Source: http://www.korean.go.kr/nkview/nklife/2008_2/18_5.html
English Language education Professor, Lee Byong Min
Braj, B kachru, Standard, Codification and Sociolinguistic Realism: The English language in the outer circle,2006
My Topic:
Korea will fall behind internationalized society if the current English education system in Korea do not get to change.
What I hope to learn from this source:
I want to extract some meaningful researches from this source. I want to use this research for describing the reality of current English education in Korea. As far, i researched about the limitations and problems in English education in Korea, then now I will find what made English education form the current appearance and how the public English education works now.
Notes:
1.This chart shows how English education is enacted in Korea and eight nations in Europe where are belong to expanding circle. The notion of expanding circle is defined by a linguist, kachru. He classified nations into 3 types - The inner circle, the outer circle( expanded circle), the expanding circle. The countries where are belong to the inner circle use English as the primary language - USA, UK, AUSTRALIA..... The outer circle. It involves the earlier phases of spread of English and its institutionalization in non-native contexts- Singapore, Nigeria, India. The expanding group refers to the countries where use English as a foreign language(EFL).
2. Upper chart clearly shows that Korea invests more time for English education than any other countries. According to the chart, other countries spend average 5 years for public English education, as opposed to Korea have designed 8 years for public English education.
Also, this information shows that which parts in English are primarily focused in each country. According to the chart, all nations are commonly focusing on communication and cultural understanding, knowledge for study. But, in actually, most Korean students do not learn speaking and writing but albeit they are included in the regular course.
3. Then, what is the problem? Why did I mention this fact? The reason why I specified the fact is because I wanted to show how English education in Korea does not work. Although other countries such as Denmark, Finland, Norway invest less time for English than Korea, we already know the pupil's English abilities in those countrie are not left behind rather they have fluent English abilities.
Final thoughts
I think this research can be used for "narration part". And next I think I have to search about why the ability of practical usage of English is important and the necessity of cultural understanding for other countries in the globalized society.
What I hope to learn from this source:
I want to extract some meaningful researches from this source. I want to use this research for describing the reality of current English education in Korea. As far, i researched about the limitations and problems in English education in Korea, then now I will find what made English education form the current appearance and how the public English education works now.
1.This chart shows how English education is enacted in Korea and eight nations in Europe where are belong to expanding circle. The notion of expanding circle is defined by a linguist, kachru. He classified nations into 3 types - The inner circle, the outer circle( expanded circle), the expanding circle. The countries where are belong to the inner circle use English as the primary language - USA, UK, AUSTRALIA..... The outer circle. It involves the earlier phases of spread of English and its institutionalization in non-native contexts- Singapore, Nigeria, India. The expanding group refers to the countries where use English as a foreign language(EFL).
2. Upper chart clearly shows that Korea invests more time for English education than any other countries. According to the chart, other countries spend average 5 years for public English education, as opposed to Korea have designed 8 years for public English education.
Also, this information shows that which parts in English are primarily focused in each country. According to the chart, all nations are commonly focusing on communication and cultural understanding, knowledge for study. But, in actually, most Korean students do not learn speaking and writing but albeit they are included in the regular course.
3. Then, what is the problem? Why did I mention this fact? The reason why I specified the fact is because I wanted to show how English education in Korea does not work. Although other countries such as Denmark, Finland, Norway invest less time for English than Korea, we already know the pupil's English abilities in those countrie are not left behind rather they have fluent English abilities.
2. Upper chart clearly shows that Korea invests more time for English education than any other countries. According to the chart, other countries spend average 5 years for public English education, as opposed to Korea have designed 8 years for public English education.
Also, this information shows that which parts in English are primarily focused in each country. According to the chart, all nations are commonly focusing on communication and cultural understanding, knowledge for study. But, in actually, most Korean students do not learn speaking and writing but albeit they are included in the regular course.
3. Then, what is the problem? Why did I mention this fact? The reason why I specified the fact is because I wanted to show how English education in Korea does not work. Although other countries such as Denmark, Finland, Norway invest less time for English than Korea, we already know the pupil's English abilities in those countrie are not left behind rather they have fluent English abilities.
Final thoughts
I think this research can be used for "narration part". And next I think I have to search about why the ability of practical usage of English is important and the necessity of cultural understanding for other countries in the globalized society.
댓글 없음:
댓글 쓰기