The Taipei Times has published two articles recently on the Paju English Village, one of 10 in South Korea ("English village in Korea," April 18, page 14; "English only in South Korea's teaching towns," April 5, page 9). These "towns" are, we are told, real communities in which only English can be spoken, a place where students of English can go to practice their English and feel like they "have left Korea behind."
The Korean government enthusiastically supports English villages because they feel such sites will reduce the number of Koreans who go abroad (or who send their children abroad) to improve their English, which is a drain on the Korean economy. Such villages are also a better bargain for parents, who pay about NT$50,000 (US$1,500) for a four-week course for their children.
According to the Taipei Times articles, the Korean government paid US$90 million just to set up the Paju village, which employs 70 staff and 100 full time teachers. That probably means a payroll of at least US$5 million per year.
But the two articles leave out some important points. First, the villages are not real. The buildings are simulations of banks, post offices, airline offices and the like, and the interactions are simulations: The "residents" of the English village in Korea are actually English teachers trained to play different roles, such as policemen (an ad for English teachers for the Seoul English village mentions that the teachers will also be trained to act as doctors).
Second, to my knowledge, there have been no formal evaluations of the English villages. We have no idea if they are really helping children acquire English skills.
Third, contrary to the claims that they save money, English villages are very expensive. The Paju school has a maximum capacity of 550 students. If the other nine schools have a similar capacity, that means the schools can deal with about 6,000 children per month. A total of 12 million children are in school in Korea, with at least six million in grades in which English is taught. Thus, English villages can, at best, impact on 1 percent of the children who are in English classes.
In other words, Korea is paying an enormous amount of money to provide an untested English experience to just 1 percent of its school-age children, an experience limited to children whose parents can come up with the tuition money.
Other countries should think twice before investing in English villages.
Stephen Krashen
Professor Emeritus
University of Southern, California, Los Angeles
US President Donald Trump has gotten off to a head-spinning start in his foreign policy. He has pressured Denmark to cede Greenland to the United States, threatened to take over the Panama Canal, urged Canada to become the 51st US state, unilaterally renamed the Gulf of Mexico to “the Gulf of America” and announced plans for the United States to annex and administer Gaza. He has imposed and then suspended 25 percent tariffs on Canada and Mexico for their roles in the flow of fentanyl into the United States, while at the same time increasing tariffs on China by 10
Trying to force a partnership between Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC) and Intel Corp would be a wildly complex ordeal. Already, the reported request from the Trump administration for TSMC to take a controlling stake in Intel’s US factories is facing valid questions about feasibility from all sides. Washington would likely not support a foreign company operating Intel’s domestic factories, Reuters reported — just look at how that is going over in the steel sector. Meanwhile, many in Taiwan are concerned about the company being forced to transfer its bleeding-edge tech capabilities and give up its strategic advantage. This is especially
US President Donald Trump last week announced plans to impose reciprocal tariffs on eight countries. As Taiwan, a key hub for semiconductor manufacturing, is among them, the policy would significantly affect the country. In response, Minister of Economic Affairs J.W. Kuo (郭智輝) dispatched two officials to the US for negotiations, and Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co’s (TSMC) board of directors convened its first-ever meeting in the US. Those developments highlight how the US’ unstable trade policies are posing a growing threat to Taiwan. Can the US truly gain an advantage in chip manufacturing by reversing trade liberalization? Is it realistic to
Last week, 24 Republican representatives in the US Congress proposed a resolution calling for US President Donald Trump’s administration to abandon the US’ “one China” policy, calling it outdated, counterproductive and not reflective of reality, and to restore official diplomatic relations with Taiwan, enter bilateral free-trade agreement negotiations and support its entry into international organizations. That is an exciting and inspiring development. To help the US government and other nations further understand that Taiwan is not a part of China, that those “one China” policies are contrary to the fact that the two countries across the Taiwan Strait are independent and
RSS