2.1 Issues with teacher employment exams

At both levels there is a standardized two-stage process to determine who gets coveted public sector positions. For secondary teachers, applicants are screened by an exam testing pedagogic knowledge, the curriculum, education policy, and professional aptitude (E. G. Kim Reference Kim2009), and in 2014 this changed from a multiple-choice exam to essays and short answers, including a listening test. Kang & Lee's (Reference Kang and Lee2014) content analysis of the exam uncovered an important finding in that the listening portion had neither ELT-related content or classroom-oriented audio, so it also seems important to improve the construct validity of the secondary school teacher exam. This exam is incredibly important for trainees because it filters the fortunate applicants who make the second stage, which is an interview and teaching demonstration assessed by a regional panel. If successful, administrators assign applicants to schools in the region where they applied. As a reviewer commented, professors and final-year students typically spend the whole year preparing for this. One recent study (Y. J. Lee & J. H. Lee Reference Lee and Lee2014) surveyed 86 seniors in three universities, with results showing that 73% of these pre-service teachers spent an average of about $360 USD per month on private tutoring in preparation for the employment exams, a somewhat troubling figure considering rising costs of tuition and living expenses for students. Employment-exam washback is an important area for further research, and an empirical study on how the exam influences SLTE pedagogy would be a useful contribution.

For primary education, the washback of employment exams is perhaps more problematic than in secondary education considering the confounding issue that all primary teachers are screened through English language interviews and teaching demonstrations, whether or not they will teach English once hired. This seems to be an urgent matter for policy makers to consider: having English proficiency as a criterion for all primary teachers favors those who can afford private education (see also Sun Woong Kim & Ju Ho Lee Reference Lee, Lee and Jang2010). Trainees with high potential but lacking English proficiency have little opportunity for the stable careers offered in public sector education.

Jung & Choi (Reference Jung and Choi2011) discussed a particular issue regarding the practicum in their survey of 868 pre-service teachers, finding that about 75% of participants observed English classes, but only about 50% had the chance to teach English during the practicum. About half the teachers felt that their own lack of proficiency inhibited their teaching of English and many teachers felt that pre-service SLTE was inadequate preparation for teaching English in primary schools. As the authors described, trainees without ELT experience during practicums are disadvantaged for the competitive examination process.

The primary school teacher exam was also revised in 2013. It also begins with an essay and short answer exam for screening applicants, then includes an interview session with a lesson planning evaluation and teaching demonstration (in the L1), followed by an English interview and English teaching demonstration. Eun & Park (Reference Eun and Park2014) raised some issues with the revision in a study with pre-service trainees, teachers, and professors. Their survey implied problems regarding the initial exam's construct validity, the limited number of questions, and the lack of time allotted for completion. Findings also suggested that the interviews were too structured and brief. The authors raised the issue of the English portion and suggested that teachers should have options to demonstrate other subjects, for example, the areas that they specialize in.

We believe the issue of the teacher examination deserves more attention than has been given. There is a need to investigate washback caused by the role of English in the primary teacher application process. The current exam necessitates applicant second language (L2) proficiency, which seems to be emphasized at the expense of training in ELT methodology or education in other subjects. Researchers could help policy makers consider the implications of their decision-making. Further commentary is offered below in the discussion of primary SLTE programs.

2.2 Studies on primary school pre-service teacher education

Considering there are only 13 primary education programs in Korea, researchers have produced a large body of work. The ten articles below representing this corpus reflect a diversity of research approaches with one mixed-method, two quantitative and seven qualitative studies, including two adapting reflective practice. Research reflected a shift from lecture-based towards more learner-centered education (see O. Kwon Reference Kwon2000), particularly evident in studies describing micro-teaching.

The Early English Policy, which moved English to third grade, made it necessary to re-train faculty and improve the proficiency and ELT knowledge of pre-service teachers (O. Kwon Reference Kwon2000), and since 1997 SLTE has been adjusting to meet objectives of this policy. Kim et al. (Reference Kim, Kim, Kim and Lee2011) described recent changes made over two years in the core English and English pedagogy courses at one National University of Education. Notable adjustments included: (1) revising curricula to focus on TETE, (2) splitting English language courses by level, (3) establishing an administrative support system, (4) starting an English language mentoring program for underprivileged students in the area, and (5) reinforcing overseas exchanges. This study included a brief discussion of program evaluations; however, survey data did not appear to provide evidence for the interpretations offered. Nonetheless, the study's relevance lies in documenting improvements since the 1990s when SLTE for primary teachers was nonexistent (cf. O. Kwon Reference Kwon2000).

The fact that all pre-service teachers are potential English teachers can be a source of anxiety for trainees. Hyun Jin Kim (Reference Kim2010) adapted two Likert-type instruments to gauge classroom anxiety in both English learning and teaching among 137 pre-service teachers. Understandably, trainees reported higher anxiety for oral production as teachers than as learners in a classroom. Furthermore, there was a moderate positive correlation between L2 learning and teaching anxiety (r = 0.461), which indicated that the more anxiety participants felt about learning, the more they may have felt about teaching. Interestingly, no correlations were found between anxiety and trainee L2 proficiency.

Regarding proficiency, K. Ahn (Reference Ahn2013) designed a case study investigating how keeping learning logs influenced pre-service teachers’ English skill development. For a period of three weeks, 22 participants recorded what they studied, feelings about progress, and future study plans. Recording these logs encouraged students to reflect on and evaluate their progress. Although no objective measures of proficiency were employed, the study found that recording learning logs positively influenced their motivation, interest, and confidence in learning English. However, a follow-up survey found that the influence of the learning logs was not sustained after the data collection period, which provided empirical evidence to suggest that learning logs require longer-term commitments to maintain their efficacy as a pedagogic tool.

Primary teacher education programs now have required courses for training teachers in appropriate classroom English, often incorporating peer micro-teaching sessions in small groups. Four studies about these classes are reviewed below. Y. Y. Park (Reference Park2009) encouraged reflective practice through self-evaluations of teaching practices. Fifteen participants watched recordings of a ten-minute lesson, then wrote up self-analyses. This process helped trainees find ‘a deeper awareness of their own teaching behavior’ (Y. Y. Park Reference Park2009: 203). In this study, trainees had trouble using and identifying level-appropriate teacher talk, which is a useful finding for teacher trainers.

Oh (Reference Oh2010) wrote about developing a teacher model for primary teacher trainees using researcher observations, consultations, and reflective journals with 36 pre-service teacher participants. The article focused on improving classroom English use, for example, by (1) discussing recommended teaching methods for elementary English education and (2) encouraging speaking improvement through group work. S. Lee's (Reference Lee2012) study included peer and instructor evaluations of peer-teaching sessions in addition to self-analysis with 35 participants. Through the process trainees were shown to gain more awareness of teaching practices and confidence in teaching English. Kim & Park (Reference Kim and Park2010) described a model for instructor-trainee consultations in order to promote further efficacy of micro-teaching sessions. Although the case studies included only three pre-service teachers, findings showed how consultations with the professor increased their awareness of practices and confidence teaching in English.

In addition to micro-teaching, pre-service teachers participate in eight-week practicums. Chang & Lee (Reference Chang and Lee2012) collected pre- and post-practicum surveys from 50 pre-service teachers and their results found statistically significant gaps between expectations and the reality faced in the classroom. Most saliently, expectations for learning to teach level-differentiated classes, how to motivate students, and how to interact with students did not seem to be met.

The studies above contributed to improving and understanding issues with pre-service ELT education. However, in a few studies reviewed above (and in many others not reviewed), the role of researchers in relation to participants appears to be a common issue. Studies tend to be generated from intra-department data, sometimes apparently by the course lecturers. This is not necessarily a problem, but such research would be strengthened through clearer theoretical frameworks that address reflexivity in the researcher-participant relationships.

More broadly, there is room for researchers and policy makers to look at the bigger picture and consider the role of English in primary school pre-service teacher education. For example, it might be worth exploring the feasibility of training full-time English teachers in addition to having all trainees learn a little about ELT.

2.3 Studies on secondary school pre-service education

This section reviews pre-service SLTE research for secondary school teachers, beginning with an elaborate study looking at why pre-service teachers choose to enter the field. H. W. Lim (Reference Lim2011) included two participant groups, one with 40 graduate and the other with 50 undergraduate students. In the first stage, reflective essays were qualitatively analyzed to produce a set of roughly 100 statements per group. Next, participants rated each statement according to its influence on their decision to become teachers. Responses were plotted onto concept maps in thematic clusters. Concept mapping revealed differences between graduate and undergraduate students’ professional identities and perceptions of the teaching profession. For example, the most important theme for graduate students related to ‘qualities and knowledge necessary for teaching English’, whereas for undergraduates it was ‘goals and aspirations for becoming a good teacher’ (H. W. Lim Reference Lim2011: 974). The undergraduates felt more resistant towards becoming teachers because of issues such as (1) lack of positive memories of teachers, (2) difficulty of employment exam, and (3) changing attitudes towards the teaching profession, such as believing that teachers are not respected as much as in the past (cf. E. G. Kim Reference Kim2009).

Unlike primary teacher education, secondary school English teacher education has a longer history, beginning during the US Army Military Government in Korea, which oversaw South Korea for three years following World War II. Foreign language policy underwent many reforms in recent decades, which O. Kwon (Reference Kwon2000) discussed. Of relevance to recent reforms, SLTE programs in the early 1990s offered mostly English literature and general linguistics courses with little emphasis on ELT pedagogy. By 1999, teacher training programs had nearly doubled the number of ELT-related courses offered, a trend O. Kwon recommended continue, since together they still made up only about half of SLTE curricula. Currently, ELT majors choose from a range of courses in linguistics and semantics, English conversation and writing, English literature, special lectures, and ELT pedagogy. Recent research suggests the variability in course offerings between universities is problematic and that issues discussed by O. Kwon still linger in some programs.

M. W. Lee (Reference Lee2011) analyzed course distribution across 14 university departments, and findings demonstrated that there has been an increased emphasis on ELT pedagogy in many cases (cf. O. Kwon Reference Kwon2000). A second part of this study looked at how the curricular reforms (see Section 1.1) were evident in SLTE programs. In a content analysis of more than 100 syllabi, it was found that:

1. 1. Communicative competence and communicative functions are discussed significantly . . .

2. 2. Speaking and listening are emphasized to some extent, but not enough . . .

3. 3. Activity-, process-, task-based learning is dealt with at the surface level . . .

4. 4. Proficiency level-based curriculum is weakly reflected . . .

5. 5. Learner-centered education has [a] long way to go. (M. W. Lee Reference Lee2011: 13–16)

Although ELT became a point of emphasis, the author argued that trainees were not getting enough experience with the pedagogic principles of reforms (e.g. learner-centeredness) to be able to put them into practice. Arguably the most significant finding was the considerable variation found in the content and quality of secondary school SLTE programs in Korea. For example, required ELT courses ranged between one and 11 among the universities. Therefore, as a reviewer reiterated, it is possible for English teacher trainees to learn very little about English education in four years while training to be an English teacher. With roughly 400 programs offering secondary school teacher training, it is necessary to further investigate the quality of education and the knowledge base of English teacher trainees.

A number of studies focused on the practicum experience. In order to facilitate reflection during the practicum, Kim & Yi (Reference Kim and Yi2010) instructed 33 trainees to describe and analyze lesson breakdowns and critical incidents in weekly journals. Results showed that many breakdowns occurred early in the lessons. The main cause, unsurprisingly, was described as inexperience in matters such as level-appropriate materials and time management during activities. Kim & Yi (Reference Kim and Yi2010: 373) found that the reflective process encouraged trainees to incorporate concepts from coursework into the classroom as ‘student teachers became more aware of their assumptions about language teaching and learning’. A post-practicum survey revealed that ‘self-observation of critical incidents in their own classroom helped them to generate powerful insights about teaching’ (Kim & Yi Reference Kim and Yi2010: 373). This study's design successfully integrated meaningful SLTE research with ELT pedagogy.

In her Ph.D. dissertation, K. Ahn (Reference Ahn2009) included findings regarding the prior learning experiences of pre-service teachers. In a series of four case studies, participants were grouped in two pairs. The first pair was educated in the Korean education system (but one participant attended secondary school in the US for about a year). The second pair had lived abroad and attended schools with English as the medium of instruction for 10 to 12 years. During the practicum, the latter pair was able to demonstrate core curricular reforms, that is, teaching communicatively and in English, better than the former pair who had been educated in Korea. This has important implications for SLTE. Trainees lacking learning experience with CLT are less likely to teach that way.

However, regardless of English proficiency and prior learning experiences, trainees face contextual challenges instituting curricular reforms in practice. In a follow-up study, K. Ahn (Reference Ahn2011) described the challenges for one participant, Bohee. Before her practicum, Bohee hoped to encourage participation through communicative activities, have students use only English, and complete her lesson plans. However, she was not entirely successful in meeting these aims. First, noise during communicative activities made it difficult to manage procedures. Second, students were reluctant to speak English. Bohee attempted to overcome this but had difficulties doing so because of the students’ mixed-level English proficiency. Third, although Bohee had some success with teaching in English and doing so communicatively, she adopted a more traditional approach in her demonstration because she felt pressure to conform to the pedagogical norms of the school system and the beliefs she perceived in her observers: the professor, mentor teachers, and peers. In this study, the mentor teachers introduced Bohee to the status quo of Korean English education. This last finding is a theme arising in other research with novice teachers (see S. K. Shin Reference Shin2012) and is amplified by the fact that for secondary teacher trainees, the practicum is only four weeks.

SLTE has received a fair amount of attention over the years and the above studies exemplify the small but growing number of sociocultural research studies on SLTE in Korea (cf. Johnson Reference Johnson2006). However, there is a need for further research, in particular studies that contribute to continuing improvements in language teacher training, for example, through action research done by trainers or adapting reflective practice instruments for trainees. M. W. Lee (Reference Lee2011) (see above) included follow-up interviews with course lecturers, many of whom reported relying on lecture-style instruction for teaching theory. In addition, most courses did not explicitly refer to themes of the SNC. Therefore, as M. W. Lee (Reference Lee2011: 15) criticized, pre-service teachers have difficulties connecting coursework to future teaching practices because the programs ‘touched on these concepts only in the surface, theoretical, and abstract levels’. This criticism extends to the practicum, which being only four weeks for secondary teachers, seems an inadequate period of time for induction. Moreover, it is necessary to follow up on how pre-service teachers fare after graduation. For example, the oversupply of qualified teachers leaves the vast majority of graduates without an opportunity for employment in the field that they are trained in.

Doing so, however, warrants careful consideration of research approach. In the studies reviewed here, researchers were generally clear about their positions within their research context. As with primary education, a good portion of SLTE research in Korea is generated by professors within their own departments; however, research roles are often not explicit. On the whole, research on SLTE would be strengthened with more robust methodologies, explaining and justifying data collection procedures and how participants are recruited, especially when participants are students in a program where the researcher is a stakeholder.

2.4 Studies on in-service SLTE

Curricular reforms, particularly the Early English Policy and the emphasis on CLT and TETE, created challenges for in-service teachers who, in the aggregate, generally lacked L2 proficiency and teaching skills to be able to implement the new reforms. Furthermore, as O. Kwon (Reference Kwon2000: 55) described, plans for hiring English teachers trained for secondary English education to share teaching duties in primary schools ‘sparked vehement opposition’ from primary teachers and professors who felt that these teachers were ‘not fully qualified’ to teach primary students. Therefore, a significant increase in in-service training became necessary. Recently, Korea became the largest provider of in-service teacher training in the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) (e.g. Kim Reference Kim and Kim2011). The largest and most expensive of these programs is for English teachers.

For English education, the major programs are six-month, intensive In-service English Teacher Training (INSET) programs and two-week Teaching English in English (TEE) courses. For the INSET, trainees receive six months of English language and education training, paid leave, and room and board including one month abroad. Understandably, then, entrance to this program is competitive. The INSET costs about $11,500 USD per participant (Hayes Reference Hayes and Tribble2012). However, because that figure excludes salaries for substitute teachers, it underestimates the actual expenses.

A number of studies have reported on the (in)effectiveness of INSET programs. In one mixed-methods study, Yang (Reference Yang2009) obtained program documents, including the post-course evaluations. Previous studies on the INSET programs relied mainly on these survey data and in-house evaluations where teachers’ INSET evaluations tended to be largely positive. However, Yang (Reference Yang2009) criticized survey items for merely eliciting ‘superficial impressions’ (176) and found ‘very little evidence’ (181) to support the positive feedback for the programs. In-depth interviews with three participants uncovered more critical responses. While they were impressed by the overseas experience, descriptions of the five-month domestic portion were not so flattering. Teachers were critical of ‘redundant courses, unqualified instructors, and differences in the English levels of trainees’ (Yang Reference Yang2009: 175). A later survey of some 449 participants had both contrasting and overlapping results (S. Y. Kim et al. Reference Kim, Gu and Jeon2010). In this study, teachers criticized the ‘inefficiency of overseas training’; however, they also ‘expressed concerns about unbalanced curriculum [and] lack of follow-up service’ (S. Y. Kim et al. Reference Kim, Gu and Jeon2010: 199). This final point remains a source of criticism as uncertainty lingers regarding the effectiveness of INSET programs.

The key aims of INSET are improving communicative competence and reinforcing teaching skills; however, administrators have prioritized language learning at the expense of ELT pedagogy (Hayes Reference Hayes and Tribble2012). Furthermore, while there is evidence for changes in teacher beliefs, there is scant evidence for changes in practice. In an extensive research project, Chang et al. (Reference Chang, Jung, Hayes, Yeon, Kim and Lee2010) provided evidence for improvements in participants’ L2 proficiency, and teachers believed it improved their teaching. Also, S. Y. Kim et al. (Reference Kim, Gu and Jeon2010) found that a vast majority of their participants felt the language courses increased their ability to teach in English. However, as these authors acknowledged, data came from self-reported instruments; therefore, questions remain as to how the INSET experience is reflected in actual in-class practices of trainees.

In a qualitative evaluation of an INSET course, K. S. Yeum (Reference Yeum2012) recruited a range of stakeholders including participants, instructors and supervisors. Data collected over six months included recorded classes, lesson plans, interviews, survey, diaries, and course documents. Pre- and post-program questionnaires demonstrated clear improvements in teaching confidence; however, by the end of the program, nearly half of the 75 teachers still felt that their English ability was merely adequate to very weak and would limit them as English teachers. Central to this study was analysis of a course focusing on English for the classroom. The author recorded classes over five months and interviewed the 16 students and their instructor, who happened to be a NEST. Trainees had near-unanimous praise for the classroom English course. However, K. S. Yeum (Reference Yeum2012) described an important theme from her observations:

This comment relates to earlier reports from the late 1990s (e.g. O. Kwon Reference Kwon2000). Teachers believed that as experienced teachers their biggest obstacle for the new reforms would be L2 proficiency. Yet, as K. S. Yeum (Reference Yeum2012) commented, increased language proficiency may not result in improved ELT pedagogy. The emphasis on language learning, then, has led to questionable results for such a significant investment in teacher training.

Another point worth mentioning relates to INSET instructors. Regarding the aforementioned criticisms of unqualified staff (S. Y. Yang Reference Yang2009), in K. S. Yeum's (Reference Yeum2012) study, all seven instructors happened to be NESTs, including the coordinator. Six of the seven had an M.A., but only two in applied linguistics or TESOL. Apart from the coordinator, none had any experience teaching in Korean public schools. Perhaps improvements for in-service teacher education would be met by involving instructors experienced in the context for which they are ostensibly training teachers. Nevertheless, this is further evidence that designers of the INSET prioritized language learning over ELT pedagogy.

One study did find evidence for improved teaching practices during the INSET, although not without significant limitations (B. K. Ahn Reference Ahn2011). In this study, 24 primary and 26 secondary teachers did peer-teaching demonstrations at the beginning and end of a course, roughly five months apart. They were instructed to use their own school textbooks but teach the same unit for both classes. Expert, peer and self-evaluations of peer-teaching sessions were correlated. B. K. Ahn (Reference Ahn2011) found evidence that (1) both L2 proficiency and teaching skill improved after the course and (2) primary teachers apparently improved more than secondary school teachers. Interestingly, primary teachers also rated themselves much higher than experts did in the first evaluation. These findings suggested that perhaps priority should be given for primary in-service training because of the inadequacy of pre-service ELT training (B. K. Ahn Reference Ahn2011). The author rightly pointed out, however, that the results may not be indicative of actual in-class practices. The course was internal; furthermore, all participants taught the same content for both lessons, which was likely a factor attributable to improvements in the ratings.

If the INSET is to continue, more research is needed to investigate long-term influences on situated teaching practices. While INSET research since 2009 has shown some evidence for positive evaluations from trainees, there remain some issues regarding the effectiveness of these programs. Uptake of INSET pedagogy is generally left to self-assessment; there has been little follow-up to investigate the impact on classroom practices, although as Hayes (Reference Hayes and Tribble2012) noted, that is not unlike many other contexts. Furthermore, questions remain about resource allocation. The costly INSET comes at the expense of other alternatives that might be more effective for instilling change, such as those based on reflective practice (see also Moodie Reference Moodie2015). A cost-benefit analysis of the INSET would be a useful contribution to in-service SLTE in Korea.

To conclude this section, we review two studies adapting reflective practice, which contribute to a view of what in-service SLTE might be reformed to resemble. In a sociocultural study, K. Ahn (Reference Ahn2010) looked at the reflective writing of a novice teacher, showing how the process enabled the participant to connect theory with practice and gain deeper insights into the influence of her experiences as a language learner on teaching. Lee & Chung (Reference Lee and Chung2012: 85) interviewed 15 novice teachers over one semester and found that they perceived their professional development as ‘stages of chaos and adjustment, reflection and exploration, modification and accommodation, and adaptation and stability’. These studies were helpful for understanding language teacher development, particularly because they link in-service SLTE with the classroom. In Korea, in-service SLTE generally occurs in isolated settings. We recommend that researchers and policy makers consider alternative approaches to in-service training that are more connected and synchronous to actual teaching practices. As education researcher S. W. Park (Reference Park2014) concluded in a survey of 200 articles on in-service teacher training in Korea, we believe it is important for researchers to challenge the scope of in-service SLTE, undertake more classroom-based studies, and provide longitudinal evidence of program efficacy.

3.1 Studies on CLT policy

After the announcement of the SNC, Li (Reference Li1998) reported that teachers were very concerned about the new policies. Interviews with 18 experienced teachers found that they felt insufficiently trained for CLT: They doubted its effectiveness and did not feel proficient enough for target language (TL) instruction. They expressed concerns for institutional constraints, student participation, and washback from grammar-focused exams. Research since that time shows that to a large extent these concerns have not gone away, even after revisions to the national curriculum towards the end of the previous decade.

J. H. Jeon (Reference Jeon and Min2009) replicated a previous study (J. H. Jeon Reference Jeon1997), a report on key issues inhibiting CLT in Korean schools under the SNC. Eighteen issues were rated by 172 participants on a Likert-type scale. Interestingly, after 12 years the top five issues had remained the same. First, classes were perceived as too large. This was still the case even though the average size had shrunk by a third between studies, from 45 to 50 in 1996 and from 30 to 37 in 2008 across the three school levels. Second, teachers felt a need for systematic in-service training in CLT. Although in-service programs were available by the second study, they were found to be insufficient. Third, teachers felt that improved pre-service training was needed. Fourth, teachers felt they lacked appropriate supplementary materials. Fifth, they wanted more interesting, practical and communicative textbooks. J. H. Jeon (Reference Jeon and Min2009) noted one significant change, however: high-stakes university entrance exams increased from the thirteenth to the sixth most important issue for teachers between 1997 and 2009. Although descriptive statistics revealed a lot of variability in teachers’ responses, the results were important for suggesting how little the major issues for CLT had changed regardless of government efforts to improve the situation, such as in-service teacher training discussed above.

Reforms and SLTE have not been effective in changing teaching practices. Even if teachers believe they are doing CLT, observations of in-class practices have shown little evidence for communicative approaches, particularly in secondary schools. For example, Y. J. Jeon (Reference Jeon2010) observed and interviewed three middle school teachers of varying experience, including an award winner of a regional English teaching contest. Findings showed that their classes provided few opportunities for meaningful, interactive, or creative language use. Nam (Reference Nam2011) analyzed interactions during four middle school classes: teacher talk was dominant, taking up more than three quarters of classroom interactions, about two thirds in the L1. Nam found little evidence of meaningful communication; most student utterances were repeated after the teacher or read from the textbook. These studies included strong content analysis of transcripts; however, it is hard to say how indicative these classes would be of lessons without a researcher present.

The following case study exemplifies the small but emerging body of sociocultural research from Korea highlighting more situated accounts of language teacher experiences. Using observation and interview data, E. J. Kim (Reference Kim and Kim2011) described the practices and decision-making of her participant, Hee-Won. While Hee-Won's stated image of herself as a professional aligned with CLT policy, class observations showed she relied on teacher-centered activities associated with grammar-translation and audio-lingual methods. Findings were explained through contradictions in activity systems. For example, Hee-Won maintained control over the class because she felt the need to cover all the textbook unit activities. Also, she relied on L1 instruction because she lacked confidence speaking English. Hee-Won ‘simultaneously resisted’ and ‘doubted her ability to implement the mandates’ (E. J. Kim Reference Kim and Kim2011: 235). Although she wanted to teach differently, she doubted that students would be receptive to communicative activities because they knew grades were determined by pen-and-paper exams. E. J. Kim (Reference Kim and Kim2011: 236) concluded that ‘individual, institutional, and social factors made local-level implementation of the CLT-based curricular mandates improbable’. The researcher's rich descriptions of the complex relationship between beliefs and teaching practice made an important contribution to understanding the issues for CLT in Korea.

The curriculum manual (MOE 1998) also recommends TBLT. Through interviews with ten participants, S. H. Yim (Reference Yim2009) found that these teachers held positive perceptions for TBLT regarding its potential for increasing student participation. However, teachers reported it was not widely used for the following reasons: (1) incompatibility with exam preparation, (2) time constraints in class because of curricular objectives, (3) lack of proficiency of both students and teachers, and (4) lack of institutional support. This study had a significant limitation in that it relied on self-reported data of teaching practices, unlike the three studies above. More research into TBLT in Korea is warranted, particularly through studies providing evidence of how it may be successfully taught to teachers and adapted in classrooms.

Overall, research has shown that CLT policy remains controversial in Korea. K. Ahn (Reference Ahn2009: 116) criticized the SNC for reflecting a ‘wholesale importation of a western view of CLT’. Perhaps it could be argued that the policy should be revised; however, there is not much evidence that the approach has been widely applied in the first place. S. A. Kim (Reference Kim2009) asserted that there is a gap between the educational policy and practice, and inconsistencies between expectations for primary and secondary education. She pointed out that stated curriculum guidelines were not generally implemented in regular secondary school English classes except during specially prepared demonstration classes. In addition, due to the differing educational contexts, the communicative teaching methods more prevalent in primary schools lose their place to the grammar-translation approach as the students move to the higher levels of school.

However, there is also an issue for connecting SLTE with classroom practices. As Nam (Reference Nam2011: 145) concluded, ‘motivated teachers try to use the teaching methods or techniques they learned from universities and teacher education programs without possessing a way to understand how to adapt them to the particular Korean classroom context’. Pre- and in-service education has not been able to bridge the gap between policy and theory and their application in classrooms. Research can look into bridging this gap by investigating how SLTE can become more effective at facilitating communicative instruction (see also Section 2.4).

Lastly, as one teacher asserted, in high schools ‘the national exam [CSAT] has total control over classroom teaching and learning’ (Yook Reference Yook2010: 134). The test-driven nature of education inhibits communicative teaching, creating systemic contradictions for educators, who can neither effectively address stakeholder expectations for exam preparation nor effectively apply the communicative approach recommended by the curriculum, so that reform issues remain unresolved 15 years later (see also Section 6).

3.2 Studies on TETE: Language use and interaction in English classrooms

Traditionally, language teaching in Korean public schools has tended towards grammatical or audio-lingual approaches taught exclusively in the L1, a practice which has been criticized as hindering language learning (O. Kwon Reference Kwon2000). In the SNC, the TETE policy recommended that teachers use only English. The revised SNC (MEHRD 2015) included assessments of teachers’ language use. Although teachers are expected to use only English, research suggests that this generally does not happen, particularly in secondary schools.

The consensus of multiple studies on TETE in Korea suggests that English is avoided for the following reasons:

1. 1. Classroom management problems (e.g. Hwang, Seo & Kim Reference Hwang, Seo and Kim2010; Nam Reference Nam2011; S. K. Shin Reference Shin2012)

2. 2. Influence of colleagues (e.g. K. Ahn Reference Ahn2011; S. K. Shin Reference Shin2012)

3. 3. Lack of teacher L2 proficiency (e.g. J. H. Jeon Reference Jeon and Min2009; Hwang et al. Reference Hwang, Seo and Kim2010; G. H. Shin Reference Shin2010; Yook Reference Yook2010)

4. 4. Large classes (e.g. J. H. Jeon Reference Jeon and Min2009; Moon & Pyo Reference Moon and Pyo2010; Yook Reference Yook2010)

5. 5. Limited contact hours to cover materials (e.g. J. H. Jeon Reference Jeon and Min2009; Moon & Pyo Reference Moon and Pyo2010)

6. 6. Socialization of students towards L1 use (e.g. Hwang et al. Reference Hwang, Seo and Kim2010; K. Ahn Reference Ahn2011; S. K. Shin Reference Shin2012)

7. 7. Testing washback (e.g. J. H. Jeon Reference Jeon and Min2009; Yook Reference Yook2010; S. K. Shin Reference Shin2012)

8. 8. Traditional (i.e. Confucian) values (e.g. Hwang et al. Reference Hwang, Seo and Kim2010; S. K. Shin Reference Shin2012)

The body of research discussed here reflects multiple approaches to analyzing teacher target language use. This section reviews four mixed-method studies, one qualitative and one quantitative study, and one meta-analysis of three quantitative studies from public school English classes. However, a critical look at these studies raises research issues, the most salient perhaps being data collection methods.

For stakeholders and policy makers it is important to have an understating of in-class teacher language use; however, research has generally relied on self-reported instruments to measure this. For example, results from a survey of 204 teachers suggested that on average English is used just over 50% of the time (G. H. Shin Reference Shin2010). On another questionnaire sent to 16 secondary school participants, S. K. Shin (Reference Shin2012) asked participants to estimate their English use in categories such as greetings and classroom management. Ratios of L2 use by category ranged between 9% and 49% on average, although this excluded data from four participants who reported using no English at all. In another study with secondary school participants, they reported using English between 60% and 100% of the time (Park & Kim Reference Park and Kim2011). However, self-reported data can be an unreliable means of describing classroom practices. For example, in Park & Kim's (Reference Park and Kim2011) study, analysis of class transcripts from three observations showed that all three teachers used English more than their own estimates. On the other hand, other studies found that teachers seem to be overestimating how much English they use in class (e.g. Hwang et al. Reference Hwang, Seo and Kim2010; Nam Reference Nam2011). Nam (Reference Nam2011) analyzed utterances from four secondary school classes and found that teacher-talk took up 77% of class time, with two thirds in Korean. These studies show that quantifying language use has been a major challenge for research, confounded by variable teaching practices and self-reported data. There is room for more naturalistic studies on language use that take careful consideration of the influence researchers may have on classroom practices.

Another research issue is the ambiguity over what is meant by TETE in educational policy. In a meta-analysis of three prior surveys, I. H. Jo (Reference Jo2011) discussed incoherent interpretations of TETE. Teachers seemed uncertain about whether the policy meant using L2 exclusively or only for specific functions, such as giving instructions for activities and socializing with students. Prior research suggested maximizing L2 use in classrooms (e.g. D. M. Kang Reference Kang2008; S. Y. Kim Reference Kim2008), but the question remains as to what that should look like in practice.

Qualitative (and mixed-method) studies including teacher interviews and observations provided a richer understanding of classroom language use and also revealed the complexity and variability of language teaching. Two studies found secondary school teachers differed considerably in classroom management, teaching philosophies and language learning beliefs. First, Park & Kim's (Reference Park and Kim2011) study of six participants included analysis of journals, observations and interviews. Teachers thought it was their duty to provide exposure to and opportunities for L2 use in class. Student-centeredness was prevalent in observed classes and the teachers wanted to present themselves as models of successful L2 learners. In contrast, an action research study by Hwang et al. (Reference Hwang, Seo and Kim2010) described how using English could be a source of disempowerment for secondary teachers. It explored how the incongruence of traditional Confucian values with TETE policy weakened the authority of the teacher (and first author). First, students addressed the teacher by his surname, a taboo in other classes, and this lowered the distance between himself and the students. Second, peer pressure discouraged English use among students. Third, group solidarity disempowered the teacher, for example, when students shared knowledge with each other rather than asking him for help. Furthermore, excerpts from class sequences reflected low rapport between the teacher and students. Code-switching to Korean enabled the teacher to assert his status.

In Hwang et al.’s (Reference Hwang, Seo and Kim2010) study, contextual issues came to the forefront of TETE practices. This was a central focus of discussion in other studies as well. For example, Moon & Pyo's (Reference Moon and Pyo2010) observations of three middle school teachers found that level gaps in student L2 proficiency created challenges. TETE seemed to benefit higher-level students while demotivating lower-level ones. The teachers also felt constrained by the large class sizes and limited contact hours with each class.

Perhaps the strongest study on TETE came from research published in TESOL Quarterly. S. K. Shin (Reference Shin2012) investigated the socialization of 16 highly proficient novice English teachers. When starting as English teachers, all 16 reported attempting exclusive L2 use; however, within months all 16 abandoned English in favor of Korean. Questionnaire findings suggested that student proficiency, classroom management, and exam washback were the biggest in-class constraints for TETE. However, interviews revealed deeper themes discouraging the use of English in English classes. First, teachers felt institutional constraints. Teachers had little control over material selection, needed to keep pace with their colleagues, and felt pressure to prepare students for exams. Second, the participants were socialized by senior teachers and administrators to the norms of secondary school English education, that is, teacher-centered classes with L1 instruction. The novice teachers felt that they needed to maintain the status quo in order to avoid creating problems. Third, beliefs about language learning and teaching from both students and fellow teachers discouraged L2 use. Teachers generally believed traditional approaches were better than CLT, particularly for exam preparation. While prior studies described the inhibiting influence of teacher proficiency on TETE (e.g. O. Kwon Reference Kwon2000; S. Y. Kim Reference Kim2002), S. K. Shin's (Reference Shin2012) research suggested that institutional constraints were stronger, since even highly proficient teachers abandoned using English in class.

We conclude this section by summarizing issues raised in this review and offering our suggestions for studies on language use. Overall, although research shows that the TETE policy is beset by uncertainties, so is the research. First of all, evidence of teaching approaches and language use generally came from self-reported instruments. More studies investigating language use in authentic classrooms are warranted. However, researchers need to consider their own influence as observers and adapt appropriate paradigms.

Second, research has not come to a consensus on what TETE should look like and how it can best be applied in Korea. Literature critical of the policy is common (e.g. Hwang et al. Reference Hwang, Seo and Kim2010; I. H. Jo Reference Jo2011); however, English education may benefit more from researchers describing principles for TETE based on empirical data (e.g. D. M. Kang Reference Kang2008). Moreover, the role of students in English language classes is unclear, for example, whether or not they too are meant to maximize English use in class. There is little evidence of students using English even for basic communication. More action research would be helpful, by showing not only how teachers can use the TL more effectively, but also how they can facilitate student TL interaction.

Third, syllabi for primary education are more amenable to TETE, and primary teachers face fewer institutional constraints such as the demand to teach to the test. As with CLT, until the CSAT is reformed L2 instruction is unlikely to change, and that creates pressure on teachers to disregard the policies. Researchers have an important role in continuing to communicate the contradictions between policy and practice and suggest solutions for dealing with negative testing washback. Further meta-analyses of classroom practices, such as that by I. H. Jo (Reference Jo2011), would be helpful in this regard.

3.3 Studies on co-teaching with native English speaking teachers

The English program in Korea (EPIK) is a co-teaching project pairing NESTs with Korean English teachers (KET) in public schools. It was developed over 20 years ago to address deficiencies in English education with central aims of (1) improving the communication abilities of students, (2) improving the English proficiency of teachers, (3) developing materials, (4) improving ELT methodologies, (5) facilitating intercultural awareness, and (6) improving Korea's image abroad (EPIK 2013). Teachers must be citizens from one of six countries: Australia, Canada, New Zealand, South Africa, the US, or the UK; the minimum educational requirement is a Bachelor's degree from an accredited university. Applicants require no teaching qualifications or experience.

Research on co-teaching in Korea has drawn a fair amount of attention over the years leading to some convergence in findings. Many qualitative studies with co-teaching teams discussed (1) the ambiguous roles for NESTs and KETs, (2) the paucity of training, and (3) the lack of successful co-teaching models (e.g. I. J. Jeon Reference Jeon2010; M. Kim Reference Kim2010a, b; Balanyk Reference Balanyk2012; S. Y. Yim Reference Yim2012). Both NESTs and KETs have largely been left on their own to decide how to teach.

One factor found to be influencing co-teaching pedagogy is the differing cultural and educational backgrounds of teachers. For example, in a study with five co-teaching pairs, Balanyk (Reference Balanyk2012) described underlying epistemic differences between NESTs and KETs due to their prior experiences in different education systems. For example, the groups revealed diverging assumptions about the best conditions for learning. Thematic analysis of interview and questionnaire data found that all five KETs referred to teacher-student interactions, while four of five NESTs described situations involving independent learning. All KETs tended to interpret learning as knowing about something, in other words, learning content. The NESTs interpreted learning as knowing how to do something, that is, skill-building or learning to do something new. While the NESTs believed student-centered, task-based activities were the most effective way to present material, KETs tended not to place much value on student participation. This correlated with their understanding that the role of a teacher is to transmit knowledge, whereas NESTs generally saw the role of a teacher as a facilitator and that the students needed to discover language for themselves. These diverging beliefs led to dissonance in the classroom regarding materials selection and teaching methods. This is an important issue for stakeholders to consider as all teachers may benefit from becoming more aware of their beliefs and how they might be influencing educational approaches.

Certainly additional factors influence co-teaching partnerships. For example, Kim & Seong (Reference Kim and Seong2012) looked at five primary school teams. All pairs had unique partnerships; however, the authors associated communication skills, positive attitudes and shared expectations with the successful pairings. Kim & Seong also discussed the complex nature of co-teaching and how different personalities, attitudes, management styles, teaching experience, and beliefs influenced the teams.

Another issue is how willing teachers are to cooperate with each other, a factor discussed by I. J. Jeon (Reference Jeon2010). For the three pairs in this study, cooperation seemed somewhat dependent on the KETs’ English ability. Interestingly, the western teachers’ lack of Korean proficiency was not addressed. However, a strength of this study is the detailed description of differences between the primary and secondary school co-teaching pairs.

For co-teachers in Korea, roles are not clearly defined and as a result need to be negotiated between the NEST and KET as they work together. This results in considerable variance in how co-teaching is practiced. In one study, the KET filled various roles for her co-teacher such as ‘an instruction partner, a crisis manager, and a secretary’ (M. Kim Reference Kim2010a: 200). Often KETs become de facto administrators for NESTs who may require help with housing and banking. From interviews with six primary school NESTs, S. Y. Yim (Reference Yim2012) described their development of professional identities and relationships with co-teachers. While NESTs felt as equals in class, for example, by leading in-class activities, outside they were marginalized and there was little evidence of collaboration. In one extreme example, M. Jeon (Reference Jeon and Min2009: 238) reported on a NEST feeling like they were ‘performing monkeys’. Researchers also discussed the inefficiencies of co-teaching in the classroom. Many pairs were observed turn-taking, where one teacher led while the other did little (e.g. I. J. Jeon Reference Jeon2010; S. Y. Yim Reference Yim2012).

At the time of writing, the EPIK program is nearly 20 years old, but early criticisms of the policy remain relevant (see O. Kwon Reference Kwon2000). First, the ambiguity of co-teaching needs addressing. The government invested heavily on bringing native English speakers to Korea but provided little guidance for how co-teaching should be put into practice. S. Y. Yim (Reference Yim2012) argued that new models of team teaching in Korea are needed, along with more dialogue between stakeholders such as administrators, policy makers, teachers, and parents. Research could look into best practices of co-teaching and develop more effective training for both parties.

Second, hiring inexperienced NESTs conflicts with two program goals, namely, to improve teaching methods and to develop materials. Research can consider these goals and assess the emerging teaching methods and quality of materials developed by co-teaching teams.

Third, more resources could be allocated for co-teaching in primary schools. For example, until the test-driven nature of secondary education is reformed, NESTs are under-utilized and perhaps resources could be better spent elsewhere. On a related point, there should be interdisciplinary research done on the economics of EPIK such as a cost-benefit analysis giving consideration to budget allocations and alternatives to the present manifestation of co-teaching, for example, reducing class sizes or improving after-school English education to reduce private sector demand.

4.1 Analysis of the curriculum and textbooks for primary English education

For primary education, the revised SNC brought an increase in contact hours for English and new selection criteria for textbooks where government-approved textbooks replaced the government-issued textbooks (MEST 2008b). This revision stimulated growth in the publishing industry and a need for critical analysis of materials, which are represented by the volume of studies reviewed here.

Four studies called into question the balance between spoken and written language in the primary school curriculum and called for more emphasis on written English in Grades 3 and 4 (Chae & Lee Reference Chae and Lee2010; Chung & Jeong Reference Chung and Jeong2010; S. Lee Reference Lee, Lee and Jang2010; Shin & Lim Reference Shin and Lim2011). The revised SNC guidelines suggested teaching third graders to read and write the alphabet (and simple words) leaving phonics instruction for the fourth grade. S. Lee's (Reference Lee2010) analysis suggested that this dichotomy hindered L2 literacy development in Korea. Analysis of 61 fifth graders’ and 58 sixth graders’ invented spellings in her study found that Korean primary students skipped the pre-communicative and semi-phonetic stages of development. Given that rote-memorization for spelling is still prevalent, the results seem meaningful for educators in Korea. According to S. Lee, spelling instruction should also promote an understanding of phonics rather than be introduced discretely within the curriculum. Furthermore, analysis of phonics materials from fourth grade textbooks recommended more thoughtfully structured sequencing of units and activities (Y. R. Ko Reference Ko2012). Ahn & Kim (Reference Ahn and Kim2011) examined chants in the third and fourth grade textbooks, teachers’ guides and e-books and suggested the need for the more informative guides that provided more detailed teaching techniques for chants.

Other studies also focused on instruction manuals for teachers. Yoo & Lee (Reference Yoo and Lee2010) compared opinions from 410 primary school English teachers in Chungbuk Province from a prior study in a municipal region. They found that teachers, regardless of the area, agreed on the need for improvement of the teacher's guide. Survey results suggested the most important improvements would be adding (1) a workbook or worksheet for evaluation of each lesson (80.94%) and (2) guidelines for evaluation and providing example tests (79.36%). Moreover, 95% of teachers without pre-service ELT training responded that the teacher's guide should include more detailed classroom English for instruction (Yoo & Lee Reference Yoo and Lee2010: 257).

The modified SNC also revised the teaching of culture and reinforced the significance of English as a global language. O. H. Park (Reference Park2012) discussed (inter)cultural aspects embedded in fifth and sixth grade textbooks, finding that American culture was dominant, and further suggested the need for more content promoting successful intercultural communication.

Huh (Reference Huh2014) devised an interesting content analysis of five primary ELT textbooks, interpreting activities according to the dominant brain hemisphere (left or right) they were likely to stimulate, categorizing roughly 60% of activities as left-brain and 25% right-brain oriented, calling for a more balanced approach to textbook design.

Overall we have found the discrete elements of the curriculum (the four skills, culture, etc.) to be fairly well covered by researchers who have contributed to understanding the issues with published textbooks. It is apparent that teachers generally exhibit low satisfaction with their textbooks, as in S. B. Lim's (Reference Lim2014) survey of 103 participants, and it is important for researchers to continue to be a voice for improving materials. What seem to be lacking are wider-focus studies that investigate the cohesion of textbook units and series in consideration of language functions and task difficulty. Further, there is as much need for researchers to contribute to developing better materials as there is a need for directing attention to issues in extant materials. Moreover, the studies above focused on authorized textbooks. Teachers may supplement the authorized textbooks as they see fit, so it is important to investigate the kinds of materials teachers choose as supplements (see also Moodie Reference Moodie2015).

4.2 Analysis of curriculum and textbooks for secondary English education

One of the major curricular revisions for secondary education was organizing level-differentiated English classes. In this section we have selected five studies representing published research on this shift in the revised SNC. One study investigated the impact of tiered classes (i.e. beginner, intermediate, and advanced) in middle schools and another longitudinal study provided results of a survey regarding supplementary speaking programs (I. S. Kim & B. G. Kim Reference Kim and Seong2012). The first three reviewed here illuminated issues in materials development in light of the revised SNC. Hae Young Kim (Reference Kim2009) examined a tenth grade high school textbook and workbook to investigate how vocabulary was replaced or eliminated in compliance with new curricular guidelines. She analyzed vocabulary according to lexeme class and found those most affected by the guidelines were (a) compound words, (b) borrowed words and (c) derivative words (i.e. affixations). Providing numerous examples of unintended consequences, Hae Young Kim documented how the new guidelines (1) deprived opportunities for learning and teaching new vocabulary, (2) altered the intended meanings of target sentences, and (3) required more complex syntactic structures to preserve original meanings. As demonstrated in her study, compliance with curricular guidelines should not go against their ostensible purpose of improving the quality of materials.

Another issue raised in research was the level-appropriateness of textbook activities. E. Y. Jeon & B. M. Jeon (Reference Jeon and Jeon2012) examined 15 exercise books from five book series for low, intermediate and advanced middle school English classes. The study found that the difficulty for listening activities was well sequenced according to the proficiency and grade level in general, presenting more difficult exercises to the higher levels. The authors pointed out, however, that in three of five series there were a significant number of cases where exercise difficulty was not successfully applied for other skills. Discrepancies in difficulty levels of vocabulary and sentence structure among textbooks were also pointed out in Song & Rha's (Reference Song and Rha2009) study investigating reading materials for tenth graders.

Two other studies assessed the effectiveness of level-based English instruction in middle schools. Kang & Cho (Reference Kang and Cho2012) collected pre- and post-tests from 480 students at the beginning and end of the school year and found that students in the lower-level classes showed the most improvement. While this contrasted with prior studies, Kang & Cho felt their results were more reliable because they also included analysis of task-difficulty in pre- and post-test items. Tiered English instruction seemed especially beneficial in the low-level classes whose students may otherwise feel left behind.

In regard to new English programs in the curriculum, I. S. Kim & B. G. Kim's (Reference Kim and Kim2012) longitudinal study of 2,645 students, 91 teachers, and 1,629 parents over two years assessed their perceptions of supplementary English speaking programs. Data came from Likert-type surveys regarding new video-conferencing classes, practical English learning programs, English zone facilities, and English camps. Results found the majority of respondents to be satisfied with these programs overall. As suggested in their study, increasing contact hours in secondary schools and developing new programs appear beneficial. While they reported modest improvements in English ability (i.e. a 9.97 point average increase from pre- and post-tests), control groups in only two of eight schools make this result appear less meaningful.

In general, research on the curricular guidelines and recommended textbooks reflects careful scholarship and attention to detail. Particularly strong were detailed content analyses of materials at each level supported by quantitative data. By providing evidence of how a tightly controlled centralized curriculum inhibits language pedagogy (e.g. H. Y. Kim Reference Kim2009; E. Y. Jeon & B. M. Jeon Reference Jeon and Jeon2012), studies suggested further reforms of the guidelines from the revised SNC. However, an aspect latent in research in this area is how the curriculum guidelines and materials necessitate teacher-centeredness in language pedagogy. Content analyses reflect a focus on form and structure over meaning and function; there is a need for exploring development of more practical, learner-centered materials putting more emphasis on productive skills, meaningful communication and L2 literacy. Moreover, few studies on secondary English materials include classroom-based data and this would be a necessary step in extending the relevance of materials assessment.

5.1 Classroom-based research in primary classrooms

Two major issues seem to be addressed in the recent research concerning ELT in primary schools: (1) ways to promote written English and (2) efforts to make the existing teaching methods and techniques more learner-centered and meaningful to Korean L2 learners. There are four studies reviewed here testing treatments of writing instruction and four looking at blended learning and role plays.

After 12 lessons over six weeks, Chung & Jeong (Reference Chung and Jeong2010) compared an experimental and a control group, finding positive results from dictation activities on fifth graders’ writing achievement and listening comprehension. Bae & Lee (Reference Bae and Lee2012) suggested a method of storytelling for literacy development. After 48 lessons, the class experiencing this method did better on post-tests than one where the teacher followed the textbook and teacher's guidebook. Chae & Lee (Reference Chae and Lee2010) recommended ‘pattern poetry’ as a way to scaffold structured writing compositions. They found the repeated patterns were effective for motivating their 29 fifth-grade participants and promoting creativity in writing. A study by Shin & Lim (Reference Shin and Lim2011) is noteworthy in that it focused not only on language forms but also on teaching the functions and purpose of written genres. They reported modest gains in writing proficiency of personal narratives and genre knowledge with eight students over 12 weeks.

The second topic in this section focuses on studies looking to assess learner-centered teaching techniques such as role plays and blended learning. Park & Cho (Reference Park and Cho2012) reported positive results on speaking ability from task-based role plays, such as one based on a foreign friend from an imaginary sister school visiting Korea. Kim, Gu & Jeon (Reference Kim, Gu and Jeon2010) suggested ‘edutainment’ through blended learning using movie clips, fairy tales, and chants posted online. They reported positive gains in vocabulary learning from teaching with these materials. Jung & Kim (Reference Jung and Kim2012) also found that storytelling using role-play, songs, chants, and games had a positive impact on the learners’ oral skills in an experimental group compared to a control group. S. J. Kim (Reference Kim2010) suggested using digital-storytelling and following it up with a creative storybook-making project. The study found an increase in the learners’ interest and confidence and also improvements in listening and grammar portions of a test. A similar study reported increased writing proficiency from projects where students wrote their own drama scripts (Cho & Moon Reference Cho and Moon2010). One study went further and investigated the influence of a learner-centered approach on students’ speaking skills and affective domains (Park & Choi Reference Park and Choi2013). This study used situation-based script writing activities and role plays, which included recording video clips, watching the video clips, and discussion sessions with one primary school class. Compared to a control group, a class using the regular textbook, students in the experimental group scored modestly better on average on a speaking test at the end of the study.

The studies above investigated treatments of teaching methods in primary English education. These tended to include quantified data from pre- and post-tests for student achievement attributed to the treatment, some with control groups. They provided evidence for the efficacy of learner-centered methods, and procedures for adapting them in classes. All the studies of this kind reviewed here reported positive results attributed to particular teaching methods; however, a big drawback of this quantified data is that it cannot account for context, the complexities of language learning, or the influence of individual teachers. There is a tendency to over-interpret the influence of one particular teaching treatment or another as being the cause of statistical correlations between methods and increased test scores, without fully considering the gains that may be attained from exposure to language input, both in and out of class, or from private education. While these studies provide a helpful starting point, more meta-analyses of research would be beneficial for stakeholders, as would more qualitative approaches to classroom practices considering the complex nature of language teaching and learning.

5.2 Teaching methods in secondary schools

Research on instructional treatments in secondary schools reviewed here assessed discrete methods for promoting oral proficiency, influences of corrective feedback on writing, and approaches to teaching reading. In respect to oral proficiency, Bae, Kahng & Sohng's (Reference Bae, Kahng and Sohng2012) study highlighted the importance of promoting the students’ phonological awareness when teaching pronunciation. In their study, 27 middle school students were taught ‘how to segment, synthesize, and manipulate phonemes’ and ‘the organs of articulation, places of articulation, and manners of articulation using audiovisual materials’ (Bae et al. Reference Bae, Kahng and Sohng2012: 8). They attributed increases in listening and speaking tests to phonological awareness instruction. One study investigated the effectiveness of shadow drills for improving listening and speaking skills. Lee, Lee & Jang (Reference Lee, Lee and Jang2010) assigned students to three groups; a general method group, a team-shadowing group, and a self-directed shadowing group. Students used shadowing for eight weeks and results from pre- and post-tests suggested improvements were greater for the self-directed group than the others. Their suggestions for self-directed listening activities seem meaningful in Korea where passive listening exercises for test preparation prevail. While these studies raise the importance of teaching productive skills, more research could be conducted looking at the issue of oral proficiency more holistically.

The following studies looked at writing instruction, with the first study identifying learner errors and the second study investigating corrective feedback treatments. Song & Park (Reference Song and Park2012) contributed a better understanding of where errors occur in L2 writing. They evaluated writing tasks from 584 foreign language high school students and found that the most frequent errors were with (1) punctuation, (2) determiners, (3) syntax, and (4) pronouns. These are helpful findings for language teachers in Korea, although it is important to note that being from a foreign language high school, results are indicative of high-proficiency learners and not necessarily the wider student body. Jeon & Min (Reference Jeon and Min2009) evaluated errors and syntactic complexity in sixty middle school students’ journal entries. In this study, the teacher gave either meaning-focused or form-focused feedback. Results from a T-unit analysis yielded positive results for accuracy, which were attributed to the teacher's feedback, but there was no significant difference between meaning-based and form-based feedback. The authors interpreted this to mean that the learners made an effort to write grammatically correct sentences regardless of feedback type. However, 12 sessions of journal writing once a week may not be enough to make a significant difference.

Regarding reading, one study generated findings supporting the importance of schema on reading comprehension (Jeong & Oh Reference Jeong and Oh2009). Interviews with five middle school students showed how eliciting schemata positively influenced their uptake of literary and historical texts. Another study assessed reading instruction in secondary schools more generally. Based on her findings in prior research, S. A. Kim (Reference Kim2009) described the problems and sources of problems on English reading instruction in Korea, which tends to be intensive, focusing on the discrete kinds of testing items found on the CSAT. Reading instruction in public schools, she argued, is generally ineffective for literacy development. We echo her call for more extensive reading and the promotion of reading skills through integration with other language skills, rather than treating them distinctly.

Moreover, as with primary school research, studies from secondary schools generally demonstrated strong statistical analyses; however, results were not always attributable to the phenomenon (i.e. teaching treatment) purportedly studied. Research in secondary schools would also do well to adapt more mixed-method or qualitative studies when looking at instructional practices. Lastly, treating public school classrooms as language laboratories requires careful ethical considerations, something that is not always sufficiently addressed in local research.

6.1 Studies on testing and assessment in primary English education

Education policy has focused on productive skills by promoting more learner-centered communicative approaches in the national curriculum. Although changes have been made in the curriculum and materials, little attention has been paid to the challenges primary school teachers have in evaluating student performance (Hyun Jung Kim Reference Jung and Kim2012). The following studies focused on developing testing instruments beyond the traditional pen-and-paper tests generally employed by primary school teachers. Hyun Jung Kim (Reference Jung and Kim2012) suggested teachers use an empirically derived, binary-choice, boundary-definition (EBB) scale, a rating scale for assessing primary school students’ speaking ability. Three novice primary school English teachers participated in validating the scale for teachers with limited experience with language testing. She suggested the EBB scale for speaking assessment and feedback. From a Vygotskian perspective, S. W. Kang (Reference Kang2011) argued for more dynamic testing that elicits more detailed data on students’ English language development than provided by traditional result-oriented tests. Because teacher mediation was allowed in dynamic testing, the process also provided increased learning opportunities through the interaction with a teacher. However, as S. W. Kang (Reference Kang2011: 97) described, conventional ideas about testing is a challenge that needs to be overcome. Negative washback from traditional testing methods inhibits authentic language teaching in Korea.

Student achievement is measured through results on the National Assessment of Educational Achievement, a series of tests that influence language teaching in primary schools. Y. J. Lee (Reference Lee2012), a researcher at KICE, compared English test results from low-level sixth grade students (defined as students scoring less than 50%) with more proficient peers. Among the main skills, listening showed the greatest difference in achievement between low-level students and others, while speaking showed the least difference. Results from this study suggested where attention is needed to more effectively teach lower-level students. However, another study brought up issues relating to the standardized achievement tests themselves (Kim, Shim & Kim Reference Kim, Shim and Kim2013). Researchers found that four out of 25 items in the achievement test for fifth graders did not fit a Rasch-model expectation. The problems identified in their study were confusing picture drawings, semantic or discourse-level problems with test items, and cognitive processing loads requiring irrelevant memory skills. Their suggestions to develop better designed, level-differentiated assessment tools should be useful to test designers.

Although testing in primary schools has less of a hold over language teaching practices than in secondary schools, there appears to be a need for more research on testing in the primary school context. First, there is a need to understand the general testing practices of primary school English teachers on a wide scale, for example, by describing the beliefs and practices of teachers regarding testing. Second, considering the prevalence of testing in Korean education, it appears to be under-represented in pre- and in-service education. Teacher educators and researchers could consider ways to promote greater understanding of issues in test design and seek ways of making testing more reflective of curricular objectives, for example, with procedures described in the first two studies in this section (S. W. Kang Reference Kang2011; Hyun Jung Kim Reference Jung and Kim2012). Third, there is room for research on testing washback. In our experience, it seems that primary English teachers are influenced by achievement tests, but there is a lack of empirical research on the topic. It is important to investigate the ways in which achievement tests influence language pedagogy in primary schools.

6.2 The hard problem: research and the CSAT

As described earlier, CSAT results are the most important criteria for university entrance in Korea, and English, a foreign language, makes up roughly 20% of it. Issues stemming from the test-driven reality of public education have been a prominent focus of research and educational reform; however, finding practical solutions has remained problematic.

In 2011 the education ministry announced that the CSAT would be reformed to ease the burden of excessive test preparation for students (Kim & Kang Reference Kim and Kang2012). The ministry asserted that new plans would put public English education on the right track so that students could be ready for the exams without needing supplementary instruction from the private sector. However, according to some (e.g. Kim & Ma Reference Kim and Ma2012), these assertions seemed rather idealistic.

In their study, Kim & Ma (Reference Kim and Ma2012) documented evidence that the CSAT was actually getting harder year by year and that there were gaps between the difficulty of the test compared to language levels in government-authorized textbooks. Their findings, based on the Flesch-Kincaid Reading Grade Level (RGL) and Reading Ease Score (RES), showed that CSAT reading materials were more challenging than the seven textbooks analyzed in their study. For example, the RGL on the CSAT came in at 10.14 in 2012 compared to a 7.48 average in the textbooks. Furthermore, the average sentence lengths were also about four words longer on the test than in the books. These findings countered the ministry's claims that existing materials were adequate for test preparation.

Nevertheless, more and more students are achieving perfect scores on the English portion each year, and, as a reviewer noted, many students believed the 2015 exam became too easy. In part this may be due to a combination of fluctuating exam difficulty and higher aggregate English proficiency since the SNC in 1997. However, another factor is the knowledge of students regarding test-taking strategies and the pool of CSAT question-types that can be found in private-sector materials. For example, E. J. Jo's (Reference Jo2011) M.A. investigated CSAT washback in a two-part study including surveys of 391 high school participants and follow-up interviews with 23. She found that participants studied extensively through exam preparation books and Education Broadcasting System content, that they were savvy about test-taking strategies, and that private sector and individual study habits focused more intently on CSAT preparation than public school English classes.

Because of concerns regarding the CSAT, efforts to develop more appropriate tests have been made; for example, through creating level-differentiated tests for the two-track secondary English education system. Kim & Kang (Reference Kim and Kang2012) surveyed 38 experts (professors and research fellows) and 76 high school teachers. Participants’ input contributed to the design of the two level-differentiated test sets, one focusing more on communicative, practical English (type-A), the other more on basic academic English (type-B). Based on their results, the 2014 CSAT would include fewer questions and lower the speed for the listening section on the lower-level test. B. C. Lee (Reference Lee2013a, b) contributed further to the development of the 2014 CSAT. Based on analysis of the reading sections from 2005 to 2012, he suggested taking ‘topics’ and ‘situations’ into consideration and further elaborated on topic specification and a more balanced distribution of topics associated with both tests (B. C. Lee Reference Lee2013b). These studies were important empirical contributions for improving the English portion of the CSAT. However, the 2015 test integrated both types again (see Seong Hye Kim Reference Kim and Lee2014), presenting something of a moving target for students, educators, and researchers. The findings above demonstrate that policy makers are merely tinkering with test design. Remaining is the systemic pedagogic and socioeconomic washback caused by these high-stakes exams.

The CSAT has focused on Korean English learners’ receptive English knowledge, such as listening and reading comprehension. Moreover, pedagogy revolves around preparing students for the kinds of multiple-choice item they will encounter during the test. There has long been a need for more balanced English testing better reflecting the aims of curricular policy, although reform has been challenging. In response to the demands for a new test, the MOE announced plans to develop a new National English Ability Test (NEAT) to replace the English portion of the CSAT (Y. M. Kim Reference Kim2010).

The three-tiered NEAT was designed to evaluate the four language skills, including speaking and writing for the first time, through online test items. Level 1 was designed as an alternative to the TOEIC and TOEFL for adult learners. Levels 2 and 3 were designed for low- and high-proficiency students planning to enter universities. According to Y. M. Kim (Reference Kim2010), the proposal to replace CSAT with NEAT was to be evaluated based on public opinion in 2012 so that it could be implemented nationwide in 2016. However, there were many concerns over its realization in the Korean educational context and regrettably the plans had been abandoned at the time of writing (although the Level 1 NEAT is used by some employers).

Although the test is not used for public education, it may be worthwhile sharing the concerns raised by researchers. One survey with 1,719 high school students evaluated their confidence and motivation regarding the NEAT (Yoon & Kim Reference Yoon and Kim2012). Positive responses were more evident in the higher confidence and motivation groups and this suggested that students with low confidence and motivation may have not been ready to take the new test. According to Y. H. Kim's (Reference Kim2013) mixed-method study on writing instruction, neither English teachers nor the school systems seemed to be ready for the new test: over 80% of teachers responded that they had neither the L2 proficiency nor pedagogic skills to prepare students for the NEAT. As Y. H. Kim (Reference Kim2013) suggested, improved writing materials and hiring assistant teachers seemed necessary for the plans to be successfully implemented. Another important socioeconomic concern related to the NEAT is that it will exacerbate the already excessive spending on English private education (E. J. Kim Reference Kim and Seong2012; Yoon & Kim Reference Yoon and Kim2012).

Research on private education has shown the importance of parental intervention on language learning (Seong Hoon Kim Reference Kim and Lee2014) and that higher income families can and do spend more on private education, with increased spending correlated with higher L2 proficiency and better exam results (Sun Woong Kim & Ju Ho Lee Reference Lee, Lee and Jang2010). Furthermore, as J. J. Song (Reference Song and Park2012) argued, English education policy has had an opposite effect to what was intended: it has helped entrench socioeconomic stratification rather than resolve it. As he wrote:

The increased emphasis on English has led to a situation where students from more privileged families can out-compete their peers, supplemented by overseas English education and private tutoring. The more privileged classes will continue to have the means for more private education regardless of testing criteria, however. The rejection of a more practical test more aligned to English policy (i.e. NEAT) means that all students spend a great deal of their life preparing for an exam with little functional value (other than being a criterion on which university entrance is regulated). A consistent theme raised by researchers is the overwhelming influence of the CSAT and how it undermines the MOE's own English education policy. Solving this issue is what we call the hard problem for English education in Korea. Although beyond the scope of this review, we shall finish with our modest recommendations for researchers and policy makers regarding the CSAT.

First, researchers could help policy makers (re)consider learning objectives to reflect how Koreans encounter English (outside the classroom) in order to bring a more practical approach to language education. Second, perhaps it is necessary to consider reducing the emphasis on English in the CSAT, and more broadly, continue to reform the university application process to mitigate the enormous significance of one exam on the future lives of students. Third, if English is to remain a dominant subject, testing for productive skills (in addition to receptive skills) would be a welcome reform in that it may have positive washback on language teaching and learning by requiring students to acquire more practical, functional competencies than needed to succeed on the current manifestations of the CSAT. Fourth, there is a need for researchers to evaluate the wide-spread assumption that teaching-to-the-test is the most effective method for preparing students for exams.