To begin with communication between the teachers and students, differences can be seen

in Maren and Dionnes communication styles. Maren generally speaks slowly and with slightly
exaggerated enunciation. She also utilizes repetition and copious hand gestures. After asking a
question, if students are unable to answer, she prompts them by saying the beginning of the
answer. This works since a lot of the questions she asks are concerning the next line of a dialogue
that students are either supposed to be memorizing or are supposed to have had memorized. She
also tends to emphasize pronunciation with the students and will help students say words more
clearly by breaking down pronunciation if she hears someone make a mistake.
Dionne also speaks loudly and clearly, but generally speaks more quickly than Maren. In
particular, if there is a co-teacher present who can translate instructions, Dionne tends to speak at
a faster pace. When speaking one-on-one with students, however, Dionne tends to speak at a
pace much more similar to Marens. Dionne also uses a lot of hand gestures for unfamiliar
words. Dionne also has a tendency to drop prepositions when explaining something she feels is
challenging or repeating something for clarification. Dionne also places an emphasis on
pronunciation, but does not spend nearly as much time on it when compared to Maren.
When students communicate with Maren and Dionne, they tend to depend on those with
the best English to translate what they want to ask. I have even seen students bring a friend to
translate when they ask to borrow a dictionary outside of class. Students also tend to use sound
effects in the place of words they dont know. One habit that stuck out to me is students
readiness to repeat what Maren and Dionne say, sometimes even without being prompted. There
was also a lack of communication when it came to not understanding. Rather than asking
questions or saying that they didnt understand, students tended to just sit and stare blankly.
When it comes to speaking with other students, students tend to speak Korean together
with some simple English phrases such as, sorry, sprinkled in. Students also tend to translate
instructions or questions for each other, particularly in the B level classes. Students are better
about speaking English together when they are put in pairs and have set dialogues to practice.
The main focus of these classes is clearly on speaking. Both Maren and Dionne ask
questions at the beginning of class to give students the opportunity to create organic dialogue
about topics such as what was learned in the previous class and what they did over the weekend.
Speaking was also emphasized through practicing dialogues. Practicing dialogues could also be
considered as a reading exercise to some extent as they are always posted on a PowerPoint so
that students can read through them before they memorize them. This seems as more of a side
effect of the speaking exercise rather than focused reading practice, however, as the activity does
not include anything that would provide students with new reading strategies or significant
reading challenges.
Listening practice is more prevalent than reading practice in a few different respects. In
addition to the simple practice of listening to instructions and questions, the second grade classes
are practicing taking messages which includes listening to what their partner says so that they
can take down the important information in the form of a message. This also doubles as a small
writing activity focusing on the ability to summarize concisely. Writing exercises are also

prevalent in the third years classes as they needed to write down fairly long answers to questions
that they may encounter during interviews.
One thing I find interesting about the English curriculum at Kyunghwa EB High School
(EB) is that the teachers have written their own textbooks. Because the focus of EB is preparing
students to enter the workforce upon graduation, rather than taking the college entrance exam,
Maren and Dionne created a textbook focusing on developing skills useful in obtaining jobs,
such as answering interview questions and interview etiquette, and skills useful as secretaries,
such as taking messages. Another interesting feature of the textbooks is the amount of space
given to pronunciation even at the highest level. This is because of the need to speak English
clearly when using it in a business context, particularly over the phone.
The classroom has fewer resources than I am used to. Maren and Dionne have access to a
projector and whiteboards in their rooms, which is very helpful in instruction. They are lacking
in some resources that I have become accustomed to, such as reliable internet access. The main
resource available to students in the classroom is dictionaries. What I find interesting, however,
is that, while there are approximately eight Korean-English dictionaries in each room, there is
only one English-Korean dictionary. While it is true that the former is probably more useful to
Korean students, I was expecting at least a few more of the latter.
One unique feature of the curriculum that I really enjoy is the one-to-one program that
was recently instituted. Every day during lunch Maren and Dionne meet with about five students
each for ten minutes to practice English on an individual basis. While the time is very short and
students only go to one-to-ones a few times a semester, the personal attention is really helpful in
helping students as individuals and connecting with students on a more personal level. With
classes as big as they are, I think this is a very valuable part of EBs English curriculum.