 2008. I wonder what the results were. I think if the 1^st graders got just 1hr of English a week then the results probably showed no big results of starting in the first grade so it plan was probably canceled.

Another interesting point had to do with the MOE’s decision to establish a total innovation plan covering all teacher policies. It also mentioned how the MOE will select successful teaching models and disseminate them widely. It seems as thought teachers in Korea are being stripped of power in the classroom.

So I am left wondering what it would take to either increase the number of hours of English education in elementary school or how to best use 1-2hrs of English lesson per week. In my opinion I think 1-2hrs is not enough so then the focus should shift to the first question, “How to increase the hours?” Who would need to get involved? Mothers, parent organizations, teachers and teacher organizations, even publishers since they can sell a few more books.

**Families earning less than 1.9mil/mo sent on average 260.000 for hakwons but families earning more than 6mil/mo spent 840.000/mo.

Indigenous critical traditions for TEFL? A historical and comparative perspective in the case of Korea

This article is about disproving (dispelling) the idea that Korean students are passive learners such as Chinese and Japanese students. The researcher conducted 2 studies, at a middle and high school. From the reading it seemed as though the high school was a Foreign Language high school. The finding showed that students didn’t resist this kind of class and that they were able to learn using a critical pedagogical method.

Do her results truly reflect a regular high school senior students’ ability to handle this type of critical pedagogical method? - I don’t think the high school was indicative of a normal high school. It seemed like the high school was a foreign language high school since it mentioned the school had a heavy emphasis on foreign languages. It went so far as to say that the kids’ English ability was greater than most Korean seniors due to that fact. (P117 1^st & 2nd paragraph)

What is the best way to balance the needs of the student by covering both the material relevant to the SAT and communication needs by using a critical pedagogical method? Would the diversity of material allow for enough grammar/vocabulary for the students to have enough success on the SAT? Is there a way to design material that is student generated that would allow this?