Job Discussion Forums

[nomad soul]

We're very much aware of what the acronyms stand for. However, from a teaching and learning perspective, what are the differences between TESL and TEFL? Or are they essentially the same thing once you get past their acronyms?

Having taught both, I have my own opinions but raise this question for the benefit of those new to the field as well as others who have experience teaching one English language context yet are contemplating the other.

Comments?

[spiral78]

I suppose the most obvious (and possibly the most significant) difference is the makeup of the classroom. For those who don't know yet, TEFL is usually taught in non-Anglophone countries, meaning that most students will share a first language. TESL is more often taught in Anglophone countries, and so students in a classroom may come from different language backgrounds. There are advantages/disadvantages to each.

I've taught both.
For me, if it's lower level students, TESL can be simpler, as students are essentially forced to use English in the classroom to a greater degree as most/many classmates will not share the same native language. Motivation to learn can be stronger and more immediate, especially if the students are immigrants. Not so much at language schools (lots of 'language tourists' there whose first priority may be to have a great time as opposed to really learning something).

TEFL in my context - higher level learners with real needs for the language - is my preference. Again, motivation tends to be strong in my situation, and it's easier to deal with the 'same' patterns of linguistic difficulty in this case than with a whole range based on a variety of first language patterns.

TEFL for lower-level students in their home countries can be tough in the case that they can't see real need to learn. I'm fortunate not to have been there, but a huge percentage of the market is in such situations and I am sure there are rewards and benefits.

[Sashadroogie]

I think, and am open to correction here, that the distinction is a little more than just where the lessons take place. In the UK, for example, it is still referred to as TEFL. This seems to be because, even though it is in an anglophone country, the school caters for learners who are not planning to stay and integrate in that country. By contrast, in the US, there seems to be much more of an emphasis on ESL, as the learners are usually living and working there, and/or in the process of naturalisation.

[Sashadroogie]

By extension, then, ESL class also includes elements of local culture, citizenship, basic knowledge of the new country etc. TEFL usually avoids all that, even when taught in the UK.

[spiral78]

Hmmm. I am not sure about this. The private language school industry caters to massive numbers of students who are not planning to stay in the country. This is true for all of North America....not sure which acronym they apply. Though I'd venture that some schools calling it EFL rather than ESL may simply not be entirely cognizant of the distinction.

[Sashadroogie]

As I said, I'm open to clarification on this point. But to me, that is the main difference in how lessons seem to be oriented. In the UK, it is for foreigners who need English for their lives back home. In the US, it seems to be more for new citizens. Certainly this is what the course books from the UK and the US would strongly suggest. Very few American course books are sold globally, mainly because the ones that are published are produced for the domestic market. The UK, on the other hand churns out course book after course book for the international market, and few if any today contain those painful Headway type texts about the royal family in Buckingham palace.

[Sashadroogie]

Hey, Nomad Soul. Can you tell us what your own ideas on this topic are? Cheers.

[Xie Lin]

Having taught both, I've found that a few of the distinctions do make a practical difference in the classroom. Motivation levels, as Spiral mentioned, can often be much higher in the ESL class, fueled by immediate need. The second big difference is English immersion outside the classroom, compared to EFL where students may hear little, if any, English between classes. Taken together, these two differences can lead to much faster progress is the ESL class.

Obviously the make-up of the class is an important distinction, as well. However, the multi-lingual ESL class is not as prevalent as we typically think, at least in the US. Many ESL classes are composed of students who share a single first language. I've taught English in the US to a class of Somali immigrants, and it is common to teach classes composed solely of Spanish, Chinese, or Korean students. Various parts of the country have large well-established immigrant communities where mono-lingual classes are common. Smaller immigrant populations tend to cluster in particular locations, as well. In the years following the Vietnam war, for example, school districts and resettlement agencies in my city provided ESL classes to groups of Vietnamese. More recently the state has seen an influx of Somali refugees, who are mainly concentrated in two locations, again allowing for single language ESL classes.

In such classes, the advantage of students not being able to communicate in a language other than English is lost. But so is the difficuly of dealing with the typical error patterns and difficulties of multiple languages.

.

[Xie Lin]

[spiral78]

[Chancellor]

While there are real distinctions (as the others have explained), more and more the two terms are being used interchangeably. In US public schools, they refer to English language learners, though the teacher is still called an ESL teacher.

[teacheratlarge]

[Sashadroogie]

Not sure I can follow the logic of that post. Could be a good point, though. Some clarification please?

[rtm]

I'd agree with Xie Lin's suggestion that it's more about 'use' than 'setting' -- or, actually, more about motivation and goals. I've taught at non-English-medium universities in non-anglophone countries, at English-medium universities in non-anglophone countries, and at English-medium universities in anglophone countries. The most similar were at the English-medium universities, regardless of where they were. At both, the students' goals were to acquire the academic English skills necessary to complete their tertiary education in English. The content and ways of teaching were very similar.

As others have pointed out, ESL in the US doesn't necessarily mean a mixed, multilingual classroom anymore. In my university IEP classes in the US, I used to have about 1/2 Chinese and 1/2 Korean. Nowadays, I typically have about 1/2 Chinese and 1/2 Saudi. Lots of L1 use by the students.

[Sashadroogie]