The KT reports that 17 of 137 foreign English teachers employed at primary and middle schools in Ulsan have been sacked… or at least didn’t have their contract renewed:
The office said that it has not renewed their contracts after judging their methods to be inappropriate for teaching students in English.
A written survey was conducted to determine how many acted decently, how faithful they were to their duty, how well they guided students and how well they taught English.
Among the dismissed were those who often yelled at students, argued with Korean teachers assisting them and wore indecent clothes. Some had to visit hospital too often for weight problems and some refused to teach after school, according to the survey.
Also on the English teacher front, police have busted six foreign English teachers — who apparently taught at elementary schools and hagwon in Gangnam — for smoking hash procured from a Nigerian at an Itaewon club.
According to YTN, they’d toke up into the wee hours of the morning even on days they had class.
Quote by one of them on YTN (translated from Korean):
“I’m Canadian, and in Canada, our concept of hash is different from here.”
You don’t say?
Interestingly, though, while the Nigerian dealer was detained, the English teachers were booked without detention.
{ 55 comments… read them below or add one }
Does the finding of yet another news item on pot smoking expat teachers trigger dopamine release in Robert Kohler’s brain? Wouldn’t it be subject to the principle of “diminishing returns”?
나는 “그것이 알고 싶다”.
Oh yeah,
Breaking news of pot-smoking teachers is NEVER subject to diminishing returns. Especially when the accused are dropping lines like “저는 캐나다 출신이고 캐나다에서는 해시시에 대한 개념이 여기와는 다릅니다.” Pure comedy!
And here’s the video:
http://news.naver.com/tv/read.php?mode=LOD&office_id=052&article_id=0000249071
I request a Korean language lesson. I know that show called “그것이 알고 싶다.” But why oh why is it 그것*이* 알고 싶다? ‘이’ is the subject particle, so to me, what that sentence is really saying is “This thing wants to know (something).” If it’s supposed to be “I want to know this,” then shouldn’t it be “그것*을* 알고 싶다”?
Yeah, as you point out, they weren’t fired, they just didn’t have their contracts renewed.
Typical b.s. journalism. I have no doubt that 12% of foreign teachers in any given area are assholes who shouldn’t be in the classroom. But teachers don’t have their contracts extended for a number of reasons, which the article chose not to enumerate.
Rather than having an article that says 88% of native speaker teachers are performing well, the paper chose to pick on 12% who are fat, stupid, yell, or demand things like, um, not having to teach bullshit after school classes that aren’t even mandatory in the first place. In other news, Gwangju teachers are stripping their students or beating them so badly that they kill themselves. Whatever.
*Disclosure* I speak Korean fairly well, but reading and writing are hard, and a lot of stuff I just know because I know, I don’t know the rules at work. The above question is me trying to reconcile things that “sound right” with rules that I’m aware of.
Then employed only these who actually have teaching experience with good references.
The current problem with English teaching in Sth Korea is most of teachers are not properly screened.
These with criminal records and drug habit should be weed out of educational industry. Not a very good role model for children and students.
Same here. I guess 이 can function in both ways. But 그것을 does sound a little more “proper” though.
Hmm. I hope someone with a bit more booklearnin’ in Korean can come explain it to us.
Just saw the video. I understand that in Canada smoking hash is somewhat de-criminalized. I get that. if I ever visit that nation, I may even try a toke.
But what I want to know is why potheads think that their nation’s lax stance on drug taking should hold ANY water here in Korea. You come to Asia, you play by different rules. Either get with that program or go back. Honestly. If you want to be a one-man advocate in Korea for legalizing dope, then do it loud and proud, in public, in front of the Justice Department. Appeal to the Human Rights Commission, etc etc. Don’t do it in secret at your apartment.
@colontos:
Prescriptive grammar says that a subject marker is correct because of the verb phrase 고 싶다 is a 형용사 (descriptive verb) in Korean, not an active verb like its English equivalent “want.” Descriptive grammar says either is correct as both are used commonly by native speakers. 싶다 can, of course, be transformed into an active verb by adding 하다 to make 싶어하다.
I’m not an educated native speaker, of course, but that is the grammar I learned back in Korean 102.
To Colontos: I once wondered the same thing. Why 그것이, not 그것을?
I believe that it may be because 싶다 is actually not an action verb, but an adjectival verb. So it is more like “that thing is something that I want to know” rather than “I want to know that thing.” This explains why 그것 is not an object, but a subject.
Greater scholars of Korean than I may be able to correct me here.
Sonagi?
from Hamel the “pussy”
Obvious statement of the day: Schools will never be able to attract top teachers unless they create a career path with opportunities for advancement.
With limited, fixed budgets there’s no way for the schools to offer the best teachers any incentive to stay. Can you imagine going to work for a private company that didn’t pay based on performance?
beat me to the post, I see, Sonagi.
Colontos, the notion of ‘subject’ is a little different in Korean from what you know. A subject marked with 이/가 is not necessarily a ‘subject’ in the western sense. It’s the main item of the sentence, what’s it’s all about in the sentence. In 그 것이 알고 싶다, ‘그 것’ is the subject of the sentence, subject as in “that’s what I am talking about, mainly”. You insist on “this thing”. As in “***THAT’S*** what I/we want to know.” or “***THIS,*** I/we really want to know.”
Thanks, Sonagi and hamel. That makes a degree of sense; I just need to work on my grammar more. But it helps, thanks.
@hamel. Haha, was that you? Did I hurt your feelings? Sorry, but go back and read the comment I was responding to. You sounded like a pussy, or “bleeding heart” if you want something less offensive. I just call ‘em like I see ‘em.
There are opportunities for advancement. School districts are screaming for principals, but teachers won’t bite because the extra pay isn’t worth the stress. Most teachers I know are satisifed with being “just teachers.” Smart districts know how to provide compensated leadership opportunities through part-time administrative roles and professional development responsibilities.
The staff at my school include a number of veteran teachers who spent a year going through the grueling process of obtaining National Board certification. They almost certainly would qualify for merit pay if it existed, yet no teacher at my school favors the idea. We are skeptical about how performance measures would be tied into pay.
@dda
Hmm. I thought that 은/는 acted in the way you’re describing (the ‘topic’ particle) but that 이/가 was more literally a subject. Sonagi and hamel’s explanation makes more sense, or seems to, based on what I learned and what I hear/say.
When I heard from my Canadian neighbor that there were Canadian citizens quarantined in that hotel in Hong Kong/China because of swine flu, I said that the Canadian government might complain it is a violation of their human rights as Canadians to keep them cut off from a steady supply of pot and Pringles.
@Colontos That’s the mistake that beginners usually make — made it myself
은/는 does not play the “emphasis” role. You could reformulate this sentence 나는 그 것이 알고 싶다. The 나는 part is optional, and is used to make sure that the person you’re talking to is aware that it’s ‘me’ (as opposed to ‘we’ for instance) that wants to know. if for instance you wanted to switch the emphasis in the sentence from “그 것” to “나” you’d say 내가 그 것을 알고 싶다. “**I** wanna know that”.
I agree with you, Colontos, that what dda is describing is the topic marker 은/는, which has no grammatical equivalent in English and one element of Korean grammar I will probably never master completely just as many highly educated Korean speakers of English still muck up articles and inflectional endings. Chinese treats nouns as topics by placing them at the beginning of a sentence, like Korean, but does not use particles to distinguish the grammatical roles of nouns.
Again, sorry, 은/는 marks the *general* topic of the sentence. 은/는 is *not* used to mark emphasis. It’s 이/가’s job. 이/가, when used as a subject marker where you’d expect 을/를, tells the listener that the speaker shifted the weight of the sentence to this part, to single it out.
dda: ok that may be so, but isn’t it ALSO true that 싶다 is an adjectival verb, not an action verb?
@hamel: sure. But it doesn’t change the roles/functions of 은/는 and 이/가. I wish I had my notes from the K grammar classes I attended all these years ago, because my Prof formulated and explained these things much better than I ever could. But that’s because he was, on top of being a native, a grammarian with a couple of PhDs, I suppose.
@dda:
You are correct that 이/가 is preferred to 은/는 when one wants to draw attention to the subject of a sentence. However, in this case, 이/가 is preferred because of the verb 싶다. Refer back to colontos’ original inquiry, the name of the show:
그 것이 알고 싶다
Would you translate that as “I want to know THAT.” According to your explanation, 이 is used to put focus on the subject, 그 것. That is not the case. 이 is used because of the descriptive verb phrase 고 싶다.
You can swap 은/는 for either subject or object marker, but you cannot just swap 이/가 and 을/를 without making some other grammar change, like transforming a descriptive verb into an active verb.
@sonagi: Oops, let me clarify. I didn’t provide enought context in my original post:
Korean public schools will never be able to attract top foreign teachers unless they create a career path that includes opportunities for them to advance [and be paid for their experience].
That’s because you use “subject” in a Western meaning. Instead, if you see “subject/主語” as ‘main point of the sentence’ it changes things. 이/가 puts the focus on that part of the sentence, making it the subject of the discourse.
Yep, that’s exactly what it means. Emphasis on THAT.
I hope that dumbass Canadian who notes a ‘different attitude towards hash’ gets at least a few months before he’s deported.
Maybe a few native speakers will chime in. I stand by my explanation.
I can only stand back and let better Korean experts chime in.
I do recall, however, a Korean university student once telling me something like 이/가 & 은/는 is an area where even Korean 국어 professors/experts have genuine disagreement.
I think for the moment that my explanation (and Sonagi’s) is the simplest way to answer Colontos’ question.
I think if the verb was ___ 알고 싶어하다 you would have to use 그것을 rather than 그것이. I wonder if Oranckay will weigh in on this. Bevers is welcome to opine too, but I put more stock in the former.
You are all correct. …고 싶다 is an exceptional case where the verb is used interchangeably between active and passive. Sonagi is correct in saying 알고 싶다 = want to know is an exceptional case where the verb is used interchangeably from descriptive to active verb. Dda is correct in saying that it’s for emphasis, and in this case, e.g. That is the thing I want to know.
If you want to say that
그것이 알고 싶다 is a warped exception/short form of 그것이 (바로) 내가 알고 싶은 것이다
then dda is right. In fact, in this case (with the documentary) I would say there is definitely an emphasis placed on the fact that That is the thing I/we want to know..
However, because this verb 고 싶다 is an exceptional verb the emphasis part disappears from the following example:
“What do you want to eat?” virtually no difference in connotation/ emphasis in the following?
무엇을 먹고 싶어? = 뭘 먹고 싶어 ? = 뭐 먹고 싶어 ?
무엇이 먹고 싶어? = 뭐가 먹고 싶어?= 뭐 먹고 싶어 ?
I want to say KUDOS to all of you. Like a typical Korean, “와, 잘하네…. ” with a BIG smile…
We use it without thinking much. Much impressed.
Back to the issue at hand, I tend to agree with You Bum Suck. In fact, I would be in support of all Canadians on E-2 teaching visas being tested for recent/current drug use and being shown the quickest way to ICN international airport.
If there were Dutch people working here in E2 visas I would say the same.
People who come from lands that have “different concepts” regarding drug use should be tested even more stringently before being let in the classroom (especially without the assistance of a Korean teacher) with little kids.
An open question to anyone who has worked/is working in the Canadian school system teaching Canadian kids, do Canadian school teachers generally see it as a non issue to smoke dope on a school night. (I presume they are not firing up on the school grounds, but what about at home after/before school?) How do Canada’s different concepts of drug use interplay with Canadian professionalism? Serious questions folks, so only serious answers will be taken into consideration.
Yes Hamel: so
basically ..고 싶다 has become a short/common form both a short form of …고 싶어 하다 && ….고 싶은 것이다
succinctly put.
Having taught in Canada, schools generally don’t question what a teacher does in his/her free time as long as it doesn’t affect their standing as a professional educator. If one were to face legal issues resulting from a drug arrest, the various provincial colleges of teachers would look at the charge and take action to take away the teacher’s professional certification, thus making them unable to be hired by a regular school district. Most teachers I know operate on a don’t know/don’t tell basis and are professional enough not to burn one in the morning before class. Doesn’t mean it doesn’t happen and as far as after work goes, glass of wine or a nice smoke are about equal for relaxing after work. The dumbasses getting busted in Korea are not professionals and shouldn’t be a reflection on ‘real’ Canadian teachers.
http://www.todaykorea.co.kr/news/articleView.html?idxno=70898
Drowned:
Oh, sure. They can’t be representative of all teachers in Canada. I just wondered how far those “different concepts” carried in Canadian society and the workplace. I am not suggesting that these doofuses would cut it as teachers in Canada – though some may have.
Different concepts on what is or isn’t a ‘big deal’. In Canada, we know it’s illegal, but we also know ‘it isn’t a big deal’. If you see an adult smoking a joint in a car in their parking lot at a mall, or going for a short walk into the bushes at the back of the beach, or even right in the middle of a mosh pit at a concert, you don’t call the authorities. It just isn’t a big deal.
There are plenty of ways and times and circumstances in Canada where you can be pretty sure of getting away with it, even if you’re seen, and in the privacy of your own home is absolutely one of them. It’s not a matter of busting lazy unemployed teenagers and fresh university grads; the Canadian police would be hauling your dental hygeinist, your lawyer, your kids’ math teacher, etc into jail, too.
So, leaving that environment, if you’re still new to a country with a VERY different view of drugs, you’re pretty vulnerable if (1) you’ve found access to pot, and (2) you haven’t yet developed the behavior that goes along with realizing that the people around think it really is a big deal.
But it makes for good reading when you make yourself look like an idiot by claiming “It’s not a big deal in Canada” when you get busted. Sigh, just another day on the globalization front.
rather, “theircar in a parking lot”
How many were not renewed by the school, and how many of those same “expelled” teachers chose not to renew with the school? It’s easy to claim they were all let go because they were unsatisfactory, but maybe of them left because it was the school or co-workers that were unsatisfactory, hastening the exit of some of these teachers looking for greener pastures.
Not for waegs. Once you become a level 1 teacher, that’s it. The ceiling (as far as pay) is reached, no matter what kind of professional development you continue with. Korean teachers get opportunity after opportunity for development and advancement and pay hikes every year. Waegs face a kimchi ceiling; you can make 2.7/2.8-ish a month and no more (and no bonuses either).
I know of one University where foreign professors are paid on the same scheme as locals. This University, which I shall not name, for it is, despite this sliver lining, a real crap-ass place, insists on its staff members to have a PhD, or at least be registered in a PhD programme, to be allowed to keep gainful employment with them.
At least one of the foreign professors — who worked there until he died — was grossing, in the late 90s, 5.5 million a month, plus extras (extra classes, mostly).
dda, that would be the exception that proves the rule.
Darth, I am not so sure this unnamed Uni is the only one to do so. And it definitely doesn’t *prove* your point — we’d need hard data. The one you worked at could be the exception…
“Some had to visit hospital too often for weight problems and some refused to teach after school, according to the survey.”
I wonder when the hell Koreans will learn the fucking difference between the hospital and the doctor’s office?
How the hell did the KT or the school learn how/why they went to the fucking “hospital” in the first place? I’m sure the Teachers didn’t tell them they went to the fucking “hospital” because they were fat!
No fucking doctor-patient confidentiality in S. Korea, when the fuck will things change in Korea?
What a crock of shit article!
I guess waeg profs aren’t very highly thought of , I’m a wrench bender and I get 7Mwon/month at the current exchange rate.
some refused to teach after school
Wat
“In fact, I would be in support of all Canadians on E-2 teaching visas being tested for recent/current drug use ”
Uh huh. Look, there are far more Canadians teaching here than Americans. So of course there are going to be more Canadians caught even if as a percentage there is no diff between the two groups.
It also seems to me that members of the nation that invented recreational drug use, and whose nation is an ongoing orgy of rampant drug use on a scale other countries can’t even imagine, well a proverb about pots and kettles comes to mind.
“Onlyonce”
That’s NOT true according to Korean Stats. There are more LEGAL American English Teachers here than LEGAL canadian teachers.
I nor anyone else know how many Illegal Canadian Teachers there are but I’ll agree with you that there are more Illegal Canadian Teachers than American!
dda, In my original spiel about pay ceilings, I was talking specifically about public school, not uni. Foreigners working in public school have their salaries capped and no amount of upgrading your credentials will bump it up. Once you are a level 1+ teacher, a level 1+ salary you will forever make and not one won more (inflation? what’s that?)
But even if you wish to talk about uni, there are A LOT more unis in Korea that pay peanuts than those that pay a decent wage. Check the job boards and you’ll see most offer LESS than 2.5/mo… and we’re talking about the ones who want people with a Masters (I’ve seen many offer 2.0 or 2.1). The uni you cite may not be the only exception to the “rule”, but there are not that many out there that will give you opportunities for advancement and uncapped pay raises. The bad unis in Korea far outnumber the good ones. And even many of the good ones have language institutes, where they can hire the waeg for less, rather than hire them through the uni proper and pay him what he’s worth..
Onlyonce:
I think I’d agree with you, if it weren’t for all of my Canadian friends constantly telling me how lax Canadian laws are, and how much better the bud is. Oh, and then there’s the guy in this article who actually got caught red-handed, and chalked it off his being Canadian. Your Canuck brethren do not seem to have your back on this one.
All of which is academic, though, because I generally disagree with Hamel also. My problem with the E-2 criminal/drug tests is that they’re being enacted not out of rational thought but out of media-fed paranoia and xenophobia. It’s like the government is hearing testimony from the writers of “Sexy Mong.”
That’s a pretty shit reason to expel them–sorry, not renew them– considering (a) after school classes are completely voluntary and are covered under a completely different contract, and (b) are paid as overtime regardless of the number of hours one does during the regular day because they are outside official school hours and not part of EPIK/GEPIK/SMOE programs.
Schools are putting in these after-school classes and have to pay the teacher, whoever it may be, the same wage for those classes regardless of who is teaching it. Why does the waeg teaching all day have to do the night classes, too, or face getting the boot? They can’t hire an F2 or F4 teacher part-time for those classes, or now that they’ve changed the laws, a Filipino or Indian with the same credentials? It’s not like the school is paying one more than the other. They’re not losing any money. Why “force” the waeg to burn out faster, when they could have a happy waeg (two in fact), AND both day classes and after-school classes covered for the same money?
I know, I know, … I’ll stop it. (sigh)
Do you, hamel, see it as a non-issue to drink alcohol on a school night?
A police ‘spokesman’ argues that they should reinforce the visa process with medical and background checks…Hmm, don’t they already have such a policy being challenged in the courts for being discriminator? Why would this person make such a claim, then? Could the government be using this to create an artificial balance, Roh-style?
I just wonder with all these cases how they even get caught? Smell leaking into the hallway? Plus dumb Canadian figuring “no Korean knows what it smells like” forgetting that 200k Koreans are back and forth between NA and Korea? Particularly Gangnam Koreans..I rarely meet a Gangnam-ite who hasn’t been overseas.
Or is it simply smoking around the Korean G/F, and then after a fight or break-up, the cops come a’ callin’?
Or is it simply smoking around the Korean G/F, and then after a fight or break-up, the cops come a’ callin’?
Always, yes.
You must log in to post a comment.