Job Discussion Forums

[gordogringo]

Came across an interesting situation that I thought could spark a thoughtful debate among this group of ESL educators.Here's a little background.
Two cousin's of my girlfriend announced they were moving to Tijuana and of course,in with us.They wanted to enroll at my school.As we don't have a chair to spare right now I thought maybe this would be a chance to further explore what others are doing.Coincidentally at a Tijuana chamber of commerce meeting a week ago I happened to sit next to a couple of ladies that ran ESL schools and they invited me to come by.So I scooped up the cousins and off we went to sit in on classes.I visited two schools.The lesson quality varied a bit from mediocre to average.Neither school used immersion technique.One thing that the schools had in common is they had no native English speakers on staff.None.Both school managers told me in the office behind closed doors that this is a more profitable strategy and the teachers were adequate.The first teacher I watched had a very heavy accent and told me he was originally from Chiapas.He told me this in Spanish because I could'nt understand his English.The only way I knew what sentences they were practicing was when he wrote them on the board.
The second teacher in school two was a bit better.However,he did not engage the students and during activities did not say anything about numerous grammatical errors.Also mispronounced several words he was teaching.Was from Sinaloa.

So here is the big question.Should native english speakers be the only people teaching ESL?Or is anybody that studied it in college qualified?

Call me what you will,but I have always been of the opinion it's native speakers or nothing.Unless you grew up in a all English enviroment you can never truly grasp all the aspects of the language.And the same with ANY language.If you are American or Canadian and did'nt grow up speaking a language in a native enviroment then stop teaching it.Gringo's and gringas have no business teaching Spanish yet they do routinely in the US.My mentors in this business have been at it a combined total of 75 years.In Japan and Taiwan.They are very strict and have regions of the US they will not hire from,such as New York and the Southern states due to accents.Always pushing for accent neutral.I have one person from Boston on staff who has learned to keep her accent in check and does well.But that is what my philosophy is based on and there you are.So what do you think,my learned associates?Should recruiting be done at the university of Guadalajara or UCLA?

[M@tt]

i think it depends on two things. first of all, quite obviously, the individual teacher. there are plenty of NNS teachers who have achieved a high level of english proficiency and are well-qualified to teach. secondly, the subject matters. in some situations, i think it's beneficial to have someone who learned English WELL as a second language, teaching other SL learners. especially if they happen to be from the same language group.
that's my 2 minute answer. the people in your story don't really meet the criteria that i mentioned, though.

[ls650]

IMHO, native vs. non-native doesn't make much difference with the beginner through intermediate stages. Some people have great teaching ability, some don't; it has little to do with native vs non-native.

Once you start getting into upper-intermediate/advanced territory, then you start to see the difference - but if my school wants to think only native speakers cut the mustard, who am I to dissuade them? I don't want to talk myself out of a job!

[gordogringo]

Well said is650.Nothing wrong with job preservation.But for me I am still not convinced that nns's can ever be qualified.Had a very nice lady come by the office.Had a masters degree in English.Was from Guadalajara.Looking to teach.I told her honestly that with her accent I would never consider her for a classroom position.That and I only hire native English speakers.But if she wanted to do lesson planning and marketing I would talk to the partners.Really wanted to teach so I sent her down the road to those schools I visited.Hope they hire her.She will be the only true English speaking person on staff.And that is my main point.Since most non native speakers have accents having students copying them is bad learning technique.But I know some of you speak to your students in Spanish.I don't allow that.I was trained and had "immersion is the way" drilled into my head years ago and it has done well so far.

[PlayadelSoul]

English is an international language. If my students only planned on speaking it with native speakers, then you might have a point. That is not the way the world works, however. Most of our students will be using their English with another non-native speaker. I want them to hear a variety of accents and pronunciations. I have a United Nations staff of teachers, including Mexican. Would I hire someone that I could not understand? No. Does that preclude non-native speakers? No. I have Mexicans and other non-native speakers who speak more clearly than I, as an American, do. I think you are setting yourself students up for failure by limiting their ability to comprehend as many types of speakers, as possible.

If you want a debate, IMHO, a college degree in ESL is unnecessary. It tends to focus the teacher on methodology and experimentation, rather than on results. If I were to run the business as you suggest, I would only hire college-educated Canadians (the most neutral accent, IMHO), and my students and their clients would suffer for it.

[Perpetual Traveller]

I think you have a point about people from other linguistic backgrounds all using English and needing to understand each other but then again if they are all taught by native speakers then you would hope to get some kind of uniformity going. I have several friends who teach English and are not native speakers and although their English is very good, it's not perfect and therefore those mistakes are being passed on to all their students, obviously not an ideal situation.

[ls650]

[Henry_Cowell]

[M@tt]

[MELEE]

It would be interesting to put this post up on the general discussion forum to see what people all around the world have to say.

I would suggest that those with an interest in the topic read the work of Peter Medges, who is very out spoken in his belief that NNESTs (non native English speaking teachers) are make better teachers than NESTs (native English speaking teachers). I saw him speak at the Best of British conference in Mexico City some years ago. He premise was based on teachers who had passed the Cambridge Proficency Exam. He aurgued that they had successfully learned the subject and studied where as many native English speakers, think new TEFL grads in language schools, really have a rather weak understanding of the whys and hows of English grammar. And that in and EFL environment if the teacher shared the students first language they could make use of commarative analysis in a way native speakers of English can not. At the end of his plenary session I had the chance to ask him what he felt about NEST who had a proficency level in the students native language. He consided that in that case he would consider NNESTs and NESTs equally qualified.
This article supports his views (which don't seem to be on-line)
http://www.davekees.com/content/view/27/26/

[some waygug-in]

I guess my last attempt at posting never made it.

From my perspective, having taught in Mexico and Korea (not saying this is anything to shout about either) I have seen instances where being a native English speaker is a disadvantage rather than an advantage.

What do I mean?

If a teacher speaks the students' L1, he/she is able to understand the students in a way that someone from Canada (for example) simply can not. He or she will have some understanding of the basic problems faced by the students, things like pronunciation and or grammar problems yes, but more importantly....cultural issues that may impact on the students' learning ability.

I can tell you that Korean English teachers get a lot more respect in the classroom than foreign teachers. Students listen to them, students generally pay attention more and focus on the lessons more than they do with a foreigner. They know, for example, that they can't get away with things like swearing or name calling because the Korean teacher can understand everything they say. I've never heard of Korean kids trying to "ddong chim" a Korean teacher.

When I taught in Mexico, I heard stories about Mexican teachers with awful pronunciation, and I agree ...that is a problem. But at least that teacher will have some understanding of grammar and the written word.


At least he/she will be able to make proper sentences and understand their meaning.

Spanish and English being what they are, a lot of the grammar and lexical issues are very similar, so a teacher can use that to help in the learning process.

When you get students from Asia, you have students that have to learn something so alien to their life experience it may as well have come from another planet. Not only, grammar and pronunciation, but a whole new writing system and more importantly, a whole new way of thinking.

This is where a person who shares the students' culture and language has a big advantage. They already know where the student is coming from and what they are having trouble with.

I think being able to speak the students' L1, while having the potential to be mis-used, is a huge advantage.

[gordogringo]

You may well be right on several fronts,matt.Economics is really an issue.Especially in Latin America where schools can't bill monthly anywhere close to what a school in Tokyo,Taipei,or the uberwealthy countries like Saudi Arabia and Quatar can.I started in the business teaching Taiwan's wealthiest kids.Our school bus would rival the finest executive class bus in Mexico.The school bought expensive toys for each kids birthday.We had a full time professional artist on staff to draw anything we needed.Marble floors in the hallway and added security for our more VIP students.And no non native speakers in the classroom.When I first asked why regarding this I was told that natives were the best and paying students should accept nothing less.While I don't have all that fancy stuff today I still firmly believe in that.Why should people who can not afford to pay as much be cheated?My corporate accounts all are employees of US companies and will mainly be dealing with the LA crowd.My ladies struggling to get off the street are glad to have anybody but now have a lady with a mild south boston accent but a real passion for helping them.If they have the dedication I can work with the accent.Yes we want to expose them to a variety of accents.But in the beginning levels as students tend to imitate the teacher if my beginners were walking around copying a heavy new york accent I would consider it a failure and time wasted for them.As well a heavy Spanish accent.If your end product(speaking the language) is not easily heard and understood by others then what is the purpose of your learning?Especially as an adult.At advanced levels,fine.Bring in a variety of accents.But not till then.I do not believe it drags down the value of the program to say you can learn it but not teach it.This belief is equally held by my Spanish teachers.I am in an advanced class full of gringos and both teachers agreed after that they did not believe any American will ever be qualified to teach Spanish.And playa I can spot a Canadian the minute they start speaking.A very noticeable accent.Those from the western half of Canada as far as Toronto are not too bad.But come on.What about your newfie's and Nova Scotia crowd?Also that horrible version of English they use in Montreal?IMHO the western half of the US and Canada are really your only areas guaranteed to get someone with a good speaking voice.

[ls650]

[MELEE]

I realize that in my previous post I didn't give any personal opinions on the topic, that was on purpose, why would I want to get into a debate with someone who make this type of comments...

[Perpetual Traveller]