Job Discussion Forums

[helenl]

Thanks for the clarification, I was beginning to think the world (according to HCT) had stopped and started spinning in the opposite direction!

[holbrook]

Sorry for not responding to earlier requests for info on ECAE. I was busy. Anyway, here is the update:

Things are getting better here. HR issues are getting worked out at a pace a bit faster than that of a snail, but at least they are moving and most of the faculty either already have or expect to have their families' visas and other issues sorted out before the next Eid. That's an improvement!

As for why anyone would want to work here...... Well, let's face it, money is important. Most of the problems such as poor quality of students, mismanagement, lack of direction, ect. can be said of most of the colleges in this country or those in the GCC neighborhood. Money is not everything, but other factors relatively equivalent I would choose the one with better pay and benefits.

Now, that said, not everything is equivalent. Let's have a look at some specifics:

Yes HCT gets 5 more vacation days each year. URGU gets about 10 more.

Yes, HCT gives more education allowance for its faculty in Dubai, Sharjah and Abu Dhabi. They offer the same amount in RAK, Al Ain and Fujariah but schools in those towns top out at 20,000 so you can't even use it. 20,000 is what ECAE offers and it is clearly not enough for Abu Dhabi but fine if you take a job with them in Al Ain. Clearly a down side for faculty with families who want to live in Abu Dhabi.

HCT also has a top notch HR department that has been doing its job for years and can get your paperwork done quickly. They pay on time, they give you exactly what they say they will when they say they will. While visas have been a problem here, at least the pay has been handled professionally. I don't know of anyone who has been missed on payday or who has been denied their furniture or relocation allowances.

The HCT, depending on the campus that you work on, demand a lot from you. HCT teachers, in my experience, work about twice as many hours as UAEU/UGRU teachers for modestly better pay. They work about the same hours for substantially less pay than ECAE.

Now let's consider this...

While HCT and UAEU encourage teachers to conduct research or continue their education they require staff to do so at their own expense. While professional development funds are available at HCT, they can not be used for degree granting studies. It was just announced in a recent meeting here that ECAE that faculty will be allowed to apply PD money towards further study. We can even use it to upgrade our credentials. Great for anyone planning a doctorate! (on a side note the Dean also expressed the belief that up to a third of the teachers work load should be earmarked as time for research and further study).

While UAEU and HCT may offer loads of tried and tested shared resources for teachers, it also offers an oppressive bureaucracy. Here it is quite easy to try something new or offer some input. Because we are a start-up everyone is busy contributing to and forming our program. For me, this is wonderful. As I was an avid Lego builder when I was a child, I am much more satisfied in an institution where I can be part of the building process, have a say in what goes on, make a difference and try to do things right from the beginning. Many teaching faculty at the HCT and UGRU do not have this option. They must finish this key writing or submit that project grade, using this rubric, by that date, regardless of whether or not it meets their students' needs or is targeted at their ability level.

Nearly all teachers that I know at the HCT or UGRU have 20 contact hours of teaching. We started with the same notion here. Thankfully, the admin surprised us with a general reduction of hours after some new staff were hired. Most teachers are therefore now teaching 12 to 16 contact hours. I can't imagine that happening at the HCT.

Housing: It depends what you want. Some of the single teachers here have found studios for 30,000 to 50,000 p.a. They get 90,000 p.a. cash for housing. That is an extra 40 to 60,000 in your pocket if your willing to live in a shoebox. Married teachers get 120,000. That's not a lot in the capital, but it is what you'd get with HCT for married with 2 kids. You can take it in cash and live off island. There's plenty of housing withing 30 minutes of Abu Dhabi that is under 75,000. That leaves a bit left over for that new car, if you don't mind driving. Not bad. But if you don't like looking around and searching for bargains then you just suck it up and spend the whole budget. At least the option to save more is there.

Students: As far as I can tell they are about the same quality/caliber as any other public tertiary institution in the UAE. No better, No worse.

In the end, with the money that you can save on housing and the extra salary that you earn, you can easily take home almost double what you'd make at either HCT or UGRU, unless of course you are one of those HCT lifers who has topped out the salary scale. No, I don't work any harder for it, but I do feel that I am making a stronger contribution than I was before and that my direct managers appreciates my efforts more.

Well, its time to head home. I'll post more when I can.

[moralleader1]

Well folks,

Thank you very much for all your input whether positive or negative. Just to let you know: I went to ECAE, walked around, talked to some teachers, had a chat with employees in other departments and I can tell you from my own observation that:

1- The atmosphere was very depressive/opressive (It seems that a dictator is running the EFL side)

2- Most of the people I met started with "Oh yes, it is a good place" and when the discussion went deeper, then they started to reveal the truth (These people were teachers). Many of them were frustrated with lack of textbooks, long hours, mismanagement and so forth.

All in all, it did not look good.

By the way, I had one straightforward TEFLer who told me that he is there for the sake of money and he's pretty much fed up being in the UAE for over 6 years.

Thank you again and thanks to Dave Sperling for creating this forum where teachers can avoid miserable working conditions like this place.

[tmac-100]

[eha]

" The atmosphere was very depressive/opressive (It seems that a dictator is running the EFL side) "

No, this is the 'Tefl Normal' atmosphere. Why do you think some of us call the whole scene "Stepfordville"?

[Eurydale]

I think the impression that a dictator is running the EFL foundations program at ECAE is perceptive. If she likes you, you're fine. If she doesn't, you'd better look for another job. A couple of instructors have already fled.

The head of EFL foundations seems nice but she does not judge people by their skills and qualifications but by the way they relate to her. Putting down other instructors behind their backs and reporting on what colleagues do in our shared offices are the behaviors that she rewards.

She has even refused to let anyone transfer to any other English language teaching program at the college even though two of these programs need highly skilled experienced instructors. Working in the EFL foundations program has become a prison sentence for some.

I wish good luck to anyone who comes to teach in the EFL foundations program. My advice would be to wait a year or two until the curriculum gets sorted out and the head of EFL foundations feels less threathened.

However, if you can get hired for the other programs at ECAE, then you should be OK.

[Mark100]

I gotta agree with some other posters that dictatorships are the norm in ESL teaching.....that was my experience in Australia and in the Gulf.
However at least in the Gulf you get some real money for your efforts.
You might get lucky and not experience this but by and large teach enough around a few different places and it seems that bad management and dictatorial bosses proliferate in the ESL industry.

[moralleader1]

[veiledsentiments]

[bje]

[Eurydale]

Yes, "fled...." I chose my words carefully. The people who left were highly qualified, experienced instructors who would not or could not submit to the authoritarian management style of the head of EFL Foundations. None of my colleagues are incompetent or act unprofessionally. They are a fine group of instructors who deserve a better manager.

[moralleader1]

[PLUM]

Eurydale wrote:

[adorabilly]

not to stick my nose into this subject, but I would like to interject the following. Plum... I hate to tell you that you are wrong... but you are wrong. It can be either.

There are several sources here.
first one
http://www.worldwidewords.org/qa/qa-non2.htm
Q] From Carol Hughes: �I have a grammar question. Your site includes the sentence, �None of these terms are likely to be taken up�. According to my rather antiquated training, this violates the rules for agreement of noun and verb regarding number. The rule is that none is logically less than one and consequently requires a singular verb. Is this still the rule?�

[A] The language police regularly pull me over for exceeding the number count on this one. Most messages about it flatly tell me I�m wrong; you�re one of the few who politely query the matter, so you get the prize of a definitive answer.

I�m right.

It�s uncertain who started the notion that none requires a singular verb, but it�s pervasive, both in the US and Britain, and seems to have been drummed into the heads of generations of schoolchildren. However, all the usage guides � and the usage notes in every dictionary that I can find � are unanimous in saying that it�s wrong.

The argument stems from a misunderstanding of where the word comes from. People assume that none is a condensed form of no one or not one. As both always take a singular verb, the argument goes, so must none. However, the amateur etymologisers have got it slightly but seriously wrong. Our modern form none comes from the Old English nan. Though this is indeed a contraction of ne an, no one, it was inflected in Old English and had different forms in singular and plural, showing that it was commonly used both ways � King Alfred used it in the plural as far back as the year 888.

The big Oxford English Dictionary has a whole section on the plural form of none, pointing out that it is frequently used to mean �no persons� (with writers preferring no one when they mean the singular) and that historical records show that its use in the plural is actually more common than in the singular. There are examples cited in the entry from many of the best English writers (and there�s also an instance in the Authorised Version of the Bible: �None of these things move me�, from Acts, chapter 20). On modern usage, the Merriam-Webster Dictionary of English Usage says, �It appears that writers generally make it singular or plural according to whatever their idea is when they write�.

Such writers, me included, follow the sense � we use the plural or singular form according to whether it�s one or many things that we�re writing about. This grammatical construction, which is based on sense rather than form, has the grand name of notional agreement or notional concord, and is very common (so common that we often don�t notice we�re doing it).

So none of you are right when you accuse me of being ungrammatical.

http://encarta.msn.com/encnet/Features/Columns/Default.aspx?article=ErrorsThatArent
It Ain't So No. 7: None comes from "not one" or "no one," and is therefore always singular.

Actually, it just might have come from "not any of them," which is plural. "None" is very often plural. None of the sorority girls have hair, for example. If you're talking about something that can't be divided into units, then make it singular. None of their hair is real.

Another way to remember: If "of it" could be swapped in for whatever follows "none," use the singular. If "of them" could be swapped in, use the plural.

http://www.bartleby.com/64/C001/039.html
The American Heritage� Book of English Usage.
A Practical and Authoritative Guide to Contemporary English. 1996.

1. Grammar: Traditional Rules, Word Order, Agreement, and Case

� 39. none


�� and then there were none.� The closing words of this well-known nursery rhyme should dispel the notion that none can only take a singular verb. People opposing the plural use base their argument on the fact that none comes from the Old English word an, meaning �one.� But the citational evidence against restricting none is overwhelming. None has been used as both a singular and plural pronoun since the ninth century. The plural usage appears in the King James Bible as well as the works of John Dryden and Edmund Burke and is widespread in the works of respected writers today. 1
Of course, the singular usage is perfectly acceptable. Whether you should choose a singular or plural verb depends on the effect you want. You can use either a singular or a plural verb in a sentence such as None of the conspirators has (or have) been brought to trial. However, none can only be plural when used in sentences such as None but his most loyal supporters believe (not believes) his story. 2
More at every, neither, and subject and verb agreement.


According to the grammar goddess http://www.llrx.com/columns/grammar1.htm
None can be both singular and plural.


And according to the Longman Grammar
If you use NONE with a plural noun form, the verb can be either singular or plural. Both are correct. When you use none with an uncountable noun it is singular (example none of the food was left). If it is a countable noun, you use the plural as either is/are depending on the situation. If you are referring to the singular of that object, then it is singular. example None of the packages was for me, none of my friends were there. If you are talking about colleagues (something in mass) it is people, mostly plural. So the None verb tense would be plural. (looking at Longman Grammar. It is American English only, British English may have different rules.)


Depending on what the writers intention was when they wrote the statement, they can use either is or are.

You should ask one of your colleagues who are so professional and knowledgeable...

p.s. you are right on one thing... some people are so stupid.