[lg policy] Korea: Language education policy

[Harold Schiffman]

Language education policy


By Robert J. Fouser

Language education policy rarely attracts headlines in Korea or
elsewhere. English education policy makes the news on and off in
Korea, but news about other languages is rare. This is regrettable
because the language education policy needs greater coordination so
that it can effectively promote individual development and the
national interest.

An overview of the current situation reveals the lack of coordination.
Two languages are required in the elementary school through the
first-year of high school: Korean and English. Both languages are also
an important component of the university entrance examination. Korean
is required as the national language and dominates the early years of
elementary school education. Literacy in Korean, the native language
of nearly all students, is essential for success in all school
learning. This is similar to most other countries in the world where
literacy in native and national languages is required for success in
the educational system.

English has been required from third grade of elementary school since
1997; previously, it began in middle school. Like Korean, English has
been required since 1945, though the reason has not always been as
clear. Currently, the main reason appears to be promoting national
competitiveness in an increasingly globalizing economy.

Korean and English are not the only languages taught in schools.
Classical Chinese is offered as an elective in middle and senior high
schools, and ``second foreign languages" as electives in almost all
high schools. The national curriculum includes Arabic, Chinese,
French, German, Japanese, Russian, and Spanish. Among these, Japanese
is by far the most popular language, followed by Chinese. For years,
French and German were most popular, but they have declined rapidly
since the 1990s. The other languages are rarely taught.

Taken together, most students leave high school having studied four
languages: Korean, English, Classical Chinese, and another foreign
language. The problem, of course, is that few Koreans are satisfied
with the outcome. Many students take extra language classes as part of
university entrance preparation, but these classes focus on developing
communicative language skills. Policy-makers and media pundits
continue to complain about the poor overall level of English
proficiency in Korea, arguing that it affects national
competitiveness. The short amount of time for studying second foreign
languages makes it difficult for students to develop much proficiency
in the language beyond a few greetings.

The current paradigm in foreign language education emerged in the
1990s when the United States was overwhelmingly dominant after the end
of the Cold War and English was extending its reach through the
Internet. Policymakers logically pushed English, giving rise to
elementary school English education and the listening component of the
university entrance examination. Pressure to open the economy in
response to the 1997 economic crisis added fuel to the fire, causing a
brief flirtation with the idea of making English a national language
along with Korean in 1999.

The 1990s are fading deeper into history as the rise of China changes
the global balance of power. The idea that English is the only foreign
language that Koreans need to know no longer fits the national
interest. China has been Korea's largest trading partner for a number
of years. Many Korean companies have a strong and expanding presence
in China. By far the largest number of foreign students in Korea is
from China, and the number of tourists from China is increasing
rapidly. On all levels, interaction with China is vastly more active
than in the 1990s or the early 2000s.

The importance of Chinese underscores the need for a three-tiered
language education policy based on Korean first, English second,
followed by a regional foreign language. Of the second foreign
language taught in Korea, either Chinese or Japanese are the most
important. Other languages are important for specialized needs, but
they can be taught in specialized schools and at the university level.

Fortunately for Korean students, Chinese and Japanese share a common
vocabulary based on Chinese characters with each other and with
Korean. Knowledge of Chinese characters not only helps learn Chinese
and Japanese, but it also helps vocabulary development in Korean. This
is a great resource that the current curriculum ignores, forcing many
parents to turn to private education for Chinese characters
instruction.

The easiest and most effective solution to the problem is to teach
Chinese characters in Korean classes beginning in the first grade of
elementary school. This would give all students a basic knowledge of
Chinese characters that they can apply later to learning Chinese and
Japanese. It would also help them develop their Korean vocabulary
through knowledge of word roots. It would make the Classical Chinese
class more interesting for those who choose to take it.

Teaching Chinese characters in Korean class is an important first step
toward creating a comprehensive language education policy that
enriches Korean while giving students an advantage in learning Chinese
or Japanese. Problems in English education, however, will require
other measures.

The writer is a professor at the Department of Korean Language
Education at Seoul National University. He can be reached at
fouser at snu.ac.kr.

http://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/news/opinon/2011/02/137_81383.html

-- 
**************************************
N.b.: Listing on the lgpolicy-list is merely intended as a service to
its members
and implies neither approval, confirmation nor agreement by the owner
or sponsor of the list as to the veracity of a message's contents.
Members who disagree with a message are encouraged to post a rebuttal,
and to write directly to the original sender of any offensive message.
 A copy of this may be forwarded to this list as well.  (H. Schiffman,
Moderator)

For more information about the lgpolicy-list, go to
https://groups.sas.upenn.edu/mailman/
listinfo/lgpolicy-list
*******************************************

_______________________________________________
This message came to you by way of the lgpolicy-list mailing list
lgpolicy-list at groups.sas.upenn.edu
To manage your subscription unsubscribe, or arrange digest format: https://groups.sas.upenn.edu/mailman/listinfo/lgpolicy-list