Communicative English Language Teaching in Korea
Seong Man Park, Canada
Seong Man Park received his PhD in Second Language Education from McGill University, Canada, in 2010. He has been teaching both English and Korean to Korean international students and to Korean immigrant secondary and college students in the Korean language school at the Hosanna church in Montreal, Canada since 2004. He is interested in enhancing Korean students’ communicative abilities in their English learning.
E-mail: seong.m.park@mail.mcgill.ca
Menu
Abstract
Introduction
The Confucian Ideology in Korea
1 Teaching English through English (TETE)
2 English program in Korea (EPIK)
The use of Behavioral Objectives in the Korean educational system
1 English Education Policy Changes in Korea
2 Grammar-based examination
Conclusion
References
In this paper, the influence of Confucian ideology in Korean culture and the use of behavioral objectives in the Korean educational system are discussed based on the two major changes in Korean English language education, TETE (i.e., Teaching English through English) and EPIK (i.e., English Program in Korea), in order to investigate the difficulties to adopt communicative English language teaching in Korea.
One of the most significant English education policy changes in the 6th and 7th National English Curricula of Korea is the adoption of communicative English language teaching in English language education (Kwon, 2000). Communicative language teaching in the public schools has been mandated by the Ministry of Education since 1992 (McGrath, 2001). This was a major shift from previous English curricula which mainly emphasized “the audio-lingual method and the grammar-translation method” (Li, 1998, p. 682) in secondary schools in Korea. In order to enhance Korean students’ communicative abilities in their English learning, the Ministry of Education in Korea, which was renamed as the Ministry of Education, Science and Technology in 2008, introduced communicative language teaching in public schools. The adoption of communicative English language education introduces two major changes in the area of English language teaching in Korea. The first change is the introduction of teaching English through English (henceforth TETE), which means that teachers should speak only English in the English language classroom. The second change is the importation of native speakers of English through the English Program in Korea (henceforth EPIK) as teachers. Even though both changes in English education policy emphasize the Korean students’ communicative abilities in their English learning, communicative English teaching has not yet been fully implemented in Korea. In addition, Korean teachers of English are still concerned about the efficiency of the communicative language teaching approach in the Korean school context. This skepticism can be attributed to several reasons such as teachers’ deficiency in spoken English, large class size, students’ reluctance to participate in classroom activities, grammar-based examination, the influence of Confucianism in Korean culture, strong belief in behavioral objectives and so on (e.g., Kim, 2004; Li, 1998). In this paper, the influence of Confucian ideology in Korean culture and the use of behavioral objectives in the Korean educational system will be mainly discussed based on the above two major changes, TETE and EPIK in order to investigate the difficulties to adopt communicative English language teaching in Korea.
It is apparent that the understanding of cultural and educational ideologies of a certain society is very important when new educational approaches are introduced, even though “educational ideologies are for schools, they are rarely presented in a public and articulate form” (Eisner, 1992, p. 305). The Confucian ideology has influenced and shaped Korean culture to a considerable extent (Windle, 2000). With the rapid growth and change of Korean economy and society, the influence of Confucianism seems to become outwardly indiscernible in Korean society, but “the doctrines of Confucianism still underlie human interactions to a great extent” (Windle, 2000, p. 1) in Korea.
As a way of enhancing Korean students’ communicative competence in English, TETE has been promoted and mandated in the public schools since the beginning of the new 7th National curriculum (Fouser, 2001) along with the adoption of a communicative English language teaching approach. In the environment of Confucianism, social hierarchy plays an important role in every aspect of Korean society, including the educational system. As a result, teachers are always placed at the top of the hierarchy in their classrooms, holding absolute authority. In this hierarchical situation in schools, Korean students have been encouraged to obey the teachers and the authority of the system. In Confucian culture, teachers do not want to lose face in front of students, which may be a result of using a communicative approach. As it has been mentioned above, Korean teachers of English are worried about their lack of native-like oral proficiency in the English language regardless of their real proficiency in English. For Korean teachers of English, “the concept of face” (Windle, 2000, p. 6) is very important, so they are reluctant to use a communicative approach in their teaching in order to avoid the embarrassment that may be caused by their lack of oral proficiency. Concerning this matter, Li (1998) surveyed the Korean teachers’ perceived difficulties in a communicative approach. In this survey, all 18 participants considered their lack of oral proficiency in English as one of the biggest difficulties in applying a communicative approach in their classroom (Li, 1998). In addition to the lack of oral proficiency, teachers are also concerned about their deficiency in sociolinguistic competence (Li, 1998). Korean teachers of English are afraid not to be able to answer all questions from students. They think that they should be able to answer all questions from students to avoid losing face (Li, 1998). These problems are not limited to teachers. Students also have difficulties caused by the influence of Confucian culture and traditional school settings. Korean students have been accustomed to the traditional classroom style which emphasizes a passive learning style. Students are accustomed to listening to teachers lecture without expressing their opinions and speaking only when teachers ask in the classroom. In this respect, the ability to think critically and to express their ideas in public are not encouraged and promoted in cultural norms in Korea (e.g., Kim, 2004; Windle, 2000).
In this situation, students feel uncomfortable in a communicative approach which requires active participation in class activities (Li, 1998). Concerning the students’ resistance to class participation, it should be said that silence is regarded as an appropriate response and this mentality permeates Korean culture (e.g., Kim, 2004; Windle, 2000). For this reason, it is very hard for teachers to encourage students to participate in class activities and apply a communicative approach in class.
The second change caused by the adoption of communicative English language education is the importation of native speakers to teach English through EPIK. The Ministry of Education in Korea started EPIK in 1996 in order to enhance Korean students’ communicative abilities in their English learning. It had originally been named the KORETTA (Korea English Teacher Training Assistant) program in the first year in 1995 (Kwon, 2000). EPIK is a Korean government sponsored program to invite native English teachers from 6 major English-speaking countries: Australia, Canada, Ireland, New Zealand, the United Kingdom, and the United States of America (Kwon, 2000). The English-speaking teachers were deployed to secondary schools to participate in the Korean teachers of English training program and to teach Korean students.
However, this program has not been firmly established until now, and has not been considered an efficient program in Korea’s English education based on the improvement of the students’ communicative competence in their English learning (e.g., Carless, 2002). There are various factors that make this program inefficient, but I would like to single out the native speakers’ lack of understanding of Korean culture. It is not an easy job for native English-speaking teachers to teach English in the Korean situation without understanding of Confucian ideology in Korea. In the real classrooms, foreign teachers usually have great difficulty in dealing with the cultural conflict between them and Korean students. No one expects that foreign teachers can teach English efficiently to the students who are not likely to participate actively in class activities. Many native English-speaking teachers complain about the difficulties in making Korean students, who have been accustomed to the traditional classroom style, participate in class activities; finally the foreign teachers feel isolated in the classroom. In addition, the foreign teachers often say that Korean students are likely to be silent in the classroom while avoiding eye contact with them. However, it is not unusual to avoid direct eye contact with teachers or any persons with authority in Confucian cultural norms in Korea (Windle, 2000). As Windle (2000) warns, if foreign teachers keep ignoring different cultural values in their classrooms, they are likely to “interpret the situation from the Western perspective” (p. 7). This interpretation can make the foreign teachers conclude that Korean students are not willing to learn English in a communicative way. Consequently, their lack of understanding of Confucian culture is making EPIK inefficient in communicative language teaching in Korea.
Prior to the adoption of communicative English language teaching in Korea, “the audio-lingual method and the Grammar-Translation method” (Li, 1998, p. 682) were mainly used in English education. This means that grammar-based examinations were the main methods used to evaluate students’ improvement. In addition, English education in Korea has been considerably affected by both Japanese and American educational planning until now.
The first official introduction of English education to Korea was made in 1883 for the purpose of diplomatic relations (Kwon, 2000). English education in Korea then changed dramatically during the Japanese colonial period (1910-1945) which used the traditional “Grammar-Translation Method in English teaching and Japanese terminology for grammar” (Kwon, 2000, p. 49). The Grammar-Translation method had been regarded as a main method of English education until the 1990s prior to the adoption of communicative English language teaching owing to the impact of this period.
After the end of the Japanese colonial period, English education in Korea was greatly influenced by America. Korea underwent a great economic change in the 1990s. After the end of the economic crisis of 1997, Korean government realized that the Grammar-Translation method could not improve Korean students’ competitiveness in the international business markets, because of their deficiency in English communicative proficiency in a global world (Fouser, 2001). This might not be the only factor to influence Korean English education policy changes in the 1990s, but this actually influenced the adoption of communicative approach in English education to a great extent through the 6th and 7th National English Curricula which “are to guide Korean English teaching from 1995 to 2010” (Li, 1998, p. 681).
Education in Korea is putting an excessive emphasis on the National University Entrance examinations (now called the College Scholastic Ability Test). In accordance with the introduction of communicative English language teaching in English language education, the Ministry of Education in Korea tried to adopt the College Scholastic Ability Test (CSAT) which was modeled after the Scholastic Aptitude Test (SAT) in America in 1993. In order to replace grammar-based English examinations which had focused on grammatical and lexical knowledge, the Ministry of Education tried to focus on “communicative competence and fluency over accuracy” (Kwon, 2000, p. 72) in the CSAT English section. As a result of this attempt, a listening comprehension test was introduced in the CSAT English section (Kwon, 2000). However, still “about 60% of the English assessment items” (Kwon, 2000, p. 73) are composed of reading comprehension items which require grammatical knowledge. Thus, Korean teachers of English still keep teaching in a traditional way in order to make their students do well on tests (teaching to the tests). Even though Korean teachers of English strongly believe that speaking tests should be adopted in order to test students’ communicative competence, the CSAT still rules out the spoken English section (Li, 1998), because the objectivity of grammar, vocabulary, and translation tests is very clear and obvious compared to “oral test which doesn’t have such clear measures of right and wrong” (McGrath, 2001, p. 7)
Based on this tendency, I would like to mention one of limitations of behavioral objectives. As Eisner (1994) points out, “those who evaluate them often fail to distinguish between the application of a standard and the making of a judgment” (p. 114). The aim of a communicative approach is to enhance Korean students’ English language competence in their fluent and accurate use of spoken and written English as their foreign language. However, Korean students are mostly evaluated based on grammar-based examinations composed of just multiple-choice and short answer questions, because grammar-based examination is relatively measurable and quantifiable compared to oral and writing tests. This limitation leaves little room for the success of communicative English language teaching for both teachers and students in a Korean context (Li, 1998).
In this paper, I have explored the influence of Confucian ideology in Korean culture and the use of behavioral objectives in the Korean educational system in order to explain the difficulties to adopt communicative English language teaching in the English language curriculum. I found that the difficulties mostly came from the different social and educational ideologies, values, and underlying educational aims and objectives between Korea and Western countries (Li, 1998). There is no doubt that the adoption of communicative language teaching will help and enhance Korean students’ communicative competence in their English learning.
However, in order to implement this approach in the Korean EFL classroom successfully, communicative language teaching in Korea should be understood within the specific socio-cultural and educational Korean EFL context. In addition, Korean teachers of English should develop their own communicative teaching methods so that they can help Korean students enhance communicative competence in their English learning rather than “conforming to the traditional teaching styles based on Confucianism” (Kim, 2004, p. 8). Foreign teachers should also try to make efforts to understand the different cultural ideologies and norms so that they can find appropriate ways to understand the Korean educational system and to help Korean students enhance communicative competence in their English learning. With regards to educational values and attitudes, the dominance of teacher-centered, grammar-centered, test-centered practices in Korea should be changed so that the student-centered and problem-solving activities can be implemented in communicative language teaching practices (Li, 1998).
Carless, D. (2002, December). Conflict or collaboration: Native and non-native speakers team teaching in schools in South Korea, Japan and Hong Kong. Paper presented at the
7th ESEA conference, Baptist University, Hong Kong.
Eisner, E. W., (1992). Curriculum ideologies. In Jackson, Philip. (Ed.), Handbook of research on curriculum (pp. 3-40). NY: Macmillan Publishing Co.
Eisner, E. W., (1994). The Educational imagination: on the design and evaluation of school
programs (3rd ed). Upper Saddle River, N.J.: Prentice Hall.
Fouser, R. J., (2001). Teaching English through English in Korea: A view from Japan. Kate Newsletter, 25(3). 10-13. Retrieved August 15, 2011, from
www.kate.or.kr/Download/Article/2001_25_3.doc
Kim, S. J., (2004). Coping with cultural obstacles to speaking English in the Korean
secondary school context. Asian EFL Journal, 6(3), 1-11.
Kwon, O. (2000). Korea’s English education policy changes in the 1990s: Innovations to
gear the nation for the 21st century. English Teaching, 55(1), 47-91.
Li, D. (1998). “It’s always more difficult than you plan and imagine”: Teachers’
perceived difficulties in introducing the communicative approach in South Korea. Tesol Quarterly, 32(4), 677-703.
McGrath, S. (2001). Communicative Language Teaching in Korean Public Schools: An informal assessment. The Korea TESOL Journal, 5(2), 1-8.
Windle, S. (2000). From Confusing to Confucian: Towards an understanding. The Korea TESOL Journal, 4(6), 1-8.
Please check the Methodology and Language for Secondary Teachers course at Pilgrims website.
Please check the How to be a Teacher Trainer course at Pilgrims website.
|
