Recently, there has been a stir of discussion amongst faculty and the student body regarding the implementation of ‘English Zones’ at George Mason University Korea. Although such implementation has not undergone any official procedures, there have been numerous opinions regarding the validity of the English Zones. Understanding such circumstances, The Voice decided to refer two things to the public opinion: the background of implementing English Zones and what this background implies.
So what does it mean to have English Zones? It means that everyone who steps into that area must use English as a common language. Any events or courses taken place at public spaces such as lecture halls, offices and student activity areas must be conducted in English. The objective of this policy strives to raise awareness of the importance of using English in public and professional settings and affairs, and does not apply to personal interactions.
The discussion about English Zones began with several feedbacks from various sources. Some international students shared their concerns and complaints about feeling ostracized in situations where some public events were conducted in Korean. Some faculty claimed that in order for the university to maintain the promise of applying the same educational curriculum as the American campus, as well as develop the student’s English abilities, the university should make effective policies to support such notions. Moreover, some parents have stressed the importance of using English in the university so that their children can receive the same level of education as Mason Fairfax.
Realistically, if George Mason University Korea were practicing and fulfilling the same education as in Fairfax, then carrying out English Zones would not be necessary. However, in reality, there have been limitations in carrying out the same education as the majority of students are Korean nationals. Although there are evident policies that enforce the usage of English in official circumstances, there have been some instances where Korean is primarily used. Even in some student organizations, there have been instances where they have proceeded their activities in Korean under the condition that all members are Korean. As the majority consists of Korean students who are more comfortable conversing in their native tongue, many of them carry a strong perception that it is acceptable to speak Korean in public settings, rather than naturally using English.
Of course, there are various factors that should be kept in consideration to publicize English Zones. Yet, as of now, the important thing to grasp is not how effective the English Zones will be, but the background of why the implementation of English Zones surfaced. There is value in realizing the setbacks of our current education system, fixing them, and understanding the recent essence of fulfilling English Zones. Furthermore, the students should think about the “identity” of our university and dwell upon the importance of using English on campus.
Comments