Discussion and Conclusion

The points outlined in this chapter with regard to the language learning and testing journeys of Korean learners of English reveal several important tensions: between the public provision of English language teaching, versus the perceived need of families to complement this provision with private measures; the role of English within a high-stakes national standardised test and its washback, versus the government’s drive to avoid negative washback and ensure that speaking and writing receive adequate attention in the language classroom; projected lack of success, versus actual success in internationally benchmarked tests.

Explanatory theories abound regarding the role of English language testing in Korea; for instance, as mentioned earlier, that the predilection for selective testing is simply the ancient and time-honoured Korean way of allowing citizens to become members of the social elite. International language proficiency tests in Japanese and Chinese also have high uptakes, not just English language tests. Choi (2008, p. 41), in an analysis of the impact of tests on Korean English language learning, describes how, ‘Given that it has been the test that provides equal opportunities for the entire population to climb up the ladder of social status, Koreans in general have tended to have an implicit faith in the potential usefulness of testing.’

However, testing by definition means winners and losers. There is intense competition for a limited number of places in Korea’s top universities, and the winners also gain the concomitant advantages of access to alumni networks, career opportunities and social status for a small group. A critical perspective on the role of English in this testing context is brought foreword by Song (2011, p. 36), who argues that English language learning in Korea should be recognised as a ‘mechanism of elimination. ’ In this argument, the impetus for attainment is, in the guise of a meritocracy, a means of conserving ‘the established social order in South Korea.’ Song suggests therefore that the English language has been recruited, in the name of globalisation, to reproduce and rationalise a hierarchical power structure. Whilst controversial, this is arguably a useful paradigm within which we could better understand the intersecting roles, washback and impact of English language learning and testing in Korean society, which impact so heavily on individual lives and pockets.

Just as the use of the English language (and other European languages) projects an image of prestige, so aspirational desires for cosmopolitanism, affluence, education and success are encapsulated in and expressed through ‘English fever’ in Korea. Efforts at English language learning are directed towards the aim of attaining a place in a top university, a job in a good company, access to the right networks, and so forth. In Elana Shohamy’s critical approach to understanding assessment, language tests have become powerful social agents (2001) in their own right, used to select or reject candidates aspiring to education, employment or citizenship. In contemporary Korea, the pressure on certification of English language proficiency has taken on such weight and impetus that it is now understood by school pupils and university students alike as an essential hurdle to be cleared in their journey to future success. The problem is that English in fact plays a central role in reproducing social inequalities rather than engendering a meritocracy: the playing field is simply not level. Public education is supplemented by private tutoring and cram schools; private education is supplemented by summer camps or study abroad programmes; these programmes are trumped by students who have taken their entire undergraduate degree abroad, in turn trumped by students who have spent their formative years in an English- language environment and have acquired a fully authentic North American variety of English. A game of educational one-upmanship in which many families cannot afford to compete.

This chapter has examined some of the contemporary functions of and parts played by the English language in Korea from an applied linguistic perspective. As described at the start of this chapter, the discipline of applied linguistics sets out to tackle language ‘problems’ in the research sense, especially within language learning and teaching, issues that we do not (yet) fully understand. The consequential validity of English language testing in Korea, which can be understood as the effect that tests have on the teaching and learning environment, has taken on a life of its own, to the extent that test preparation is an industry and test scores are a rite of passage for young Koreans (Park, J. S.-Y. 2009). In many ways, this is seen as a necessary evil, or what Choi (2008, p. 59) describes as a ‘double-edged sword’ in ‘a fiercely competitive world’:

‘This is very true for the Korean society, which has to capitalize on only human resources, who need to be cultivated, screened, and selected on a national level to survive global economic competition.’ (ibid)

The current situation regarding the impact and washback of standardised English language testing in Korea represents as a very specific set of conditions and consequences that merit further study in the field of applied linguistics and language testing, especially given the stakes involved for individual language learners and language instructors. It is hoped this examination of English language learning and testing in Korea has helped illuminate some aspects of the Korean context of English language learning and testing.