|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
edwardcatflap
Joined: 22 Mar 2009
|
 Posted: Sun Dec 02, 2012 4:04 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| Quote: |
Lol...do you really believe this?
Is this the type of thing CELTA instructors have swallowed as gospel and just expect others to believe? lol
|
It doesn't really matter whether I believe it or not does it. As I pointed out before a lot of prestigious language institutes value practical qualifications over theoretical ones. Now you can scoff and say they don't know anything about teaching or it's a conspiracy to make more money of the CELTA etc..etc...and that's your prerogative but don't try to make out it's just some outlandish view point of mine hardly anyone else shares. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
12ax7
Joined: 07 Nov 2009
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 02, 2012 4:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| edwardcatflap wrote: |
| Quote: |
| I responded because I don't want more people to get the wrong impression (there's a guy at work who keeps bringing up his CELTA (or is it a Delta, I'm not sure since I stopped paying attention) in discussions as if it makes him a greater authority than those of us who have an MA in ESL/EFL or applied linguistics). |
If the MAs had no teaching practice then he would be a greater authority on how to each an EFL class. |
You're making a lot of faulty assumptions if that's the conclusion you come to.
As others have pointed out, a couple of hours of teaching practice is not a substitute for a good theoretical understanding of the second language acquisition process and of linguistics. An MA in ESL/EFL doesn't teach you to follow a dogmatic approach to teaching, it gives you the theoretical foundation to adapt to the students' needs and the classroom context in the most efficient manner.
Let me put it this way: I had to conduct classroom research in order to get my MA. In other words, I wasn't standing in front of the class waiting for feedback like someone who does his or her CELTA, I was the one doing the evaluation and providing the feedback. So, there goes the grossly misinformed notion that a CELTA is better than an MA in ESL/EFL because of its few hours of practical experience.
Last edited by 12ax7 on Sun Dec 02, 2012 5:06 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
edwardcatflap
Joined: 22 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 02, 2012 5:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| Sorry, but a couple of hours of teaching practice is not a substitute for classroom research, a greater understanding of the language acquisition process, linguistic theories, and years upon years of experience. |
Well firstly it's more than a couple of hours and what has experience got to do with anything, I thought we were talking about qualifications? If you look at it from an employer's view point it makes more sense. You know as well as I do that it's possible to get an MA without any ablity to be able to teach at all. You've done one I assume, I've done one and we know this is the case. Language institutes can't take the chance on someone who has never been assessed in a teaching scenario before. It's not worth the risk. These places have to retain students in order to survive, to a much greater extent than a university, and students can be incredibly fickle. At least with a practical qualification they know at some stage the candidate has been able to teach a half decent lesson in a real life teaching situation. Of course ideally a teacher would have both but given the choice they veer towards the practical. I can quite understand why universities veer towards the theoretical too, it's a different ballgame.
To go back to the 'greater authority' debate, it obviously depends on what they were discussing. If it was a discussion on practical teaching for example, and he knew one of his colleagues was inclined to do something pedagogically unsound in the class room he might know more about it as it was something people discussed on a practical course as a result of teaching observations. His colleague might be unaware of it. It's pretty childish anyway to dismiss someone's view point out of hand just because they relate it to a certain qualification you think is less worthy. Listen to what they have to say then make a valued judgement. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
12ax7
Joined: 07 Nov 2009
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 02, 2012 5:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| edwardcatflap wrote: |
| Quote: |
| Sorry, but a couple of hours of teaching practice is not a substitute for classroom research, a greater understanding of the language acquisition process, linguistic theories, and years upon years of experience. |
Well firstly it's more than a couple of hours and what has experience got to do with anything, I thought we were talking about qualifications? If you look at it from an employer's view point it makes more sense. You know as well as I do that it's possible to get an MA without any ablity to be able to teach at all. You've done one I assume, I've done one and we know this is the case. Language institutes can't take the chance on someone who has never been assessed in a teaching scenario before. It's not worth the risk. These places have to retain students in order to survive, to a much greater extent than a university, and students can be incredibly fickle. At least with a practical qualification they know at some stage the candidate has been able to teach a half decent lesson in a real life teaching situation. Of course ideally a teacher would have both but given the choice they veer towards the practical. I can quite understand why universities veer towards the theoretical too, it's a different ballgame.
To go back to the 'greater authority' debate, it obviously depends on what they were discussing. If it was a discussion on practical teaching for example, and he knew one of his colleagues was inclined to do something pedagogically unsound in the class room he might know more about it as it was something people discussed on a practical course as a result of teaching observations. His colleague might be unaware of it. It's pretty childish anyway to dismiss someone's view point out of hand just because they relate it to a certain qualification you think is less worthy. Listen to what they have to say then make a valued judgement. |
Read my post. I added something at the end. You're wrongfully assuming that getting an MA in ESL/EFL doesn't involve hours of practical experience. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
edwardcatflap
Joined: 22 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 02, 2012 5:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Read my post. Watching lessons and giving feedback doesn't prove that you can teach |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Jimskins
Joined: 07 Nov 2007
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 02, 2012 5:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| Let me put it this way: I had to conduct classroom research in order to get my MA. In other words, I wasn't standing in front of the class waiting for feedback like someone who does his or her CELTA, I was the one doing the evaluation and providing the feedback. So, there goes the grossly misinformed notion that a CELTA is better than an MA in ESL/EFL because of its few hours of practical experience. |
On a CELTA course when another student is teaching you sit at the back and evaluate their performance before providing detailed feedback. The feedback session usually takes the best part of an hour so you get a total of about 10 hours of teaching and then 10 hours of evaluating other teachers. That's hardly an insignificant amount of time. I personally found those sessions priceless in terms of what I learnt from them, and I had my MA for three years before I did the CELTA.
Both on my CELTA and elsewhere I have seen people with MA TESOLs who couldn't teach monkeys to eat bananas. Of course it's completely possible to be a good teacher without a CELTA but at least for employers it gives a solid indication that you know what you are doing in the classroom. Hopefully more Unis in Korea will catch onto this. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
12ax7
Joined: 07 Nov 2009
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 02, 2012 6:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| edwardcatflap wrote: |
| Read my post. Watching lessons and giving feedback doesn't prove that you can teach |
Right, because getting an advanced degree in teaching English as a foreign language/second language doesn't make one a teacher.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
12ax7
Joined: 07 Nov 2009
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 02, 2012 6:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Jimskins wrote: |
| Quote: |
| Let me put it this way: I had to conduct classroom research in order to get my MA. In other words, I wasn't standing in front of the class waiting for feedback like someone who does his or her CELTA, I was the one doing the evaluation and providing the feedback. So, there goes the grossly misinformed notion that a CELTA is better than an MA in ESL/EFL because of its few hours of practical experience. |
On a CELTA course when another student is teaching you sit at the back and evaluate their performance before providing detailed feedback. The feedback session usually takes the best part of an hour so you get a total of about 10 hours of teaching and then 10 hours of evaluating other teachers. That's hardly an insignificant amount of time. I personally found those sessions priceless in terms of what I learnt from them, and I had my MA for three years before I did the CELTA.
Both on my CELTA and elsewhere I have seen people with MA TESOLs who couldn't teach monkeys to eat bananas. Of course it's completely possible to be a good teacher without a CELTA but at least for employers it gives a solid indication that you know what you are doing in the classroom. Hopefully more Unis in Korea will catch onto this. |
MA in ESL/EFL? If so, you should have done classroom research, which is much more involved and extensive than simply evaluating a teacher (I don't suppose you had do write a 5000 word paper on your evaluation during your CELTA). If you didn't, your programme failed you.
In any case, you're missing my original point, which is that some people seem to think that a CELTA is the equivalent, or even superior, to an MA in ESL/EFL, which it clearly isn't.
And, yes, some people don't apply what they've learnt...Doesn't mean you should make blanket statements nor is it an indication that a CELTA is the equivalent to an MA in ESL/EFL. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Jimskins
Joined: 07 Nov 2007
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 02, 2012 6:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I did an MA in EFL in the UK. Yeah i agree with you, a CELTA is by no means equivalent to an MA by any stretch of the imagination. I do think though for most people with an MA that a CELTA would add something to your teaching abilities. It is also an essential step to the DELTA, which is indeed seen my most in the profession as MA-level.
We did have to write a paper on our evaluations on the CELTA, I think it was around 2000-3000 words. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
12ax7
Joined: 07 Nov 2009
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 02, 2012 7:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Jimskins wrote: |
I did an MA in EFL in the UK. Yeah i agree with you, a CELTA is by no means equivalent to an MA by any stretch of the imagination. I do think though for most people with an MA that a CELTA would add something to your teaching abilities. It is also an essential step to the DELTA, which is indeed seen my most in the profession as MA-level.
We did have to write a paper on our evaluations on the CELTA, I think it was around 2000-3000 words. |
Sure, there's nothing wrong with wanting to try new things and getting additional certification.
If you want to be specific, a Delta is more like a postgraduate certificate (i.e. similar to the degree you'd get if you only completed the first year of an MA programme). It's at the MA level, but it isn't its equivalent.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Postgraduate_certificate |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
I'm With You
Joined: 01 Sep 2011
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 02, 2012 7:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Jimskins wrote: |
I did an MA in EFL in the UK. Yeah i agree with you, a CELTA is by no means equivalent to an MA by any stretch of the imagination. I do think though for most people with an MA that a CELTA would add something to your teaching abilities. It is also an essential step to the DELTA, which is indeed seen my most in the profession as MA-level.
We did have to write a paper on our evaluations on the CELTA, I think it was around 2000-3000 words. |
People with an M.A. don't know how to teach. Those who hold CELTAs, and DELTAs, do.
Most people here who do master's degrees do not include any supervised teaching component. The CELTA does. That's all one does in a CELTA course for a month straight - teach in front of his / her peers and senior, experienced TEFL instructors. The feedback is invaluable.
Also, most people here did a course-work based master's degree without doing a thesis / dissertation component. Most of these master's degrees (e.g., Australian M.A. programs) are a complete joke. They've completely dummied down the master's degree.
If you want to learn how to clasroom teach, then do a CELTA. If you want to learn more about learning styles, motivation, SLA, discourse analysis, then do a master's degree in TESOL / Applied Linguistics.
My suggestion: Do both. They aren't necessarily the same thing. I found the CELTA more useful for classroom teaching and very practical for your everyday TEFL'er.
But if you're in EFL for the long haul, invest in both. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Francis-Pax
Joined: 20 Nov 2005
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 02, 2012 9:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Hank the Iconoclast wrote: |
| Francis-Pax wrote: |
| edwardcatflap wrote: |
| Quote: |
| I don't agree. The practical component of the CELTA course is very dogmatic in terms of presented models of teaching and evaluation. I do not think that the CELTA way of teaching is particularly better. A good MA TESOL provides much more background on language teaching methods, language awareness, and knowledge about second language acquisition. There is no research that substantiates that a teacher with a CELTA knows more about teaching (theoretically or practically) than people with an MA without a practicum, so your comment is not grounded in anything. |
Well, you also don't agree with the British Council, International House and many other reputable language institutes who don't take anyone on without a practical qualification. Nothing new there, many people don't agree with big organizations' ways of looking at things but they do have a lot of experience in language teaching and presumably have done their own research into what works for them in the class room. |
You have misconstrued my comments. The CELTA and DELTA are credentials that have a lot of weight for those organisations. They still are considered to be 'good qualifications' in non-tertiary contexts -- especially in Europe or other places influenced by the British ELT tradition. My comments were not speaking to that. Please look carefully at what I was replying to.
You also need to bear in mind that there is a conflict of interest between the BC/IH and Cambridge ESOL. Both of these organisations offer CELTA/DELTA courses and administer Cambridge ESOL tests. They have a vested interest to perpetuate the qualification. It is a profitable industry. I am taking more of a critical view.
Again, I point to something I wrote before. The nature of ELT is changing. This includes how qualifications are viewed in light of the development in the field. The CELTA and DELTA emerged at an early stage of development in ELT long before the degrees that are offered now (and in many cases by distance education).
ELT like any professional practice in education changes and becomes more professionalized and academically mature as time goes on. These are points that are difficult to understand in context to new teachers in ELT, especially for those who have only taught in the Korean context. However, from my point which includes having taught in multiple countries over a long period of time and higher studies (certificate, masters, doctorate), the evolution is very clear. |
QFT. While I see value in getting a CELTA, it's definitely something to do before you come to Korea or midway through your first year. DELTA would be useful too with a MA, but I got certified in the States (while doing my student teaching at an international school) as I found that much more useful for my career. It also reinforced a lot of things I learned in my MA in ESL/EFL. |
I am not sure why you quoted me above. It sounds like you are disagreeing with what I wrote; however, if you read my first post to this thread, you will see that I recommend doing a CELTA and MA for those planning to stay in ELT for the long haul. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Francis-Pax
Joined: 20 Nov 2005
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 02, 2012 9:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| I'm With You wrote: |
| Jimskins wrote: |
I did an MA in EFL in the UK. Yeah i agree with you, a CELTA is by no means equivalent to an MA by any stretch of the imagination. I do think though for most people with an MA that a CELTA would add something to your teaching abilities. It is also an essential step to the DELTA, which is indeed seen my most in the profession as MA-level.
We did have to write a paper on our evaluations on the CELTA, I think it was around 2000-3000 words. |
People with an M.A. don't know how to teach. Those who hold CELTAs, and DELTAs, do.
Most people here who do master's degrees do not include any supervised teaching component. The CELTA does. That's all one does in a CELTA course for a month straight - teach in front of his / her peers and senior, experienced TEFL instructors. The feedback is invaluable.
Also, most people here did a course-work based master's degree without doing a thesis / dissertation component. Most of these master's degrees (e.g., Australian M.A. programs) are a complete joke. They've completely dummied down the master's degree.
If you want to learn how to clasroom teach, then do a CELTA. If you want to learn more about learning styles, motivation, SLA, discourse analysis, then do a master's degree in TESOL / Applied Linguistics.
My suggestion: Do both. They aren't necessarily the same thing. I found the CELTA more useful for classroom teaching and very practical for your everyday TEFL'er.
But if you're in EFL for the long haul, invest in both. |
This is laughable. You make a lot of unqualified statements, and I think you don't really know what you are talking about. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
diver
Joined: 16 Jun 2003
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 03, 2012 1:08 am Post subject: |
|
|
The bullet points below are from something I have been working on. I might try to cobble it together later into something more coherent.
BTW - nice to see a discussion on PD here. I hope it stays polite (I know..Charlie Brown...Lucy...football...)
The highlights: we can't really compare a specific program (the CELTA) to a range of programs ("an" MA). We are not even talking about "an" MA here - we're talking about many different programs each with a different focus and aim.
The literature supports the importance of the practicum. I feel my MA (lots of theory, no practicum) helped me, but without my CELTA, I don't think that I would be able to effectively apply what I learned in the MA. I know the MA holders don't like being told they can't teach (who would?), and in many cases that statement simply wouldn't be true. However, based on observations I have done, the teachers who have completed some sort of teaching practicum are going to outperform those that haven't. CELTA holders may not be able to pontificate at length about Vygotsky, Piaget or Krashen - but they don't have to. It's not their job. Their job is to teach.
There's one other point I'd like to make. My degree is in history. I applied to an MA TESOL program, and was accepted. I just recently completed the program. Our program had no practicum. This "loophole" means that I (and I am sure I am not a unique case) would have been able to to attain the qualification "Master's Degree in TEACHING English to Speakers of Other Languages" without ever having been taught to teach or having been observed while teaching. This is why I am so glad I took the CELTA. So, for the poster who pointed out (in bold print) that he had a graduate degree in teaching - I am not convinced that that degree makes someone a good teacher. I'd like to (A) know more about the degree and (B) more about your experience. I say this not to criticize you, but to say I am not sure I would be a very good teacher if I had only completed a theory-centric program.
Anyway, for your reading pleasure:
• Study of student teachers showed that the trainees needed to practice what they had learned, and that the observations of their teaching were very important to their development (Numrich, 1996)
• MA programs are as varied as the number of programs themselves (Crookes & Richards, 2003).
• Teacher training is concerned with a specific model of teaching while the MA, or teacher education, deals primarily with decision making skills, or rather, when and how to apply the methods you have learned. (Crookes and Richards, 2003) (BTW, this one rang true with me - it's why I would recommend serious teachers do BOTH a CELTA and an MA)
• Value of practical experience (Crookes & Richards, 2003; Farrell, 2007; Farrell, 2008)
• Performance on essays not an accurate reflection of skill as a teacher (Stoynoff, 1999)
• Too many language teacher programs focus on subordinate areas such as linguistics and language acquisition to the detriment of the teaching itself (Freeman, 1989)
• “The measure of a good lesson is the student activity taking place, not the performance of the teacher” (Jeremy Harmer, 2001)
• “Your most crucial experiences will be those provided when you do your practice teaching in a real classroom” (Richards and Farrell, 2011)
• Methods learned in previous methodology classes become clearer during the practicum (Brinton and Holton, 1989)
• Just because you do something for a long time, doesn’t mean you are doing it correctly (Ruiz-Funes, 2002).
References
Brinton, D., & Holton, C. (1989). What novice teachers focus on: The practicum in TESL. TESOL Quarterly , 23, 343-350.
Crookes, G., & Richards, J. (2003). A practicum in TESOL. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Farrell, T. (2007). Failing the practicum: Narrowing the gap between expectations and reality with reflective practice. TESOL Quarterly , 41 (1), 193-201.
Farrell, T. (2008). Here's the book, go teach the class: ELT practicum support. RELC Journal , 39 (2), pp. 226-241.
Freeman, D. (1989). Teacher training, development and decisionmaking: A model of teaching and related strategies for language teacher education. TESOL Quarterly , 23 (1), 27-45.
Harmer, J. (2001). The practice of English language teaching. London, UK: Pearson Education.
Numrich, C. (1996). On becoming a language teacher: Insights from diary studies. TESOL Quarterly , 30 (1), 131-153.
Richards, J., & Farrell, T. (2011). Practice teaching: A reflective approach. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Ruiz-Funes, M. (2002). On teaching foreign languages: Linking theory to practice. Santa Barbara, CA: Praeger.
Stoynoff, S. (1999). The TESOL practicum: An integrated model in the U.S. TESOL Quarterly , 33 (1), 145-151.
Last edited by diver on Mon Dec 03, 2012 1:22 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Francis-Pax
Joined: 20 Nov 2005
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 03, 2012 1:18 am Post subject: |
|
|
| diver wrote: |
I took these from something I have been working on. I might try to cobble it together later into something more coherent.
The highlights: we can't really compare a specific program (the CELTA) to a range of programs ("an" MA). We are not even talking about "an" MA here - we're talking about many different programs each with a different focus and aim.
The literature supports the importance of the practicum. I feel my MA helped me, but without my CELTA, I don't think that I would be able to effectively apply what I learned in the MA. I know the MA holders don't like being told they can't teach (who would?), and in many cases that statement simply wouldn't be true. However, based on observations I have done, the teachers who have completed some sort of teaching practicum are going to outperform those that haven't. CELTA holders may not be able to pontificate at length about Vygotsky, Piaget or Krashen - but they don't have to. It's not their job. Their job is to teach.
Anyway, for your reading pleasure:
• Study of student teachers showed that the trainees needed to practice what they had learned, and that the observations of their teaching were very important to their development (Numrich, 1996)
• MA programs are as varied as the number of programs themselves (Crookes & Richards, 2003).
• Teacher training is concerned with a specific model of teaching while the MA, or teacher education, deals primarily with decision making skills, or rather, when and how to apply the methods you have learned. (Crookes and Richards, 2003) (BTW, this one rang true with me - it's why I would recommend serious teachers do BOTH a CELTA and an MA)
• Value of practical experience (Crookes & Richards, 2003; Farrell, 2007; Farrell, 2008)
• Performance on essays not an accurate reflection of skill as a teacher (Stoynoff, 1999)
• Too many language teacher programs focus on subordinate areas such as linguistics and language acquisition to the detriment of the teaching itself (Freeman, 1989)
• “The measure of a good lesson is the student activity taking place, not the performance of the teacher” (Jeremy Harmer, 2001)
• “Your most crucial experiences will be those provided when you do your practice teaching in a real classroom” (Richards and Farrell, 2011)
• Methods learned in previous methodology classes become clearer during the practicum (Brinton and Holton, 1989)
• Just because you do something for a long time, doesn’t mean you are doing it correctly (Ruiz-Funes, 2002).
References
Brinton, D., & Holton, C. (1989). What novice teachers focus on: The practicum in TESL. TESOL Quarterly , 23, 343-350.
Crookes, G., & Richards, J. (2003). A practicum in TESOL. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Farrell, T. (2007). Failing the practicum: Narrowing the gap between expectations and reality with reflective practice. TESOL Quarterly , 41 (1), 193-201.
Farrell, T. (2008). Here's the book, go teach the class: ELT practicum support. RELC Journal , 39 (2), pp. 226-241.
Freeman, D. (1989). Teacher training, development and decisionmaking: A model of teaching and related strategies for language teacher education. TESOL Quarterly , 23 (1), 27-45.
Harmer, J. (2001). The practice of English language teaching. London, UK: Pearson Education.
Numrich, C. (1996). On becoming a language teacher: Insights from diary studies. TESOL Quarterly , 30 (1), 131-153.
Richards, J., & Farrell, T. (2011). Practice teaching: A reflective approach. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Ruiz-Funes, M. (2002). On teaching foreign languages: Linking theory to practice. Santa Barbara, CA: Praeger.
Stoynoff, S. (1999). The TESOL practicum: An integrated model in the U.S. TESOL Quarterly , 33 (1), 145-151. |
Proof texting individual studies is not proof that you are right. Each study is only one piece of evidence that must be scrutinised within a particular context. That is something that you learn in a beginner research methods course. You didn't really prove anything.
But moving to more of a reflective comment about the CELTA and qualification in general, it is important to keep in mind that CELTA promotes a particular way of teaching. It is very dogmatic in terms of what is 'good' and 'bad' practice. And, as a person currently doing a doctorate in education and carefully looking at these issues, I take serious issue with that. However, this is not to say that it does not have value.
I don't like reading comments on here that express unilateral generalisations such as CELTA holders can teach and MA holder can't. That is just complete nonsense. It also comes across as very immature.
In terms of this message board, most people here are looking for practical advice about how to get a better job. As I and many other people have mentioned, both the CELTA and MA are important. I would say that they are important at different stages. CELTA is decidedly an entry level qualification. I personally do not give too much weight to the practicum one gets in the course. It has value for beginning teachers, but I don't think it speaks to a lot of teachers who have been in the profession for a long period of time. Teaching is very dynamic and varies according to context. There are no GOOD and BAD ways. It depends on the school, students, constraints, curriculum, etc. There are just too many factors. Learning to make a lesson plan and other things that CELTA teaches is good, but they have limited value for the long haul.
You definitely need, at the very least, an MA if you want to get a good university job. You also need it for better language teaching jobs with young people. CELTAs are not valued in most university settings. If you want to teach in a hogwon that treats you like dirt and where pay is mediocre, get your CELTA and be happy with that. The same goes for the public school teachers here. If you want to keep working with that co-teacher that does not view you as a real teacher and holds you in contempt -- fine! Even move on to the DELTA if you feel that make you a better teacher and helps you achieve your goals. These are personal decisions.
I am not sure how productive it is to discuss the differences of knowledge and teaching skills between a CELTA and MA holders (especially when it is not really grounded in substantial evidence). We all have our anecdotes. Let's talk about practical points and frame it in practical questions: Will this advance my career? Will it make me a better teacher?
Bottom line folks -- If you want to really go somewhere in ELT you need an MA. I would even go further. A trend here in the Middle East, where I am, is that more and more people are doing doctorates. This will definitely be a required qualification in five to ten years. So things at the university level things are changing rapidly. Of course the pay here is MUCH HIGHER than Korea.
In general, we are starting to see a raising of standards for ESL/EFL teachers. Things are changing. It is important to spot the trends and move with them. CELTA and DELTA belong to an older paradigm that emerged out of a particular historical context. The landscape has changed. Move with the future!
One more thing... The university I work for has a comprehensive faculty review process. All of senior management are Western foreigners with doctorates in the field in addition to decades of experience in teaching and language education. We are observed several times by them in addition to peer observations. The review framework is theoretically and practically very good. The feedback that we get from the process far exceeds anything that you will get in a CELTA or DELTA course. These types of professional environments in ELT are rare, but they do exist. But I am afraid your CELTA and DELTA will not get you there.
Last edited by Francis-Pax on Mon Dec 03, 2012 1:50 am; edited 2 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
