[Robert J. Fouser] Korean language education requires understanding of learners

Last July, the South Korean government announced that it would promote Korean as a second language under the King Sejong Institute brand.

Currently three branches of the Korean government -- the Ministry of Education, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, and the Ministry of Culture, Sports, and Tourism -- operate different Korean language programs, each with a different name and curriculum.

The policy aims to combine the Ministry of Education’s programs for overseas Koreans with those of the King Sejong Institute. It also includes an effort to encourage “Hangeul Schools” in Korean communities overseas to apply for affiliate status with the King Sejong Institute.

The policy also includes support for developing online materials to augment classroom teaching and encourage independent learning.  Language learning materials developed at the National Institute of the Korean Language will be used in all King Sejong Institute programs. A committee of experts on Korean being taught as a second language will meet regularly to give direction and assess progress.

The idea behind the policy is that unifying the programs under the King Sejong Institute brand will help strengthen the brand, raising the profile of Korean as a second language overseas. Since the late 2000s, the South Korean government has focused on nation branding through a variety of slogans, campaigns, and programs. Banding, it is argued, will help improve the image of South Korea overseas, which will help sell tourism and the consumption of Korean cultural content.

What is a brand? The American Marketing Association defines a brand as “A name, term, design, symbol, or any other feature that identifies one seller’s good or service as distinct from those of other sellers.” The important point here is distinction from other sellers. It follows that creating a Korean brand distinct from, say, China or Japan, makes Korea stand out, thus increasing its competitive advantage in the marketplace.

A brand, then is really about selling, but to sell you need buyers, or consumers, as they are usually called. In the case of promoting Korean language and culture overseas, the sellers are the creators and developers in Korea, and the buyers are foreigners and ethnic Koreans who mostly live overseas.

In a normal market, the sellers would think about the consumers’ wants and needs and develop a product or service to meet the needs of enough consumers to turn a profit from selling. Sellers who ignore consumer needs eventually go out of business.

As for Korean as a second language, the key question is who are the consumers and what are their wants and needs. The answer to the question will offer insights into the direction of government policy.

Unlike English and French, Korean is not usually required as part of formal education, which means learners of Korean as a second language have some sort of personal motivation to do so. They may have Korean friends, they may be in love with a Korean, they may like Korean cultural products, they may be living in Korea, or they may like learning an “exotic language.”  The reasons are as varied as the learners.

The diversity of learners makes it difficult to develop standardized approaches to teaching. Learners also come from a wide range of linguistic and cultural backgrounds that create different expectations about learning a second language. Some learners find grammar explanations boring, while others cannot live without them. All of this suggests that standardization, particularly of teaching materials, may not work well, which is at odds with the current policy of producing textbooks in Korea.

The focus on standardization controlled by experts in South Korea raises questions about whether policy makers understand those who learn Korean as a second language overseas. These individuals are usually referred to as “foreigners” and “ethnic Koreans,” but descriptions rarely go into much detail. This suggests that policy makers do not know much about the consumers, which further suggests that they are basing the policy on assumptions instead of a deep understanding of the market.

South Korean government policies designed to support Korean as a second language will continue to disappoint unless policy makers and the experts they rely on develop a better understanding of what learners want.

Policy makers can draw inspiration from China, which requires Chinese native speaking teachers to be proficient in the native language of the learners they plan to teach. This shows that policy makers in China know that teachers have to understand their learners to be effective. This, more than branding, is what the policy makers should be thinking about. 

By Robert J. Fouser

Robert J. Fouser is a former associate professor of Korean language education at Seoul National University. He writes on Korea from Ann Arbor, Michigan. -- Ed.