Job Discussion Forums

[leeroy]

How's the world of ELT looking now? (This is just my perception from speaking to teachers, personal experience, and this website. I'm not trying to convince anyone of anything, rather I want to check if I've got it right )

You'd think, what with English being the (emerging) global language, that the demand for English lessons worldwide would fund a massive improvement and professionalisation of the Englsh Language Teaching industry.

But while there are some very professional institutions and individuals out there, the vast majority of companies claiming to be English Language Schools are actually only this to a limited degree. Those who claim to be "English Language Teachers" are often underqualified, underpaid, and unmotivated.

For example, there is a vast body of work out there in Korea which seems little more than babysitting Korean children. For such little darlings, the chance to prod and poke people who don't look Korean are far more interesting than the notion of speaking English.

What percentage, in fact, of the global market for English lessons is under 16 years old? A high one, I would bet. And of those, how many are genuinely there to learn English? As opposed to, say, being there because their parents told them to, to look at a western person, or to chat with their friends. Even those who are genuine in their motives, how many then go on to respect the westerner's qualifications, teaching experience and methodologies? How many students, in the world, honestly give a *beep*?

The owners of schools understand this - there is simply no need to get someone with (gasp) a degree in teaching (with the corresponding higher wage packet), any fool with white skin is enough, because it's what the customers expect.

It's curious that ESL teachers in London (and, apparently, New York too) are paid so little and suffer such bad working conditions. But when you consider the relatively bizarre customer/vendor situation here, things start to become more clear. English teachers, predominately, come from rich countries. Most students in London come from countries far poorer, though there are some from Japan and Korea. Students in London simply can't afford to pay that much. Even �90 a week (which is cheap, when you think about it) is a fortune to someone from Poland, or Colombia. Most schools in London are cheap, and so they don't pay their teachers much money. The rest is easy to figure out...

But all this doesn't just stem from the students...

Any extended stint backpacking will confirm that "English teaching" is something meant to be done for a year or two before you settle down and do something serious. I would hazard a guess and say that most people teaching English right now are like this. These folk aren't too bothered about pensions, job security or professional development - and understandably so. This suits the employers worldwide, because (as previously stated) all they really want is young pretty people anyway.

So, is this it? Unmotivated teachers for dissaffected students... Poignantly fitting, perhaps?

But where do the teachers who know what they are doing fit in to all this? And what about the students who want to learn, and who know the difference between a good teacher and a barbie doll? There are plenty of teachers and students like this out there, but are they hidden, like needles in the proverbial haystack of unprofessionalism?

As much as the need for "English as a global language" is trumpeted about, most of our current students will have no serious need for it. Oh sure, there is the "I need English to be competitive in my domestic workplace" argument, but this is simply another test and benchmark dreamt up by sadistic Asian bosses designed to weed out the weak.

Interdependence (as a measure of global trade as a perctenage of GDP) worldwide is no bigger now than it was 100 years ago. Economically, the world is not globalising as much as you might think. English may be the global language for business - but still, most businessmen will have no need to speak it, as most business in the world has been (and will continue to be) done domestically.

There is a globalisation of culture - and while English has been exported alongside this to an extent, generally western culture and materialism integrates into the host culture's own linguistic environment. Just because you're buying and eating American things doesn't mean you have to speak American...

[joe-joe]

Leeroy,

sadly I would have to agree with what you've written pretty much 100%. Most schools are money making machines (the old bums on seats syndrome of quantity rather than quality). And the quality of teachers is low in general because of the back packing culture, and people who are taking 'time out to see the world before I settle down to the real world of work back home'. Also the standard of qualifications which is available isn't really so great either, with a few exceptions.

I mean no disrespect to anyone here, but it makes it very hard for people who do want to find decent jobs and have decent prospects of making it into a career. Schools know they can choose the cheapest job candidates in many cases because of the number of transient people available, and as I said before quality isn't the main issue for most schools, profit is.

Besides any of the better institutions won't employ such people from the 'back packer' scene, and moreover people of this kind don't want to work in such places anyway. The thought of actually having to know what you're doing, turning up on time, dressed smartly, etc, isn't in keeping with 'cool' nature of their lifestyle choice anyway.

I love teaching, but I think there's much wrong with the industry, and I'm not sure that English itself will remain in such high demand; if anything there could well be a rapid drop in demand as a result of a backlash to western cultural imperialism, as globalisation is often perceived in the developing world., (and perceived with some justification)

[denise]

I also agree with what Leeroy wrote--maybe not 100%, but probably a good 98.4 percent. I know that the whole "backpacker" image hurts the profession, and I know that there are folks out there "teaching" who contribute to the negative stereotype, but I just can't believe that they are the majority. Even if many of the EFL teachers out there aren't doing this for a career--only for a year or so while they see the world--I just have to have faith that they take themselves at least semi-seriously when they are in a classroom.

Can students tell the difference? Hmmm.... If they have two choices--a private language school that boasts "all native speakers" and might, for example, publish the pictures of the teachers so the students can see just how "authentic" they look and a school that has experienced teachers, a clear goal (i.e., NOT just getting through a book or conversing every week), etc.--honestly, naive little me again just has to have faith that students can tell the difference.

d

[dreadnought]

[denise]

Dreadnought--I agree with you. The situation that I set up likely would not yield well-informed decisions by many students. They see a happy smiling ("white") foreign face, and they think ENGLISH!!!! I think I was just in an overly optimistic mood in my last post...

d

[Wolf]

Some really good points made here.

Yes, it's really difficult to find long term EFL positions, as has been my experience. Many of the people who come to Asia for as long as a year are backpackers, or skirt chasers, or other types that you might not want teaching your kids back home. Also, it isn't easy to get started in this field. Going to grad school and getting an MA right after undergrad school isn't an option for many. Most distance learning MAs require that you have a few years of teaching experience before you can take them, by the way. It can even be hard to obtain a fly by night "certification" in many areas of the world. That means that new teachers have to put up with some pretty crappy jobs (that do not help with certification or anything) until they are experienced and qualified enough to do something else.

Yes, many students automatically equate someone who looks like Bradd Pitt or Meg Ryan or whoever it is nowadays with learning English. This is a real problem as many private schools have been known to turn away non-white movie star looking types who are good qualified teachers. In the name of satisfying the parents/students. Denise: if it makes you feel better, when I selected a Japanese language school (where I studied for 2 1/2 years) I used your criteria: "experienced teachers, a clear goal . . . etc."

Yes, the actual, everyday need for English has been exaggerated in many places. In China, the fact that this nation will host the Olympics and has entered the WTO mystically means that there will be a great demand for English, or so the government says. Well, the Olympics are a 16 day event, that will happen 2000 kilometers away, 5 years from now. Many of my students say that they want to go to Bejing to help the "foreigners" there. It's a scary thought that a) a great portion of the population of China wants to go to already crowded Beijing and b) my students don't seem to be aware that the Olympics will attract non-English speaking people. As to WTO - induced jobs that require English . . . as it has been stated, many employers create this arbitrary requirement wether or not it is an actualy requirement of the job.

In Korea, they have had an English learning craze for about 8 or 9 years. That means that all those 10 year olds that started Hogwans then are now young men and women who have graduated high school. So tell me, where is South Korea's army of English speakers? If I posted this paragraph on the Korean Board, how many times do you think I'd get flamed? There is no such thing. The Hogwan system is far closer to the "ineffective/useless/waste of time" end of the spectrum than it is to the "worthwhile" end. Once again, the nation of South Korea seems to be functioning.

In Japan, well, for how many decades has English been a mandatory class in high school? How much money does this nation have, even now? And yet with all their experience and resources, they often manage to be the nation in Asia that scores lowest on TOEIC tests. When I ask my students why they had embarked on the long and difficult journey of learning a foreign language, well, the answers were odd. "I want to take a vacation in Italy." "I want to go to Hawaii someday." "English is interesting." "I want to speak with foreingers." "I want a foreigners boyfriend/girlfriend." "My boss wants me to score *** on a TOEIC test." Naturally people are free to study a foreign language half heartedly just to kill time (or just to please the boss.) BUT, that means that the private sector will set up schools to exploit these people. As they make up the majority of "language learners", the average/most common EFL job becomes one of "entertainer."

Even "back home" in Britian or the US or Canada, ESL positions are famously low paying and unstable jobs. There are some glamourous exceptions to this rule, but these are exceptions rather than the rule.

Now: I personally think that the "English craze" will flame out sooner or later. Maybe later, but there are little hints of it happening now, in some places. I think that over time, the ranks of English language learners will show a greater proportion of students who will either need English or are likely to need English. The "white, has a pulse, oh and maybe a BA in Astrophysics just to please immigration" sorts of positions will disappear when people begin demanding more serious results, and give up on a really expensive hobby (EFL lessons in most coutries are big bucks. If I was going to pay that much, I'd want good teachers and a well thought out program.) It isn't going to happen next Tuesday, but I think that this trend will change over time.