Steps to prepare Yonseians as global-minded citizens Interview with Professor Park Hyung Ji A new English program is currently being introduced for freshmen for 2008 academic year. This program is completely different from the previous one, which had a more academically-oriented curriculum. The previous model, with the "Communicative English" courses at its core, was introduced over a decade ago with the goal of helping students achieve comfort and familiarity in conversing with native speakers of English. I visited Prof. Park Hyung Ji, Chair of the English Education Committee which has devised the new model, to find out more about the new program and how this program can help students with using English language in a global community. Professor Park received her B.A. in English and American Literature from Harvard University in 1989 and went on to receive her M.A in 1992 and Ph.D. in 1996 from Princeton University. She was a professor at Union College from 1996 until she came to Yonsei in 2000.She is currently Associate Professor in the Department of English Language and Literature. Besides her duties at the English Department, Professor Park has been actively committed to improving Yonsei’s international competitiveness. She was part of a preparatory committee for the founding of Underwood International College (UIC) where she was the Chair of the Curriculum Committee responsible for designing the curriculum of UIC. Professor Park has also served as the Associate Dean of UIC from 2005 to 2006. She now manages exchange students from the University of California as part of her new position as Study Center Director for the Education Abroad Program (EAP). Professor Park has been the Chair of the University College English Education Committee since Sept. 2007 and the Chair for the Graduate School of English Education since March, 2008. Q: What are the differences from the previous English programs? A: The primary features of the new curriculum can be summarized in the following three words: Integrated Curriculum, Leveled Curriculum, and Academic Curriculum. First, being an integrated curriculum the new program requires all students (with the exception of those who waive out of one semester of College English) to take two courses, one on Speaking/Listening and the other on Reading/Writing. Previously, freshmen chose between Reading and Speaking/Writing. The two courses (Speaking/Listening and Reading/Writing) will be presented in English by native-speakers. Second, as a leveled curriculum, all students will, by taking a placement test, be recommended one of the three course levels appropriate for their abilities and their needs. It is important to have students be placed in a class with students of a similar level so that teachers can target and prepare a curriculum suited to the students’ needs. This leveled curriculum is advantageous to all students. The students at the top either take a waiver for one semester or go to the advanced level classes. The students at the bottom level will be able to take basic English courses, while in the past, they were mixed with students of higher levels and inevitably got bad grades. These students will now be given more individual attention and reach a certain level of English fluency. Q: The top students will be evaluated in absolute grading system whereas the majority of the students will compete under the relative grading system. I heard that students think this unfair. I personally think that students in the bottom and middle should compete with the same ability. A: It is not unfair. Students on the top level are separated in advanced classes and this will bring the majority chances for better grades. Advanced students have a more difficult curriculum so they should be given incentives. Students are not forced but recommended to choose one of the levels. They can choose either absolute grading or relative grading. Relative grading was applied to students in the previous English model so it is not at all new here. I understand why student object but their objection is on ideological grounds. I do not think they understand exactly to what extent this is advantageous to ninety-nine percent of students on campus. Q: So, students of different level study different materials? Advanced students study more difficult contents while bottom- level students study fundamentals? They reach different levels but get the same credits, I believe? A: Yes, we are going to change that. It is not finally decided, though. We’re looking into revising the program further. Basically we have just addressed freshman English. In the subsequent years we will be seeking to improve students’ language ability before they graduate. We may ask students to reach a certain level before they graduate, or we may offer a variety of additional courses. Q: Do you think that two courses in the freshman program are sufficient to prepare students for the global stage? A: To be honest, I do not think so. We need to increase the number of required credit hours in order to guarantee good English education. But even with that, the previous curriculum was not put to the best use. It was not worth the students’ money and time. Students can obtain communicative skills in commercial language schools, you see. Courses offered at Yonsei ought to be quite different. After making the freshman program solid, we will submit a proposal to increase the number of class offerings for the next academic year. The new law school will open just in time for the new changes, so we are thinking about legal writing or business English. We are going to provide upper level English courses to help students be prepared for specific fields.