Culture of Discussion Needed in Korea
Yesterday's Korea Herald (December 29, 2005) has an interesting article on Joshua Park's goal of developing a culture of discussion in Korea.
Anyway, that's what I'm calling it since it's something that I've been calling for.
Yang Sung-jin, who interviewed Park for the Herald article, "Korean students urged to learn critical thinking through discussion," begins with the familiar complaint:
Korean students are said to excel in simple memorization, but often fail miserably when it comes to critical, creative and logical thinking.We've heard this so often because it concisely states what many of us in the teaching profession have noticed.
In my opinion, the problem exists not just in the educational system but in Korean society as a whole because Korea lacks a culture of discussion, as I've previously argued.
So, how does Park intend to alter this? He proposes to teach discussion skills in class:
Park is actually teaching English discussion skills to his students, using the Socratic method -- the famous methodology of leading people to understanding through constant questioning and dialogue.This sounds good to me.
"I throw more questions than explanations during the class in a way that helps students see both merits and demerits of a certain issue. Eventually, students discover the problems and formulate their own opinions."
Park also has a recently published book on this issue: Global Talent: The Answer Lies in Discussion (Nexus; 292 pages; 9,800 won), which I assume is a translation of the Korean title. My wife intends to take a look at Park's book in her next visit to downtown Seoul's Gyobo Bookstore -- and maybe also purchase Cho Se-mi's 세계는 지금 이런 인재를 원한다 (roughly translated: The World Wants Talent Like This), which treats this same subject.
Gypsy Scholar says: More of these and faster please.
posted by Horace Jeffery Hodges @ 9:22 AM
16 comments
16 Comments:
I'd love to see the implications of that for Korean students' second language acquisition. For example, would speaking and listening TOEFL scores rise if discussion is used consistently in the curriculum?
On the other hand, having attempted the Socratic method more than once, I know that it's a fabulous theory but the practice is guided much by personality. Many students (and I'm just talking about gregarious American high school kids here) are content to sit in silence rather than say something that risks garnering attention or losing face. Good luck to Park & others.
The proof is in the pudding, I suppose.
The problem with Korean scores on standardized tests such as TOEFL is that Koreans study only to get a high score and not really to learn English, certainly not to use English.
I've met too many Koreans who claim to have high test scores on TOEFL, TOEIC, etc. but who cannot utter a basic English sentence.
One can hardly blame them given the traditional teaching methods. Many, perhaps most Koreans still think that the best way to learn a foreign language is to memorize sentences. When I was at my previous university, Hanshin, two of my fellow professors assigned about 60 sentences per week for their students to memorize.
Students might as well study that way for a thousand years if they want to collect enough sentences to have some ready for use -- and even then, they'd not have enough to get though the day!
But this is a distinct issue from the need of Korean society to develop a culture of discourse, though the two would reinforce one another.
Developing a culture of discourse runs against the grain of Korean hierarchy and the required courtesy structures of the Korean language.
So . . . changing will not be easy.
Jeffery Hodges
* * *
"So ... changing will not be easy."
You assume of course that they would want to change! But why should this society want to change? Merely because you arrived here at some point in the not-too-distant past and noticed it was substantially different from the one you left behind?
Let's apply the same logic back. So, try to recall, if you can, the number of times you remember taking the advice of a foreigner making a substantial critique of your own country while you were living there.
Recall, if you can, the face of the Guatamalan you once met who said: "You know, Horace, your country lacks a culture of honesty. In my country, we place the greatest emphasis on always telling the truth about ourselves -- unlike you."
Or bring to mind the Angolan who said to you: "It's my opinion, Horace, that your home country needs to adopt the teaching method of the well-known Angolan elder Eduardo de los Santos, who emphasizes humility above all things. He is a greater teacher even than Socrates."
What was your reaction?
Anonymous, when you refer to my having "arrived here [in Korea] at some point in the not-too-distant past and noticed it was substantially different from the . . . [society that I] left behind," what assumptions are you making?
That I have little experience with other cultures generally and with Korean culture specifically?
That would be not merely an assumption but even a presumption.
At any rate, whenever non-Americans have criticized America to me, and that is quite often, I've listened to their reasons.
Sometimes, I agree; sometimes, I don't.
But what difference does that make? If something should change, it should do so regardless of my reaction.
But to the point at hand . . . if you will take the time to read what I have written and the links that I made, you'd see that I'm taking part in a dialogue on this issue with Koreans -- including with my wife of over ten years.
Moreover, since my two children attend Korean schools, I have a particular interest in seeing educational and cultural change.
As for your specific question about how I reacted to those remarks by a Guatamalan or an Angolan, I reply that I had no reactions because these things never happened.
Thus, your question is an odd one for me.
But I would note the irony that your hypothetical Angolan's remark about humility is not especially humble.
By the way, I prefer "Jeffery."
Jeffery Hodges
* * *
Points well taken.
Developing a culture of discourse runs against the grain of Korean hierarchy and the required courtesy structures of the Korean language.
This fascinates me. Maybe it's out of style, but ever hear of the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis? Forgive me if I'm introducing another tangent.
Jessica, yes, I've heard of it but haven't read up on it much.
My sense is that it hypothesizes that the deeper structures of a language have a deterministic influence on the worldview of those who are native speakers of the language.
The courtesy structures of Korean, however, are constructions of relatively recent origin (I'm told) and could be undone if desired. They are a bit like the German "Sie," which is used for courtesy and to keep others at a distance.
By this similarity, I mean that "Sie" was consciously adopted at a certain time in the Medieval period (or so I'm told) to express social distinctions.
Such lingiustic constructions could be done away with if desired.
Jeffery Hodges
* * *
Jeffery:
My feeling is that whenever Americans have criticized other countries to me, and that is quite often, I've listened to their reasons.
The trouble is I get the impression that it's a one-way street.
Anonymous, I suppose that we each have our own experiences. My experience is quite different from yours. Everywhere that I've lived, I've listened to others critizing America, and I'm surprised that you haven't experienced this.
At any rate, my dialogue with Koreans is mostly with those who are not satisfied with the social hierarchy here in Korea, who don't like the top-down orders, the lack of free expression to their "seniors," the absence of a culture of discussion, and so on.
I'm not so much criticing Korea as I am discussing directions Korea could take if it wants to change.
My impression is that Koreans do want change . . . but I could be wrong.
Jeffery Hodges
* * *
Jeffery wrote (although his spacing was different):
"Anonymous, I suppose that we each have our own experiences.
My experience is quite different from yours.
Everywhere that I've lived, I've listened to others critizing America, and I'm surprised that you haven't experienced this."
Why are you surprised that I haven't experienced this when you say you suppose that we each have our own experiences and accept that my experience is quite different from yours?
Could it be that although you accept that everyone has their own experience and that you recognize that my experience is quite different from yours, nevertheless you think that it would be better if everyone's experience were in fact the same?
American, even?
Does this make sense?
.
Anonymous asks:
"Why are you surprised that I haven't experienced this [criticism of America] when you say you suppose that we each have our own experiences and accept that my experience is quite different from yours?"
I conclude that your experience is quite different from mine because of what you report.
I am nevertheless surprised that you haven't heard many people criticize America.
Anonymous adds:
"Could it be that although you accept that everyone has their own experience and that you recognize that my experience is quite different from yours, nevertheless you think that it would be better if everyone's experience were in fact the same?"
No. I'm just surprised that you haven't heard much criticism of America.
Anonymous then asks if I think that everyone's experience should be American:
"American, even?"
No.
Anonymous then asks:
"Does this make sense?"
I'm not sure what your question refers to, but perhaps my position is clear by now, anyway.
Jeffery Hodges
* * *
Jeffery,
If we are going to have a culture of discussion in Korea, then we need to get a few things clear about how discussion should proceed.
Perhaps the first thing we need to be clear about is WHO is assuming WHAT. That way we will both know where we stand.
So, from where I am standing, it is YOU who are reporting that YOU are surprised that I (can't capitalize here unfortunately) hadn't had much experience with criticism of "America".
You concluded what you did not on the basis of anything I reported but rather on the basis of what YOU assumed.
Read what YOU said again:
"Anonymous, I suppose that WE each have OUR OWN experiences. MY experience is quite different from YOURS. Everywhere that I'VE lived, I'VE listened to others critizing America, and I'M surprised that YOU haven't experienced this."
Why are you surprised, if you accept that MY experience (not yours Jeffery) is different from YOURS (not mine Jeffery)? If I had heard other people criticizing "America", wouldn't that mean that our experiences were the same?
But you just denied this!
And again you say:
"I am nevertheless surprised that you haven't heard many people criticize America."
Why are you surprised by something you haven't heard?
Look back on my posts and see if I say what you attribute to me even once. It is not me but YOU who keep talking about people criticizing the country you have the most experience of.
Anonymous, in a previous comment, you wrote this:
"My feeling is that whenever Americans have criticized other countries to me, and that is quite often, I've listened to their reasons.
The trouble is I get the impression that it's a one-way street."
Looking back, I see that I misread this. By "one-way street," I thought that you meant that you had heard many Americans criticize other countries but that you hadn't heard many non-Americans criticize America.
I now see that you meant that you hadn't found many Americans ready to listen to criticisms of America.
I apologize for the misunderstanding. I can be a bit obtuse at times.
Jeffery Hodges
* * *
Anonymous, one other point: I see no necessary contradiction in acknowledging that two people's experiences can be different and yet being surprised about a specific difference in experience.
Jeffery Hodges
* * *
Jeffery wrote: "Anonymous, one other point: I see no necessary contradiction in acknowledging that two people's experiences can be different and yet being surprised about a specific difference in experience."
Jeffrey: please pay attention then!
Because this is not "one other point"; this is the same point dressed up differently!
The form of the statement above is problematic: “yet being surprised” is doing double duty, attempting to refer both to you and to me. If you were to rewrite this sentence, you would see that there IS in fact a contradiction.
I will do the math for you:
Let us assume that the two people are you and me. When you acknowledge that "two people's experiences can be different", you are acknowledging two things, not one. You are acknowledging both the validity of your own experience and, equally, the validity of the other person's differenet experience. (The latter is much more difficult to do, of course.)
In other words, you are saying: Your experience is different from mine. But you are also saying: My experience is different from yours. In other words: you accept that my experience is NOT THE SAME AS yours. And you also accept that your experience is NOT THE SAME AS mine.
Now: where is the basis for any kind of surprise? The only place that surprise can come from is from you secretly wishing that your experiences should be the same as, or perhaps even the pattern for, everyone else’s.
But how can you have a culture of discussion if your most secret wish is that everyone agree in the first place?
Anonymous, I see no necessary contradiction in my acknowledging that two people's experiences can be different and yet my being surprised about a specific difference in experience.
For example, if someone were to tell me that he had never experienced anyone criticizing America, I would be surprised.
I would be surprised because criticisms of America are very common.
I also do not see that being surprised (e.g., that someone had never experienced anyone criticizing America) would entail secretly wanting everyone to have the same experiences.
But perhaps we'll just have to agree to disagree.
Jeffery Hodges
* * *
Whenever Americans have criticized other countries to me, and that is quite often, I've listened to their reasons.
As for your specific question about how I reacted to remarks by someone criticizing America, I reply that I had no reactions because these things never happened.
Thus, your question is an odd one for me.
Post a Comment
<< Home