Republic of the Philippines

CEBU NORMAL UNIVERSITY

COLLEGE OF TEACHER EDUCATION

COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS ON

LANGUAGE PROGRAMS AND POLICIES

BETWEEN THE PHILIPPINES AND THE REUBLIC OF SOUTH KOREA

Jade G. Tahanlangit

BSED English 1-C

T-Th (4:30 - 6:00 PM)

Dr. Vinchita G. Quinto

EM 5 Professor

(April 15, 2019)

In a world that is much closer and connected, it is not solely only because of the technological
advancements we have had all throughout the years although in some way it plays a very crucial part and
serves as a medium that enables people to think and interact globally, but it is also due to some very important
factor, it is by learning and using the said "global" or "world" language. English is the language of science, of
aviation, computers, diplomacy, and tourism. Knowing English increases your chances of getting a good job in
a multinational company within your home country or for finding work abroad (ELC, 2013).

English may not be the most spoken language in the world, but it is the official language of 53 countries
and spoken by around 400 million people across the globe. It is the dominant business language and it has
become almost a necessity for people to speak English if they are to enter a global workforce. Research from
all over the world shows that cross-border business communication is most often conducted in English and
many international companies expect employees to be fluent in English. Many of the world’s top films, books
and music are published and produced in English. Therefore, by learning English you will have access to a
great wealth of entertainment and will be able to have a greater cultural understanding (ELC, 2013). It is safe
to say that a person will surely become successful and will have many opportunities not only in his home
country but also internationally. That is why certain countries who lacks at English proficiency are striving to
implement English language programs and policies to elevate their economic status by having an edge and be
competent globally.

Language Programs and Policies are what a government does either officially through legislation, court
decisions or policy to determine how languages are used, cultivate language skills needed to meet national
priorities or to establish the rights of individuals or groups to use and maintain languages. Many countries have
a language policy designed to favor or discourage the use of a particular language or set of languages.
Although nations historically have used language policies most often to promote one official language at the
expense of others, many countries now have policies designed to protect and promote regional and ethnic
languages whose viability is threatened.

To compete in the global economy, the South Korean government believes that it is essential to
increase the ability of the population to use English more effectively (Littlewood, 2007). English has become
the ‘lingua franca’ of an increasingly global society. In South Korea, English is seen as having a significant role
in “promoting international exchange, technological expertise and progressing (economically)” in a global
economy (Ross, 1992). While the South Korean government has implemented many strategies to increase the
proficiency of English, South Korea overall ranks lower in English proficiency levels than countries in much of
Asia and Western Europe. In 2003 a survey by the Seoul metropolitan government, 74.2% of people polled
said they had difficulty communicating in English. In a country that is spending 1.9% of its GDP on English
language policies, this is a concerning statistic (Hwang, 2001). To remain globally competitive, South Koreans
must enhance their proficiency to remain competitive. However changing educational policy to improve
proficiency has proved problematic for South Korea. It is important to consider the history of South Korea’s
English language policies, and examine barriers which have made the implementation of those policies
problematic.

“We cannot live with our doors shut. No, we have to be more forward and walk towards the world. If tied
to Northern Asia, (we) will only be victims of China and Japan’s supremacy. At this moment, the weapon we
can give to our children is a challenging spirit and language proficiency. In this world, only those with excellent
language skills will survive. We cannot leave our children to be ‘half-muted’ in English in this kind of world”
(Yim, 2007). While English is used in advertising and pop culture throughout South Korea, essentially “English
remains a foreign language rarely used in Korean’s daily lives” (Yoo, 2005). Instead an interesting social
phenomenon has developed as English has become a way for South Korean’s to measure success. English
has become a “symbol of job success, social mobility, and international competitiveness” (Koo, 2007; Yim,
2007).

While the policy on Bilingual Education in the Philippines aims at the achievement of competence in
both Filipino and English at the national level, through the teaching of both languages and their use as media
of instruction at all levels. The regional languages shall be used as auxiliary languages in Grades I and II. The
aspiration of the Filipino nation is to have its citizens possess skills in Filipino to enable them to perform their
functions and duties in order to meet the needs of the country in the community of nations. The goals of the
Bilingual Education Policy shall be: enhanced learning through two languages to achieve quality education as
called for by the 1987 Constitution; the propagation of Filipino as a language of literacy; the development of
Filipino as a linguistic symbol of national unity and identity; the cultivation and elaboration of Filipino as a
language of scholarly discourse, that is to say its continuing intellectualization; and the maintenance of English
as an international language for the Philippines and as a non-exclusive language of science and technology.
Review of the Related Literature and Studies

Language Programs and Policies in the Republic of South Korea

English language education was first introduced to Korea in 1883, when” the Joseon government
opened an English language school in order to train interpreters”(Kim, 2008). With the colonization and
occupation of Korea by the Japanese, English education became unimportant as Japan tried to replace Korean
with Japanese as the national language in Korea (Kim, 1969). Eventually English was prohibited as an enemy
language by the Japanese. With the end of World War II and the Korean War, English was taught in Korea
essentially for military purposes. South Korea had a United States “military presence in its territory and
therefore had to train its citizens to be competent in communication with the US army” (Kim E.-G, 2008).
English was largely untaught in the Korean education system until the 1970s and not in elementary school until
1982 (Kim, 2008).

Issues around the need for English education became more important after the assassination of
General Park Chung-Hee in October of 1979 who was then President of South Korea (Kim, Hyung-A,2003).
Rapid economic growth in South Korea is attributed to General Park. However, his authoritarian rule saw strict
censorship, restriction on overseas travel and personal freedom. (Kim, 2003). With his death, changes in
policy emerged and South Korea became more active internationally hosting the Asian Games and the
Olympics (Park, 2009). During the 1981-1996 American Peace Corps teachers and Fullbright Scholarship
teachers were placed in secondary schools and universities throughout South Korea to teach English.
(Education, 2013) In 1995 two major English policies were launched: "Reinforcing Foreign Language
Education" and "Reinforcing Globalization Education". English was made a compulsory subject in 1997.
(Education, 2013) Another factor that highlighted the need for English was the Asian financial crisis in 1997
(Jeon, 2009). The South Korean government recognized that English was a key to Korea’s future global
success and began taking measures to implement English educational policy.

The goal of Lee Myeong Bak , President of Korea from 2008 to 2013, was to reform English Public
School Education “creating Korea as a more English-friendly nation, and the proposed goal was to have every
high school graduate conversational in English”(Ahn, 2013). In January 23, 2008, the government English
Committee launched their “English Education Roadmap”, a proposal to reform the current teaching system and
drastically improve Korean's English proficiency (Kang, 2008). The proposed project would cost more than
4.25-billion-dollars and be implemented over the next 5 years. One aim of the project was to teach other key
learning areas in English creating an English immersion program (“Immersion Roadmap,” 2008). However,
within a week of announcing this project, the policy failed because of its lack of feasibility due to the high cost
and shortage of teachers with sufficient skills to implement the project. President Lee Myung Bak announced
that “English immersion education is something we should not carry out and we cannot, but is a matter for the
distant future” (Kang, 2008).

In 2008, teachers were banned from participating in private education when it was found that many
teachers were illegally providing English test questions to private institutions for financial gain, giving private
education students an unfair advantage when taking the English test. (Kang, 2008). Despite the high cost of
private education and the competitiveness, South Korea's English proficiency is still lacking (Jin, 2006).

The “Communicative Language Teaching” (CLT) has been adopted as the official method of teaching.
In reality, the grammar-translation is often used. There are four main issues around using Communicative
Language Teaching in Korea. The first is teacher based. Korean native teachers often have deficiency in
spoken English. Many teachers are not trained in CLT and they have little time for developing materials for
communicative classes (Hadikin, 2014).The second issue is the students. Korean students often resist class
participation or lack proficiency to participate in CLT. (Hadikin, 2014).The third issue is lack of support, funding
and the large classes of students. The (Hadikin, 2014).fourth issue is that currently Korea has a grammar
based examination system and it is difficult to have effective and efficient assessment for CLT (Hadikin,
2014).The failure of the English education system is attributed to the use of the traditional grammar/translation
methods rather than the CLT method to improve communicative competence or, more precisely, oral language
fluency. (Chun, 1992). In an effort to improve Communicative Language Teaching foreign native English
speaking teachers were hired to provide fluency and increase class involvement.

The main goal of English education in Korea is simply to advance the ability to communicate in English
(Ministry of Education, 2008). One of the main education reforms to try to meet this goal was the introduction of
the English Program in Korea (EPIK) program which was established in 1995. Korea invited native English
speakers to Korea to work in schools around the country. The purpose of the program was to “improve the
English communication skills of teachers and students, improve the English education system, and increase
Koreans’ cultural understanding of the world as well as foreigners’ understanding of Korea (Education, 2013).
In 1995 the Korean government drastically lowered the age at which English is first learned in school, from first
grade middle school to third grade elementary school (Jeong, 2004). Ultimately, making English a standard
school subject in 1997 brought about ‘English fever’ in Korea (Jeong, 2004), causing Koreans to become
obsessed with learning English (Shin, 2007). The Korean Ministry of Education in 2008 states in the curriculum
that, “To contribute to the nation and society, the use of English is essential. The ability to communicate in
English will act as an important bridge connecting different countries, and will be the driving force in developing
our country, forming trust among various countries and cultures” (Education, 2013).
 The EPIK program was jointly operated by the Korea National University of Education (KNUE) and the
National Institute for International Education Development (NIIED). Between 2009 and 2013, EPIK placed an
average of 1500 foreign teachers per year to meet the needs of six millions elementary, middle and high
school students (World Education News & Reviewism, 1987). The Ministry of Education believes that these
training programs will help teachers make better connections with their students. All EPIK teachers are
required to complete the online program in an effort to understand their role as a teacher and develop co-
teaching skills. In more recent years these measures have improved the quality of applicants. The Ministry of
Education believes that these training programs will help teachers make better connections with their students.
All EPIK teachers are required to complete the online program in an effort to understand their role as a teacher
and develop co-teaching skills. In more recent years these measures have improved the quality of applicants.

Language Programs and Policies in the Philippines

Consistent with the 1987 constitutional mandate and a declared policy of the National Board of
Education (NBE) on bilingualism in the schools (NBE Resolution No. 73-7, s.1973) the Department of
Education, Culture and Sports (DECS) promulgated its language policy. The policy was first implemented in
1974 when DECS issued Dept. Order No. 25, s. 1974 titled, "Implementing Guidelines for the Policy on
Bilingual Education."

Bilingual education in the Philippines is defined operationally as the separate use of Filipino and
English as the media of instruction in specific subject areas. As embodied in the DECS Order No. 25, Pilipino
(changed to Filipino in 1987) shall be used as medium of instruction in social studies/social sciences, music,
arts, physical education, home economics, practical arts and character education. English, on the other hand
is allocated to science, mathematics and technology subjects. The same subject allocation is provided in the
1987 Policy on Bilingual Education which is disseminated through Department Order No. 52, s. 1987.

Filipino and English shall be used as media of instruction, the use allocated to specific subjects in the
curriculum as indicated in the Department Order No. 25, s. 1974. The regional languages shall be used as
auxiliary media of instruction and as initial language for literacy, where needed. Filipino and English shall be
taught as language subjects in all levels to achieve the goals of bilingual competence. Since competence in the
use of both Filipino and English is one of the goals of the Bilingual Education Policy, continuing improvement in
the teaching of both languages, their use as media of instruction and the specification of their functions in
Philippine schooling shall be the responsibility of the whole educational system. Tertiary level institutions shall
lead in the continuing intellectualization of Filipino. The program of intellectualization, however, shall also be
pursued in both the elementary and secondary levels.

The Department of Education, Culture and Sports shall cooperate with the National Language
Commission which according to the 1987 Constitution, shall be tasked with the further development and
enrichment of Filipino. The Department of Education Culture and Sports shall provide the means by which the
language policy can be implemented with the cooperation of government and non- government organizations.
The Department shall program funds for implementing the Policy, in such areas as materials production, in-
service training, compensatory and enrichment program for non-Tagalogs, development of a suitable and
standardized Filipino for classroom use and the development of appropriate evaluative instruments. Guidelines
for the implementation of the 1987 Policy on Bilingual Education are specified in the DECS Order No. 54, s.
1987. Among these are the need to intellectualize Filipino and the concrete steps suggested towards its
realization.

In 1994, Republic Act No. 7722, creating the Commission on Higher Education (CHED) was signed.
This Act which is known as the "Higher Education Act of 1994" provides that the CHED shall be independent
and separate from the DECS and attached to the Office of the President for administrative purposes only. Its
coverage shall be both public and private institutions of higher education as well as degree-granting programs
in all post-secondary educational institutions, public and private.

One of the first steps undertaken by CHED was to update the General Education Curriculum (GEC) of
tertiary courses leading to an initial bachelor's degree covering four (4) curriculum years. This was done to
make the curriculum more responsive to the demands of the next millenium.

The requirements of the new GEC are embodied in the CHED Memorandum Order (CMO) No. 59, s.
1996. Listed under miscellaneous of this CMO is its language policy which is as follows:

In consonance with the Bilingual Education Policy underlined in DECS Order No. 52, Series of 1987,
the following are the guidelines vis-a-vis medium of instruction, to wit: Language courses, whether Filipino or
English, should be taught in that language. At the discretion of the HEI, Literature subjects may be taught in
Filipino, English or any other language as long as there are enough instructional materials for the same and
both students and instructors/professors are competent in the language.
Analysis

English Education in South Korea is at a cross roads, government policy have failed spectacular;
despite the trillions of dollars spend on English, Koreans still lack proficiency. Korea’s English program needs
to adapt a more communicative approach over grammar and exam based methods. The government has set
out ambitious policy but many of these policies have been downscaled or unpursued. There seems to be no
substantial improvement in the overall level of English Language. This means that there is a ‘high-cost and
low-efficiency’ in the English education of Koreans (Chun and Choi, 2006).

South Korea needs to move away from the traditional grammar/translation methods in order to achieve
policy targets related to communicative language methods and improve communicative competence rather
than just improve International English Language Testing System (IELTS) and Test of English for International
Communication (TOEIC) test scores. On a broader scale, society needs to move away from attaching social
status to English. This also needs to be addressed by higher education as they review the necessity for
English in the Korean SAT test. While steps have been taken to ensure that better qualified teachers are hired,
development of these around active participation in the classroom.

Foreign teachers need to take a more active role in promoting Communicative Language Teaching in
the classroom. Korean native teachers need to be provided with better training and more support around
teaching English more effectively to large classes. Finally, government policy needs to be focused on building
curriculum that is long lasting and relevant to the objects set out in its English policy that improves current
practice. With these changes and implementations South Korea can improve and progress in becoming more
proficient in the English Language.

In the Philippines, Bilingual Education is efficiently and effectively implemented. Through the teaching
of both languages and their use as media of instruction at all levels, issues and problems did not rise as much
as South Korea’s implementation of English education.

Summary

The Republic of South Korea only welcomed to learn and teach the English language because of
globalization and to achieve international economic competence. Even though they have a big budget on
English Education, Koreans still have a hard time achieving on learning and speaking English since the country
lacks teachers who can effectively speak and teach English. South Korea’s English language programs and
policies are needed to be improved and be implemented effectively.
 While in the Philippines, English language is not only learned but it is also used as a medium in
teaching. In an early age, students are already exposed to the English language. That is why the
implementation of the language programs and policies are very effective and does not have similar issues that
the Republic of South Korea faced.

Conclusion

The roles of language policy and language practice and use in education have been regarded to
influence the efficacy of teaching and learning in the school setting. With the rise of globalization and
internationalization of services in education, the objective of producing manpower that is equipped to the
demands of the knowledge-based economy has realigned government policies worldwide to put education at
the forefront of its development plans. The English language programs and policies in the Philippines is in no
doubt much better than what South Korea has implemented. Although, it will of course be improved and soon
be a country full of efficient English speakers.