Is the fact that Koreans get high scores in English examinations but are poor in communicating in English really attributable to just deficiencies in English capability? Let me describe two tales of experience.

In the run-up to Yeosu winning its bid to host the 2012 International Exposition, I had the opportunity to watch presentations in English by three contenders -- South Korea, Morocco and Poland -- at Bureau International des Expositions general assemblies in June and November last year. We screened an elegant video dubbed by a foreigner, and the presenter on stage spoke in fluent English. If needed, English, like other things, can be outsourced like that.

The problem is the ability to communicate, seen in the presentation itself. Although it was slick, free from noticeable flaws, there was something missing from our presentation, something hard to pinpoint. I felt as if I were watching Korean children anxiously trying to score full marks in an examination.

Poland's presentation in June was impressive. They used a novel idea of relaying video from their candidate city live and on-the-spot, with citizens on the screen singing and clapping along with performers on the stage. As a result, they amused BIE delegates from other countries sitting in the gallery as well.

We were caught off guard by Morocco in the November general assembly. A female Kenyan leader made a persuasive and moving address in English, not fluent but accurate: "Africa is ready. Africa has potential. Morocco is also Africa." The atmosphere among the Korean support group was tense -- we had taken a hit.

A foreign diplomat who watched us closely asked the Korean ambassador, "Why is South Korea so serious about everything?" With ponderous and uninspired presentations, we lacked that certain indefinable quality by which we might have found humor and fun in ourselves. We won the bid for the Yeosu Expo not through our presentation, but by a broad mobilization of diplomatic power behind the scenes.

The second example involves a Korean girl who moved to Paris when her father was posted here. Having diligently attended English cram schools at home, she pronounced and spoke English better than our generation. Still, she endured tremendous stress for several months at an American school in Paris -- because the local class formula requires students to prepare materials and present them in class. The girl knew only rote learning, taught only how to correctly answer test questions, instead of the teaching method in which students are encouraged to read and write a lot and express themselves in front of others.

In the era of globalization, English is a useful tool for communication with the rest of the world. When people have identical abilities, the one with the better command of English will enjoy more opportunities.

But we cannot achieve our goals by concentrating on English alone. Parents and students are right to be worried that private education will increase if examination methods are changed and schools are told to conduct classes only in English from whatever year. The conditions at our schools are inadequate, but what is lacking in our education system is not simply English instruction.

Had they instead come up with the wild idea of increasing the number of English classes in which students play around in English using the lyrics of pop songs, making friends laugh with English jokes and telling their dreams in broken English... Had they taken a different approach, vowing a reformed system in which students are first encouraged to read generously in Korean and history classes and to learn to better express themselves in writing and speech... Enthusiastic though it may be, the plan for reforming public English education leaves much to be desired.

This column was contributed by Kang Kyung-hee, the Chosun Ilbo's correspondent in Paris.