The Hub of Sparkle!

FINAL RESPONSE TO THE HUB OF SPARKLE DISCUSSION

A few introductory remarks

I will do my best to respond to all of the criticisms raised. Some are more pertinent than others, but rather than leave out anything, I’ll do my best herein to assuage the concerns of both of the other two respondents. Many of their concerns are concerns that have been raised elsewhere, and therefore I hope to clarify as much as possible within this short and final response.

I would like to personally thank Rob for setting this discussion up and allowing this dialogue to take place. It is difficult to be able to sit down and address so many issues in one place. I hope this leads to further discussion amongst members and potential members alike, and that those who care to form an opinion about how best to help English teachers in South Korea will engage in productive activity to further this end. The fact that much of the community is so focused now on finding out the best ways to improve our lives here is a very positive thing.

General concerns addressed

Chris believes that ATEK is moving too fast and has bitten off more than it can chew. I would like to reiterate that any organization needs a vision and that our vision should not be confused with the wheels that have been set in motion. We currently have a very limited set of goals, some of which are long-term. These will be further developed by the National Council. Since launching the majority of our time has been spent on setting up the provincial and metropolitan associations around the country. Aside from that we have offered support and information to teachers in need around the country. But ATEK does need to learn to walk before it can run.

ATEK is a second full-time job for the founding board. We are working very hard to manage the workload and are currently reviewing applications for volunteers who will work directly for the national association until the first general elections are ready to be held. A number of people have offered their services and this will help us to spend more time informing members of progress and focus on ensuring the transition is smooth by allowing us to focus on developing the online services for general members. We have made it clear that we will not be making any more major decisions for the organization. This will be the job of those elected by the membership.

How can ATEK achieve its lofty goals like the emergency phone line which would need to be staffed 24/7? While this is a service that is currently provided by AJET in Japan to its members, we realize that this would take time and resources to achieve nationally here. But while a national 24-hour hotline may be something to strive for in the longer term, there is no reason why local associations cannot provide these services in their local communities. In fact, members in Seoul are already considering ways to do this by assigning different shifts to volunteers who will be able to answer their phone at any time of the day or night. I’d encourage those in the habit of criticizing ATEK to consider offering constructive suggestions to help us further develop our resources with those we already have at our disposal.

We have ordered a number of retractions since we were first mentioned in the media. This goes back to the second article ever written about us and unfortunately became quite commonplace. See Roboseyo’s blog for the most recent occurrence (we caught this just before the city edition went to press in Seoul, but not before the other editions for the provinces had gone to press and the web edition had gone live). This is a part and parcel of dealing with the media in South Korea. Media exposure played an important role in getting our name out there. It is now more important that we focus on our membership and encourage local leads to take on the role of spreading the word in their local areas.

Mike has heaped a number of accusations against ATEK, one of which I find to be in particularly poor taste; that is his accusation that ATEK exploited the death of a teacher to make a name for itself. I personally met with someone who had worked closely with William Kapoun’s family at the time of his tragic death. His case was by no means the sole inspiration for my work for the association, but it served and still does serve as a pretty clear example of why teachers need some kind of association that can offer them support. I have cleared up any confusion that may have existed about this with a couple of his friends who recently contacted me, and would like to ask that readers avoid involving his name in any criticism of the association out of respect for his family and friends.

I had not met Tony when the first Korea Times article about ATEK was published. We had all been working separately on the idea and put our ideas together when we sat down together to form the Founding Board. Admittedly I had not seen this particular discussion post previous to Mike pointing it out on his first response, but it should hardly seem strange that good ideas from any one member were approved by the board and taken forward.

Teacher’s Guide

The teacher’s guide was published by the Seoul Global Center. While ATEK is responsible for its entire content including the title, it was not once mentioned to us that this name would cause offence. I would also like to bring your attention to the title of this blog (Hub of Sparkle), which itself borrows from a similar slogan and does not intend to offend.

We have spoken at length about the allegations of intentional plagiarism in the manual. Please see our press release: It was very disappointing to have such a positive achievement marred by these allegations, but we are already looking at how to improve the next edition, soliciting academics for submissions for the next edition, and considering ways to ensure that there will be a better editorial process in place. Basically we will be recommending to the National Council that an editorial board be established consisting of a number of members which will be responsible for the editorial process.

Equal Checks for All Campaign

I would first like to direct people to the NHRCK Report posted at Gusts of Popular Feeling. It is very compelling reading. There are still questions hovering around about the origins of the report and speculation about the relationship between Ben Wagner and ATEK. I’d like to address these questions here.

Ben Wagner first approached ATEK near the end of 2008 with an early version of his report. He attended a board meeting at the time and went through his findings in detail with us. At the time, we had an E2 visa holder, two E1 visa holders, and an F5 visa holder on the board who all agreed to the decision to launch the campaign. We were convinced, as are those who subsequently made complaints to the National Human Rights Commission of Korea and those who have recently commented on the expanded report since it was made public, that his findings pointed to a pattern of discrimination against non-citizen English teachers.

Those who opposed the campaign argued that the government is likely to react to our complaints in a negative way and impose further restrictions on all E and F-class visa holders teaching in South Korea as a result of our campaign. The concern is about a hypothetical outcome rather than actual concrete events, and ignores the bill proposed in December 2008 (Bill 3356), which aims to extend the regulations to all foreigners applying for a work visa in Korea and not just E2 visa holders.

All teachers should have an opinion and have the right to let it be known. Unfortunately for those who are concerned about ending discrimination, it was portrayed as an ‘us’ versus ‘them’ scenario, or E2s versus ‘the rest’. Mike suggested that the Joongang Daily article and the Marmot’s Hole interview helped create this atmosphere. It is worth mentioning at this point that there were a number of invented quotations in the first article, as can be seen mentioned on Gusts of Popular Feeling. If people have concerns with the way that we conveyed the message, they are more than in their rights to criticize us and ask us to clarify our position, but to take certain information out of context and then accuse us of advocating something we didn’t is disingenuous and in no way helps fight the real enemy: discrimination.

Many people have focused on the differences between the needs of the F-class visa community and the E-class visa community. If we are able to step forward from the division that arose around this campaign and realize the common ground that we tread, I think that we can work together to prevent any further discrimination from taking place against anyone in the community, irrespective of the type of visa they own.

We are happy to accept criticism and responsibility for any shortcomings in our work thus far. We are not in this for personal reward, which will become very clear by the end of my response if it is not already. Like any volunteer work, we would have given up long ago if that were the case. I would go one step further and say that a large amount of the criticism should be viewed as positive. It shows a real interest in what we are doing, and I hope there is a high level of constructive criticism from the membership to keep the future leadership and association in check.

Working with others

We have approached a number of external shareholders (in plain language, other organizations who share a common interest with ATEK’s members) and see definite opportunities to work in tandem with them in the future. As I mentioned in my previous post, we sought the expertise of a number of professionals before embarking on this journey. This will likely occur in the future within the scope chosen by the National Council. There seems little point in treading the paths already carved out by organizations established before us. As an example, it would make sense to work with a well-respected organization like KOTESOL on the issue of professional development rather than developing our resources from scratch.

On representation

At this point we represent all of our 630 members. We are satisfied with the membership growth to date, and the join-up trend suggests that this number is likely to continue to grow into the future so it is important that the organizational structure is there to support them. The association provides information and resources to them and we are encouraging them to generate their own resources through the provincial and metropolitan associations. We will also continue to highlight issues that English teachers bring to our attention and that teachers ought to know, whether they be members or not, by passing on information to bloggers and the like, and working with teachers in need. Unfortunately, the supply of these is not likely to run out in the near future.

It is a little disheartening to read that non-members would like to tell us what we should and shouldn’t advocate. While this can make for interesting reading on the popular blog sites, I’m sure many members would be upset to read that those who are not a part of our association feel that they should be able to dictate what we do as an association. We have made it clear that we do not intend to launch any major initiatives until national elections have been held. At that point, any advocacy or campaigning will be decided on by the National Council. Our mission statement, objectives, and positions on particular issues are clearly visible on our website to members and non-members alike. Criticism directed towards these would at least be constructive.

ATEK has a lot to offer those planning to be in the country for a short period of time (one to two years) as it has a lot to offer long-termers. Rather than rehash old statements, I’ll simply refer you to my previous response. It is important to look for commonalities to bring the English teaching community together and strengthen it. There are many reasons why the community, in all its diversity, should come together and cooperate: we are all non-Koreans in a homogenous society that is slowly opening up to outside world; we all teach English; we share professional experiences; we share social and cultural experiences– to name but a few.

Much of the focus on the blogs has been on how we are different, but why not focus on how we are the same and how we can help each other? Is it not true that the outright majority of us were E visa holders at one point and would have liked to have had services available to us when we first arrived? Wouldn’t more teachers feel more inclined to stick around if they saw that this community is willing to embrace new members rather than turn its back on them?

Are we in it for the money or simply the glory?

None of the founding board members have profited from ATEK personally in any way and do not intend to do so at any point in time. Please feel free to quote me on this repeatedly. We have volunteered our time and energy into building this thing up from the ground, and to see it take shape and start providing real benefits to teachers is very rewarding in itself.

That said, the process has been exhausting and demanding, and we have not changed our minds about stepping down as soon as new leaders have been elected (see: here). ATEK is an association for and of its members and we feel that it would benefit from those with more expertise, experience, and energy. With this in mind, and to ensure that new ideas are represented, we have declared all current and previous founding board members ineligible for national leadership roles (including all board positions, national council positions, officer positions, and the presidency) for a period of one year (effective from July 1). As this is not written into our Bylaws, it will need to be written into them by the National Council as a first order of business and we will be strongly recommending that they do this.

The road ahead

It is important that we keep our membership updated about the progress of our organization and set clear targets for the establishment of the governing structure of the national organization. We hope that we will be able to keep members much better informed now that we have recruited more volunteers to help us prepare the website to cater for the number of provincial and metropolitan associations nearing registration and manage our internal communications. These positions are temporary positions which we will retain until the national elections have been held.

The Founding Board has reviewed the growth and development of membership and the PMAs and based on these patterns has set the following binding timeline for the association:

July 1 – National Council will be seated. We expect to have at least 4 provincial/metropolitan associations registered by then who will form the first council.

July 1 – 31 National elections will be held to elect a new Board of Directors and President.

By August 1 Founding Board and Officers will step down and a new President and Board of Directors will be seated.

We hope that the new leadership will inject some new life into the association and believe that by removing the founding members from the running this will encourage those with more experience and new ideas to take leading roles in the association.

Lastly, I would like to remind all English teachers that ATEK already has the potential to improve conditions and quality of life and experience for English teachers in Korea – and is already doing so. Please keep thinking of constructive ways that ATEK can be of real service to teachers in Korea and let us know. Mike is working with others (including another detractor known as Chicken Lover) on his own group for F-class visa holders called AFEK. The discussion around ATEK may lead to other groups forming as well. As long as all such groups are able to do their job to help out ex-pats and English teachers living in South Korea and bring their respective communities together in new ways rather than divide and conquer, they can only be positive developments.

Here is Tom’s original article.

Back to the table of contents

Trackback URL