Job Discussion Forums

[Talkdoc]

[ContemporaryDog]

[Old Dog]

In haste:

Thanks, Talkdoc, for your thoughts. Yes, what are we doing here? I do give thought to that question for myself and I also give thought to the whole question of China�s investment in foreign teachers.

When the question of the genuineness of �China�s� seriousness about the teaching of English is raised, I stagger under the weight of the cynicism that is unleashed. But I am not at all cynical about the fact that somewhere in China there is a genuine conviction that China�s opening to the world and its future demand mastery at the best level possible in the circumstances of a capacity with English. Wherever this fount of wisdom may be, I�m sure the decision-makers there recognize that, in this curate�s egg of a country, the ideal will often be far from realized but that, somehow, through it all, a reasonable number of people throughout the land will be equipped sufficiently to deal with China�s needs to relate to the outside world in a language widely understood.

Why do I believe that there is genuineness of intention? I take the final Junior Middle School exam and the National Matriculation Examination as my primary argument and I support that with an argument related to the use of time in Chinese schools. The Junior Middle School Examination gives English an equal footing with other subjects examined. The National Examination gives English an equal place among the three compulsory subjects, English, Chinese and Mathematics. Chinese schools, teachers, students and their parents do not play games with that examination. The consequences of success or failure are too serious for that. I conclude from this that the central government is genuine in its belief about the value for China of competence in English. I cannot believe that a window-dressing exercise would be allowed to intrude into the compulsory element of the examination. Everyone is aware of the seriousness with which Politics is studied in schools. Yet does Politics find its way into the compulsory subject grouping? It does not.

Principals here assure me that, where a school has approval to employ foreign teachers, the salaries of those teachers are paid by the government. Again, I find it difficult to be cynical about a government�s intentions when it is prepared to fork out the amounts what must be a fairly hefty sum in ft salary payments.

And is there not demonstrated among the population at large a belief in the value of a knowledge of English. Can all those entrepreneurs with their often dodgy private organizations selling a product for which there is no market be ill-informed? Are organizations like English First off their rockers financially? Hardly! They recognize that there is a demand in the general population, quite independent of government policy, that they attempt to meet on a commercial basis.

Obviously, promoting literacy and competence in English on so vast a scale is not going to be an easy task. I spent many years as Principal of secondary schools. I had passionate beliefs about all sorts of things � and policies to go with them. But I can�t always say that the troops in the trenches were fired with quite my enthusiasm - and not a little subversion sometimes ferreted away. Be that as it may, my intentions were good � as I believe those of the central government to be good in this regard. Unfortunately, examining 5,000,000 students in English with a three-week deadline for submission of results places something of a strain on enlightened assessment practice. The result is that teachers are forced to teach and students are forced to learn, not with English proficiency in view, but with the attainment of the highest score possible in the National Exam. So good intentions get a little twisted by the pressures of an examination where a �superfluity� of candidates compete for too few places in good universities. I once asked why the teacher who speaks the most beautiful English on the staff had not been given a Grade 3 class. The reply was to the point. �He may speak beautiful English but beautiful English is not what the students want. They want the most beautiful result.�

Posters in this forum may bay to the moon about the atrocious grammar their students bring to tertiary institutions, they may deplore the lack of creativity and spontaneity among their students � but this hardly supports the argument that �China� is not truly serious about its wish to promote excellence in the mastery of English.

And so what am I doing here, what is any of us doing here? One assumes that those seeking the mantle of �Foreign Expert� come with the intention of assisting China�s schools to attain their English goals. What a pity that the distinction between �Foreign Teacher� and �Foreign Expert� has disappeared! But this is by the way � though I�d be more content to see those who come here primarily for a �blast� to labour under the title of �Foreign Teacher� than under the more grand, �Foreign Expert�. I do believe that if people come here and seek employment as English teachers/experts, they should do their best to equip themselves to perform just that task which, by my previous definitions, involves some mastery of content and some mastery of method.

Plato is not fashionable these days � yet his ideas do have something to commend them. If we take the teaching �shilling�, we should make some effort to form ourselves according to a teaching ideal. That our employers are satisfied with less, that they have no understanding of the ideal � these should hardly be matters of consideration. I am underutilized most scandalously as are so many others. I am dissatisfied with that. I recognize that I could be having a �blast� non-stop. Yet I beaver on, pursuing my own ideal of what I should give and giving my classes a level of insight and expertise that, as far as the understanding of administrators and staff is concerned, is often like casting pearls before swine. My ideals may be pearls but my students and my conscience are not swine.

I do admire the logic and the clarity of Talkdoc�s words but he is a sweet talker and sweet talk sometimes masks error. There is one error, as I see it, in his last posting, and this referred to insight and method. He claimed, surely to be nice, that despite his many years in the academic world, despite his rise to the rank of Professor and his vast experience as a teacher, were he to be faced with a primary school class, his manner of presentation and his insights into content and method would be only the equal of that of teachers with neither qualifications nor experience as teachers who may be engaged in the same task. I just can�t see how this can be so. I think that maybe Talkdoc was overcome with an excess of humility when he wrote.

So I return, then, to the question that Talkdoc posed, �What are we doing here?� Well, for me, I have an ideal of what is possible in an English classroom � whatever aspect of English it may be that is pursued in that classroom � and I set out to move in tune with that ideal. I thank Plato. And what do I think we should all be doing? Dare I say it � but I think we should all be doing the same thing. Rats to the lack of understanding of others. Rats to the pay. Rats to the crowded classrooms. Rats to the shonky operators. The important thing is that if we come here as teachers, we should strive to equip ourselves as best we can to meet the ideal that that decision should place before us.

And so to a question that I often ask. Is the acquisition of an adequate standard of English in any way promoted by the current policy of employing a vast army of �Foreign Experts�? Does the central policy of promoting the acquisition of English necessitate such employment? Even were it to be decided that �Foreign Experts� are necessary to this acquisition, one must surely ask what the minimum level of expertise is that is likely to produce a gain that is in line with the aims of central policy.

If the comments about the lamentable standard of English that finds its way into posters� classrooms is any guide, then it seems that both foreigners and Chinese teachers alike have failed dismally. If this is so, why bother with foreign teachers. Why not save the money? If failure is what the government is faced with, why not have failure at half the cost and get rid of the foreigners? And, indeed, I have the feeling that, when rationality prevails, the Chinese will be content to get on with their own version of failure unaided by Experts in the field.

I make no bones to Principals about the fact that, in my view, a school is better off without a foreign teacher than with a bad one. I am not concerned about money here. I am talking about students� time. Time is of the essence in Chinese schools. To employ someone who doesn�t understand what he/she�s on about is not a good use of time. To employ someone without teaching skills is not a good use of time. I go to seminars here and I hear debutantes exclaiming how the children love them, what a �blast� they themselves are having, how the Chinese are treating them like royalty but �I just can�t get the children to listen to me�. Then you are wasting the children�s and the teachers� time, I say. There is no necessary virtue in your physical presence before a class if they are not listening to you and swinging from the rafters. My view is that even the least inspiring Chinese teacher is likely to achieve more of worth in those 40 minutes than a deb. to whom no one is listening. If such teachers were in my school at home, they�d be on the streets and into Macdonalds very quickly. And, if Chinese Principals had any sense, they�d be doing the same thing.

In western countries, despite all the argy-bargy that sometimes goes on between schools and parents, most parents place great faith in the work that teachers do. It is that awareness of parents� faith that should spur all teachers to excellence. In the same way, Chinese Principals place a similar faith in foreign teachers to produce some good, to know how to produce some good. Whether they use us well, whether they have any idea at all of what to do with us, it matters not. We have a responsibility to meet that faith with competence and dedication. And so when I hear that people without much to teach, with no experience as teachers are China-bound, I trust that they will do their best to equip themselves by their dedication to ensure that the faith placed in them is not misplaced. Maybe a little more Bloom and a little less beer would be in order.

And so, finally, to the abominable standards of English that so many posters are offended by. I am reminded, when I read some postings of Lawrence:

No longer can I endure the brunt
Of the books that lie out on the desks; a full threescore
Of several insults of blotted pages, and scrawl
Of slovenly work that they have offered me.
I am sick, and what on earth is the good of it all?
What good to them or to me, I cannot see!

I marvel at these postings sometimes. Surely I do not deceive myself when I am in dining halls here and have perfectly normally conversations in English on a great range of subjects with a mix of students in the High School. And what a delight it is to sit with the Junior School students in their dining hall and find the Junior Grade 1�s capable of splendid conversations within the limits of their grammar and vocabulary mastery. I know only that, in the Junior School here, if I work closely with Chinese teachers over a three-year period, we will produce a set of students ready for High School who can speak English with such a level of competence that they could hold down a conversation in any part of the English-speaking world with total assurance. In the High School, things are rather more mixed. The high-quality city schools with excellent Chinese teachers will produce excellent users of all aspects of English. Things are not so good from the village schools. As for writing, posters complain about grammatical infelicities. How much more then would you be outraged by what you might find coming from the classrooms of so many English-speaking countries. I have seen so much written English coming out of classrooms here that would put the �slovenly work� of native speakers at home to shame.

And so, things are not all bad � as, surely, some posters here must realize but never give voice to.

[arodeorowdy]

Well said Talk Doc, it is a pleasure to read your postings; I have been reading your views since I joined this board.
Old dog could not say it better than you.
Cheers to all, Rowdy4bush

[Talkdoc]

Old Dog, I fully concede that my writing will never possess the flair, style and personality that yours does. And if my posts contain elements of logic and clarity, that�s only because those are the only two attributes required to publish in academia!

As to whose rhetoric contains a greater degree of sucrose for the purposes of masking the bitter taste of the truth, I�ll defer the dubious honor of that distinction to you.

Perhaps I am wrong in my assertion that foreign teachers are used primarily as English speaking practice partners in China. But if I am correct, then I have to repeat my question to you: What possible benefit is there to requiring that these practice partners possess a bachelor�s degree (in any field) and two years of teaching experience?

Do I believe that my lessons provide a greater degree of breath and depth, in regard to method and presentation, than those provided by someone without my credentials? The answer is �of course I do.� But my point is, and I must reiterate, to what avail? (Given the current gross underutilization of truly credentialed people.)

When I was in Shenyang and teaching at a private English language school, I established a very close friendship with a young man, about half my age, who was particularly bright and articulate. He was an Asian studies major in college but had dropped out about six months prior to completion. Prior to coming to China, he had never accumulated even one day of teaching experience.

We were both assigned to teaching classes for this corporate client. We were both teaching from the same set of materials. At the end of the class, our numerical teaching evaluations were identical. What does this mean? What it tells me, among other things, is that my friend was more than able to satisfy the teaching demands of the task at hand without the benefit of a doctorate and over 15 years of university graduate-level teaching experience. Because the teaching assignment at hand simply did not require what I have to offer even though I did cover, I have to believe, a greater breath and scope of material than my junior counterpart did.

If you assign a highly skilled thorasic surgeon to perform as a scrub nurse in an appendectomy, do you believe that the outcome of that operation will be necessarily better for the patient because you had a highly skilled surgeon functioning as a nurse? I don�t think so. (Conversely, I believe I could successfully argue that continuing to use the surgeon as a scrub nurse would eventually adversely affect the outcome of the simple operation; assuming the scrub nurse was content in her job and conscientious and further assuming that the surgeon might become bored and irritable with his lesser assignment.)

I am not experienced enough in China to know if the National Exam speaks to the seriousness of their intent regarding the teaching of English as a foreign language. But I had to wonder if you were attempting to be comedic when you wrote: �If the comments about the lamentable standard of English that finds its way into posters� classrooms is any guide, then it seems that both foreigners and Chinese teachers alike have failed dismally. If this is so, why bother with foreign teachers. Why not save the money? If failure is what the government is faced with, why not have failure at half the cost and get rid of the foreigners?�

The answer to that point, as you well know, is that Asian faces do not sell English language classes at 15 RMB per hour the way White faces do. It�s about business OD, not seriousness of intent.

My friend � if so-called foreign experts were being hired, predominantly, to teach Western literature or courses in linguistics (or even technical English), I would be spearheading your campaign for and with you. But for the most part, we are being utilized to practice oral English with the Chinese students and I simply do not understand, as a professional educator, why that task, in your estimation, requires a minimum of a bachelor�s degree and two years of related teaching experience. I am not attempting to be nice, humble or mendacious with this assertion - but if I was an administrator of a primary school in China, I would hire someone like Rhonda Place over me everyday of the week and twice on Sunday for the job of practicing oral English with the kids. How long do you think someone of my ilk would last passing out stickers, playing games and singing songs to 63 hyperactive, Chinese seven-year olds who, all along, would be attempting to punch me in the stomach (not to mention other sensitive areas)? I don�t even tolerate private conversations in my university classes while I, or the recognized students, are speaking. Unless the kids became suddenly mesmerized and silenced by a discussion on the differences between Jung�s personal vs. collective unconscious, I seriously doubt I would be able to retain what little sanity I have left; not for more than a couple of hours anyway.

So, are you joining me at Lee Odden�s place for some Irish Whiskey on Christmas?

And in all seriousness, thank you for all the time you obviously take to share on this forum. It means a lot to me personally.

Doc

PS. arodeorowdy - thank you for your comments, my friend.

[tradinup]

I am very humbled by some of the posts here, especially TalkDoc's. I think he has proven his point (in true academic form) regarding what qualifications are required to teach in China. This goes against what I previously thought, but then, people's attitudes can change.

I was previously never that concerned with whether or not ESL teachers had a degree or not, rather, whether or not they had a strong enough grasp on the english language to teach it or not. I think I am more of a purist though - I care less about what the employer really wants from me (spoken english), and more towards teaching english the way I feel is right. (I will always stop to correct grammar mistakes when I see them, even if that is not what is wanted of me!)

I suppose I am a rebel then. I also teach piano and see some similarities. For instance, I will meet a potential student who will ask me to teach them how to play a song, and is also willing to pay a substantial amount for these services. Still, I do not feel obligated to fulfill this request immediately. I will first tell them that they need to learn this theory, these scales, and all of these other songs before I will teach them that song. In this way, they can learn to play the piano well.

I feel the same way with english, which of course makes me a disobediant employee at times. I see now that one does not need a degree, or even a real competancy in the english language to be a successful employee in China. China is clearly not asking that of us. The question could be asked; is China asking for the wrong thing? I think it is irrelevant though - the situation is the way it is.


Note: Talkdoc, why not publish a journal on the matter?! With your last post you are probably already halfway there!

[Talkdoc]

[Talkdoc]

As I said in an earlier post, I do believe China has painted herself into something of a corner with her current foreign expert criteria and requirement (for the Z-Visa).

At the risk of being called an "elitist" again, here's what I would recommend. Three distinct "teaching" categories should be established; Foreign Teaching Assistant (minimum H.S. diploma and a TEFL certificate), Foreign Teacher (minimum B.A./B.S. degree and 2 years of teaching experience) and, finally, Foreign Expert (minimum of a M.A./M.S. degree and 5 years of experience). Each category would qualify, obviously, for the Z-Visa.

Then it would be relatively simple to establish specifications for the utilization of each category with appropriate and commensurate pay scales.

Doc

P.S. Of course, we all do know what would happen if such a system was to be implemented. Most of the highly credentialed people teaching in China would disappear or be forced to work as "Foreign Teaching Assistants." But at least that would paint a far more honest (and realistic) portrait of what is currently happening in China. The "teaching assistants" in place wouldn't need to hide behind fake degrees and experience and they would be here legitimately.

[Long ai gu]

If you geniuses don't know why you are here, I suggest you catch the next plane out. The original question this person asked was "Do I need a university degree to teach in China and which areas speak Mandarin". You do not need a university degree to teach in China and it's not because the schools are paying people off. Korea and Japan by law require a university degree, but China does not. China is full of dialects based on Mandarin and Cantonese in the south. A standard Chinese being taught in Chinese schools is called poo-tong wa and is the Chinese commonly spoken in Beijing. When I read all this bickering and off topic sniping at each other it makes me wonder just what kind of people are here teaching English. Good luck in China Jared, as you can see this is a good introduction to the fellow teachers you will be working with.

[Lee_Odden]

I was wondering how long it would be before the rat-pack started its attack in formation.

[Long ai gu]

My appologies sir, I guess this RAT was out of line, or in line as you stated. Personal insults and academic debate mix well I see.

[Zero]

[badtyndale]

[tradinup]

Let's stay on track people. Forget about quotation marks and rats for a minute... Anyone else want to add their bit?

[Jared]

Man I never thought that one topic by me would get people in a big discussion that evolved from this topic "Degrees or no Degrees".