Are the Good Times Gone for Native English Teachers?

Update: Since publishing time, the Gwangju Metropolitan Office of Education (GMOE) has hired 20 new native English teachers.

The 2015 school year has begun without the Gwangju Metropolitan Office of Education hiring any new native English teachers to replenish its ranks, leaving roughly as many teachers working in Gwangju schools as in 2011. Last July, Incheon Metropolitan City announced that it would also cease hiring new native English teachers, citing budget concerns as the primary cause.

English is still necessary for socio-economic mobility in Korea, but in what appears to be a cyclical pattern—similar decreases have happened before—the demand for NETs in both government-run programs and cram schools has significantly decreased. In ceasing new hiring, Gwangju and Incheon are following in the footsteps of Seoul itself, which initiated a program to phase out all secondary level NETs in 2011 after implementing the Teaching English in English initiative, which was meant to provide further training to Korean English teachers in conversational English. Gyeonggi Province started to downgrade its NET program in non-rural areas in 2009. According to The Korea Herald, the number of NETs decreased by more than 580 between 2012 and 2013. The various education offices cited different reasons for cutting their programs; thus, highlighting just how multifaceted the causes of these changes are.

English language education holds an interesting place in Korea’s history as a tool for both combating and increasing economic mobility and disparity. Parents seeking to ensure their children gain admissions to top universities spend $15 billion on private English education—mostly through hagwons. A recent article in the Kyunghyang Shinmun reported that an estimated 500,000 Korean families are “goose dad” families—families that have moved abroad to study English while the father continues working in Korea. Because these practices inhibit students whose families cannot afford hagwons or study abroad, President Park Geun-Hye’s administration has created new regulations that vastly limit what hagwons can teach. For example, hagwons can no longer teach students material above their grade. It is not just hagwons that have been affected by President Park’s administration.

President Park’s education agenda has emphasized the need for Korea to overcome its “English fever” and become self-reliant. For Korea to remain dependent on foreigners for English education is said to be embarrassing, so she has promoted much stricter requirements for NETs to meet in order to teach.

Meanwhile, some education officials argue that the quality of English education provided by Korean teachers has increased. That is somewhat true. Half of Koreans surveyed under age 40 say they can understand basic English and 10% claim to be fluent, many more than a decade ago. However, many Korean English teachers remain less effective than they could be. In one notable case, a Korean teacher was denied retirement benefits after working for nearly 20 years when it was discovered that his TOEIC score was about 250 points lower than most Korean English teachers.

English teacher qualifications really matter for student outcomes. According to Gwangju-Jeonnam KOTESOL Chapter President and Chosun University professor David Shaffer, students benefit from exposure to authentic English usage and NET knowledge about modern English teaching techniques. While Korean teachers have a vast knowledge of English grammar, their teaching methods may not emphasize English as a communicative tool. A study published in a Chung-Ang University Research Institute of Korean Education journal stated that nearly seven out of ten Korean secondary school students are dissatisfied with English education due to the lack of emphasize on conversation. Not all NETs, however, are effective, as some lack sufficient training or cannot adjust to Korean culture.

Interestingly, having fewer NETs now may mean increased demand later. Decreasing the number of NETs may negate some gains already made in English education. Shaffer, who has taught English in Korea for decades, claims that cutting back on NETs has historically shown where the weakness remains in English language education. “There is the realization that NETs are still needed in certain areas, and more [are] hired to fill those needs.”

As such, the best that NETs worried by these cuts can do is to improve their skills. One of the primary reasons why such cuts can be justified is because some NETs really are underqualified. Dr. Shaffer emphasizes that at a minimum, NETs should have a 100-hour certificate on English language teaching. He also recommends learning about Korean culture—particularly school and work culture—and utilizing the many resources available for continued training—books on pedagogy, textbooks, online certificate programs and online and in-person Master’s and doctorates programs.

Maybe next time the Incheon office makes an announcement it will be about the increasing need for NETs.