敎養英語 運營方案에 關한 硏究 = A Study on the Management of Freshman English

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

This is a study cn the acministration of freshman English for the overall integration of Seoul National University. Up to now freshman English, along with other general subjects, has been managed separately by different colleges without any mutual cooperation or consistent method owing to their dispersed locations. When, however, the University moves to the new campus at the beginning of the academic year 1975, the administrative integration of the subject for an efficient, collective management becomes inevitable.
There have been discussions as to the improvement of freshman English teaching, but no substantial revision has been attempted, so that the teaching remained the same as ever with large­size classes, mostly of 60 to 80 students, and with antiquated method of teaching chiefly depending on translation lectures. Along with tendency to underrate the subject on the part of both professors and students frequent complaints were put forth on the occasions when the subject was brought forward.
There are several points to be raised on the situation of freshman English management. First of all the amount of investment is far too small. Secondly, the class­size is too big for teaching anything other than perhaps translation of textbook materials, and exercises for composition, conversation, and hearing are quite impossible to be managed. Thirdly, the text­book material is uniformly standardized, so that no differentiation by levels or students’proposed major subjects has been taken into consideration. Fourthly, the teachers still hold on to the time­honored method of translation. Lastly, a considerable number of part­time lecturers teach the respective number of classes, which is another source of complaint on the part of the student. There may be further question to be discussed on the subject, but those seem to be the main obstacles to the improvement of freshman English teaching.
Question being put forward, the solution seems to be fairly simple. Of these, however, a hew are vital in order to bring about any form of progress at all. The first is the question of more investment for the subject, which will be the key to betterment, if not a panacea. The installment of language laboratory, for example, has been requested repeatedly, but no regular­size facility has been acquired to be used for the subject, which is only one of the things that can contribute to improvement by increasing investment.
Another important factor is the question of the class­size, which again has much to do with the problem of investment. To begin with, freshman English education in this University must divest itself of the antiquated teaching method almost solely dependent on translation. In order to do son the dual division of classes may be necessary: the student should be grouped into large­size classes of 200 or more for lectures, and at the same time into 30 or less for composition and language laboratory classes. While for the lectures large­size classes may be preferable because of the fact that in such a kind of class personal attention for the student is not absolutely necessary, as well as for economy sake, the small­size classes are essential for the student to improve their ability to write and speak, teaching of which has never been tried at the freshman English level in this University.
The problems of graduated textbooks and teaching method present further materials for careful studies. The curricula for the general courses in this University provide the maximum of three different levels of freshman English courses, so that graduated text­books, at least two or three kinds should be compiled. Also, when the student’s major fields are considered, and if freshman English education is regarded to a large extent as a preparatory stage for reading English texts and references in major subjects, probably freshman English textbooks may be subdivided according to the major groups of special fields. The course, however, being a general education one, such graduated and depart｜mental differentiation perhaps has to be reduced to the minimum. As for teaching method is should be studied to suit the class­size, student ability, textbook materials, etc.
One can hardly over­estimate the importance of the teaching of English, and the University must endeavor to improve freshman English education on this occasion of the integration. A committee of specialists and active administrative assistance to work out solutions and to help realize them will be essential.
The education has been neglected for too long in this University and some kind of drastic measure to reform it is long overdue. This study by a layman presents only a rudimen­tary aspect of and solution for the present statue of freshman English education is this University. The present writer, therefore, wishes that close cooperation for a lasting solution by specialists in this field should be an imminent undertaking, and that the tendency of belittling such general subjects as freshman English in favor of major subjects must be put to an end.