Is It Problematic to Teach English in South Korea? Part 2: What English, and Whose?
Students about to take the Suneung Exam. (source)
Part 2 of my Is It Problematic to Teach English in South Korea? series, which examines the TEFL industry in Korea, linguistic imperialism, and neo-colonialism.
Last time we discussed neo-colonialism and how Korea’s been historically impacted by imperialism. This time, we’re lasering in on English education.
The Equalizer
“If native speakers of English – those who enjoy the privilege of having their mother tongue as the universal language – would not wait for others to protest but would take steps to regulate themselves, what respect they would earn from the rest of the world! If that is too much to ask, the rest of the world would appreciate it if they would at least be aware of their privileged position – and more important, be aware that the privilege is unwarranted.” - Minae Mizumura
English in Korea was discouraged during the Japanese Occupation, as it was considered the “language of the enemy.” Following Korea’s liberation and subsequent economic development (the Miracle on the Han), English education boomed.
In 1994, President Kim Young-Sam started an initiative to encourage a little thing called segyehwa (globalization). The idea was basically that if Korea was to survive—even thrive— as a nation in the era of globalization, then Koreans needed to communicate effectively in English (Smith, 8).
Jump forward to today.
A massive part of any Korean high school student’s life is passing the standardized college exam. Called the Su-neung 수능, this thing is so important that it basically halts everyday life in Korea on the third Thursday of November.
It has an English section which is extremely difficult.
Students taking the Suneung test. (source)
Parents will put their children through years of after-school and Saturday classes to prepare them.
Of course, specialized English tutoring is more accessible to the wealthy and privileged. Private after-school classes here can easily run up to over 1 million won a month ($1,000+). Learning English in Korea is undoubtedly connected to status and wealth.
(Side-note: The connection between English and class has roots in centuries of class stratification. See Smith’s paper for more on the yangban and how education was restricted to the elites.)
My coteacher believes it’s vital we have English in public schools, as it lessens the gap between privileged and unprivileged students.
And as much as students cram for English, English class is often the only time they get to unwind and play games. At least with my elementary school, English is seen as the “fun class.”
why do we need foreign teachers to teach English?
This is a good question. Phillipson would say that it’s a fallacy to require native speakers to teach English. After all, who better to teach English as a second language than someone who had to learn it?
Korean scholar Sooho Song says that learning a language isn’t just about knowing the words—it’s also about knowing the sociopolitical nuances behind them (27). This is, obviously, not exclusive to foreigners, but still something native teachers can impart more readily.
Anecdotally, even though the average Korean speaks some English, many Korean teachers are not comfortable teaching English. Not enough you can supply every public school with them, anyway. This is all the more true for rural schools that might not be able to afford or attract English speakers.
Plus, having a foreigner come to school fulfills another educational goal, one that’s a little less linguistic. But I’ll come back to that idea in Part 3.
A IS FOR ALLIES…
Korea is one of the most racially, linguistically, and culturally homogeneous countries in the world. Most Korean children don’t have much exposure to non-Koreans.
And the media and education system don’t exactly give a ton of unique examples of foreigners, either.
I’m pale, blonde-ish...I look like what you’d see in a 90s brochure for an English teacher. Or, hell, a 2021 brochure. Many private academies here in Korea specifically want to hire young, white American women—oh yeah, white privilege definitely still exists here, too.
Of course, this doesn’t stop at the private sector. Despite over 67 countries having English as their official language, EPIK only hires from 7 countries. (And you should note that the US has no official language.)
It’s no accident which dialects Korea chooses to teach—and from whom.
American and Korean military personnel at Camp Humphreys, the largest US overseas military base (source).
I probably don't need to explain why the South Korea educational system prefers American English or why North Korea teaches British English.
The English taught in South Korean curriculum, much like in American schools, is an upper-middle class, white North American dialect—never any other dialect, e.g. AAVE (African American Vernacular English).
KOREAN PERSPECTIVES
When I asked my (many) Korean coteachers about this topic, they kind of look at me like I have three heads. It feels dumb to ask why Korean students learn the lingua franca in school. It’s like asking why water is wet.
One of them told me she likes that we learn English in schools because, in her opinion, “it’s for our own sakes. We get to learn another language and that’s for our own benefit.”
For their benefit personally, yes—but the bigger picture here is about labor. (Marx has entered the chat.)
Michael D. Smith of Kwansei Gakuin University did a study with 50 Koreans, ages 21-23 and with advanced levels of English. One question examined the relationship between English and one’s “worth.” One participant said, “When getting a job, there are requirements for English, like the TOIEC. So English ability is one’s worth” (Centre, 15).
Now, we could discuss the association between job = worth, but we can get into Marxian post-colonial criticism another day. For many Koreans, learning English is a matter of practicality. They need jobs; jobs need English.
Smith also asked their participants: “Do you agree if the promotion of English is a strategy of US hegemony?” In other words, do you think English is a way of controlling “periphery” countries—like Korea? Out of the 50 participants, over 70% disagreed (21).
“I don’t think it’s about control,” said one participant. “But English is promoted naturally because of globalization.” Another said: “It could be, I guess. But they don’t force Koreans to learn English. We study because it is our will and our culture.”
A hagwon, or private cram school . (source)
Korean students learn English with their L1 (first language). This is why there’s a Korean co-teacher in the classroom—because the education system sees a value in having on-the-spot translation and support. Usually, Korean is not disallowed, even if much of the materials or instruction are in English.
These students aren’t being stripped of their language. Nor their culture.
I’m not saying that the Korean school system or ways Korean parents view English education are healthy—hagwon culture is brutal and the Korean relationship with English fluency is complicated—but these students are receiving instruction that adds to their education, not deprives them.
Bangladeshi scholar Fakrul Alam says his parents put him in an English school because they knew “I would eventually pick up Bengali from the world I lived in” (373).
According to the pluralization argument, English, in this sort of educational context, won’t replace or destroy the native language (Basu 190).
When asked about why English, my coteacher shrugged. “It’s the global language. I just think Americans are lucky. I have no anger about it.”
For my coteacher, English being the lingua franca is simply a reality we must accept. The die is cast. America’s large stake in Korea’s business, trade, politics and education just…is what it is.
Obviously, my coteacher is just one person. Koreans are not a monolith.
But Smith’s research points to similar prevailing attitudes.
At best, Koreans might see English is an exciting window into the wider world. At worst, English being the universal language is a regrettable reality you’d be foolish to ignore.
In the big picture, Smith’s research proves there’s some serious concerns about Korea’s “obsessions with English” and the way it perpetuates class inequality. How to stop abusive cram culture….well, that’s for Koreans to decide—“[change] must be decided within” (11).
I can’t enact that change—I’m not the wacky foreigner who can pop in and just fix class inequality in Korea. This isn’t Emily in Paris. I don’t even have that power in my own country.
So, as a non-Korean English teacher, what can I do for my students?
See Part 3: The System We Got, which explores the ways English can be used as resistance—and also what we English teachers can do to not be neo-colonialists.
Sources
Achebe, Chinua. “Achebe on Language.” Edited by Derek Barker, Chinua Achebe: Father of African Literature 1930-2013, 29 Oct. 2013, viennachinuaachebe.wordpress.com/2013/10/29/achebe-on-language/#:~:text=Or%20we%20may%20go%20on,out%20the%20good%20with%20it.
Achebe, Chinua. “English and the African Writer.” Transition, no. 18, 1965, pp. 27–30. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/2934835. Accessed 26 Mar. 2021.
Alam, F. (2007). Imperial Entanglements and Literature in English. Dhaka: Writers.ink.
Basu, Bijoy Lal. “The Global Spread of English, ‘Linguistic Imperialism’, and the ‘Politics’ of English Language Teaching: A Reassessment of the Role of English in the World Today.” Spectrum, vol. 8, 9, July 2013, pp. 186–198.
Exambot. “Why the ESL Market Is Set to Boom in the next 10 Years.” CEFR Exam Bot, CEFR Language Exam Resource Centre, 15 Apr. 2018, cefrexambot.com/esl-market-due-boom-next-10-years-part-1/.
Hamburg, Sarah K. “Linguistic Imperialism and Volunteer English Teaching: A Neocolonial Practice?” University of Montana, 2017, scholarworks.umt.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1178&context=utpp.
James, Alyssa. “How to Teach English Abroad and Not Be a Neocolonialist.” Matador Network, 26 Nov. 2013, matadornetwork.com/abroad/how-to-teach-english-abroad-and-not-be-a-neocolonialist/.
Pennycook, A. (1994). The Cultural Politics of English as an International Language. Essex: Pearson Education. Phillipson, R. (1992). Linguistic Imperialism. Oxford: Oxford University Press. https://books.google.co.kr/books/about/Linguistic_Imperialism.html?id=4jVeGWtzQ1oC&redir_esc=y
Phillipson, Robert. Linguistic Imperialism. Oxford [England: Oxford University Press, 1992. Print.
Phillipson, R. (2008), Lingua franca or lingua frankensteinia? English in European integration and globalisation1. World Englishes, 27: 250-267. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-971X.2008.00555.x
Smith, Michael. (2019). A Bourdieusian Interpretation of English Language Learning: The Case of Korea. 15. 3-22.
Smith, Michael. (2018). Centre-Periphery Agency Dynamics During Linguistic Imperialism: An Investigation of Korean Perspectives. 14. 3-30. 10.5281/zenodo.4437743.
Song, Sooho. Second Language Acquisition as a Mode-Switching Process: An Empirical Analysis of Korean Learners of English. Palgrave Macmillan, 2018.
The Halfie Project, director. Does White Privilege Exist in Korea? What Might It Look Like? #THPP. Performance by Cedric, and Becky, YouTube, YouTube, 3 Feb. 2021, www.youtube.com/watch?v=8jP4RsQjk6k&feature=youtu.be.