Re: Re: GEPIK is Finished

http://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/news/nation/2011/03/117_82296.html

I just read that article, and was coming on to post it! I would like to know, and I have emailed the author for clarity: were those teachers contracted until August? Or did their contracts just end a week ago, and they were not offered another year's contract?

My contract was done at the end of February so it was my renewed contract that wouldn't have been able to get adequate funding. The funding is set aside for the year, so it is my assumption that if you're contracted until August, the money should already be there.

An additional note is that many people, including the Korean teachers at my school and parents didn't know that funding for native teachers was being cut in order to provide free meals for students. So, after about three weeks of looking for a new job my school asked me not to take a new job because the provincial education board might change its mind and provide funding again. So, I waited and turned down a job at another school. Originally it was a two day wait, then five, then ten. When word was received, my school would get 40% from the province rather than 60% (my school already gets 40% from the city's education office). My school told me to wait and they might be able to find 20% in their own budget. At this point, I had less than a week left on my visa so I decided to take the first good offer that I received. I was offered a sweet university job, so I took. I went to my school the next day to get the visa transfer request, at which point they told me that they had 20% for me. I had to say sorry, it's too late.

I had been at my high school for 4.5 years and had planned to stay for one more. I loved working there, but the provincial education board ruined it. Even if I had stayed at my school, who's to say this problem wouldn't happen again in the future. They really need to think these kind of far-reaching decisions through a lot better in the future and make information more available. I'm sure a lot of schools lost good teachers from all this flip-flopping on the part of the education board.

My school cancelled my contract after I just renewed.  They received an email telling the school not to sign any contract b/c the Edu Office cancelled all funding for native teachers.

Has anyone else heard any other news?

It looks like the end of the GEPIK program.

http://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/news/nation/2011/07/117_91266.html

Sadly, ... At least for schools that are funded through GEPIK.... you're 100% right.

At a meeting this week, GEPIK's budget was rejected, and they're scrambling to come up with a back up plan.
GEPIK then sent out an email to the public schools, and explained the situation to them.
Basically, if you were planning on renewing with / transfering to a Gyeonggi-do public school for this fall, chances are the status of you're employment is up in the air... GEPIK wrote in their email that a final decision would be announced in the near future, but that schools should prepare for the worst.


There are some schools that have a different funding structure, but most schools getting there money through GEPIK.

To sum up.... It sucks..

Interesting stuff. The quote by the SMOE official says it all, “One of the reasons schools have native teachers is to give Korean teachers opportunities to learn from them so that they can provide better English lessons to students,” the official said on condition of anonymity. “However, as Korean teachers’ language skills are getting better, there will be less need for native speakers at schools. That’s the reality.”

That is the reality indeed. All my Korean co teachers, all 7 of them, are at native speaking level. Their lessons are really great. They are trained teachers, delivering great lessons.

I don't really see what they can learn from me. I learn more from them.

does this mean that current contracts would be terminated? If your contract does not end until March can they cancel your contract?

Take a read:

http://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/news/nation/2011/07/117_91266.html

This is certainly an unfortunate situation for many teachers.  When I came two years ago with the GEPIK program (Gyeonggi) they were all over the job boards hiring like crazy.  In just two years the province has determined that the quality of Korean English teachers has improved?

I decided not to resign with my GEPIK school this spring and instead moved down to Gyeongsangnam-do.  The trend makes sense - the more affluent areas of the country may begin to shed native teachers from their schools while the more rural areas are just beginning or are in the middle of building a more widespread coverage of native teachers in their schools. 

I worked with a recruiter called Korean Horizons.  The guy you would be in contact with is Alistair Wery, an excellent person all around.  I just saw that on their site they are hiring for several less affluent provinces.  We could debate about the pros and cons of living in rural areas, but I can say for myself that my quality of everyday life has increased dramatically since the move.  There is a lot of fresh air out here and great people to meet.

This isn't about performance. They admit in the article that foreign teachers have, for the most part, helped a great deal. This is all about money.

Interesting stuff. The quote by the SMOE official says it all, “One of the reasons schools have native teachers is to give Korean teachers opportunities to learn from them so that they can provide better English lessons to students,” the official said on condition of anonymity. “However, as Korean teachers’ language skills are getting better, there will be less need for native speakers at schools. That’s the reality.”

That is the reality indeed. All my Korean co teachers, all 7 of them, are at native speaking level. Their lessons are really great. They are trained teachers, delivering great lessons.

I don't really see what they can learn from me. I learn more from them.

That's interesting but it's not often seen that way. You hear a lot of people, even NETs, saying that KETs are the "experts" and the"qualified teachers." It has been my experience that KETs are working with an extremely difficult exam system in desperate need of an overhaul and a severe lack of training in modern ESL techniques. You're incredibly lucky to have such skilled NETs to work with.

I hope that with the cuts to NETs, the government redirects those funds towards improving not only the language skills of KETs, but their approach to the material they have to teach. Ultimately though, the material itself needs changing along with the testing.

This isn't about performance. They admit in the article that foreign teachers have, for the most part, helped a great deal. This is all about money.

Right, but i'm not at all concerned about my long-term position in a poorer rural area of Chungbuk at an elementary school with a dedicated 'English centre.' This school services more than just itself, and acts like a hub for other tiny schools in the area. Realistically, its quite good value for money. GEPIK program, well, maybe they were throwing money at it in the past because of the high density population, and not so much based on need.

Uh-oh.....I've just been hired by a school in Gyeonggi do for a september start, after doing on year down here in Gyeongnam.....I seriously hope that this doesnt affect me as my schools going to be relatively rural.

Interesting stuff. The quote by the SMOE official says it all, “One of the reasons schools have native teachers is to give Korean teachers opportunities to learn from them so that they can provide better English lessons to students,” the official said on condition of anonymity. “However, as Korean teachers’ language skills are getting better, there will be less need for native speakers at schools. That’s the reality.”

That is the reality indeed. All my Korean co teachers, all 7 of them, are at native speaking level. Their lessons are really great. They are trained teachers, delivering great lessons.

I don't really see what they can learn from me. I learn more from them.

That's interesting but it's not often seen that way. You hear a lot of people, even NETs, saying that KETs are the "experts" and the"qualified teachers." It has been my experience that KETs are working with an extremely difficult exam system in desperate need of an overhaul and a severe lack of training in modern ESL techniques. You're incredibly lucky to have such skilled NETs to work with.

I hope that with the cuts to NETs, the government redirects those funds towards improving not only the language skills of KETs, but their approach to the material they have to teach. Ultimately though, the material itself needs changing along with the testing.

What isn't seen that way? The Government have not been quiet on the issue of native English speaking teachers. The eventual plan has always been to replace them with Koreans. The fact is that the general level of English is increasing in Korea.

I do agree that the system can be limiting and thus detrimental to teaching and learning. I also think that I am quite lucky with my situation too. That said, things are changing. Korean teachers are learning from other countries teaching models, whethar it be through spending time abroad or, as the Seoul official suggests, directly learning from the teaching style of Native speakers from advanced societies.

The EPIK programme does have an expiration date.

Wow.  I know times are tough and budgets are tight, but this is ridiculous.  Lets just machete chop the entire Native English program.  Time to put my resume out to some recruiters.  You're losing a lot of good teachers Korea.

Great timing too.  My first son is only due to be born 4 days after my contract is set to expire......

Interesting stuff. The quote by the SMOE official says it all, “One of the reasons schools have native teachers is to give Korean teachers opportunities to learn from them so that they can provide better English lessons to students,” the official said on condition of anonymity. “However, as Korean teachers’ language skills are getting better, there will be less need for native speakers at schools. That’s the reality.”

That is the reality indeed. All my Korean co teachers, all 7 of them, are at native speaking level. Their lessons are really great. They are trained teachers, delivering great lessons.

I don't really see what they can learn from me. I learn more from them.

I agree and have similar feelings about my coteachers.

It does seem that 'reality' is quickly approaching on a national level.

What isn't seen that way?

Sorry. This isn't often seen that way:

“One of the reasons schools have native teachers is to give Korean teachers opportunities to learn from them so that they can provide better English lessons to students.”

because like I said:

You hear a lot of people, even NETs, saying that KETs are the "experts" and the"qualified teachers."

What I mean by that is that whilst KETs might improve their English by speaking with NETs, most of them won't acknowledge that NETs techniques in the classroom can be better and many NETs go along that route too by convincing themselves that they are mere teaching assistants when in fact they can be much more. English isn't the only thing that KETs can learn from NETs (although of course learning goes both ways). What is quite interesting is that this official "on condition of anonymity" didn't want to reveal their real name despite talking so much sense.

Ah ok. Actually, while I often struggle to think what they could learn from me the teachers do acknowledge that I make an impact. Experienced teachers have told me that they learn from me. I have no teacher training, just go by what I learned at school, on the job and from the Korean teachers.

In this sense learning is mutual, between KET and NET, which is a huge strength of the programme that is perhaps overlooked for budget purposes. The money is there to keep it going longer. Someone at the top is tightening purses.

What's interesting to know is to what extent EPIK has or will influence the system of teaching and learning more widely. Korea has made huge progress socially and economically so I tend to think that the outcomes are and will continute to be positive.

There are huge cultural and educational gains to be had from this programme.

This is not really news. They have  been saying for the past few years that the whole point of bringing teachers over was to train the KET's and that was also the reason for having those training programs for the KETs overseas. Sorry, I know it is unfortunate many will lost their jobs...but I really have to say to all the NETs who told me "no, the Korean teachers have poor English...we will always have a job...they need us...etc. etc." Sorry, but people told you things would end...people just didn't listen.

Just look into SMOE (even though they hint at downsizing) or switch to hagwons. Not much choice. I hope schools can pay out the contracts for a while.