Gifted Education in Korea Meesook Kim, Ph.D Director National Research Center for Gifted and Talented Education Korean Educational Development Institute September 23, 2010 KoçUnivertisy, Istanbul
CONTENTS I. Overview of Korean Education II. Understanding Gifted Education in Korea III. The Development of Gifted Education in Korea IV. The Present Situation of Gifted Education in Korea V. Problems & Future Direction VI. Sample Practices 2
II. Understanding Gifted Education in Korea 4
National policy making Supporting the gifted in science Supporting the gifted in arts Other: promotion of gifted education The current government policy One of the 100 National Priorities (#75) Establish a solid system for supporting the gifted • Effective system for gifted education • Systemic identification of the gifted in science • Continuity of gifted education to higher education • Extending gifted education to the areas of arts
The purpose of gifted education Contributing to the nation’s development Full development of GS’s abilities and self-actualization Offering education customized to the abilities and psychological characteristics of gifted students 6
Definitions and concepts of giftedness Includes various elements: intelligence, creativity, specific talents, school achievements, motivation, leadership, etc. No single definition internationally agreed upon Different depending upon the society and culture as well as the generation The proportion of children who receive gifted education differs across the countries, too, depending upon the educational conditions as well as the educational philosophy of the country. 7
What is gifted education in Korea? What is GE? Gifted Classes Gifted Education Centers Gifted Schools Teaching & Learning Materials Higher Education Programs Identification Tools Gifted Education Promotion Act (2000) Article 2 • Gifted Child: a person who possesses extraordinary innate abilities or • visible talents requiring special education to nurture them • Gifted Education: providing education with the contents and the methods • tailored to the characteristics and the needs of a gifted child GIFTED EDUCATION SYSTEM INSTITUTES PROGRAMS INFRASTRUCTURE Law, Professional Development Educational System, Networking, etc.
Gifted education system Tertiary Education University MEST Specialized Areas, Focus on Creativity Special High School Gifted Schools 16 Local Offices of Education Identification & Development of Giftedness Potentials Gifted Classes Gifted Education Centers 3-12 grade Law, Review Committee, Research Centers 9
Gifted education institutes: 3 types • Gifted Schools • Ministry operated • Specialized in Science • Gifted Education Centers • Operated by local • offices of education or by universities • Gifted Classes • School-based • Sometimes combining neighborhood schools 10
Gifted students (70,205 as of 2009, 1%) 30,567 Students in 967 Gifted Classes 548 Students in 2Gifted Schools 39,090 Students in 555 Gifted Education Centers Basic Advanced Mentorship Other
Observation of stars Programs & Activities Presentation of what they found 17
Visit to research institutes & labs Special lectures by invited scientists 18
Leadership program Taking tests without supervision 19
Contest of creative inventions Summer camps 20
Infra Structure: Law & Supporting Organizations • Gifted Education Promotion Act (2000, revised in 2005) • Enforcement Ordinance for GEPA (2002, revised in 2006) • Comprehensive Plans for Promotion of Gifted Education (2003, 2008) 21
Primary Roles of NRCGTE In close partnership with MEST and 16 City & Provincial Offices of Education Innovation & Practice Nation-wide Development/ Training Research/ Data-based Policy Int’l Symposium Workshops Leadership Camps Youth Conference About 150 Research Reports Law & Nat’l Plan About 500 T&L Materials Gifted Education Database Nat’l Training Institute
III. The Development of Gifted Education in Korea 23
Korean educators used to • Take one-size-fits-all approach. • Emphasize equality and sameness as very important societal values to keep so that treating students differently is a taboo. • Believe in efforts more than abilities of students. • Think it unnecessary and impossible to provide educational service tailored individual child’s needs and ability, especially in classrooms. • Assume that learning is knowing the contents rather than thinking or creating new knowledge. • Think that able teachers are those who know what to teach rather than how to teach.
Which resulted in • Same type of school (high school equalization law in 1974) • Same teaching methods to all students such as teacher-centered lectures • Ignoring the existence of gifted children in the classroom, and thus no explicit gifted education • But small voices concerning individual differences in children and new educational values for the 21st century began to be heard since 1980’s.
New Changes in Korean Education 1980’s Gyeonggi Science High School (1983) The Office of Gifted Education at KEDI (1987) 1990’s The Korean Society for the Gifted (1990) Presidential Report by Education Reform Review Council (1995) The Center for Gifted Education at KEDI (1996) 26
2000’s • Gifted Education Promotion Act (2000) • National Research Center for Gifted and Talented Education (NRCGTE) (2002) • Comprehensive Plan I for 2003-2007 (2002) • Gifted Education Centers and Gifted Classes (2003) • Korea Science Academy (2003) • Comprehensive Plan II for 2008-2012 (2007) 27
The Past and the Present of Korean GE 2008 - 2012 2003 - 2007 • Gradual Expansion • More gifted schools • More coverage of the areas of subject matters in GE • Identification based on teachers’observations and recommendations • Increase of GE to 2% • Actualization of other policy measures related to GE • Initial Development • Establishing law (’02) • NRCGTE (’02) • GE started in public education (’03) • Korean Science Academy (’03) • 46,000 students(’07)
Multiple stages of identification 1st Stage: Teachers’ Observation, GPA, Portfolio, etc. 2nd Stage: Paper & Pencil Tests, Group Tests 3rd Stage: Performance, Audition, Camp, Interview 4th Stage: Selection and Placement 31
New policy measures for identification • Identification method changed from relying on paper & pencil test scores to emphasizing teachers’ observations and recommendations. • All students who have potentials are provided gifted education. • Policy focus is changed from identification to provision of gifted education. • The number of students who receive gifted education is continually increased.
Identification of gifted students PAST FUTURE Test Scores Checklists & Recommendations Knowledge, Rote Memory Application, Critical Thinking Intelligence, Creativity, Motivation Intelligence Observation, Products, etc. Paper & Pencil Tests Group Evaluation One Time Evaluation Single Indicator (school achievement or IQ) Multiple Indicators 33
Identification Process (3 Posts) 1. Teacher Observation/ Recommendation 2. School Selection Committee 3. Institute Selection Committee School Gifted Education Center Gifted Class • developed a nation-wide • on-line computerized system • of identification process • on Gifted Education • Database (GED) Nation-wide Test of Giftedness developed By NRCGTE • Team evaluation with multiple criteria • Emphasis on potential for future growth • Comprehensive consideration of students’ • interests, family background, etc.
Gifted Education Database (GED) http://ged.kedi.re.kr
Teachers’ Professional Development About 6,200 out of about 30,000 teachers trained in gifted education were trained by NRCGTE (Total 8% of Korean teachers have a training in GE.) Training Programs at NRCGTE • Basic Training Course (60 hrs.) • Advanced Training Course (120 hrs.) • Intensive Training Course (90 hrs.) • Training Program for Administrators (30 hrs.) • Overseas Training Course ( 2-4 wks.) 36
Teachers’ Professional Development On subject matters of gifted education such as • Math and Science, IT • Humanities and Social Sciences • Leadership • Music & Fine Arts Or theme-based intensive courses such as • Instructional Strategies (Pedagogy) • Identification Based on Teacher Recommendation • Educational Evaluation for the Gifted • Teaching the Gifted from Disadvantaged Groups 37
Satisfaction Survey Results • Kim, M. & Seo, H. A. (2005) • Overall Satisfaction with Gifted Education: Mean 3.61 point on 5-point Likert scale (cf. for general school education: 2.8-3.2 points) • Gifted Students: 3.66 • Gifted Students’ Parents: 3.63 • Teachers: 3.49 • Areas of Satisfaction: Contents of program, Teaching & Evaluation methods 41
Satisfaction Survey Results (Kim & Seo, 2005) • The Effects of Gifted Education: • Significant increase of interest & knowledge in the relevant areas of study • Enhancement of logical reasoning, creative problem-solving skills, & motivation • Development of collaborative ability & leadership 42
Problems Validity of identification tools and methods Quality control of programs Preference for preparation of the college entrance exam distorting the purpose of gifted education Limited focus on specific areas of study (82.6% for math & science) Discontinuity of gifted education Shortage of competent teachers with expertise Lack of networking and effective collaboration among relevant government ministries 44
2010Policy Direction (MEST) Enlarging the beneficiaries of GE and upgrading the quality • More gifted schools (4 schools by 2011) • Increase of the beneficiaries of GE to 2% by 2012 • Ultimately, all students who have potentials are provided • gifted education. • Identification method changed from relying on paper & • pencil test scores to emphasizing teachers’ observations • and recommendations. • More coverage of the areas of subject matters in GE (Arts, • literature, leadership, integrated curriculum)
Other Suggestions for Future Direction • Specialization of Gifted Institutions • Gifted Schools, Gifted Classes and Gifted Education Centers Specialized by School Levels, the Foci of the Programs, and by Local Areas • Upgrading the Quality of Gifted Education • Upgrading the Curriculum & Operation Efficiency • Providing the teachers with consulting service in addition to training 47
Other Suggestions for Future Direction • Developing the Continuity of Gifted Education • Improving the Identification System • Promoting Social Integration • Developing the Gifted Program for Post-secondary Education • Enriching the Experience of Gifted Teachers • Recruiting High Quality Teachers • Developing Systematic Approach to Training & Distributing Teachers • Recommending Teachers to Undergo Training 48
Other Suggestions for Future Direction • Improving Support Systems • Amending Existing Policies & Laws • Strengthening the Think-Tank Function of NRCGTE • Nurturing Existing Networks through Workshops, Forums and Symposiums on a Regular Basis 49