Advertisement

English Education Policies in South Korea: Planned and Enacted

  • Jeehyae Chung
  • Taehee ChoiEmail author
Part of the Language Policy book series (LAPO, volume 11)

Abstract

In South Korea, the government has actively promoted English proficiency as an indispensable tool in ascertaining competitiveness of individuals and the country. This chapter examines English education in South Korea and its policies as contextualized in its socio-cultural backgrounds. The discussion draws on theoretical insights that view policies as an interactive process among policy documents, the context and the actors in it (Ball, Maguire, & Braun, 2012; Menken & García, 2010). First, the background is laid out by illustrating the symbolic and practical meaning of the English language in the Korean context. Following that, the chapter traces the changes in English language teaching (ELT) policies through a historical survey of curricular reforms and also presents the current agenda of ELT policies, within which the communicative approach is strongly recommended, as reflected in the seventh National Educational Curriculum. In an attempt to investigate ELT practice in context, two case studies, one at the primary level and the other at the secondary level, are presented, particularly to determine the relationship between policy and practice. Both case studies demonstrate that while teachers make efforts to follow the policies, how they actually implement them depends on their unique contexts and individual beliefs. The chapter concludes with suggestions for future research and policy making.

Keywords

South Korea English education policy English language teaching Medium of instruction Teachers as actors Actor agency Language planning and language policy Policy enactment 

References

  1. Andon, N., & Eckerth, J. (2009). Chacun à son gout? Task-based L2 pedagogy from the teacher’s point of view. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 19(3), 286–310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Armstrong, C. K. (2007). The Koreas. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  3. Baldauf, R. B., & Nguyen, H. T. M. (2012). Language policy in Asia and the Pacific. In B. Spolsky (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of language policy (pp. 617–638). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Ball, S. J., Maguire, M., & Braun, A. (2012). How schools do policy: Policy enactments in secondary schools. London/New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  5. Ball, S. J., Maguire, M., Braun, A., & Hoskins, K. (2011a). Policy subjects and policy actors in schools: Some necessary but insufficient analyses. Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education, 32(4), 611–624.Google Scholar
  6. Ball, S. J., Maguire, M., Braun, A., & Hoskins, K. (2011b). Policy actors: Doing policy work in schools. Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education, 32(4), 625–639.Google Scholar
  7. Canagarajah, A. S. (1999). Resisting Linguistic Imperialism in English Teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  8. Choi, S. (2007). 한국사회에서 영어실력은 문화자본인가? [Is English proficiency social capital in the Korean society?]. In J. Yoon (Ed.), 영어, 내 마음의 식민지 [English, colonialism of my heart] (pp. 105–130). Seoul: Dangdae.Google Scholar
  9. Choi, T.-H. (2014). The impact of the ‘Teaching English through English’ policy on teachers and teaching in South Korea, Current Issues in Language Planning. DOI:  10.1080/14664208.2015.970727.
  10. Choi, T.-H. (forthcoming). Glocalization of English language education: Comparison of three contexts in East Asia. In C.-M Lam & J. Park (Eds.), Sociological and philosophical perspectives on education in the Asia-Pacific region (pp. xx–xx). Hong Kong: Springer.Google Scholar
  11. Choi, T.-H., & Andon, N. (2014). Can a teacher certification scheme change ELT classroom practice? ELT Journal, 68(1), 12–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Choi, Y. H. (2006). Impact of politico-economic situations on English language education in Korea. English Teaching, 61, 3–26.Google Scholar
  13. Chung, J. (2011). The (dis)connection between policy and practice: Primary English education in South Korea. Dissertation, Teachers College Columbia University.Google Scholar
  14. Cooper, R. L. (1989). Language planning and social change. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  15. Demick, B. (2002, March 31). Some in S. Korea opt for a trim when English trips the tongue. Los Angeles Times. Retrieved from http://articles.latimes.com/2002/mar/31/news/mn-35590
  16. Education First. (2013). EF English proficiency index. http://www.ef.com/epi/. Accessed 08 Aug 2013.
  17. Educational Testing Service. (2012). Test and score data summary for TOEFL iBT tests and TOEFL PBT tests. ETS. Available via ETS. http://www.ets.org/s/toefl/pdf/94227_unlweb.pdf. Accessed 16 Oct 2013.
  18. Glasgow, G. P., & Paller, D. L. (2015). English language education policy in Japan: Recent trends, future directions. In: Kirkpatrick, R (Ed.), English Education Policy in Asia and the Middle East (pp. 137–159). Singapore: Springer.Google Scholar
  19. Jenkins, J. (2006). Current perspectives on teaching world Englishes and English as a lingua franca. TESOL Quarterly, 40(1), 157–181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Kachru, B. (1992). World Englishes: Approaches, issues and resources. Language Teaching, 25, 1–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Kwon, O. (2000). Korea’s English education policy changes in the 1990s: Innovations to gear the nation for the 21st century. English Teaching, 55(1), 47–91.Google Scholar
  22. Lambert, R. D. (1999). A scaffolding for language policy. International Journal of the Sociology of Language, 137, 3–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Lee, J. (2004). Multi-layered aspects of language policy: Implementing English education at elementary schools in Korea. Working Papers in Educational Linguistics, 20(1), 71–87.Google Scholar
  24. Lee, J. S. (2006). Linguistic constructions of modernity: English mixing in Korean television commercials. Language in Society, 35, 59–91.Google Scholar
  25. Menken, K., & García, O. (Eds.). (2010). Negotiating language policies in schools: Educators as policymakers. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  26. Ministry of Education. (1997). 7차 초등교육과정 – 영어. [7th primary curriculum – English]. Seoul: Ministry of Education.Google Scholar
  27. Ministry of Education and Human Resources Development. (2006). 영어교육혁신방안 정책참고자료 [Data for policy on innovation of English education]. Seoul: Ministry of Education and Human Resource Development.Google Scholar
  28. Ministry of Education Science and Technology. (ca. 2011). 중학교 교육과정 해설 총론 [Introduction to junior high school curriculum]. Ministry of Education Science and Technology, Seoul. Retrieved from http://sen.go.kr/web/services/bbs/bbsView.action?bbsBean.bbsCd=43&bbsBean.bbsSeq=247
  29. OECD. (2013). Asian countries top OECD’s latest PISA survey on state of global education. OECD. http://www.oecd.org/newsroom/asian-countries-top-oecd-s-latest-pisa-survey-on-state-of-global-education.htm. Accessed 12 Oct 2013.
  30. Park, G. S., Jang, Y. S., & Lee, H. Y. (2007). The interplay between globalness and localness: Korea’s globalization revisited. International Journal of Comparative Sociology, 48(4), 337–353.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Piller, I., & Cho, J. (2013). Neoliberalism as language policy. Language in Society, 42(1), 23–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Rudduck, J., & Fielding, M. (2006). Student voice and the perils of popularity. Educational Review, 58(2), 219–231.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Seoul Metropolitan Office of Education. (2011). 영어교사 TEE 인증제 개선 계획 [Plan for revision of the TEE certification for English teachers]. Seoul: Seoul Metropolitan Office of Education.Google Scholar
  34. Seoul Metropolitan Office of Education. (2012). 영어교사 TEE 인증제 [TEE certification for English teachers]. Seoul: Seoul Metropolitan Office of Education.Google Scholar
  35. Seth, M. J. (2002). Education fever: Society, politics, and the pursuit of schooling in South Korea. Honolulu: University of Hawai’i Press.Google Scholar
  36. Shim, D., & Park, J. S. Y. (2008). The language politics of “English fever” in South Korea. Korea Journal, 48(2), 136–159.Google Scholar
  37. Shim, S. (2003, October 24). Roh supports English as second official language. Korea Herald. Retrieved from http://news.naver.com/main/read.nhn?mode=LSD&mid=sec&sid1=108&oid=044&aid=0000037686
  38. Statistics Korea. (2012). Annual report on private education expenditures. Seoul: Statistics Korea.Google Scholar
  39. Stronach, I., & Morris, B. (1994). Polemical notes on educational evaluation in the age of ‘policy hysteria’. Evaluation and Research in Education, 8(1 & 2), 5–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Tak, S. H. (2011, May 24). Korea suffers glut of university students. The Chosunilbo. Retrieved from http://english.chosun.com/site/data/html_dir/2011/05/24/2011052401058.html
  41. Tsui, A. B., & Tollefson, J. W. (2007). Language policy, culture and identity in Asian contexts. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  42. Ur, P. (2013). Language-teaching method revisited. ELT Journal, 67(4), 468–474.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Hankuk University of Foreign StudiesSeoulSouth Korea
  2. 2.Hong Kong Institute of EducationTai PoHong Kong

Personalised recommendations