The 1st Annual Global EIL Congress was held at Korea University on May 26, 2007. The motto of the Global EIL Conference, “Bringing the World Together,” was entirely appropriate; the conference attendees had the opportunity to meet and converse with distinguished speakers and educators from all over the world. Presenters arrived from nations such as Iran, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, China, Kazakhstan, Japan, Malaysia, and many of the “Western Countries.” The range of cultures, accents, and perspectives were all an integral part of the modest, but well-deserved success of this conference. The light attendance was a bit disappointing, but not surprising, for reasons which will be mentioned later.

The theme of the conference was “English as an International Language: Setting the Standards.” Lecturers focused heavily on the premise that EFL/ESL should be renamed EIL (English as an International Language) due to the rapid expansion of English as the language of commerce and education. The presenters lectured on themes such the effects of globalization (“The Question of Global English Language Teaching: A Turkish Perspective” by Rana Yildarim and Zuhal Okhan), international language prospectus (“English as an International Lingua Franca” (Matthew Waterson), and practical teaching and/or theory “Assessing Students’ Reading Competencies: Setting Global Standards” by Prof. Reima Al-Jarf).

Due to a last minute transportation issue (I live “in-a-rice-field-next-to-a-gae-go-gi-farm near Suwon), I was unable to attend the morning sessions. An acquaintance who was able to attend the morning sessions said that they were poorly attended and started late, but that they were interesting. I arrived late for the 10:00 session just in time to hear Prof. Jinny Choi present her findings in a comparative study of language shift among Koreans in Paraguay and Koreans in the United States. Through a series of tables and brief interjections, Ms. Choi was able to show that in Paraguay, the Korean language remains mostly intact, whereas in the United States, Koreans vastly prefer to learn English. I would have liked to hear Ms. Choi speak more about the implications of such a shift, but she did not directly address this issue. It was still a very intriguing presentation.

The keynote speaker, Rebecca Oxford, was unable to attend the conference, so Dr. Phyllis Chew from Singapore kindly stepped in. Her presentation (I did not catch the title) was well-organized, informative, and clearly researched. She proposed a new model of Evolving Lingua Francas, rather than the old native speaker/ESL/EFL ripple diagram (anyone who wants to can PM for my notes). She compared South Korea’s response to English as an International Language to her own nation of Singapore. Singapore openly embraces English as the language of education and economic change; Dr. Chew did, however, point out that a population that is 44% immigrants (and growing) will also become “a country which strives to make its own population a minority!” She suggested that South Korea has not yet embraced English as the language of commerce due to the facts that a) English has political implications and b) citizens fear the loss of national pride.

I attended a few more “nuts and bolts” presentations (teaching theory), but decided to play hooky during some of the later sessions. There was NO lunch break scheduled, and some of the presentations ran over their allotted time. I met up with an interesting group of people by chance in the lobby, and quickly got drawn into their conversation. I mostly listened, content to hear intellectual repartee for once rather than “Hello, my name is purple.” I shamelessly tagged along with this group as they went to the Starbucks on campus. Hmmm….our university doesn’t have a Starbucks….One of the men was Chris Gelken of the Korea Herald, and another was the “Legal Guy” (can’t for the life of me remember his name, only his face) from the EFL Law site. Mr. Gelken is a fascinating and passionate speaker; several of the current foreigner cases (Daegu signs, libel suit, etc.) came up for discussion.

I followed the group to a smaller conference room (yes, I am also a forum lurker); Chris continued to speak about some of these issues. As near as I could tell, he was not listed as a speaker for the conference, but somehow the word had gotten out. Mr. Gelken presented a call-to-arms about how teachers are treated in Korea. “Where is the ESL community in all this?” and “Why don’t they write to the press about their concerns?” were questions he asked of us. His background is in human rights, and he has the power to print these stories. Apparently in Korean press culture, if no one writes and documents a story on paper (ex. Letter to the Editor), there is no problem to talk about. The Korean press simply hang out in press rooms waiting for official feeds rather than going out and finding information themselves; I wonder if there are any good Korean muckrakers out there at all. In our defense (the ESL instructors), those of us who have been her long enough have realized that “the tallest nail gets pounded.” Hence the anonymous bloggers. Mr. Gelken assured us that names will be protected if people so desire.

We brainstormed as a group on how to get these stories of the blogs (which have a tenuous claim to “journalism” at best, or so I’ve been told) and into the press. A lively and slightly off-topic (but important) discussion ensued about the grossly mismanaged EPIK program, and complaints and horror stories poured out of the people in the room. Wisely, I kept mum about my own “interesting” situation (not EPIK-related); no one would believe me anyway. What is necessary, Mr. Gelken argued, is that these stories are documented and written for publication. He encouraged us all to become “citizen journalists.” The session with Mr. Gelken ran over into two sessions, but no one was leaving.

The success of the conference itself could have been improved if some better planning and organizing had been undertaken. There was no signage indicating where the conference was; Korea University is of mammoth proportion and all of the buildings are built in the same, prison-stone style architecture. I got lost and the security guard had absolutely knowledge of the conference’s existence. A passing student helped translate my poor Korean, but it was no good. Through a rather hectic phone call, I was able to get directions from my friend to help me find the building using the Internet…

There was very little advertising online and not one flyer; EIL Congress take note of KOTESOL’s advertising, please! The conference book we were given left out all of the room numbers for the speakers; butcher paper with the room numbers hastily scrawled lined the walls behind the small tables where two assistants with limited (but reasonably functional) English sat, giggled, and answered questions. It was a bit like talking to intermediate university students… The schedule did NOT take into account cancelled or delayed speakers. There was no scheduled lunch break, and a few people (such as myself) were obliged to bow out for some of the sessions due to hunger and “classroom fatigue” (we know how our college students feel, trust me!).

All in all, the conference was a pretty decent effort for a first-time try. It was, as all conferences are, a great networking tool (I am currently looking for a uni position in Seoul – take note!), a good chance to meet international educators, and audit high-quality presenters. I fully expect to attend the conference next year if it is offered.