EPIK Esay Contest: How to Improve ESL in Korea

Epik, the public school teacher placement agency I work for, recently held an essay contest.. (1st prize: 500 000 Won). You could choose 2 possible topics: Write about your experiences overcoming cultural challenges in Korea, or you could write about how to improve English Education in Korea. I chose the latter. I think the challenges of being an effective English teacher stream directly from cultural differences. Foreign English teachers straight out of university like myself will find that Western pedogogical methods and goals (ie, essay writing, active creative expression, constructive problem solving, individual opinion formation) often fail completely when we try and apply them to our Korean students, so well versed in route memorization, copying and other passive learning methods.

I wasn't going to enter, because when I found out about the contest, it was 3 days before the deadline. But, another teacher, Dayle, contacted me and suggested we work together to enter something. Without his editing and suggestions, I wouldn't have even started it, nor finished in time.

So, here is my submission. I have a feeling they are looking for something more sugar coated, more ripe for propaganda, to bait new teachers. So, I don't even know if they will get past page 1. But, my main gripe with the Board of Education, which I expound upon in the essay is this tenacious unwillingness to address the real problems and failures of the Native Teacher program, in favor of perpetuating feel good illusions.

Beyond Image:
Struggles and Solutions to Improve English Education at the High School Level
(extended version)

In one month, I will celebrate my one year anniversary as an EPIK teacher at a girls’ high school in the city of Samcheok, Gangwon-do. In fact, my first year in Korea was also my very first year working as a teacher with classes of real students. This is also an important landmark for EPIK in Gangwon-do, because in the beginning of 2008 many high schools across the province welcomed a native speaking English teacher for the very first time.

For many English teachers in our staff, I am the first foreigner they have worked with or interacted with daily, so this has been a learning experience for them as well. I think everyone’s expectations have been challenged during this year. I wholly agree with claim that “Men learn while they teach,” (Lucius A. Seneca) for I have made just as many mistakes and learned just as many lessons as my students have during our time together. Due to my own inexperience, and the newness of this program for my school, this experience has been very challenging and not always successful. I hope that by honestly sharing what I’ve learned and experienced, both good and bad, I can help future EPIK teachers develop the Team Teaching program to its full potential so it meets EPIK’s stated ideals.

In Korea’s formal culture, it may seem negative for people’s professional image to discuss their own weaknesses and failures. However, I strongly believe that English educators in Korea, both Co-teachers (CTs) and Guest English Teachers (GETs) need to initiate open, honest dialogue in which they feel comfortable to address problems, needs, errors and concerns. Only then can we identify what doesn’t work and cooperatively develop a strong foundation for English conversation studies at the high school level.

Despite my constant efforts to be an effective teacher and create stimulating conversation lessons, I am frustrated by the results.1 While there are several special students whom I have been able to help, many of the students will not leave class with a higher English speaking ability. This is disappointing; and the main reason the EPIK program needs to improve if we want our students’ English to do likewise.

This essay focuses on struggles I have experienced and solutions I propose within the EPIK program at the high school level in Gangwon-do. Unlike elementary and middle schools, where the program has been in place for a few years, this program has just begun in high schools so requires great scrutiny for improvement. High schools, from my experience, lack pedagogically sound materials and resources such as textbooks and listening CDs, and standardized curriculums. Older students are uncomfortable with the games, songs and informal activities which are so successful with the younger grades. Further, exam preparation stress and sleep deprivation due to their longer school day reduces high school students’ willingness to participate. Thus, the challenges and solutions faced by high schools differ from those at middle schools. I feel it is crucial for GETs in high schools to share their experiences and feedback during the nascent stage with EPIK administrators so that we can cooperate to pre-empt problems from occurring and find solutions to build a strong foundation. The biggest challenge, I think, is how to overcome low speaking levels.

Photo: On average, I would rate the participation rate at about 10%. Out of 30 students, only 10 students will voluntarily converse with me or offer answers, complete worksheets on their own or do information sharing activities correctly. The remaining students will copy their answers from others and collect information by silently reading their partner’s paper rather than verbally sharing and gaining information through conversation. Many students, despite repeated disciplinary actions, refuse to do anything at all and spend the class sleeping, reading, talking in Korean or working on homework from other classes.

Struggles: The Ironies of Image and Classroom Realities

One issue which often surfaces in the media, and confounds English teachers is that while Koreans spend more time and money on English language education, overall the speaking ability of students remains very low. According to the Korea Times, Korea spends the most time and money on English language education, yet students’ test score results remain internationally amongst the lowest.

http://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/news/nation/2008/06/117_25279.html

I believe the growth of this embarrassing state is rooted in the failure of the current education system to teach students how to communicate and must be remedied. The irony of high effort and expense contrasted with low results and conversational skills is well known to high school GETs who face this dilemma very every day. What are the factors that cause this irony? One of many causes which could be pinpointed is the emphasis on image. It is my belief that high school educators focus too much on the external image of English education rather than trying to eliminate flaws deep within its core. Ironically, focusing on image actually diminishes the quality and content of education. The result is students who are able to perform speeches and parrot example sentences for an audience, but who lack the ability to converse on a most basic level. Teaching a mile wide but an inch deep produces students with a thin ability in English.

Consider as illustration a recent regional speech contest where a student from our school won first prize and several other students placed as finalists. I had helped them prepare by editing grammar and coaching pronunciation. I am proud of these students’ achievements, for they worked very hard. However, although these students scored in the contest’s top level, they struggled to communicate simple things to me while we prepared. They couldn’t form simple sentences, such as “Can you help me?” “Are you busy?” “Let’s practice together” “How do you say this word?,” and so on. These ‘top’ students communicated with single words (“Teacher… help”), gestures or a CT’s translation because they didn’t feel comfortable or capable to express themselves in English. Before my adjustments, each speech (including the prize winner) was unintelligible because students relied on electronic translators, not their own abilities.
Nor did the students did not try to understand why their original scripts did not make sense to an English speaker.

Speech contests are performances which focus on memorization, attitude, composure and appearance. While all these skills are important, they have do not relate to dialogue, which, by definition, requires communication between at least two parties. Due to these contests, and because English exams test focus on multiple choice selection rather than speaking skills, students come to associate English with repetition and memory. These learning skills ill-equip students to converse naturally with native speakers or orally express ideas unless they have weeks to prepare. As an alternative, we should consider replacing speech contests with debate contests.

Debates give students an opportunity and motivation to improve their active listening and speaking skills. While debates lack the formal, atmosphere of speech contests, they closer resemble authentic conversation: Students listen to each other; they evaluate what was said; and then they respond accordingly.4 Students could be given time to prepare for the topics beforehand, but because they cannot anticipate their competitor’s ideas, responses or comments, students must rely on critical thinking, not memory. Due to the spontaneous “on the spot” nature of debating, responses will be less polished and imperfect in comparison to rehearsed speeches. In my experience using this method in the classroom, debates can become rowdy, loud and students often lose their composure when they get passionate about what they are talking about. But replacing frozen academic formalities and polished appearances with this type of expression is exactly what needs to take place to come closer to the ideals of fluid communication. In addition to speech contests I am troubled by another misleading practice in English education in Korea: demo classes.

Demo classes: What do they demonstrate?

Demo classes are given for the benefit of the audience, and do not at all represent what actually occurs in real English classes. Before Education officials or new GETs observe classes, the class practices until the lesson is perfected. Once again, students memorize and perform correct phrases. CTs extensively prepare their own scripts and lines beforehand, which increases their participation to a 50-50 role. This conveys a dishonest image that is in contrast to what actually happens in regular classes because the majority of high school GETs I have spoken to say they usually teach their classes alone. Many CTs only go to the GET’s class because the EPIK contract requires it. In many cases, the CT remains silently in the back of class and does not play an active “team teaching” role in the class as suggested by EPIK. This is not always the CT’s fault; they may not know what is required of them or the GET has not consulted with them while making the lessons. In fact, because of demanding schedules and exam preparations, it is not actually possible in high schools for a co-teacher to attend most of the GET’s classes, nor do CTs have time to help make lessons. In addition, students barely participate at all when given speaking tasks let alone answer perfectly with complete sentences as they do in demo classes. Because there is no exam or letter grade for the GET’s class, GETs in high school struggle daily with low student involvement. Many students view conversation class as an opportunity to study other subjects or catch up on much needed rest. These realities and problems must be openly admitted and demonstrated to the Board of Education, and to incoming GETs. Honesty is a prerequisite to growth and improvement.

Photo: In reality, high school teachers struggle to get school students to stay awake or participate because there is no academic motivation to succeed in the class. Students must constantly be monitored but this is difficult in large classes of 30-35, and without a CT.

Instead of performing perfect, rehearsed classes, would it not be more effective in the long-term to show Education officials and other GETs our lessons as they actually occur? If I don’t usually have a CT while I teach, why suddenly acquire one for the audience? Viewing a regular class without a CT will show new teachers the strategies experienced GETs have found effective when CTs are absent due to a lack of available staff . As well, if Education officials witnessed the difficulties and struggles that GETs face without a CT (as I do every day) perhaps they would work more closely with schools to ensure a CT attends - and participates - in every class. More importantly, if students usually refuse to participate, why not expose this issue as well?

To fully understand the GET experience, during demo classes GETs, CTs and students must make mistakes and encounter the same problems they face in regular classes. Afterwards, the audience, CTs and GETS should thoroughly and openly discuss the challenges of English in the classroom: what went wrong and how to avoid or remedy it in the future. GETS cannot tackle this issue alone. Honest dialogue, reflection, and resolve are necessary for English education to improve.

Steps Forward: Communication and Cooperation

So far we’ve looked at what I consider to be some the main challenges facing English improvement in the Korean education system. Now we will look at steps that need to take place to improve English education in the Korean high school classroom. Clearly, drastic pedagogical reforms must take place over the course of time. For example, high school exams and college SATS must decrease translation and multiple choice based testing, and include writing and speaking evaluation. This ambitious, but necessary change will take a lot of years and effort before it can be a reality. However, I believe there are several easy steps EPIK teachers could immediately begin initiating in order to take the beginning steps towards this goal, while improving the quality of their present classes. At this early developmental stage of EPIK in high school, creating more programs will not work. It is counter-productive to build rooms when a building’s foundations are not secure and well-tested. I propose that the existing Team-Teaching program continues to be strengthened by improving upon the foundations that high school GET’s laid for the first time this year.

Here is the crux: The core of the EPIK program is the teachers. They must have a better resources and support systems available to them. The reason is perhaps simplistic but nonetheless key to improving English education: Teachers who are better informed and developed to teach better conversation lessons leads to students who speak and use English better. The most simple and cost-effective way to provide better resources and support for EPIK teachers would be strengthening communication and cooperation in the teaching community. Fortunately, concerned EPIK teachers have already set this plan in motion.

http://www.epikforum.org/ is a great strength to the program for GETs and should be officially promoted and financially supported by EPIK administrators to attract more membership. This site allows teachers across Korea to share lessons plans, ideas while discussing issues related to teaching and living in Korea. Creating, maintaining, and donating money to fund this online forum has been a voluntarily initiative undertaken by dedicated EPIK teachers. This site has been an invaluable resource for seeking advice and materials for improving my class. It is much more helpful than the hard copy teaching guides and lesson books I received from EPIK. In fact, the most recent book I received (“Advanced Team Teaching Materials” July 2008) mostly contained materials directly taken from http://www.bogglesworld.com/, a well known ESL site, without any alterations. These lessons are intended for small classes of advanced adults trying to learn English by choice, not large groups of low level teenagers who for the most part have little or no inner motivation mainly have no personal desire to improve their English speaking skills.

EPIK could save a great deal of money by funding this affordable website ($ 80 000 W/year) instead of paying to print hundreds of lesson material books that many teachers don’t even use. In my early teaching days, I photocopied and applied lessons directly from the EPIK manuals, and the results were disastrous. These materials are especially insufficient for the age I teach. The majority of the activities are too juvenile to engage them, while the intermediate books intended specifically for high school are far too difficult.

I have never been able to just photocopy and apply another teacher’s lesson plan. Every class has different needs. http://www.epikforum.org/ allows teachers to upload Power Point presentations and worksheets which other teachers can quickly edit according to their classes’ needs and abilities. Teachers who try the lesson can later comment on the outcome and suggest improvements. Overtime, lessons become better because many teachers experiment with them in real class situations and build upon them. However, for it to succeed, more teachers need to participate.

Without guidelines or expectations, the content and quality of conversation classes varies wildly in each high school. High school teachers are not given text books or any curriculum guide to follow unlike teachers of lower grades. For inexperienced teachers like me, creating new lesson plans and designing an entire curriculum from scratch can be a time consuming, frustrating process which depletes the physical energy needed for these lessons to work in the class. Unfortunately, in the absence of standard curriculum requirements and CT’s to monitor and assist, it is possible for other teachers to become overwhelmed by the challenges and simply resort to teaching poor lessons, showing movies and playing games unrelated to learning English. For students’ English to improve Korea wide, we need to replace these inconsistencies with professional unity.

In addition to interacting online, more teachers could become part of the support network and access better lessons if EPIK held teacher workshops and meetings every few months where teachers could meet and talk in person. These meetings must differ from the Board of Education gatherings I have attended, which resemble formal ceremonies, rather than constructive workshops. Instead of watching a rehearsed demo class and listening to many formal speeches, teachers need to talk frankly about problematic issues and share advice. This would be an opportune time to show videos of the ‘real’ demo classes I suggested, so together teachers can brainstorm solutions. Such gatherings would re-energize and motivate teachers. Lessons and materials created and shared by teachers during this time could then be collected by moderators of the website for class room testing. Ideally, teachers would create one curriculum-model based on common goals and themes that everyone could loosely follow and tailor to their individual needs .

One standardized, organized curriculum would also help CTs become more involved. If there was a predetermined curriculum outline complete with suggested lessons – better than the disappointing EPIK team-teaching manuals - CTs would know what to expect in the class and overcome uncertainties about their role. CTs with less confidence in their spoken English would then have ample time to prepare. GET classes are sometimes disregarded as irrelevant by students because this class lacks a link to the curriculum of their other classes and the exams those classes prepare for. Often the students with the highest exam scores participate the least in my conversation classes because they feel this time detracts from “real” studying. With more time to prepare for the GET class, CTs could help include vocabulary and grammar points from their own classes. This may encourage students to apply the same effort and respect in conversation class as they do in other subjects. Even the best lessons will fail if the the students don’t have an academic incentive to succeed in the class. These changes would benefit the GET and the CT; and ultimately English education in state schools.

Conclusion: Long Terms Hopes

In conclusion, here are three most important steps which I think are pertinent to improving English education: First, replace image conscious speech contests and demo classes with debates.

Secondly, a standardized communicate-based curriculum is required, which ideally will become a tested feature of exams. If a standard Korea wide conversational High school curriculum one day takes shape, speaking evaluations could become a tested feature of exams.8 This is a really key motivation for students to challenge themselves to become better speakers instead of relying on memory and translation. Speech testing could resemble the French speaking tests which I took in Canada. For these tests, students have a one on one oral recorded interview with their teacher. They respond to basic conversational questions (“How are you?”) as well as more complicated questions such as “What is happening in this picture?”,“How would you sum up this text?” and so on. Test results depend upon pronunciation, and the student’s ability to listen and respond.

Thirdly, more open communication is needed: GETs to CTs, and GETS to other GETS. Though we teach communication every day, EPIK teachers still need to work on communicating more with each other. Once high school teachers have organized their lessons at the high school level, the next step will be working with middle school teachers for a smoother learning transition for first grade students.

In light of all the problems I mentioned, these goals may seem ambitious in scale. However the potential of my students and passion of EPIK teachers makes me confident that if we continue to build our online resources and cooperatively work on the EPIK program, then students’ communicative ability in English will improve.