|
Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Students and Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
rtm
Joined: 13 Apr 2007
Posts: 1003
Location: US
|
 Posted: Mon Sep 15, 2014 8:54 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| Martinaj wrote: |
| Does 6 hours of supervised teaching really trump 3.5 years of experience? This is just getting a little hard for me to wrap my head around. |
For some employers, yes (but not all). Experience doesn't necessarily result in good teaching. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Martinaj
Joined: 07 Sep 2014
Posts: 35
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 15, 2014 8:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| rtm wrote: |
| For some employers, yes (but not all). Experience doesn't necessarily result in good teaching. |
A fair point, but I would imagine in most cases it means, especially if your employer asked you to renew your contract three times, that you at least understand the ins and outs of managing a classroom and putting lessons together, and, by the same token, 6 hours of experience doesn't necessarily mean you'll be prepared for an entire term. I had been under the impression that the in-classroom course was less essential for teachers with prior experience. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
rtm
Joined: 13 Apr 2007
Posts: 1003
Location: US
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 15, 2014 9:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Martinaj wrote: |
| I would imagine in most cases it means, especially if your employer asked you to renew your contract three times, that you at least understand the ins and outs of managing a classroom and putting lessons together, and, by the same token, 6 hours of experience doesn't necessarily mean you'll be prepared for an entire term. |
One would think that renewals signified good performance, right? But, that's not necessarily the case. Some employers have no idea what their teachers do in the classroom, and as long as there are no (or few) complaints from students, contracts get renewed.
Some hiring employers would rather take a 'known' 6-hours of teaching experience than an 'unknown' 3.5 years.
Of course, some employers will prefer the 3.5 years of experience, and for some employers the in-class certificate won't be necessary. For others, however, they'll want to see the in-class certificate and supervised teaching experience. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
spiral78
Joined: 05 Apr 2004
Posts: 11534
Location: On a Short Leash
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 16, 2014 4:34 am Post subject: |
|
|
To put it another way, working 3.5 years for an employer who required zero related qualifications doesn't assure another potential employer that 'you' can measure up where teaching standards are applied.
To elaborate a bit:
For all a potential employer knows, your Chinese employer may have renewed teachers (not you specifically, but their teachers in general) for reasons like:
1.they're blonde and blue-eyed
2. they are cool and play a mean guitar in the classroom
3. their lessons were super-fun and based on popular US culture
4. they made friends with your students and hung out regularly
5. they were quiet and low key and simply didn't rock the boat; easy to get along with on the admin side
6. other equally unrelated to the meat-and-bones of EFL teaching.....
Last edited by spiral78 on Tue Sep 16, 2014 6:22 am; edited 3 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sashadroogie
Joined: 17 Apr 2007
Posts: 11061
Location: Moskva, The Workers' Paradise
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 16, 2014 5:02 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Martinaj wrote: |
| I had been under the impression that the in-classroom course was less essential for teachers with prior experience. |
Just curious - where did this idea come from? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
nomad soul
Joined: 31 Jan 2010
Posts: 11454
Location: The real world
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 16, 2014 5:20 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Martinaj wrote: |
IDELT is, as is obvious from the website, a 140 hour certification course. It was modeled after the CELTA, and I guess one of their selling points is specifically delving into things like various teaching methodologies and generally getting more academic about things than Bridge's more standard TEFL. I am waiting to get this confirmed by UNC, but I believe that the university either reviewed their course or helped design it.
The certificate you get from the course does NOT indicate a connection to UNC. It is accredited by ACCET, which is on the certificate. Along with the certificate, you also get grade and a transcript of the course, and the transcript IS from the UNC and this IS indicated. They also provide a course breakdown that employers can look at, so they know exactly what the course entails, but I don't know how many would bother to look that. |
You have two separate components to your situation: one is academic, the other impacts employment. In terms of academics, if you're interested in eventually pursuing a TEFL-related MA (regardless of where it's taken), then it's worth it to follow up with UNC about the assessed grad credits from the IDELT. However, for employment, it won't matter that the IDELT may have been set up by UNC or that it's modeled after the CELTA. Your particular IDELT course falls short of that comparison.
| and wrote: |
Does 6 hours of supervised teaching really trump 3.5 years of experience? This is just getting a little hard for me to wrap my head around.
....
I would imagine in most cases it means, especially if your employer asked you to renew your contract three times, that you at least understand the ins and outs of managing a classroom and putting lessons together, and, by the same token, 6 hours of experience doesn't necessarily mean you'll be prepared for an entire term. I had been under the impression that the in-classroom course was less essential for teachers with prior experience. |
Ironically, you mentioned how you're learning a lot from your IDELT course---as if it's energized you. Supervised teaching practice would have been a continuation of your learning---giving you an opportunity to put those new concepts and techniques to actual practice under the expertise and guidance of a seasoned pro.
Anyway, as I and others have repeatedly pointed out, there's no proof you were properly trained to teach. Moreover, your teaching has never been observed and assessed. Simply teaching for 3.5 years on contract renewals means zippo to many potential employers, which is why you'll see job postings specifying CELTA, Trinity, SIT or a CELTA-equivalent TEFL cert. So keep in mind there are plenty of teachers who also have 3 or more years of experience gained after their CELTA/in-class equivalent teacher training. That's who you're competing against for jobs. Additionally, make sure you have a good answer if ever asked during an interview why you didn't get a TEFL cert that included supervised teaching practice.
By the way, many of us with relevant MAs are still formally observed and assessed; it's actually standard practice for the profession. In fact, I've personally been observed at least once a year for every year I've taught and consider it a professional development tool. Although observations vary in length, context, criteria, competencies, etc., the main objective stays the same: to guide and support the teacher toward becoming more aware of and reflective on his/her strengths and weaknesses (what's going well vs. what needs improvement) in the classroom in order to optimize the students' learning experience. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
spiral78
Joined: 05 Apr 2004
Posts: 11534
Location: On a Short Leash
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 16, 2014 6:21 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| By the way, many of us with relevant MAs are still formally observed and assessed; it's actually standard practice for the profession. |
I and my colleagues (at three institutions over the past decade +) have always been observed. Often far more often than annu | | |
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
