Environmental English: The EAEP Program

Article by C. Adam Volle
Photos by Stewart McKay

The Environmental Awareness Education Program has finally made its mark.

That certainly seemed to be the case, anyway, on Saturday morning, April 7, after the conclusion of its inaugural class of 2012. Not only had Gwangju News Online (GNO) observed the presentation and requested a lunch interview afterward, but the Education Broadcasting System of Korea (EBS) had unexpectedly deployed a cameraman out of its own legions to cover the proceedings. Both news organizations found Mr. Lee Young-ho himself in attendance, the man widely known among Gwangju’s foreign teachers as the endearing face of the city’s Metropolitan Office of Education (GMOE). His associate, Mr. Oh, informed GNO that at least another 23 classes are on the calendar and that they’d love to see even more. In the back of the room, two understudies of the program finished jotting down notes on what they’d seen. It was a shame the program’s founders were no longer around to see the spectacle of such attention lavished on their creation; after all the effort they put into nurturing it, one imagines the warmth of such a spotlight would feel quite validating.

The Environmental Awareness Education Program (or EAEP) began as the personal project of Trevor Homeniuk and Andrea Hildebrand, two English teachers from Canada. English-Korean translation assistance was provided by their friend Ko Nam-il. The trio funded their biweekly “Green Seed” classes for upper elementary-level students, each of which cost an average of 110,000₩won out of their own pockets, by holding fund-raisers. Their efforts eventually paid off when the GMOE agreed to adopt the EAEP as an official government program.

Judging by videos of Green Seed programs prior to that victory, some of which are still viewable on You Tube, it’s easy to see how Homeniuk and Hildebrand won the GMOE’s support. The presentation’s production values are unusually high for what is essentially a double-length ESL class. Its undeniably inventive set of props testifies to Hildebrand’s Art degree. More importantly, Homeniuk and Hildebrand have good classroom presence and clear confidence in what they’re doing. Watch their whole show; not once will you see them offer a knowing glance, smile or laugh to communicate they know how silly they’re being. Even when Homeniuk’s audience is a room full of fellow adults at the Gwangju International Center, the man doesn’t shrink from belting out the cringe-worthy lyrics to his song “We Can Make A Change” – and by owning it, he sells it. They make a great team.

Or at least they did. Again, Homeniuk and Hildebrand are gone now, having returned to their home country last year. Their absence forces an issue that all activist programs eventually face. Young initiatives often prove themselves transitory wisps once deprived of the strong personalities that got them running. How well did Homeniuk and Hildebrand set up the EAEP to thrive in the absence of their own dynamism? Will it continue to grow? Stagnate at its current size? Or begin, even as it makes the national news, to slowly wither away?

That’s not the sole existential dilemma the EAEP has found itself recently confronting. Here’s another: practically speaking, what does being an official part of the GMOE mean? Any government employee can tell you that substantive support for your work, especially in the form of money, should never be taken for granted just because you sport a seal of approval. What exactly is the GMOE offering the EAEP? And assuming there are indeed perks aplenty to be gained from sponsorship, what effect will they have on the program’s future?

Many of the more straightforward answers to these questions came out during GNO’s interview with the EAEP’s current leads, Americans Krista Gwidt and Rachel Hoyt.

“Last semester we had a very tough time,” Gwidt admitted. “There were a lot of problems. But this year we’re having a much more positive experience.”

She explained that the GMOE is now providing logistical assistance that makes far easier the necessary coordination between EAEP members and participating Korean teachers. For instance, rather than having to individually brief every Korean co-teacher and hand-deliver important materials, meetings are now scheduled and the distribution of materials is centralized. Even better, the GMOE also now prints off all paper materials used in EAEP classes, which it accomplishes at a much cheaper price than the EAEP used to pay at copy shops. And yes, there is money too. In fact, these days, EAEP members are paid for their time, and at the same rate the GMOE pays any teacher working on a weekend.

Since Homeniuk and Hildebrand took their leave in August, credit for successfully lobbying the GMOE goes to Gwidt and Hoyt, whose own production of the Green Seed class on April 7 also suggests the EAEP isn’t yet hard up for strong personalities. While not as authentic onstage as their predecessors, they obviously understand the secret to holding a young student’s attention: above all, keep the energy level high, which they certainly did on the 7th. When Hoyt “forgot” to flip off a light switch during their act, Gwidt shrieked her partner’s name with a level of alarm you might’ve thought reserved for oncoming traffic.

“When Trevor and Andrea asked us what we would bring to the program, we said, ‘Theatricality’,” Hoyt recalled later. “And energy. We really bring the energy.”

They also bring much-needed stability  – they plan to stay in Gwangju another year – and equally important, ambition. While they see no need to update the two-year-old Green Seed plan they inherited from Homeniuk and Hildebrand, they do see opportunities to expand the EAEP’s offerings.

“I’d like to talk to kids about littering. Littering is big in Korea,” Gwidt said to Hoyt’s accompanying nods, and both also agreed, “We definitely want to find a way to get students outside the classroom.”

She noted that particular dream would definitely be far more difficult, perhaps impossible, without the GMOE’s sponsorship. Government association clearly does have its perks.

Put to rest any suspicions of the GMOE’s usefulness to the EAEP’s work, then. Having also found two capable young women in charge of the program for at least another year, the only outstanding issue to be considered is how the GMOE’s influence may affect the EAEP’s course – but that’s probably the wrong question anyway. Consider instead the influence the EAEP may come to have on the GMOE.

The EAEP is an attempt to graft a strongly pro-environment message onto the larger body of Korean education. If the program perseveres long enough, success will mean effectively becoming indistinguishable from that body, its formal structure likely dismantled but its ethos incorporated into the regular services of Gwangju’s public education system.

If that happens, the EAEP will have truly made its mark.