Every time I read an article relating to retooling English education in Korea, as a teacher. I do become fleetingly hopeful; that is until I actually read the article. In a surprisingly uncombative article Mr. Kang Shin Who reports that the Minister of Education, Science and Technology, Ahn Byong-Man, has developed a plan - a pancea - for the aches of English education: teacher evaluations.
While in theory, I support teacher evaluations any evaluation that I have ever received in Korea was the following "Your teaching is good". Whenever, I pressed for specific evaluation criteria I was met with blank stares. I did see co-teachers filling out forms, but it was never explained to me. Even "good teachers" have room for improvement, and the only means to improve is through constructive objective feedback.
However, this article does not concern native English teachers. It concerns the Korean ones. The article does claim that teachers will be evaluated in 18 categories: I just hope that conversational fluency, the ability to spot egregious errors in the textbooks, cultural sensitivity to the native teacher, and planning motivating lessons are not part of the evaluation criteria.
In all seriousness, castigating poor preforming teachers is not part of the solution at all in my opinion. They are after all, a product of the system as a whole. What English education requires, is merely symptomatic of what the larger scope of education requires in Korea: A reworking of the philosophy of education. If the goal of education still remains to memorize large volumes of random (and looking at my textbooks the information is certainly random) information without ever having to apply that knowledge or boil it down to its essential essence Korean education will remain stagnant.
Whenever, I engage in light professional discussions with my VP or my co teachers, many of them do agree with the above point. The problem arises that they can't envision a class room or teaching strategy that smells of this philosophy. How to change education, and how to construct a class room that fosters an environment of active engagement with learned material, first should begin with a consideration of how students will be evaluated.
I believe that multiple choice tests do have a purpose, but they should not be the sole means of student evaluation. Students should be assessed through multiple means: rubrics, rating skills, peer evaluations, and numerous other means that should have been learned in any basic teacher training course. By finding means of assessment that meet the students ability to display learned knowledge we can better evaluate that student. I find it scandalous that the whole of my student's yearly English grade is determined by roughly 100 multiple choice questions.
Changing assessment and evaluation standards of students is only step one. Secondly, students have to learn to take responsibility for their own learning. Schools, public and private alike, are shouldering most of the cognitive weight of the learning process for students. Students need to learn to sit down, either alone or with peers, and study the material. They need to learn to do the bulk of the thinking and work for themselves. Students need to accept the consquences of lack of effort. It may be harsh to say, but students who don't do the work should be failed and not moved on until they have mastered the material. Every effort should be reasonably made to facilitate their success, however; if they refuse to do the work they should not advance a grade level. The realistic fear of failure should serve to propel their academic efforts.
The final point that I would like to make at this time would be that the reasons for studying English should be rexamined. Currently, you will hear a lot of BS regarding the reasons that English is studied in Korea: "It's a global language. For Business. For science" etc etc. These are noble reasons to be sure, but they do not speak of the truth of the matter. English is only studied for the purpose of passing those mind numbing poorly conceived multiple choice examinations, which brings me around again to point number one. If Koreans wish to remain true to their noble aspirations then the very means by which the subject is studied and assessed must change.
Providing teachers with yearly evaluations may prove fruitful, but I am skeptical , for the above reasons, that this will not translate into creating the dawn of the great English speaking Korean generation. A reworking of the general philosophy is needed first.
More comments on this to come later,
These thoughts have been brewing for a long time.
Cheers
Adam
