I have not been a very good blogger of late, and for that I do apologize to my regular reader. I do have a few reasons/excuses, just as a preamble to today's post:
1) Nothing big to blog about of late, things have mostly trod along on an even keel;
2) School and job-related activities have picked up, what with school going back into session, my extra class for Nambu district requiring some evenings and most of Saturday;
3) Other projects in the sitting at the computer and writing vein, having reduced my will to continue at the same for blog purposes.
And here we are again; nothing much to report, except I had a bit of a fracas with one of my co-teachers last week. As background, let me remind the reader that one of the key classroom management techniques I use here is "the stopwatch", something suggested by Dave Deubelweiss during my initial training by SMOE--so it has the imprimatur, as it were, of my employer. We have fifty minutes of class; when class begins, I start the stopwatch, and when the stopwatch (a big red one with one-inch digits) reads 50:00, class ends. If students won't stop talking, are misbehaving, egregiously off-task, etc., I stop the stopwatch (beep) until they get back to what they should be doing.
Another management technique I've picked up is the "exit pass" or "exit check", where students have to show they completed the written work before exiting the classroom; my co-teacher and I each cover a door and mark them off as they leave.
One of my co-teachers has a tendency to leave class either right at ending time or even a few minutes early. On Wed., he left so early he didn't know I was doing an "exit check" (this is usually only done when a class is not being diligent), putting me in the position of checking all forty students' work alone, and making some of them late for their next class. Unfair.
I happened to catch him in the hall on Thursday and mention to him that he left early, leaving me to do the check alone, etc., etc. He said, he needed his break time before the next class, that he thinks I should only follow the bells, and he recommends that I not use the stopwatch method.
I pointed out that this was the technique I had used since coming to Korea, and no other co-teacher had suggested it was a problem, what was ...--
He said, he could not adjust to my teaching style and if I had anything else to say, I could say it to the Principal! He walked off, leaving me to marvel anew at the psychic treat that is the passive-aggressive.
We co-taught three periods together all last semester, I asked him for his comments and suggestions on my lessons on several occasions, he has my email and phone number, but never once made a suggestion or comment. We were to teach first period together the next day, so I went round to his office when I arrived at school, bearing a blueberry pastry and a bottle of OJ from Tous les Jours. I asked if there was a time we could get together to discuss the problem he told me about, since after all we have practically a whole semester left, and I wanted to make sure he knew how important his contribution was ...
So we sat down after first period and I asked him to help me figure out what we could do about the issues. His only problem, at least that he is admitting to, was not following the bell schedule. I pointed out that since the construction of the new gym outside my very windows, we could no longer hear the bells anyway, so I used the classroom wall clock as a guide.
I asked him to consider the teaching situation from my point of view: I have no power over my classes. If I use the discipline techniques that other teachers use, I could easily be deported for assault. I do not assign grades, and the conversation that is the key aspect of my teaching is not even covered in testing. Just about all I have is to make them stay after class a few minutes when they misbehave.
I agreed with him that yes, it is an inconvenience to the co-teacher, but no more than it is to me, and the whole point of it is to be an inconvenience to the students. Hopefully, they'll remember staying after class and losing their break time, and won't repeat the behavior that led to that outcome.
Besides, I asked, more or less rhetorically, how often have I kept a class late? It's pretty rare, he agreed. He also agreed that he was displeased with his students' behavior in my class sometimes, but he could not stop it. The problem is, he explained to me, while I choked on irony, is that some students are able to get along perfectly well in my class, but some of them do not understand anything I say. They are bored and act out. Wouldn't it be better if each class has students of similar ability?
I sighed. Yes, yes, that would be better.
Sunday, September 4, 2011
Sunday, August 21, 2011
Education News: School Begins
Well, tomorrow marks 개학하다, the beginning of school, the second semester at least. And my seventh semester at 영일고. Not a lot of new prep to do, though I have done my best to learn the lessons of previous, um, lessons, and improve my planning accordingly.
More on the new school term as events develop.
Meanwhile, let's inaugurate the back-to-school vibe with some education news:
1) The big story (well, for those of a political bent) is that Seoul mayor Oh See-hoon has gambled his career on a rare referendum concerning the free lunch plan brought in by the new City Council last year when the Dems took control. First, he decided to forego running for the Korean Presidency two years from now when when MB's single five-year term ends. The Seoul mayorship is a natural springboard to that position, as MB himself could tell you.
Then, today, the mayor tearfully announced he would resign--not if the referendum did not go his way (he is opposed to the free lunches) but if the voter turn-out is less than 33.3%. Reports the KT:
2) Korea has a functioning democracy, though it has its odd ideas of what that means from an American perspective. Still, no one who pays attention can doubt that there is a sophisticated political environment beneath the squabbles, lock-outs, fisticuffs and appeals on bended knee. Take the on-going flap over brief descriptions and a few words here or there in history textbooks. Dong-A Ilbo:
Ultimately, scientists and science teachers fought back; the development of curricula by groups like the NSTA gave us a powerful tool to counteract capricious and benighted policy-makers and textbook adopters. Korea is not yet at that stage; instead, despite its remarkably unlitigious society, textbook arguments go to the courts. As the article explains:
3) In a completely unrelated story, JoongAng Daily gives us an "intern report" (one of a series written by high school students working with the paper's staff reporters) titled "Gadgets may transform classrooms". True, but then again, maybe they will not.
I consider myself pro-technology in the classroom--I used computers in school as long ago as 1989, I have been school webmaster, taught computer, tried to help my colleagues overcome their techno-phobias, etc, etc. But one thing I know after a quarter century in the teaching trenches is that gizmos and gadgets are tools, they are not teachers.
Ah, but, as the story mentions, that's where it gets sticky:
So what impact have "gadgets" had in the Korean classroom? The article examines a study called Ssam, in which 16 schools offered classes incorporating IT devices. The story says that within a year, students improved by "55 percent in Korean, 46 percent in mathematics, 47 percent in social studies, 50 percent in science and 34 percent in English. Also, according to the study, students showed improvement in concentration and logical thinking."
That would be pretty impressive if it were not total bullshit. First of all 55%, 46% of what, compared to what? Secondly, logical thinking is difficult as hell to measure, and even harder to measure improvement in, particularly in one year. I don't want to come down hard on the student intern here, so I say shame on you to the professional who failed to point out the meaninglessness of these statistics.
Thirdly, their lowest improvement was in Englsih. Go figure.
More on the new school term as events develop.
Meanwhile, let's inaugurate the back-to-school vibe with some education news:
1) The big story (well, for those of a political bent) is that Seoul mayor Oh See-hoon has gambled his career on a rare referendum concerning the free lunch plan brought in by the new City Council last year when the Dems took control. First, he decided to forego running for the Korean Presidency two years from now when when MB's single five-year term ends. The Seoul mayorship is a natural springboard to that position, as MB himself could tell you.
Then, today, the mayor tearfully announced he would resign--not if the referendum did not go his way (he is opposed to the free lunches) but if the voter turn-out is less than 33.3%. Reports the KT:
The brinkmanship, only three days before the Aug. 24 vote day and without a consensus with his Grand National Party (GNP), underlined the situation that he has no other choice but to take his last option in order to encourage as many citizens as possible to cast their votes, while opposition groups are campaigning to boycott the vote.
“If my decision today can sow the seed for ‘sustainable welfare’ and ‘true democracy’ in the future, I have no regret even though I disappear from the stage of history,” the mayor said.[...]
The mayor called for citizens to go to the polls and support his policy, which aims to provide free school lunches only to students in low-income brackets, over the city council’s idea to provide it to all students regardless of the financial status of their parents.[...]
Finishing the announcement, he abruptly fell down to his knees and bowed his head, an apparent gesture to appeal to Seoul citizens.
2) Korea has a functioning democracy, though it has its odd ideas of what that means from an American perspective. Still, no one who pays attention can doubt that there is a sophisticated political environment beneath the squabbles, lock-outs, fisticuffs and appeals on bended knee. Take the on-going flap over brief descriptions and a few words here or there in history textbooks. Dong-A Ilbo:
Kumsung’s textbook contains biased sentences such as, “Under the Rhee Syngman administration, pro-Japanese collaborators were not eliminated, undoing efforts to start a new country based on national spirit,” and “North Korea`s land reform based on free confiscation and free distribution benefited farmers more than South’s farmland reform did.” The ministry’s order to correct 29 items is based on common sense. A person with a normal historical view would agree to it because of hard-to-understand and unclear expressions and unilateral claims that go against historical truth.In the US, a textbook publisher can write whatever they want in a textbook, but they must beware that it may not get adopted if it's too "controversial". Indeed, for many years, a single couple, Mel and Norma Gabler of Longview, Texas, actually had the textbook industry by the short-and-curlies, since they had strong influence with the Texas purchasing committee--that state being the largest single buyer in the nation. Alas, the Gablers were anti-science, anti-evoluton nitwits, with the result that when I began teaching in the 1980s, many biology textbooks barely mentioned the term evolution, even though it is a fundamental organizing principle of the field; my earth science books trimmed Big Bang theory to one or two innocuous sentences.
Ultimately, scientists and science teachers fought back; the development of curricula by groups like the NSTA gave us a powerful tool to counteract capricious and benighted policy-makers and textbook adopters. Korea is not yet at that stage; instead, despite its remarkably unlitigious society, textbook arguments go to the courts. As the article explains:
The Seoul High Court has ruled in favor of the Education, Science and Technology Ministry, which ordered Kumsung Publishing to amend its left-leaning high school textbooks on modern and contemporary Korean history. On Sept. 1 last year, the court had nullified the amendment order, saying assessment of the textbooks should come through deliberation by a specific textbook review committee within the ministry, which did not follow this procedure. This time, however, the court said no flaws occurred in the procedure, saying regulations do not require amendment orders to go through the review committee. Textbook authors agreed to make corrections when the ministry makes the order after the publishing contract is made.This story appeared on 17 August. On 19 August, the Dong-A followed up with this lede graf:
The latest ruling said, “The country can screen a book upon request whether the book`s content is suitable for students, whether the book contains a biased view or expressions, and whether it goes against the national system and legitimacy.” The court emphasized that history textbooks should teach future generations historical truths based on Korea’s legitimacy and constitutional value.
Controversy is mounting over the term “liberal democracy” contained in the 2011 History Education Curriculum. Adopted by the Education, Science and Technology Ministry on Aug. 9, the curriculum provides directions and standards that Korean history textbook authors and publishers must comply with. When the ministry announced the final curriculum, it replaced the term “democracy” with “liberal democracy.” The draft curriculum said, “This explains democracy, economy and mass culture that have developed since the 1960 Revolution.” The final draft says, however, “This is to understand how liberal democracy and economic growth have been achieved since the 1960s and grasp the heightened international profile of the Republic of Korea.” On hearing news of this change, certain scholars are demanding that “liberal democracy” be replaced with “democracy” again.An on-going irritation with Korean media is the frequent publication of opinion and editorial pieces that are not marked as such. The article has no by-line or Op/Ed designation but it clearly is. Take the xloser, for instance:
People wonder why certain forces show an allergic reaction to liberal democracy. Democracy can be divided into liberal democracy, social democracy, people’s democracy and others. If leftist groups do not pursue democracy that has its roots in liberty, they should make clear what democracy they are seeking.
3) In a completely unrelated story, JoongAng Daily gives us an "intern report" (one of a series written by high school students working with the paper's staff reporters) titled "Gadgets may transform classrooms". True, but then again, maybe they will not.
I consider myself pro-technology in the classroom--I used computers in school as long ago as 1989, I have been school webmaster, taught computer, tried to help my colleagues overcome their techno-phobias, etc, etc. But one thing I know after a quarter century in the teaching trenches is that gizmos and gadgets are tools, they are not teachers.
“Before using my laptop during class, it took me a lot of time, effort and energy to take notes in my notebook,” Sun [A-young, an 18-year-old student at CheongShim International Academy] said. “After the school allowed us to use our laptops, however, I found I could not only save time and effort but I could also easily find the materials taught during class.”Yep, Sun hits the nail on the head. I don't know when this school started allowing students to bring computers, but it should have been long ago. Indeed, most US colleges require them, and more and more high schools, too.
Ah, but, as the story mentions, that's where it gets sticky:
Despite the rosy expectations, however, there is some concern, as not all households can afford such expensive devices.Furthermore, some students will not use laptops in an appropriate manner--playing video games in class, or even searching for pr0n, could prove to be a distraction.
“I am very worried about this decision,” said Kim Hye-young, 39, a mother of two elementary school students. “Our family cannot afford such a burden. People like us live every day with financial concerns. We do not have the capacity to pay for such an expensive device.”
So what impact have "gadgets" had in the Korean classroom? The article examines a study called Ssam, in which 16 schools offered classes incorporating IT devices. The story says that within a year, students improved by "55 percent in Korean, 46 percent in mathematics, 47 percent in social studies, 50 percent in science and 34 percent in English. Also, according to the study, students showed improvement in concentration and logical thinking."
That would be pretty impressive if it were not total bullshit. First of all 55%, 46% of what, compared to what? Secondly, logical thinking is difficult as hell to measure, and even harder to measure improvement in, particularly in one year. I don't want to come down hard on the student intern here, so I say shame on you to the professional who failed to point out the meaninglessness of these statistics.
Thirdly, their lowest improvement was in Englsih. Go figure.
Sunday, July 17, 2011
Education News Wrap
This is probably the last Ed News Wrap-up until after the new semester begins, not because Ed News doesn't happen, but because I'm lazy and don't pay much attention to it during the inter-term hiatus.
Nothing earth-shattering of late, but interesting:
1) No. of women in higher education doubles, says the KT headline, but this is absolutely,unwquivocally NOT what it means to sat, at all. The article means to say that the number of women with a higher education has doubled:
Women are also defering marriage and motherhood, shadowing US trends of the seventies, with an increase of 37% of women in the 25-34 age cohort remaining unmarried compared to 2000.
2) From the JoongAng Daily, and perhaps of more interest to our waygookin readers, "At hagwon, demand for U.S. teachers rises". The story states early on: "Because Western norms have been embedded within these instructors’ gestures, speech and behavior, these teachers provide education in English while also exposing students to Western culture." This is particularly important for families planning to send their children to the States for English immersion.
You see, the teachers themselves, in this meme, are irrelevant, what's important is their embedded features, as though they are educational Terminator units with their mission hard-wired: Never mind John Connor, demonstrate American cultural minutiae to our children, please.
[One tutor at a popular hagwon in an upscale district] believes that an American teacher offers a certain trust to parents and students, which has increased their employment in Korea:
Yes, that includes my job. But, the way I understand it, I can keep my HS job as long as my school decides to offer it. Anyway, assuming a positive medical exam tomorrow, my job is secure for at least another year. Besides, who knows what may happen in 2012!
Nothing earth-shattering of late, but interesting:
1) No. of women in higher education doubles, says the KT headline, but this is absolutely,unwquivocally NOT what it means to sat, at all. The article means to say that the number of women with a higher education has doubled:
The number of women in Seoul with higher education has almost doubled in the last 10 years, according to a survey Sunday. [...]Girls are also matriculating high schools and continuing on to university at a better clip than boys--last year, 66% of high school girls went on to college, compared to 59.8% of boys.
The research by Seoul City showed that the number of women aged 30 or over who received college education or higher jumped by 95.4 percent to 1.1 million in 2010 from 575,000 in 2000.
During the same period, that of men rose by 45.1 percent.
Women are also defering marriage and motherhood, shadowing US trends of the seventies, with an increase of 37% of women in the 25-34 age cohort remaining unmarried compared to 2000.
2) From the JoongAng Daily, and perhaps of more interest to our waygookin readers, "At hagwon, demand for U.S. teachers rises". The story states early on: "Because Western norms have been embedded within these instructors’ gestures, speech and behavior, these teachers provide education in English while also exposing students to Western culture." This is particularly important for families planning to send their children to the States for English immersion.
You see, the teachers themselves, in this meme, are irrelevant, what's important is their embedded features, as though they are educational Terminator units with their mission hard-wired: Never mind John Connor, demonstrate American cultural minutiae to our children, please.
[One tutor at a popular hagwon in an upscale district] believes that an American teacher offers a certain trust to parents and students, which has increased their employment in Korea:
“There are lots of factors, but I think the overarching reason is that it is similar for most students,” he said. “[The] number one reason people go to these academies is to learn. And I think the biggest thing is [that they come with a] certain trust and feeling that they are going to get the best education from these native speakers rather than someone who can speak English but is not familiar with the culture. A lingering doubt evolves from that type of teacher.”Meanwhile, although the national SAT will be adding an English speaking component in a year or two (such dates being eminently mutable), SMOE is dismantling the very high school conversation program with NSETs that represents the public schools' best chance at competing. Go fingure.
Yes, that includes my job. But, the way I understand it, I can keep my HS job as long as my school decides to offer it. Anyway, assuming a positive medical exam tomorrow, my job is secure for at least another year. Besides, who knows what may happen in 2012!
Sunday, July 3, 2011
Education News Wrap
Time for the weekly *cough, cough* post about what's going on in education here on the peninsula. And this one is particularly interesting, or at least [your adjective here] since it crystallizes some of the key issues in Korean education.
First up, there is "the problem with an easy CSAT prep test", the problem being that too many Moms complained that the test does not allow their particular genius children to shine, since there was just too much shiny-ness.
It’s an important issue because CSAT scores are weighed heavily by universities in their admissions criteria. “If the official CSAT this year is this easy, getting just one problem wrong will place you in the second level,” said Park Su-jin of Seoul Foreign Language High School. Park is in charge of helping students at the school with their university admissions.
“Because of this [exam], it will be harder on the students.”
One might suggest that the best action on an easy exam is not getting just one problem wrong. That's what Norfolk & Chance did last Thursday at 3AP in winning the Trivia Contest, after all. But this is Korea, and it's always more complicated than that:
[Previously] KICE came under heavy criticism from parents. Last year, only 11 brought home a score of 100 percent for those sections. The prep test is intended to be used a barometer for students to determine their readiness for November’s CSAT. [...]
This isn’t the first time KICE [Korea Institute for Curriculum Evaluation] has come under fire for the CSAT’s difficulty level, which was introduced in 2008. Every year, parents complain that it is either too difficult or too easy. Korean students often compare it to water or fire.
It’s an important issue because CSAT scores are weighed heavily by universities in their admissions criteria.
So, which is the greater problem, that the test can be by turns judged--by less than impartial parties--too easy or too hard, or that a single test, administered on one and only one day in November, is weighed so heavily in in college admissions?
Next, three recent stories concerned the digital age and the Korean student. Yonhap News via KH describes the results of an OECD study on digital literacy. The story begins with the sentence:
Young South Koreans learn the best from computers and the Internet according to a survey of 15 year-olds in 19 countries, the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development said on Monday.
This sentence is a total--and typical--misunderstanding of the report. It really says that Korean students, thanks to their unwholesome addiction to PC bangs and MMRPGs like Starcraft, have a head start on digital reading. Reading. They can read from a computer screen better ... and "their ability to solve problems using the Internet is even better,” a Seoul Education Ministry official said, without a shred of evidence for his statement from the study.
Even an occasional reader of this blog knows I am as techno-savvy as most teachers and more so than most with similar hair-hue; at my school I am the "God of Powerpoint" since I seem able to bend that program to my will. I bought into the Internet for homework information, cool links and interactive assignments when they could be found, long ago. I totally believe in the power of technology for good, and of course, for ill.
All textbooks to go digital by 2015, announces another KH headline, stating that soon students in all age groups will be able to access textbooks and activity books using smartphones, tablet PCs and so on. This is a good thing.
Citing the best score South Korea garnered in an OECD digital reading survey, the Education Ministry believes that the digital platforms will bring about a sea change in the classroom and boost the country’s educational competitiveness.
Oh, dear. Well, see, no. That's not ... um, [sigh] Or, put it this way:
The problem we face now, however, is an exaggerated trust in digital education. Some people wrongfully assume that the quality of academic activity will improve with the use of multimedia digital material instead of conventional textbooks. However, without a teacher’s guidance, the impact of digital textbooks may fall short of expectations. There is a risk that digital textbooks will only aggravate addiction to the Internet among the young, when 12.8 percent of students are already suffering from this condition.
The above is from a JoongAng Ilbo editorial titled Smart education, not lazy teachers, which does a reasonable job lying out context for the e-textbook, teachers, and the computer-based classroom in the 21st century. Many in the educational administration field, especially the political wing--in Korea and America and probably everywhere--seem to view technology as a money-saver: more technology units=less teacher units. Certainly, quality interactive materials can free a teacher's time from rote processes like grading, but they cannot replace the truly interactive experience that is at the heart of education: teacher-student face time.
First up, there is "the problem with an easy CSAT prep test", the problem being that too many Moms complained that the test does not allow their particular genius children to shine, since there was just too much shiny-ness.
It’s an important issue because CSAT scores are weighed heavily by universities in their admissions criteria. “If the official CSAT this year is this easy, getting just one problem wrong will place you in the second level,” said Park Su-jin of Seoul Foreign Language High School. Park is in charge of helping students at the school with their university admissions.
“Because of this [exam], it will be harder on the students.”
One might suggest that the best action on an easy exam is not getting just one problem wrong. That's what Norfolk & Chance did last Thursday at 3AP in winning the Trivia Contest, after all. But this is Korea, and it's always more complicated than that:
[Previously] KICE came under heavy criticism from parents. Last year, only 11 brought home a score of 100 percent for those sections. The prep test is intended to be used a barometer for students to determine their readiness for November’s CSAT. [...]
This isn’t the first time KICE [Korea Institute for Curriculum Evaluation] has come under fire for the CSAT’s difficulty level, which was introduced in 2008. Every year, parents complain that it is either too difficult or too easy. Korean students often compare it to water or fire.
It’s an important issue because CSAT scores are weighed heavily by universities in their admissions criteria.
So, which is the greater problem, that the test can be by turns judged--by less than impartial parties--too easy or too hard, or that a single test, administered on one and only one day in November, is weighed so heavily in in college admissions?
Next, three recent stories concerned the digital age and the Korean student. Yonhap News via KH describes the results of an OECD study on digital literacy. The story begins with the sentence:
Young South Koreans learn the best from computers and the Internet according to a survey of 15 year-olds in 19 countries, the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development said on Monday.
This sentence is a total--and typical--misunderstanding of the report. It really says that Korean students, thanks to their unwholesome addiction to PC bangs and MMRPGs like Starcraft, have a head start on digital reading. Reading. They can read from a computer screen better ... and "their ability to solve problems using the Internet is even better,” a Seoul Education Ministry official said, without a shred of evidence for his statement from the study.
Even an occasional reader of this blog knows I am as techno-savvy as most teachers and more so than most with similar hair-hue; at my school I am the "God of Powerpoint" since I seem able to bend that program to my will. I bought into the Internet for homework information, cool links and interactive assignments when they could be found, long ago. I totally believe in the power of technology for good, and of course, for ill.
All textbooks to go digital by 2015, announces another KH headline, stating that soon students in all age groups will be able to access textbooks and activity books using smartphones, tablet PCs and so on. This is a good thing.
Citing the best score South Korea garnered in an OECD digital reading survey, the Education Ministry believes that the digital platforms will bring about a sea change in the classroom and boost the country’s educational competitiveness.
Oh, dear. Well, see, no. That's not ... um, [sigh] Or, put it this way:
The problem we face now, however, is an exaggerated trust in digital education. Some people wrongfully assume that the quality of academic activity will improve with the use of multimedia digital material instead of conventional textbooks. However, without a teacher’s guidance, the impact of digital textbooks may fall short of expectations. There is a risk that digital textbooks will only aggravate addiction to the Internet among the young, when 12.8 percent of students are already suffering from this condition.
The above is from a JoongAng Ilbo editorial titled Smart education, not lazy teachers, which does a reasonable job lying out context for the e-textbook, teachers, and the computer-based classroom in the 21st century. Many in the educational administration field, especially the political wing--in Korea and America and probably everywhere--seem to view technology as a money-saver: more technology units=less teacher units. Certainly, quality interactive materials can free a teacher's time from rote processes like grading, but they cannot replace the truly interactive experience that is at the heart of education: teacher-student face time.
Saturday, June 25, 2011
This Week in English B
This week my classroom was converted into the Exhibition Hall of the Young-il Job Fair. This is one of my favorite lessons, and one of the students' as well. It comes from BogglesworldESL, but it has to be beefed up for my classes since I need 10 HR reps and 31 job-seekers in order to accommodate 40+ students.
The activity is essentially the same as described at the website, but I increase the range of skill sets, and sneak in a lot of names that Koreans aren't used to pronouncing--lots of l, r, f and consonant blends. I also use a wider range of companies, including Korean chaebol like Hyundai Heavy Industries and Dongwon FB, and some internationals like DDB Agency and Chevron. Each company has two job functions to fill, so the interviewers have to use the information they learned from the applicant to decide which job to tell them about.
I made a couple of "Welcome to the Young-il Job Fair" type banners, and arranged the classroom as you see in the photos. My co-teacher chooses 10 students to man the interview booths, and gives instruction to the job-seekers in the hallway while I go over the duties of the company reps. "The success of this activity," I intone, "is all up to you. If you are serious, and if you make the others speak and listen in English, this will be a great lesson." Even high school boys respond well to being put in a position of trust and responsibility.
Once that is done, the lesson runs itself, except for guarding the entrance door to ensure an orderly process, monitoring conversations, and checking that interviewees are writing the information they learn correctly and in English--spelling doesn't matter in my class, but not writing in Hangeul does.
Monday 5th period was the Open Class for my contract renewal process, and I was told to expect several members of the administration as well as English Department members to observe. Only the vice principal showed up, walked around for about ten minutes, and left. I was told he was "very pleased". He is rising to become principal when Mr Jun retires in August, so that's a good sign.
The activity is essentially the same as described at the website, but I increase the range of skill sets, and sneak in a lot of names that Koreans aren't used to pronouncing--lots of l, r, f and consonant blends. I also use a wider range of companies, including Korean chaebol like Hyundai Heavy Industries and Dongwon FB, and some internationals like DDB Agency and Chevron. Each company has two job functions to fill, so the interviewers have to use the information they learned from the applicant to decide which job to tell them about.
I made a couple of "Welcome to the Young-il Job Fair" type banners, and arranged the classroom as you see in the photos. My co-teacher chooses 10 students to man the interview booths, and gives instruction to the job-seekers in the hallway while I go over the duties of the company reps. "The success of this activity," I intone, "is all up to you. If you are serious, and if you make the others speak and listen in English, this will be a great lesson." Even high school boys respond well to being put in a position of trust and responsibility.
Once that is done, the lesson runs itself, except for guarding the entrance door to ensure an orderly process, monitoring conversations, and checking that interviewees are writing the information they learn correctly and in English--spelling doesn't matter in my class, but not writing in Hangeul does.
Monday 5th period was the Open Class for my contract renewal process, and I was told to expect several members of the administration as well as English Department members to observe. Only the vice principal showed up, walked around for about ten minutes, and left. I was told he was "very pleased". He is rising to become principal when Mr Jun retires in August, so that's a good sign.
Monday, June 20, 2011
Every 토 is 놀토
... at least, starting next year, and at least, according to a story in the DongA Ilbo titled, Schools to introduce 5-day week from next year. 토요일 to-yo-il is the Korean for Saturday, and nol-to is a contraction for "no school Saturday".
Some years ago, Saturday was just another school day for most of Korea's middle and high school students. Then, the government cut down to half-days on Saturday, and more recently to half-days on only the first, third and fifth Saturdays. At my school, these are club days.
On the other hand, hakwon owners will be happy, as each hour out of school is an hour potentially in academy classes. As the article describes:
On the one hand, of course this is a positive move for the health and well-being of Korean children; but on the other hand, I do wish the-powers-that-be here would be a bit more circumspect in these kinds of undertakings.
But it doesn't actually impact me in any case: a) my school will no doubt opt to continue with Saturday school; and b) I don't work on Saturdays.
Some years ago, Saturday was just another school day for most of Korea's middle and high school students. Then, the government cut down to half-days on Saturday, and more recently to half-days on only the first, third and fifth Saturdays. At my school, these are club days.
"A five-day school week system will be introduced on a voluntary basis at all elementary, middle and high schools nationwide in earnest beginning with the 2012 school year,” the [Education, Science and Technology] ministry said.Since it is "voluntary", I'm not going to hold my breath. I am sure a great many mothers are unhappy about this, but at least schools will not fall down on their baby-sitting task: "child care classes will be conducted every Saturday for children whose parents both work".
Since schools have different educational environments for class, the ministry plans to require school steering committees to review the system and implement it on a voluntary basis.
In line with the expansion of the five-day workweek at companies in Korea, the five-day workweek for the entire population will start in full swing from next year.
On the other hand, hakwon owners will be happy, as each hour out of school is an hour potentially in academy classes. As the article describes:
The five-day school week system, however, has fueled fears over a hike in private tutoring expenses and lowering of academic performance.Whew! We can see they've thought it through quite thoroughly: a 4 month trial in one-tenth of schools is certain to iron out the kinks in a social change of enormous magnitude; this is not about shortening the school day by ten minutes, it's loosing 1.5 million children on the streets twice a month.
As such, the government will test the new system at 10 percent of elementary and middle schools from this year’s second half. The system will be operated on a trial basis at certain schools to make final check on side effects that could arise from the expansion of the five-day school week as well as countermeasures.
On the one hand, of course this is a positive move for the health and well-being of Korean children; but on the other hand, I do wish the-powers-that-be here would be a bit more circumspect in these kinds of undertakings.
But it doesn't actually impact me in any case: a) my school will no doubt opt to continue with Saturday school; and b) I don't work on Saturdays.
Tuesday, June 14, 2011
SSGT Reckless, Korean War Hero
Last week was a lesson on Sports in my first grade classes, which is mainly a survey activity: teams are given a specific topic and they work together to devise three good survey questions to elicit the opinions of their classmates. Topics in sports include favorite sport, attendance at sports events, women in sports, etc. This year, gambling and game-fixing was included, due to the K-League scandal.
And Animals in Sports. I make that team ask some form of the question, Is it morally right to use animals for our entertainment? I make them ask because I want to know what Korean students think on this issue. I myself am a bit conflicted on it: I love the circus, elephant parades, dogs pushing prams and lion-tamers included, I have been to the racetrack a few times in my day, I even saw the cobra show in Thailand last month and uploaded video to Youtube! But I'm always a bit je ne sais quoi: it's one thing to use them for sustenance, another to force them to perform just for the purpose of relieving our ennui. Of course, being wild creatures, they'd probably be dead otherwise, rather than, say, populating lawn chairs at a clean yet inexpensive resort.
Interestingly, my students seem to be divided right down the middle: 50%, more or less, think it is uncool to treat/mistreat animals like this. Fast forward to today, when when one of my old (well, thirty or so) students posts the link at top on his FB--he's a horsey type from way back.
I'm wondering what my current students would think of this use of an animal, or this particular animal. What do you think? You can read more here: http://www.scuttlebuttsmallchow.com/mascreck.html
It's quite a story, but it ended pretty well for SSGT Reckless. One cannot say the same for many other animals drafted for military use, particularly bomb-carriers like the Soviet anti-tank dogs or the USA's Project Pigeon. Go to this Wikipedia article, scroll down to "As living bombs"--is a content warning here really necessary?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)