Questions for those with Prior Teaching Experience and /or TESOL Certified

[Driver 8]

First a little background about me: I am a high school teacher teaching English conversation at high school with a long history of notoriously low students in all subjects, but especially English.  Having been a (substitute) teacher for five years in the US and having recently completed a TESOL certificate program, I was somewhat shocked  and chagrined to learn about teaching methods in Korea.  It appears that Korea's approach to education is an antiquated model by western standards, one of emphasis on rote memorization and teacher-directed lessons, not student-centered.  I'm basing this mostly on what I've briefly observed and the the way in which students learn English in their regular English classrooms.  Basically, until recently, all they did was read and study vocab words, there was no real active learning going on, no tapping into prior knowledge etc.  Basically, the Korean approach to teaching flies in the face of everything I've learned about best practices in my teacher training and TESOL training.  It seems hopelessly mired in outdated philosophies of education.  Piaget,  Vygotsky?  Have Korean teachers ever  heard of these people?  I want to emphasize it's not the teachers'  fault necessarily.  The superintendent of my school district thinks students memorizing textbook pages is a valid objective that teachers and students should focus on!  :o 

So for those of you that have had prior teaching experience, did you experience a similar kind of culture shock, teaching in Korean schools How did you react?  Is/ was it possible to introduce some new progressive methods to your coteachers?  Can improvements be made?  How did you go about it?  Or is it best to leave the other English teachers to do it their way and to focus solely on your own class?  Does the emphasis on rote memorization in other classes automatically cancel out any sort of active learning approach?  Have Korean students been so conditioned to be passive absorbers of information that they can't learn to  become  active learners?  How do I work within this system, and teach,  using the the best practices I know for teaching language learning?  Maybe it's just this school and my district.  Are their other schools / districts in Korea that take more of a student-centered approach?

The greatest culture shock for me hasn't been in daily living in Korea, so much as it has been teaching in one of its schools.

[TriKorea]

I was in pursuit of my teaching cert back in the states, took many hours of classes on how to teach, did the whole substitute thing too! When I got here I felt the same. I did a 120hr TEFL and was constantly taught the method of student-centered learning. Here, at the orientation, I learned how Korean teachers teach (and I saw it in the classrooms). Their entire view on education is so different then ours. My co-teacher even says "all Korean's do is memorize facts, they can't think."
I don't really think you can influence them to change their ways, but part of your role here is to bring our culture to the classroom. That means you should try your best to make all your lessons student-centered. Let the kids learn by doing not just someone barking at them from the front of the classroom. I try to have my kids do activities as much as possible, and not just go though a power point, followed by a listening activity. I think the more I can get my students interacting with each
other in English, the better! Good luck!

[makeshiftb0y]

It was like that in the States some years ago too. I haven't been here long, but I think Korea's education system is beginning to change, and much quicker than it did in the US, or so it seems. It's still mostly rote memorization, but the differences my friends and I see between older and younger students is pretty drastic, and I don't mean just in maturity. It is pretty tough at times, because it's still mostly rote memorization and they seem lost sometimes when I try to let them have some control over the learning experience. They do surprise me sometimes though.

I try to find a balance between the two teaching styles. In my lessons, I generally include some part that just focuses on memorizing key words or phrases and parts that allow them to be a little more creative and have more responsibility. I have to follow the textbook to some extent, but I usually try to give them some choice. For example, when they have to create dialogues, I try to give them two or three scenarios to choose from, all of which should use the key phrases learned. One will be like the textbook dialogue, which many of them choose, and others would be less guided and more open-ended--still not completely unguided, since they have a topic and I will walk around and help, but I mean they have more freedom with how the dialogue or story or whatever will go.

[Driver 8]

A balance makes sense.  I strive to create student-centered  lessons, but the level of my students (very low) has made it difficult at times, and I find myself falling back on more teacher-centered instruction than I know I know is ideal.  It seems like asking them to produce an language on  their own is often like pulling teeth, and  They need lots and lots of scaffolding. :(

Is a student-centered  class possible with really low students?  How?

[NMonk]

I just wrote a small piece on beliefs in learning for my M.A TESOL course. I'm just going to copy and paste it, you might find it interesting, sorry if you don't!! This wasn't a formal task, just discussion task:

For me, thinking about, evaluating and reading about beliefs is a very interesting topic. As I'm sure most of you know by now, I live and teach in Korea. Koreans are very set in their ways. Many Korean people believe certain things should be done certain ways, and the educational system here is one of the most traditional and slowest progressing of all the social institutions. The way English is taught in Korean schools, and the way students are taught to study in English is centred rote learning. In Korea it was believed that if you study and learn by heart enough grammar rules and enough vocabulary, if you do enough reading comprehension exercises then you will acquire the English language. This belief is now slowly starting to change, however it is now ingrained into the education system here that studying should be done through learning facts, theories and memorization. The best student is the one who can memorize the most. My beliefs surrounding language acquisition could not be any more different to this. I firmly believe in a communicative approach to language learning. As Chomsky (1965) stated there is a “fundamental difference between [language] competence (the speaker’s knowledge of the language) and [language] performance (the actual use of the language in concrete situations).” Korean students are firmly rooted in language competence. Their tests are all multiple choice reading comprehension exercises focusing on grammar and vocabulary. Up until I started working at XXXXXXXX High School my students could get a perfect score for English with having never spoken a word of English. You can imagine how the students felt when they were told that from now on 30% of their grade was going to be based on communicative competence and performance. The general objective for my classes is that “the learners will be able to survive in temporary contacts with foreign language speakers in everyday situations….and to be able to establish and maintain social contacts” (Van Ek, 1976).
One of the major challenges in beliefs I face is regarding speaking out loud. Koreans are extremely shy people. Even Korean people who we would consider fluent in English will avoid speaking to foreigners in case they make a mistake. This is also apparent in class. Korean students are generally not allowed or expected to speak or ask questions in class. Getting a high school Korean student to speak to another person in the class, in English is extremely difficult. I have taken on this challenge in a number of ways. Firstly there is error correction. As Terrell (1977) argued there is “no evidence which shows that the correction of speech errors is necessary or even helpful in language acquisition”. I see error correction as negative in terms of motivation, attitude and embarrassment. If I can understand the students meaning I am happy. Students are also given plenty of time to discuss tasks with their partner/s, in Korean if they choose. If they are going to speak in front of the class I will tell them so they can prepare, and after speaking in front of the class they are rewarded.
Another challenge in beliefs I have regards cooperative Vs individual learning. The Korean education system is highly competitive. My students have literally never been expected to work in pairs or groups before. This is in stark contrast to my belief that every task should involve a negotiation of meaning through a minimum of pair work. If I gave the students in pairs one work sheet each and ask them to work in pairs, no matter what the task was they would find a way to do it without speaking to each other, if I gave them one between two they would just take it in turns to write!! It was just that they had never practiced working this way before! I feel I overcame this by always explaining to the students how the tasks were useful to them and what social situation they could use the language in, slowly but surely they have become not just willing to, but through feedback have stated that they really enjoy group work and group problem solving.
The last challenge regarding a difference of beliefs I have time to discuss before grading some papers is that regarding creative thinking. I believe that in order to communicate in a language you have to be able to create the language. There are literally infinite combinations of words grammatical sentence structures etc in any given language. So how is it possible to memorize them all, and then be able to reproduce the correct sentence, in the correct social context at the correct time? I don’t think it is, so I train my students to create the language. I see myself simply as their guide. However, Korean students are expected to memorize lexis, grammar, dialogues, poems, songs, Shakespeare even in their quest to acquire the English language. I remember the first time I asked them to create a dialogue there was genuine confusion. They didn’t understand the task, and they asked if they could memorize one instead! Now thankfully, they are on board and making real progress, even amongst the very lowest levels in their willingness to speak and communicate in English.

[kj]

They do have a very unproductive English program that is based on rote memorization and teaches alsmost no applicable skills. Kids want to learn and have fun, so you can train them. I teach some very low level students and as long as you can make it fun and relate it to their lives(somewhat) they will be interested. It might take some time to get them to come around. They've grown up hating English and school (especially if they are low level students). It never fails to amaze me when students can tell you the dictionary definition of an advanced vocabulary word but can't answer a simple question like, "How are you?"

[ren546]

I agree. I teach in a university, and thankfully I have some measure of control over the methods that I use to teach, but the students aren't used to actually using language. They're accustomed to being taught grammar, vocabulary, etc., and they're very accustomed to tests, but when they are asked to speak to one another in groups, they freeze, simply because it's something that they were never expected to do. Their vocabulary is often more extensive than some NES that I know, but they can't actually use any of those words in conversation. Some of the Koreans that I have worked with recognize the need for change in this respect (most of whom have been trained in other countries), but it may take some time before the "administration" realizes that their methods are dated and ineffective. There is also a large number of people working in language education here who know very little about both education and language, and that certainly doesn't help.

[flasyb]

They do have a very unproductive English program that is based on rote memorization and teaches alsmost no applicable skills. Kids want to learn and have fun, so you can train them. I teach some very low level students and as long as you can make it fun and relate it to their lives(somewhat) they will be interested. It might take some time to get them to come around. They've grown up hating English and school (especially if they are low level students). It never fails to amaze me when students can tell you the dictionary definition of an advanced vocabulary word but can't answer a simple question like, "How are you?"

Also, they know the dictionary definition but there's no way they can use it in a sentence. The chief problem with all that memorisation is that the kids don't learn how to create new sentences with the language. They are stuck in grinding repetition and only those who study at home can beak it.

As for memorisation, it can be very helpful. Do you guys know about "the art of memory." Basically memory techniques which anyone can do and that kick the crap out of rote memorisation.

They're used in all the international memory championships and that Japanese fella who memorised pi to 35,000 characters used the same techniques. It's all about putting what you want to remember into object form and scattering the objects around memory palaces. I'm thinking about giving it a try with some Korean words next week.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Art_of_memory
Here's a link for it.

[21 grams]

I think it's worth pointing out that not so long ago, the U.S. was using these same "antiquated" methods and its education system was easily the best in the world.  The enormous wealth disparity that existed, for many years, between the United States and most of the rest of world, particularly following WWII, may have had something to do with that.  But the fact nevertheless remains. 

Fast forward through the last forty years of rapid inflation and consequent economic decline in the U.S., and you have a world reaping both the benefits and consequences of globalization.  Currently riding the benefits is South Korea, who according to the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), now has the top ranked education system, despite its relatively outdated methods.  I'm not saying I agree with the methodology, but you can't argue with the results:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2010/dec/07/world-education-rankings-maths-science-reading

Now, with that being said, you really have to examine what the goal of formal education is, fundamentally.  With just a pinch of perception, you might see that the release of well-rounded, independent-minded, critical thinkers into society, is not the priority.  Instead, governments are obsessed with growing their respective economies, and for that, you need obedient, disciplined workers that are just smart enough to handle job instructions with little need for clarification.  And that plank works great ... for a while.  Eventually though, the cumulative effect of a systematically dumbed-down population is a culture of anti-intellectualism, one completely disconnected from the reality that surrounds it.  The porcine, clueless, livestock currently grazing the vapid wasteland that is the United States of America are proof-positive of this endgame.

I wish the word 'education' wasn't doublespeak for the degrading process of conditioning young minds for a life in service of money, but that is what the great preponderance of humanity has settled for. 

[RufusW]

21 grams.  If that table is just maths science and reading it proves the point.  Wheres the critical thinking, writing (!) etc...

The rigidity and ineffectiveness means I'll never teach in Korea again.  Its up to Koreans to understand the importance of how they teach.  Until then, Western teachers are actually here for status\appearance.  The fact that TESOL CELTA methods are 'Western centric' doesnt help their adoption either.

Simpy put, I believe Western\Modern\Progressive methods are more effective but Korea is unwilling to adopt them.  Some people wont like this, but the 'Asian teaching style' is bourne from an aspect of their culture which I simply think is wrong: the dislike of individualism.

Vietnam on the other hand has incorporated British Council teachers into their education system.  They understand its better and are humble enough to basically get 'outside help'.

Stick to your guns.  Incorpoate modern learning as much as possible.  The conditioning students have received will make it harder but thats no excuse not to tech as well as you can.  Hopefully youll get results and can show (while explaning) how and why these methods are better.  The other choice is capitulation and you wont enjoy your work.

(I believe this question should be in a 'teaching' board.  Its certianly the bigeest issue with teaching in Korea.  No doubt.)

[Driver 8]

Rufus,

I think you're right  about where this thread should be.  I didn't  read the headings closely enough before posting, I guess.  The moderators are welcome  to move this if they deem it appropriate.

[rogue85]

The teaching style in this country really bothers me. The rote learning is so boring for both the students and the teachers. One of the main problems with this learning style is the lack of context when learning the vocabulary or sentence structures. It's all very well for the students to remember something by rote, but they never know when to use the words or phrases that they've learnt because it was never put into context for them.
I have tried numerous to times to suggest new ways of teaching to my co-teachers but they are adament about following the textbook every step of the way. It's very frustrating for me.

[postkorea]

Although, I have not discussed teaching methods with my coteacher's extensively, my impression is that they are aware of methods used in other countries and even support some of those methods. I know they value speaking in the classroom. However, while I think it's best for the students to produce from scratch. At least one teacher values fill in the blank speaking activities. I think the teacher's believe guidance is needed even in freer speaking activities- hence the fill in the blank speaking activities. My personal method is question and answer speaking practice followed by a role-play, which uses the target language, but everything they say comes from their head. Initially, I wanted to give them no preparation time, but I have found with 40 students mixed level students in the classroom, it is necessary to give them time to prepare and write a dialogue. Another thing I suspect bothers the teachers is my never allowing the students to read what they wrote in front of the class. They must produce it from memory or from previous knowledge when it's their turn to speak. This is not perfect because some can memorize a great deal, but I do my best to challenge them to speak fluently. I know my coteacher's don't respect me as a teacher, but they do support me in the classroom, and I think they do their best to be good coteacher's. I also understand that they don't get to teach exactly how they want to teach either. They have to teach reading and listening and translation whether they like it or not.

[shadoweaver]

I have encountered the same problems in my classroom.  I teach very low lever high school students who are just not used to learning in a student centered environment.  It seems to make them uncomfortable and confused.  Again, like many people have posted, it is very hard to get them to produce their own language.  I feel like a lot of what we learned in TEFL courses can tend to contradict Korean culture, especially classroom culture.  My goal is to try to make a comfortable environment for the students and motivate them to talk and create as much language as they can.  This sometimes feels like it is impossible.  I find it even more difficult in other ways, as my students are very poorly behaved and have no interest in learning English.  If I give them the freedom I want to give them in class, they will just speak in Korean and goof around, ignoring the lesson or directions. 

Does anyone have any good advice for how to slowly incorporate a student centered language classroom with Korean culture and very shy or very uninterested students.  I am just looking for ways to encourage my students to try harder, speak more, and NOT BE afraid of making mistakes while keeping in mind that it must feel very uncomfortable and strange for them to be in such a different classroom setting.

I would love anyone's advice on what has worked for them. 

[Paul]

It seems hopelessly mired in outdated philosophies of education.  Piaget,  Vygotsky?  Have Korean teachers ever  heard of these people?

At least someone has. When I arrived last year they were changing the EPIK "Pre-orientation" course (an online "watch the video and do the multi-choice and we'll multiply the hours that took you by 10 to meet our end of the contract" thing) so I was "lucky" enough to do both. They've mostly removed it now, but previously they actually had all new staff sit through about two hours straight of lectures on child psychology, linguistics etc. Basically a quick primer on all the core theory. Heck, the "tests" were just exercises in spotting which quote or philosophy belonged to which name.

(Having said that, I've worked with one person who blinked and looked completely dumbfounded when I mentioned Chomsky.)

[jennfenn21]

Rote memorization and completing exercises that do NOT require any critical thinking, creativity, or cooperation is definitely a situation at my school. Last semester, I had a "co-teacher" who could not speak English, and yet, here she was as my co-teacher! Her plan for the semester--follow the textbook, put in the CD-ROM, and do the textbook activities (super boring). She told me (through the translation skills of a qualified English teacher) that the Korean education system and Korean way of teaching is to follow the teaching materials and follow the script. Excuse me, but I am not a puppet! I am a credentialed USA teacher and I will not do that. So I didn't.

Instead, I brought in games and activities (some from fellow waygook posters!) that the kids enjoyed. My students made posters and I had group work to tape on the walls! My students had opportunities to be creative with their responses and their group work. I still had to do the book work, but almost always the textbook plan lasts 20-25 minutes before the game/activity. I take out the book's game idea, add my own 1-2 activities, and the result is that part of the class is boring textbook ish (required by the school) and at least 15-20 minutes is always students engaged with English learning.

The Korean government spends a lot of money to bring all us NETs here to teach. They must know that a reason their population is not proficient in English conversation and fluency is because rote memorization is not the way to learn a language. Learning it from a NET is a step in the right direction. The most effective NETs are the ones with the chance to incorporate what we consider teaching best practices and student-centered, cooperative, differentiated learning activities. It sounds like you know how you should be teaching--keep fighting to make it a reality.

I did a survey at the end of the semester asking students what they liked, didn't like, and want to do more of (the other teachers were shocked I would do such a thing!). The overwhelming majority loved the games and small group work and asked to do more! Of course, most responses were written in Korean so I had to ask a co-worker to translate them for me. Regardless, kids love games and they love being social. The challenge for us as English teachers is to bring that into our classes where they feel so uncomfortable speaking in another language.