Analyzing media discourse on the development of the National English Ability Test (NEAT) in South Korea

Dongil Shin

doi:10.1186/s40468-019-0081-z

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to analyze newspaper articles from three publications (Chosun Ilbo, Donga Ilbo, and JoongAng Ilbo) regarding a newly developed high-stakes English test in South Korea, the National English Ability Test (NEAT), from the viewpoint of critical discourse analysis. All of the articles were collected from online archives, and most were published between 2007 and 2012. The events surrounding the development of the test were analyzed from three dimensions: textual, discursive, and social. It was found that NEAT-related media discourse was formulated in terms of technology-focused, economic (private education expenditure), or utilitarian (the benefits of a domestic “Korean” test) practice. These discursive events were implicitly connected to the cultures of “technopoly” and “teach-to-the-test,” both of which were exploited to silence the voices of diverse groups in the English language education community.

Highlights

Traditional research on language testing viewed it as a psychometric exploration that set language knowledge as a test construct (McNamara & Roever, 2006); in recent years, a values-based social discourse on professionalism, ethics, fairness, and social justice in language testing has been flourishing
The present study aims to analyze newspaper articles on the National English Ability Test (NEAT) in Korea—a homegrown, newly developed, and currently suspended English proficiency test—using critical discourse analysis (CDA) to understand the media pressure for the development of high-stakes language testing
Texts in three newspapers In articles on the 2007 Test of English as a Foreign Language (TOEFL) crisis, Chosun Ilbo selected words suggestive of market principles and denigrated the market competitiveness of “domestic” English proficiency tests, ideas supported by Donga Ilbo (Shin, 2012)

Summary

Introduction

Traditional research on language testing viewed it as a psychometric exploration that set language knowledge as a test construct (McNamara & Roever, 2006); in recent years, a values-based social discourse on professionalism, ethics, fairness, and social justice in language testing has been flourishing. This socio-humanities discourse includes both macro- and micro-language testing as well as integrates testing issues with sociopolitical variables (McNamara, 2001; McNamara & Roever, 2006). When a test is politically (2019) 9:4 planned and rushed into use without sufficient public debate, the media can exaggerate its meaning in inappropriate ways, distorting or misinterpreting its purposes or expectations

Objectives

Results

Conclusion