Phil Owen, KOTESOL President, wrote the following peice for the Korea Times. I’ve copied the entire piece here as I feel it is worth it. ATTENTION Phil: if you want to guest author here, feel free to do so.

There is a general assumption that one of the problems with English education in Korea is the poor quality of English teachers. Is this true? How do we decide who is a ``quality teacher?’’ How do we define ``qualified?’‘

article continues in the extended entry.

I distinctly remember a conversation I had many years ago. I was with other native-speaker English teachers at a nightspot in Seoul. We were just chatting informally when one of the teachers started complaining about how badly his boss had been treating him. He ended it all by saying, ``And I’m his best teacher!’’ I asked how he knew he was the boss’s best teacher. It was a serious question, if perhaps a little obnoxious for a social gathering. I was surprised at my friend’s definition of ``best teacher.’’ He said, ``Let’s put it this way, he makes more money from me than from the other teachers.’‘

No mention of qualifications here. Now, to be sure, I had no idea if my friend was a good teacher or a bad teacher. I never saw his lesson plans, never observed his class, never heard him talk about his students or the activities he used in class. I never heard his students talk about him. So I have no way of knowing about his teaching skills. Indeed, counting the students in each teacher’s classes or adding up the tuition they pay seems to be one way of ranking teachers.

Do we measure native-speaker English teachers differently from Korean teachers of English? Does it matter if they are licensed by the office of education? Do you need a Masters Degree or other formal education to be a good teacher? My own first time in a classroom was a disaster. About 30 years ago, I was stationed in a small town in northern Japan with the US Air Force.

I knew I eventually wanted to teach English as a Foreign Language, so when I saw an advertisement for people to volunteer at a local evening class, I went. A group of us carpooled to a near-by city. I was shown a room with about ten eager students in it and told to ``just talk with them.’’ No book, no guidance, no suggestions. It was horrible. Even though I had spent many hours in classes studying three different languages, I had no idea what to do in this classroom as the teacher. We got through the 60 minutes, but I was miserable and I am sure they got nothing out of the time.

On the way back to base, the other people in my car talked of how wonderful it was because they liked the students. Well, I liked the students just fine; they were nice folks. But as a learning experience, it fell flat. I never went back to that class. I did eventually get back to school myself, get some experience and get involved in professional development, but that was later.

Not too long ago I overheard a teacher here in Korea telling her story. She had been teaching three years when it hit her that ``not every native speaker can teach English.’’ She recognized her limitations and frustrations and set about to get some additional academic training. One must applaud her for that. In fact, probably every teacher in Korea has experienced moments while teaching, or reflections outside the classroom, where they felt ``unqualified.’‘

There are two kinds of teacher here in Korea that really make me wince. One is the native-speaker who has been here for six or nine months, acknowledges he was lost for three months, but now ``has it all figured out.’’ No help, no study, no reading, no questions to other teachers; he just somehow found a way to get through his classes without bosses, parents or students complaining. He no longer feels uncomfortable in class, so he no longer feels the need to grow, change, develop or learn. Maybe he’s hit on one or two good activities, but I sort of doubt it.

The other kind is the Korean teacher who has studied modern teaching ideas and techniques, who does know what exciting things she could and should be doing in class, but who doesn’t do those things because she is afraid her boss or the other teachers or the parents won’t like them, or because she must ``prepare students for the college entrance test.’’ Yes, introducing something new is often difficult, and one does sometimes make compromises, but giving up and giving in are rarely the best responses.

So, if just being a native-speaker is not enough to be a good teacher, and if simply counting heads in a classroom or adding up the tuition the students pay is not a very good way of identifying the best teachers, we need to think about what does make good teachers and ways to identify them.

In the past few years, Korean government officials have raised the issue of teacher assessment through various instruments. Teachers object because what they do is hard to objectify ― and students’ ratings, assessors in the classroom, and learners’ test scores all leave important aspects of teaching under-appreciated. Learners learn at different rates, and enter the course at differing levels.

If one approaches the question from the student’s point of view, one might come up with some way to compare the amount of English the student learns with the amount of time and/or money the student spends to learn it. A simple cost-benefit analysis. It’s a nice daydream. But it’s much harder to do a cost-benefit analysis of learning or teaching than of, say, MP3 players.

What do qualified teachers of English in Korean schools look like? For one thing, they must have a good command of the language ― not necessarily native or near-native, but they need to be comfortable with it. Ideally, they should be the kind of people who are active learners and users of English, continually expanding their exposure to new words and situations. (Not every native English speaker teacher meets this criterion.) This applies to teachers of beginner students as well as advanced students. I think teachers should be interested in and excited by their subjects.

Teachers also need an understanding of child development and psychology and other subjects from general Education courses. They need a good understanding of their approach toward teaching and learning English and a wide variety of techniques, methods and resources to draw upon. This implies deliberate and extensive training in and thinking about teaching techniques and methods. This looks like a long list of requirements. But, really, it’s not longer than the list for teachers of mathematics, Korean language, or history, and it’s not out of line with what is required of most teachers in other countries.

Outside of the public education system, the 120-hour certificate courses are a start towards qualification in teaching English, but continuing professional development is needed for anyone who teaches, whatever ``qualification’’ they hold. Even PhD holders need to continue their studies. But my daydreams are not the reality in Korea at this time. Yes, it is possible to hire qualified native speaking teachers and it is possible to find well-qualified Korean teachers. It is also the case that well-intentioned native speakers come to Korea but don’t have grounding in teaching, and we can find well-intentioned and even well-trained Korean teachers who are weak in English. All these deficiencies can be remedied. If the teachers want it.

A good teacher will seek out ways to improve: formal teacher training courses and formal English classes are one way to start. Informal training, such as is provided at Korea TESOL chapter events and at the KOTESOL Conferences, are good ways to learn new things and keep current. They are also good ways for Korean teachers to use English in real and important ways.

Teaching English is always about knowing what our students need and want to do in English and helping them find the most efficient and effective ways to do so. This applies also to thinking about and improving our own work as teachers. Quality education comes from teachers concerned about quality, and qualified teachers are those who, regardless of the degrees and diplomas, work towards that end.