Job Discussion Forums

[Lynn]

[dduck]

[Lynn]

[James Stunell]

Maybe again, it depends on the language. I'm not sure about Japanese; maybe people just don't trust non-native teachers because the language is perceived as being so difficult to master. However, a friend of mine in Sorrento makes a little bit of cash on the side teaching Italian to tourists. And people actually pay this Englishman to teach them Italian in a country cram-packed with native Italians! The reason? Because they think that he's more in tune with the sort of problems they will experience with the language. And probably, being a fellow-Anglo Saxon, they feel that they ae less likely to be ripped-off. But it's certainly an interesting question.

[Roger]

Let's not oversimplify and arrive at preposterous conclusions: the ability to teach a language, any language has little to do with a person's ethnic background or mother tongue! It has much more to do with a person's ability to get that language across to learners. That ability has to do with understanding the language and the learner. The teacher is the interface and guide between the two of them.
I am certain that Westerners can teach Japanese and Arabic, or Chinese and Korean. Fact is that most languages have been "discovered" by Westerners, and made a subject at Western universities. If we go back to when Asia was forcibly opened up to the Western world, we will easily find proof that Westerners taught themselves the local tongues, made them accessible to their peers and finally taught locals our languages - this happened in Japan, KOrea and China. SO how can anybody claim teachers have to be "native" speakers of the target language? To me, this contention has always reeked of Anglosaxon protectionism as only English speakers propagate this concept so vehemently - go to the Fre3nch, and watch as Arabs, Africans or Caribbeans teach la langue de VOltaire et Rousseau to Chinese, Filippinos and others!

I find it healthy to question the need for foreign countries to hire "native English speakers" (I would put a question mark to this concept as I doubt it is an accurate term; it implies you are born an English speaker, which you are not; you are an English mother tongue speaker, which means your mother taught you the essentials of your first language!). But I think it is way over the top to say that English speakers cannot teach an asian language! They can - provided they study it in-depth just as our Asian students and their local teachers have to study our language in-depth!

[denise]

James--

I did the same thing as your friend. I took Czech lessons (sponsored by my school, not private, if that makes any difference) from a British colleague in Prague. Why? Because I/we felt that he could understand where we were coming from, help us through our problems, etc. I knew I wouldn't be getting as much natural input as I would with a native speaker, but at that point I was a true beginner, and almost nothing was comprehensible to me. A year later, I went to a class taught by a Czech teacher. The grammar explanations weren't as clear as they had been before (our colleague used liberal amounts of English--should we get back into the "to translate or not to translate" debate?), but since I had been there for a while at that point, I had acquired a bit more and could follow along.

Now I am going to a Japanese class taught by a Japanese teacher. She, too, sometimes translates/explains things in English, but I am getting so much exposure to Japanese that I don't feel at all cheated.

d

[Irish]

It's an interesting twist on the original topic but it's hard to answer because it brings in so many different points.

The question of whether someone would pay to learn Japanese (or Italian or Arabic or some other language) from a non-native speaker of that language is valid, but that's more about image than skill. Just because a teacher doesn't look the part or hold the "right" passport doesn't mean that he or she can't do the job. Although this issue can (and does) hurt people looking for work, it tells us nothing about their abilities.

Can ESL/EFL teachers teach other languages? Sure, if they're willing to put in the time and effort required to become good at it. Whether or not that's possible/practical is a whole other story. Like the Duck said, it depends on the person. Personally, I wouldn't teach either of the other languages that I know (in addition to English) because I don't feel confident enough in my abilities. Then again, I haven't put the effort into achieving that level of fluency. Dealing with my first language keeps me busy enough.

[dduck]

[Lynn]

[Ajax]

I'm a non-native teacher of English from an East European country. I read this thread with interest and it seems that in general natives have a good word to say about non-natives. In my own country I'm also a teacher of English at a good University from my native town. At the moment I'm doing my masters in Thailand, where I also teach English for one of the best schools in Bangok. I've decided to post a message (my first one) because I always come across this issue in my daily life.

The thing is that as soon as I started teaching in Thailand I have gained so much respect from the schools' managers and from my students that later on I had to reject classes due to lack of time. At the language school where I was working part-time, non-natives were the ones who were never late and who were willing to fill in on short notice. They were more reliable. I'm not saying that natives are lazy, but from my own experience in Thailand I can say that non-natives have always finished their contracts on good terms with everybody. Of course there were some exceptions. Those exceptions came from the persons who were not qualified to teach English in their own country. They had a good command of the language but they were not able to control a class.

I think this reliability comes from the fact that when non-natives apply for a teachng position they are rejected many times just because their passport is from a non-native speaking country. This is one of the reasons that makes us (the non-natives) stick with the schools and try and do our best. It is funny that schools won't hire non-natives only if they had previous experiences with such teachers. As soon as people get to understand that accent is not that important our life is easier and easier.

But I have to say that I won't ever try (with my current qualification) to teach my native language! Not at home and not elsewhere. I think I understand better the English language than my own native one.

[Lynn]

Today I taught the first lesson. And, surprisingly, it went very well. The student was very happy with the lesson and wants to continue every week. She has even asked if her sister could join.

However, I must include that the student is actually a high school humanities teacher. Therefore, she understands the process of learning and teaching. She even said that she knows her Hispanic students could never teach Spanish, even though it is their mother-tongue.

Anyhow, just thought I'd share that with you all since I posed the question a few months ago.

[Dave Kessel]

In regards to an East European not having problems teaching English in Thailand:

An average Thai cannot distinguish an East Euro from an American or a Greek or an Australian. Traditionally, these are " Farangs" ( white people whom most Thais see as one homogenous nation) and they speak a " Farang " language. So, a Pole could teach English in Thailand and Thais would be happy. But a Black American will have very very hard time getting a job there. It would be, like...impossible ( ?). So would an Asian American, maybe not impossible but very hard. A Thai wants to see a "Farang". So, if you are from Transylvania, you might have a much better chance getting a job in Thailand teaching English ( which is the native language of all white people from Portugal to Kamchatka and from Alaska to Tierra de Fuego, according to an average Thai ) than a 3d generation Chinese American.

Now as far as teaching languages in the US as a non-native speaker, at a university you should not have much trouble provided you have the qualifications- MA, PhD, etc. And also, there won't be much trouble in the school system.

I have seen many Cubans and Filipinos teaching English at the LA Unified School District. Iranians and all that. They have a degree in Education/English, so they teach it.

I have had native- born Americans with PhDs teach me Spanish and French and Latin ( this one would be hard to get a native speaker of). There were Poles and Yugoslavs teaching Russian in NY. But these were all at State University of New York.

And yes, I remember a blond Southern lady teach Japanese to people going to Japan. She worked in Seattle for an East/West Educational exchange organization.

In the US, while tutorees can employ their prejudices against us, or maybe small language schools can do that ( while breaking the law, actually), solid, respectable colleges and universities in the US will not normally do it and if they do do it, hey, we can sue them. If we have qualifications and they discriminate against us because of race or national origin, they violate our constitutional rights.

[shmooj]

I'm a firm believer that, with the state of foreign language teaching in 2003, non-natives who are proficient in a foreign language are better teachers of that language than native speakers of it.

But the reasons that this is so seem to have been forgotten here. Let's face it, the majority of so called EFL teachers are simply lacking professionality. While the non-native seems to know more about the language works this is not because they are better able to understand this. It is, literally, because they have done their homework. If we natives were to do our homework, we too would understand our own languages.
So, until us supposed English teachign professionals actually study to earn this wonderful epithet, the non-natives will win hands down. How many of you did a grammar test on your initial teacher training along with non-native teachers? You fared miserably compared to them didn't you? I know I did. But I'd give them a run for their money now...

Also, it is often cited that non-natives are more sympathetic to learners in the learning process. Again, this is by default as most English teachers rarely become proficient in another language. It is simply too easy for them to remain English speakers and often hard for them to fit into another culture and learn that language when they are there as "ambassadors" for English so to speak. Natives who have learned another, or a few, languages well and worked hard at it are arguably just as sympathetic when teaching their native language. Particularly if they have worked with students for years and years.

So, non-natives may be better now but they earn this title, IMHO, by default. They are handed it on a platter by the sad bunch that usually masquerades under the banner "Native Speaker Teacher".

[FGT]

I agree with Shmooj that studying a language in order to teach it generally makes for a better teacher. 11 years into this business and I'm still learning about my language, thank God: that's one of the reasons that this job is still interesting and enjoyable plus I believe that I'm a better teacher now than x years ago. Non-native teachers of English have the "advantage" that they've learnt English the 'hard' way and are therefore, perhaps, in a better position to put it across to the learner rather than someone who speaks it instinctively.

However, I believe that as EFL teachers we have (providing we study/ make the effort etc) a unique role to play, in that our classrooms can become an island of English, where L1 is the foreign language and we can respond in a natural way to queries about cultural mores as well as enabling our students to master the intracacies and illogicalities of grammar, syntax etc. This is even more apparent if the NET has knowledge of linguistic and cultural differences between L1 and L2 and can incorporate/ complement/ highlight these in his/her teaching.

I would suggest a parallel between learning maths from a teacher who struggled to learn maths themselves and can therefore identify with the learner, explain things in simplistic terms etc., such that the learner can sail through an exam with ease; and a mathematical prodigy who can inspire and illuminate and generate a feeling for the art of maths so that the learner is swept along and overcomes his/her initial fear and blinkered attitude to the subject.

Whether or not you agree with this hypothesis may depend on your experience of learning maths!

[Afra]

English language teaching has been my career. I started in Spain and along the way became fluent in Spanish; to the point that Spaniards would ask which part of Spain I was from. It was usually lack of cultural information which made people realise I wasn't Spanish.
After a years of not using Spanish, I joined an evening class taught by a native speaker who had no previous teaching experience and who had just past the Cambridge PET - I learnt this after I had paid! Although this woman had been to language classes which used communicative approaches to learning, she had no idea how to approach teaching Spanish or even how to use the course book as a teacher. During the classes, she constantly asked my advice about what to do and how to manage the various tasks. Eventually, some students complained to the college and I was asked to take over the class, which I did until they found a properly qualified Spanish teacher.
As a result of this, of my experience teaching in a variety of countries, of teaching multi-lingual classes and as a language learner, I would say that a native speaker is not always the best option but that a native speaker can impart cultural aspects of a language in a way that a non-native teacher probably can't. However, although non-native English teachers are wonderful at grammar, deconstructing sentences, etc. but they don't seem to teach much outside the 'standard'.