Job Discussion Forums

[Cobra]

DOING THE QUOTE THING!

PUT YOUR CURSER AT THE BEGINNING OF THE MATERIAL TO BE QUOTED. CLICK AND HOLD THE MOUSE BUTTON DOWN WHILE SCANNING OVER THE ENTIRE MATERIAL TO BE QUOTED. YOU HAVE NOW HIGHLIGHTED THE MATERIAL YOU WANT TO QUOTE.

NEXT CLICK THE QUOTE ICON.

DONE!

[Cobra]

I AGREE THAT TEACHERS MAY WISH TO TRY IMPROVING BASIC SKILLS.

[Roger]

And a slightly misanthropic piece of my mind:

Native English speakers take themselves by far too seriously! Since the majority of them have never had to acquire a second tongue themselves, they tend to believe they have an unique gift that they could market. Turning your mother's tongue into gold - bah! Who is so conceited but natives from certain countries which pursue geopolitical ambitions? (An interesting aside to the war in Rwanda - when the Americans came to pacify that country, English was introduced, and French had to take a backseat - ask those poor Africans how happy they are having to study TWO Western languages which they seldom need, and never need in conversations with Westerners!).

There also is this mentality - prevalent in NOrth America, I feel (but correct me if it is also prevalent in English-speaking Gibraltar or Kivalu!), that teaching is for the adventurous, womanising, drug-sniffing world traveller who has loans to repay back home.
Well, when I moved to China, I had enough funds to tide me over for the foreseeable time. Believe it or not, but I do hear of Westerners arriving in China and being completely down and out until they get a job! Whether that's a professional attitude, or deficient in other ways as well is moot.

Another angle:
Virtually all countries in the world employ locally-recruited, locally-trained English teachers. Most of you out there could not discharge your duties overseas without your students first having undergone preparation for this task with the help of their own teachers! These "foreign" teachers DO HAVE to be professional, yet so many of us "native English speakers" take over from them, thinking we are going to do a much better job than they were.
I hold that if you can't teach the basics of your own language you are not a teacher. "Basics" means everything that our local colleagues have to teach. Teaching grammar to foreign students is a lot more challenging than teaching it to one's own peers.
And this is where our employers come into the picture: they employ us (most of the time) for conversation practice. It's precisely this specialisation that causes many of us to have troubles for which we are not sufficiently prepared - our foreign students do not tick the way we wish they would because they are anchored in their native culture, and their own teachers fail to use English outside formal settings. There is a clash between Western expectations and local habits.
Let's dispense with fancies and delusions! No one in the world needs "native English speakers" to acquire proficiency in English! In most countries, foreign languages are taught without practising conversation! In these countries, it isd a lot harder for native speakers to find an English teaching job. And, no, the English of students there is no worse off than the English in East Asian countries - if anything, it is better, more functional.

Besides, 'native English speakers" is a misnomer par excellence! "Mother tongue English speaker" is more accurate. No one is born a speaker of their first language - your mother makes you that.
In some cases, however, your father may speak another "mother tongue". We then are dealing with bilingual speakers.
And, that is, in my opinion, the most reliable indicator of someone's suitability as a teacher: if they are NOT monolingual, then they know intimately a bit about the differences between the various modes of thinking and different languages.
You do not need to be fluent in your students' first tongue - it is helpful if you speak any two or more different languages.
But, how many "native English speakers" are mentally prepared to make those efforts that they expect their English majors to make?

In countries like Kora or China, certs, talents and education of job
candidates are of secondary importance. Consideration is first given to
- Nationality of candidate (North Americans preferred - ask yourself, why!
- Manupulativity (not a neglibible quality in view of the highly
sensitive political situations of our host countries);
- Photogenic candidates!

Well, and if you are familiar with, and a pious follower of, Krashen and his ilk then you are promised a fun time in China.

[Cleopatra]

I think what Roger says about native speakers being employed only to teach conversation may be true in ASia, but certainly is not elsewhere in the world. In Europe and the Middle East, NS teachers most definately do have to teach grammar - and often other skills such as business writing -to students.

Obviously, if you don't market yourself as a professional - I'm talking the in-it-for-the-beer-no-qualifications-backpacker type teacher, then you have no right to expect to be treated as a professional. However, plenty of teachers do put a lot of effort into both obtaining qualifications and giving good lessons. The mangers of such schools often charge quite a bit of money from students, only a tiny proportion of which makes its way to the teachers.

I think the problem is that EFL is now a very competitive for profit business, and also that there is an attitude out there that 'anyone can teach English'. I work in the training centre of a hospital in Saudi ARabia, and - needless to say - my employers would not dream of taking on a clinical instructor who did not have appropriate qualifications and expereince. At the same time, however, they accept applications for EFL teachers from people who have barely ever been in a classroom since the time they finished school. We often get CVs from NS people who are qualified as teachers of Maths or Science, for example, but despite the fact that they've never taught English, reckon they might as well go ahead and apply because, hey, anyone can teach English, can't they?

[guest of Japan]

To Roger and Cleopatra, are you looking for a teacher or a linguist? I am a certified history teacher, but in the US I have taught history, economics, politics, English, Math, and the sciences. How could I have taught all those classes that I'm not qualified for? Answer: training in pedagogy and psychology with lots and lots of hands-on structured and evaluated experience. Being a student of something does not qualify a person to be a teacher. Is it helpful? Certainly. But even lowly "Native English Speakers" know more about the field they teach than doctorate holders in any other subject area.

[Roger]

I would love to teach world history, but I have no relevant degree, and thus, I can't be trusted to remember the exact date when Julius Cesar was born!
As for your somewhat sarcastic attitude: it is precisely this frame of mind that I have found in many Chinese English students that I deplore, you know , youngsters that come to class telling me "I do not need to be a linguist to speak English - just let me do the talking, and my English will improve... no grammar..."
Who put such moronic fads into young minds?
Yes, I think a whole generation of underachieving TEFLers who come here to enjoy their time and put in a little more than a dozen hours a week practising oral English with locals.

I note Cleopatra's correction. So in OTHER countries native English speakers have to teach the more substantive subjects too. I am glad.
Meanwhile, lots of the teachers that roam China have the desire - but not the relevant qualifications or experience - to teach elsewhere. They often complain on this board about "discrimination" against them.

Oh, and today I read in a newspaper that airport tower staff in China's airports shall in future communicate with pilots, both international and domestic ones, in English - a departure from the cosy situation prevalent until now that allows for them to speak in Chinese to pilots flying Chinese airliners.
Lest you think China is really becoming more international, this new rule applies only for the airports of Peking, Shanghai and Guangzhou (besides Hong Kong and Macau).
Where in the world do local airlines and those manning airport towers resort to local languages? Only in China, right?
Doesn't this say something about the deplorable state of English in this country?

[guest of Japan]

What I'm saying is that vast amounts of specific subject knowledge are less important than the skills of teaching. Simple preparation can prepare a teacher to give the details of the lesson, whether it be infinitives or Julius Caesar's birthdate. Of course at the university level the expectation of professors is on knowledge and not teaching, and quite rightly so, since at this level the teacher is not focusing on things like motivation, classroom behavior, student learning styles, and cognitive ability.

I am not advocationg teachers coasting through lessons without preparation. I am saying that being a teacher requires the skills in teaching first and foremost, followed by subject knowledge.

I apologize for my sarcasm in my previous post. Mark

[spatrick]

In general, I agree with most of the sentiments expressed here. I do have some qualifications I�d like to throw in.

Unlike other subject specific topics one might teach -- maths or biology say -- the real difficulty of having students learn a language is that most of the learning is done sub- and or unconsciously. It has been my experience that those students who memorize and "learn" the language will sooner or later hit the dreaded big hard wall where fluency comes in. Just one example will suffice -- in my classes, the Ss throw out their electronic dictionaries after they have passed the basic level (hence going into high basic). Can you imagine learning math without formulae?

It is also true (I believe) that most language schools do not teach, and need not teach, EAP classes. Therefore, the Ss use and need of writing and professional speaking abilities (read OPs) is much lower. This, of course, makes both the teaching and the learning less demanding.

As far as non-native teachers: I maintain that the same theoretical and grammatical knowledge is necessary native or not. One of the strongest professional experiences I�ve ever had was when I was living in Hungary where every English professor over 40 used to teach Russian -- the Min of Ed gave those teachers a little over one year (as I remember) to learn English or get a different job. They did and were some of the best teachers I know.

Being able to speak one�s native language in no way, to me, suggests that you can teach the language, other than conversation courses (which doesn�t really seem to be teaching anything other than regulating and perhaps suggesting corrections -- it�s been many years since I taught a "conversation" class). I am aware that many schools do not have NT teaching the grammar. I don�t know their motivation, but I have always assumed these schools do this as they don�t want to accept contemporary language learning theory, but rather keep with the good old days of drill and kill. I further believe that these schools will be or are heading toward extinction in most countries (including China, it just might take a while there). The reason I believe this is I have had many students from various countries (including China) who�ve come over to the US for an IEP experience and groaned about having to go back to their countries�learning practices. Obviously these are the well off people, but as is the case so often (too often?), they will probably be calling the shots now or in the future.

As far as native English teachers who do not speak a second language, I agree that there is something terribly wrong here. I myself do not speak a second language fluently -- my best is Spanish. Yet, I have learned the conception(s) of numerous languages from when I lived in dif countries. I have also experienced various ways of learning languages by sitting in on native-to-that-country primary school classes. This topic reverts back to qualifications -- most Masters programs demand that you learn at least one language, and many two or three.

Now, on the other hand, most of the TESOL literature suggests that most of the students, esp. in EFL, will never need nor want fluency. Further, most students will never have to communicate in a natural setting with native speakers: rather they will deal with other second language users who presumably learned in the same fashion as they. I can�t tell you the number of places I�ve taught where certain non-English phrases are not only accepted, but deemed significantly more correct as the Ss peers, now and in the future, will be using these forms. Should a teacher correct this when s/he knows that ultimately it will hurt the Ss� future? For me, it depends on the student -- those wishing to go to an English medium univ. or get a job in which they will need to frequently speak with native speakers, yes they should know the difference. Yet, really, how many of our students really need to be able to _fluently_ use the subjunctive? (I teach the subjunctive in terms of Job Interviews where it actually may make a difference).

Definitely an interesting thread. Keep it coming.

Patrick

[struelle]

[lagger]

I also blame the Directors rather than the backpackers (who will make a living any way they can).

A lot of them only seem to care about whether you are white and attractive. I have a drop dead gorgeous Colombian friend (who can't speak English for shit) teaching English to children in Korea. I laughed my ass off when she told me and she agrees that she barely speaks English and doesn't understand why they gave her a job.

[dduck]

[khmerhit]

Sorry, dduck, I don't buy that one. I'm no economist, but i have read the Economist and other journals, and i seem to recall that China is considered important but not a world-shattering power, evn for the future. There were several things they need to do to improve their economy first, because essentially it is a mom and pop affair. Hang on;;; I will look and see if i can't find some links.

Here we are... i typed the keywords: china--economy--potential

The OECD chief listed some the challenges China would be confronted with in the coming decade as: a segmented market, insufficient utilization of resources, an imbalance in economic growth, a growing gap between rural and urban areas, the slow increase in farmers' incomes, the poor educational levels of the enormous rural population, regional protectionism, a financial system which lags behind economic growth, and trade monopolization.
He suggested that the Chinese government should play an active role in eliminating regional economic segments and encourage fair competition in the financial sector.
He cited Europe as an example where the problem of different rates of growth in different areas is being solved. While emphasizing free trade, Europe also regards balanced development throughout the area important.
The OECD chief expressed his confidence in the future of China's economy. He said that the OECD hopes to further its cooperation with China.
"The OECD is convinced that China's economy has enormous potential," said Johnston, "with proper management China can be a force for prosperity in the region and throughout the world."

http://www.google.ca/search?q=cache:IXtpvcLd-0gJ:english.people.com.cn/200203/28/eng20020328_93022.shtml+china+economy+potential&hl=en&ie=UTF-8

[Capergirl]

@Steve (struelle)...Loved your post. I think you are right about the future of "international" languages and the fact that English will not be 'top dog' forever. All of these people who are becoming proficient in English as a second language are going to have the advantage over native speakers of English who cannot speak any other languages. Most of my students are multilingual and all of them seem to be interested in learning other languages in the future after "mastering" English. Here in Canada - a bilingual country - you will find a far greater number of monolinguals (English speakers) than bilinguals. I often wonder how people can believe so completely that English is the language, and that it will not benefit them in any way to learn any other language - even French, which is so prevalent here in our own country. Sure, there are people the world over paying lots of money to learn English. We seem to forget, however, that these people already know at least one other language.

On that note, I would also like to add that if people like us are going to teach a second language to others, I believe that we should already have learned a second language ourselves. This enables us to better understand the position our students are in and I think (and this is just my opinion) that it makes us better teachers of ESL/EFL.

[dduck]

[Corey]

I have to disagree also. English has such a huge lead and will remain important into the distant future. The amount of info stored on the net has nothing to do with how useful or used it is.