Site Search:
 
TEFL International Supports Dave's ESL Cafe
TEFL Courses, TESOL Course, English Teaching Jobs - TEFL International
Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Can an introverted person succeed as a teacher?
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index -> General Discussion Forum
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Unposter



Joined: 04 Jun 2006

PostPosted: Thu Jan 09, 2014 5:34 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Edward,

I understand your analogy but I think there is at least one variable you are missing. The twin without the qualification can be a born teacher or an effective self-learner.

So called "qualifications" are just paper certifying certain learning or knowledge which can be useful but if you already know such things than it is a waste of time and money.

Now, yes, you can be wrong about knowing these things or not but so can the teachers who grant the qualification.

Show me what you can do; don't tell me what piece of paper you have.

Being able to do something has nothing to do with having the piece of paper; it has with being able to do something.

Admittedly, most people need to learn and work toward pieces of paper but not all people do. If you do not look for trailblazers and diamonds in the rough, your school or business will be missing out.

In some cases, the trailblazer or the diamond in the rough will prove to be better because they are bringing other skills and talents that the average person with qualifications does not have.

But, yes, for the most part the twin with qualifications is better but not always. Don't be blind to it is all I am saying.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
edwardcatflap



Joined: 22 Mar 2009

PostPosted: Thu Jan 09, 2014 6:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
Edward,

I understand your analogy but I think there is at least one variable you are missing. The twin without the qualification can be a born teacher or an effective self-learner.

So called "qualifications" are just paper certifying certain learning or knowledge which can be useful but if you already know such things than it is a waste of time and money.

Now, yes, you can be wrong about knowing these things or not but so can the teachers who grant the qualification.

Show me what you can do; don't tell me what piece of paper you have.

Being able to do something has nothing to do with having the piece of paper; it has with being able to do something.

Admittedly, most people need to learn and work toward pieces of paper but not all people do. If you do not look for trailblazers and diamonds in the rough, your school or business will be missing out.

In some cases, the trailblazer or the diamond in the rough will prove to be better because they are bringing other skills and talents that the average person with qualifications does not have.

But, yes, for the most part the twin with qualifications is better but not always. Don't be blind to it is all I am saying.


My hypothetical situation was kind of based on the fact that the twins were identical in every way, so they would both be born teachers.

To me, with regards to recruitment, a teacher without any qualifications after a few years in education would signify either someone who was too lazy to bother or thought he knew it all already. Not very desirable qualities for a teacher. Even the born teacher/self learner would still be humble enough to recognise he could learn from being observed by others more experienced than him.

Quote:
Show me what you can do; don't tell me what piece of paper you have.

Being able to do something has nothing to do with having the piece of paper; it has with being able to do something.


Having a driving licence shows that you can drive to certain standards and criteria, just as a practical teaching qualification does. It doesn't mean you will always drive or teach like that but it means at some point you have shown you can.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
archaeologist5



Joined: 25 Dec 2013

PostPosted: Thu Jan 09, 2014 6:26 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
You talked about teaching 'correctly' . That sounds pretty subjective to me. You can't say 'They are much more flexible and have a better desire to learn how to teach correctly' and then say you don't like setting standards. You just set one


First off, you left out words of mine that are important to the intent and context I spoke with. Second, I didn't define the word 'correctly'. It is alluding to the idea that there is a right and wrong way to teach.

Third, I didn't set a standard and I didn't say I didn't like 'setting a standard' I said I didn't like 'subjective standards'.

Quote:
Makes no difference to me personally if you are or aren't but I assume you count yourself among one of the exceptional teachers who improved as a result of training?


No, I improved because of experience. I am constantly editing my work to make sure I present the best material to the students.

Quote:
What qualifications are you talking about and what area of education?


I would say those with BEds. and Teacher's Diplomas or TEOFL or TEOSL. I do not run into many people who have the CELTA or DELTA and I recall some people on this board have posted that those two are not needed in Korea.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
archaeologist5



Joined: 25 Dec 2013

PostPosted: Thu Jan 09, 2014 6:34 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
I was talking to a friend the other day who was complaining about the "sink or swim" process of training NES teachers here in Korea.


It is not a bad way to separate the men from the boys. I used to know a lot of people whose dads took them out on a lake in a boat and simply tossed them overboard. They learned to swim pretty quickly.

I do not think it is wrong to do that in the classroom either. I think it would be best for both the teacher and the hagwon/school to find out pretty early who can/wants/likes to teach and who doesn't.

I am not going to go through both of Unposter's posts but suffice it to say I agree with him a lot. Not everything but he has a good perspective on the issue.

I like his views on credentials a lot.

Quote:
When I first came to Korea, things were pretty wide open. You could walk through a lot of doors. In the end, it was up to you. Either you sank or you swam. This afforded good people real opportunities.

These days seem gone to me.


I remember those days and I miss them.

Quote:
If they left the country they can't possibly be the "same teachers".


No wonder some posters do not like talking to Urban Myth, he takes some minute item and tries to blow it out of proportion. If I have to itemize and be specific every little minute detail, I wouldn't be finished that post. I would still be writing it. Some things do not have to be said because they are commonly known.

Quote:
And how do you know the track record of most teachers here with teaching qualifications?


it is not important how I know something and you are derailing the discussion by asking such unimportant and distracting questions.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
edwardcatflap



Joined: 22 Mar 2009

PostPosted: Thu Jan 09, 2014 6:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
No, I improved because of experience. I am constantly editing my work to make sure I present the best material to the students.


You're fudging the issue again. We all agree that experience makes you a better teacher you don't have to repeat that. The question was about training. whether your training had a positive effect on your teaching or not.

Quote:
First off, you left out words of mine that are important to the intent and context I spoke with. Second, I didn't define the word 'correctly'. It is alluding to the idea that there is a right and wrong way to teach.


Yes 'correctly' means there is a right or wrong way to teach and that is the word you used. Are you saying you didn't mean to use it?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
archaeologist5



Joined: 25 Dec 2013

PostPosted: Thu Jan 09, 2014 6:40 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
Show me what you can do; don't tell me what piece of paper you have.


Years ago in a hagwon, I worked with numerous westerners and one year we got 2 with qualifications. One had a BEd. and the other had a Masters (in some form of educational unit).

Well the first guy couldn't keep a student in his class. He inherited 6-8 full classes and within a month and a half he was down to almost zero students. The new owners tried every thing they could to get him students and they would not last. It was a travesty.

The second guy may have been competent but you would never know i because when the doors to his classroom opened the students were rushing out to breathe clean unpolluted air. He smelled the place up.

All of his qualifications went out the window because of this one distraction. What was sad was both of those guys were renewed for another year.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
archaeologist5



Joined: 25 Dec 2013

PostPosted: Thu Jan 09, 2014 6:52 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

edwardcatflap wrote:
Quote:
No, I improved because of experience. I am constantly editing my work to make sure I present the best material to the students.


You're fudging the issue again. We all agree that experience makes you a better teacher you don't have to repeat that. The question was about training. whether your training had a positive effect on your teaching or not.

Quote:
First off, you left out words of mine that are important to the intent and context I spoke with. Second, I didn't define the word 'correctly'. It is alluding to the idea that there is a right and wrong way to teach.


Yes 'correctly' means there is a right or wrong way to teach and that is the word you used. Are you saying you didn't mean to use it?


For the first question--No, I had to start from scratch and redo everything.

For the second question-- I am trying to avoid any harsh disagreement because very few people on this board would agree on what is or isn't the correct method to teach.

I for one think that a person's methodology should fit his or her personality. They shouldn't try to be someone else when they go teach. They need to adapt their material and curriculum to fit who they are. I am also not talking about tearing down the system and building a new one--there is only one that can be used.

In my explanation I am trying to avoid words that would get me in trouble with the TOS so I am being more generic than I normally would be. But when I use the term correctly I am referring to a mixture of presentation by and character of the teacher

I strongly dislike the practice that some teachers who talk nice to the face of the students then say bad things about them when the teacher is with their friends. You may recall the teacher in America who got in trouble for putting nasty things about her students on her facebook page.

I think that is wrong. So my term 'correctly' goes beyond just methodology and curriculum. A bad teacher could have a great methodology or curriculum but yet can't teach it for whatever reason.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
edwardcatflap



Joined: 22 Mar 2009

PostPosted: Thu Jan 09, 2014 6:59 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
For the first question--No, I had to start from scratch and redo everything.


So I infer that you thought the way you were teaching before your training was better than the way they made you teach on the course?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
archaeologist5



Joined: 25 Dec 2013

PostPosted: Thu Jan 09, 2014 7:05 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

edwardcatflap wrote:
Quote:
For the first question--No, I had to start from scratch and redo everything.


So I infer that you thought the way you were teaching before your training was better than the way they made you teach on the course?


No you misunderstand. My training came long before I came to Korea. I had to redo everything via the sink or swim method as I received zero training in this country.

Keep in mind I am a very spiritual person and my change in teaching quality did not come via human help but divine aid. I do not take credit for any good I have done because it wasn't me alone.

This is why I am being very general when I use the term 'correctly' as that term goes beyond just methodology and curriculum. Non-spiritual people have excellent methods and curriculums as well but they lack certain ingredients to make them the best.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
edwardcatflap



Joined: 22 Mar 2009

PostPosted: Thu Jan 09, 2014 7:15 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
Keep in mind I am a very spiritual person and my change in teaching quality did not come via human help but divine aid. I do not take credit for any good I have done because it wasn't me alone.

This is why I am being very general when I use the term 'correctly' as that term goes beyond just methodology and curriculum. Non-spiritual people have excellent methods and curriculums as well but they lack certain ingredients to make them the best.


Ha ha ha. Ok I can see why you might find our 'earthly' training courses a bit beneath you. Say no more
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
archaeologist5



Joined: 25 Dec 2013

PostPosted: Thu Jan 09, 2014 7:35 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

edwardcatflap wrote:
Quote:
Keep in mind I am a very spiritual person and my change in teaching quality did not come via human help but divine aid. I do not take credit for any good I have done because it wasn't me alone.

This is why I am being very general when I use the term 'correctly' as that term goes beyond just methodology and curriculum. Non-spiritual people have excellent methods and curriculums as well but they lack certain ingredients to make them the best.


Ha ha ha. Ok I can see why you might find our 'earthly' training courses a bit beneath you. Say no more


I am not trying to be insulting but answer your question without causing problems.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Unposter



Joined: 04 Jun 2006

PostPosted: Fri Jan 10, 2014 12:15 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Edward,

If you had twins that were "that" identical, their ability to teach would be identical as well and the credentials wouldn't mean anything.

Credentials don't have some special power. They, in of themselves, don't give ability. You either have ability or you don't, regardless of the credentials. Now, some people need formalized education to be able to do the job but some people do not, as evidenced by their ability to do the job.

It is not lazy. It makes economic and academic sense. Why waste your time and money learning something that you either already know or can learn on your own?

A better question is whether schools should focus more on credentials or on the job training? Which is more effective?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
edwardcatflap



Joined: 22 Mar 2009

PostPosted: Fri Jan 10, 2014 12:38 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
Credentials don't have some special power. They, in of themselves, don't give ability. You either have ability or you don't, regardless of the credentials. Now, some people need formalized education to be able to do the job but some people do not, as evidenced by their ability to do the job.

It is not lazy. It makes economic and academic sense. Why waste your time and money learning something that you either already know or can learn on your own?


Well I don't agree and fortunately nor do the vast majority of people doing the hiring at schools all over the world. I think you can learn a lot of the basics of teaching ESL from a course that you wouldn't necessarily learn through experience. After all, we are always the last people to recognise and do something about our own weaknesses and shortcomings. It's arrogant to think you wouldn't benefit from other more experienced teachers' advice.

Basically until you actually get some training you'll never know whether it would have benefited your or not and can't really take part properly in the debate. You're also severely restricting yourself to entry level jobs in a few Asian countries.

Quote:
A better question is whether schools should focus more on credentials or on the job training? Which is more effective?


That's not a serious question as the majority of schools can't afford to hire someone untried. Commercial schools would lose students, and therefore money, and state schools would get complaints from the parents. The only way Korea manages it is to have the co-teaching system in the state system and hagwans insisting their teachers stick to the rigid syllabus at all costs in the private sector.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
archaeologist5



Joined: 25 Dec 2013

PostPosted: Fri Jan 10, 2014 2:14 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
Well I don't agree and fortunately nor do the vast majority of people doing the hiring at schools all over the world.


In reading your discussion with Unposter I think you to are very close in your arguments but you both want to be stubborn and do not want to come to a consensus that teaching needs both of your points working together and not at odds with each other.

Quote:
I think you can learn a lot of the basics of teaching ESL from a course that you wouldn't necessarily learn through experience.


The reverse would be true as well. Training prepares you mentally where you can identify problems before they get worse but on the job puts it all into reality where you can see what does or doesn't work.

Quote:
After all, we are always the last people to recognize and do something about our own weaknesses and shortcomings. It's arrogant to think you wouldn't benefit from other more experienced teachers' advice.


Yes BUT that benefit of experienced teacher's advice can also come from on the job training by talking with them and asking the right questions.

Quote:
That's not a serious question as the majority of schools can't afford to hire someone untried


Nor can they afford to hire a paper qualified teacher and have them fail. The arguments both of you are giving works for both sides because both sides have individuals who do fail. As to the percentages I do not know.

Quote:
Commercial schools would lose students, and therefore money, and state schools would get complaints from the parents.


Commercial schools?? You would have to be more specific on that one as hagwons have had failures from both sides of the fence. Public schools would not nor would universities.

Quote:
The only way Korea manages it is to have the co-teaching system in the state system and hagwans insisting their teachers stick to the rigid syllabus at all costs in the private sector.


A co-teaching situation favors the non-paper trained teacher over the paper trained one. The hagwon situation is a wash.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Unposter



Joined: 04 Jun 2006

PostPosted: Fri Jan 10, 2014 2:56 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I didn't know this before but I was surprised to learn that there are thousands of teachers in the public schools in the U.S. who have never attended an Education College. You can actually teach in the U.S. with a degree in anything. They are expected to receive on the job training though.

And, admittedly, the results of such programs are quite mixed. Some of these people without Education College training do well and some don't, which really isn't a surprise to me.

I don't doubt that peer feedback can be beneficial by the way but to me that is not the point.

The point is that it is not the piece of paper that makes you a good teacher or not. It is being a good teacher or not, regardless of what your piece of paper says.

Is the person who graduates from Oxford University inherently better than the person who graduates from the University of London? No. Though, it may prove that a greater percentage come from one university or another but it is not inherent.

The same is true for ESL qualifications. The qualification does not make one person inherently better than another.

The proof is in the pudding as they say.

When I have served on hiring committees, our prime focus was on educational attainment and work experience. But, we also looked for other qualities such as some kind of interesting background and brought them in for an interview as well because, well, you never know. For the most part those people were never hired but occasionally they were. And, to be honest, maybe half of those did well.

But, you don't know what you are missing out on if you are blind to the possibility.

But, yes, I would not say that the person without teaching qualifications is inherently superior to the person with teaching qualifications.

Personally, I would not be that superficial.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index -> General Discussion Forum All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
Page 3 of 5

 
Jump to:  
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


This page is maintained by the one and only Dave Sperling.
Contact Dave's ESL Cafe
Copyright © 2013 Dave Sperling. All Rights Reserved.

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group

TEFL International Supports Dave's ESL Cafe
TEFL Courses, TESOL Course, English Teaching Jobs - TEFL International