Job Discussion Forums

[arioch36]

Whether the mistakes the OP presented are too basic or not is one issue.



But the OWL Purdue site? Have you actually looked at it? It is a great teaching tool, though some of the stuff is above my college writing students. OWL is a legitamitely great tool in the English teacher's arsenal.

And yeah, it probably is true that many FT's here have some mistakes they regularly make that are basic, and that they would be ashamed to ask for help about, for fear of another, more superior laowai such as yourself, heaping scorn on them. There are also many non-native FT's who make some common mistakes

Personally I don't think Voice of Reason makes many of these mistakes. But perhaps he hs met others who do.

I know for myself, most of the ones he mentions I have no problem with, though i have to remember at times, it's and its when I am actually writing. I also have the bad habit of saying Me and SUsan, instead of Susan and I.

You do recruiting, right? What are the high standards you maintain for teachers coming to China. White and breathing? Or actual certs and teaching degrees?

[Lobster]

Well, it just goes to show that there are, simplistically speaking, two types of teachers in China and on this board. The first group are the trained and experienced English teachers who have made teaching their vocation. As such, they have dedicated some time and effort to improving their language skills and knowledge.

The second group consists of those who, even though in possession of a diploma, have usually studied in areas other than education or English. They haven't taken the time to read extensively (the key to spelling and grammar proficiency), improve their basic language skills, or learn what they need to know to become more effective English teachers. It's not that the latter don't do a good job in the conversation classroom, it's just that their skill levels won't stand up to any serious scrutiny.

Where this creates problems for all of us is in the situation when Chinese people, particularly Chinese teachers, start asking questions about grammar and usage and want a technical explanation. That's when the second group falters. The Chinese reaction is often, "Here's a guy making four times my salary, and he doesn't even know what a gerund is."

A few years back there was a report, often mentioned by Chinese teachers, about four foreign "teachers" who couldn't even pass the Chinese Grade 12 high school exam.

My take on this is that if you're coming here to be a teacher, you should learn your subject first. Even a "dancing monkey" will benefit from increased literacy during its lifetime. You should also be aware of the predisposition to analytical grammar in Chinese English learning and be prepared to respond to queries on this topic.

So, if you need it, get onto the internet and get to a good grammar reference site to bone up. Get that list of "100 commonly confused and misspelt words". The OP was great because some people here really need it. That's not so great.

I'll leave you with a couple of more hints taken from recent posts:

1. There is no such word as "irregardless". Just use "regardless".
2. The "of" sound you hear in could've doesn't mean "could of", it means "could have".
3. Speech cannot be illegible. It may be unintelligible, but legible only refers to writing.
4. Don't write corrupt forms such as gonna, ain't or hafta.
5. Find out which common words end with "tion" and which with "sion". Also check that "ible/able" contrast.
6. Watch out for the word "regards".

Regarding your letter of January 15th.
In regard to your letter of January 15th.
He is held in high regard.
He is a highly-regarded scholar.

Best regards and happy writing,

RED

My sig had spelling errors and was deleted. Don't let it happen to you!

[vikuk]

[Lobster]

A tip for improving your writing.

Write your draft in MSWord.

Now move your cursor to the beginning of your document.

Look up, way, way up to the menu bar. (No, I won't call Rusty or Jerome).

There you will see a little symbol. It's a check mark (tick) and the letters abc.

That's called the spell checker. Click on it. (Hint: it's a good thing to have the grammar checker on too if you're literacy-challenged. Go to "Tools/Options/Spelling and Grammar tab to set this. Turn the "Check grammar with spelling" option on.)

Voila! It will take you through your document and point out any spellings or usages that Mr. Gates disapproves of. (A bane for the Canadians and British who haven't set their dictionaries properly.)

It may make a lot of suggestions you dn't want to pay heed to, but you can just click "ignore". Although it won't tell you that you've made a mistake by using "sew" instead of "so" or "to" instead of "too", it can save you a lot of face.

You still need to proofread your document!

Sorry Arioch, you gave me a perfect example.

It would tell you to spell it "legitimately" and not "legitamitely".

That's the beauty of spell check. Know it, use it, love it, learn from it.

RED

My sig was deleted due to a subject/verb agreement error. Don't let it happen to you!

[vikuk]

[Surfdude18]

In my humble view, there's nothing that wrong with writing things like 'gonna'. After all, if the writer is otherwise linguistically adept, it should be clear that it's a deliberate use of the slang term. I pride myself on pretty excellent grammar and writing (although of course I may commit the odd typo) but I do use gonna - I know it's not good English, but if my sentences are punctuated properly, I don't write "Its a good city" or "The dog licked it's balls", and I don't confuse "They're" and "Their", I feel I have a certain licence to write 'gonna'. The important thing is that I know what I'm doing.

Posters can feel free to agree or disagree.

[vikuk]

[bearcanada]

The proud functionally illiterate would include Anda.

The problem is related to (1) an inferior educational system that no longer respects language excellence, and (2) people who no longer read - perhaps because they don't know how to do that.

(2) is the source of most of the small common mistakes like 'could of', confusing 'their and they're', 'its and it's'. Anyone who reads will naturally recognise these errors and, conversely, those who don't or can't read will never know they've made a mistake.

It seems to me that instead of taking cheap shots, some of us might recognise this problem and admit that it exists, even if we're too lazy to remedy our shortcomings.

It's almost inconceivable to me that people would pretend to be language teachers when their own facility with the language in question borders on the abominable. If you want names, read some of the posts here.

Do you pretend you're an engineer when all your bridges fall down because you don't appreciate the difference between traction and compression? Does it bother you that your students know your own language better than you know it?

Ignorance is not a crime, but the fact of a teacher plying a trade while being ignorant in even the kindergarten basics of the subject being taught, should be a felony punished by employment at McDonalds.

If you are one of the self-proclaimed 'dancing monkeys' on this board, perhaps you have found your place in the world and shouldn't complain. For what it's worth, there are those of us who teach English in China and live in a very different world than the one you describe as being familiar to you. Do you ever wonder why?

I read so many insulting and outrageous complaints about the Chinese on this board. To be sure, all things here are not perfect, but there is another side to that story:

"The fault, dear Brutus, is not in the stars, but in ourselves, that we are underlings." Shakespeare - Julius Caesar

.

[bearcanada]

From a re-reading of vikuk's post, it would appear that the ability to read and understand, to analyse and think logically, and to simply be sensible, are qualities also in short supply.

For one thing, an argument stated without presented facts is not the same as an argument made in the absence of facts. It simply means the facts have not been listed.

vik's advice to teachers is to worry about their written and spoken fluency in their own languge only when they want to 'make an impression'. Is that the same as saying, 'I never drink at the school because I don't want them to know I'm a drunk'? Or perhaps, 'I wear clean underwear only when I'm going to have an accident.'

We then seem to be told that pride in one's language fluency must come before one's pride in one's occupation. What is the function of pride in all of this? I am not 'proud' either of my language ability nor of being a teacher. I would, however, be 'ashamed' to be functionally illiterate in my own language, and I would be both dishonest and fradulent if I were to teach a subject in which I were incompetent.

I'm then told that my course of action should be to request written works from these 'authors' in order to more thoroughly evaluate their language ability. My God. First, I am not a policeman. Second, I am not so arrogant as to believe they would willingly submit to my non-existent authority. Third, they don't care so why should I?

And then we're told that the real problem with all these illiterate English teachers is that the schools hiring them have no pride or scruples. vikuk, your reasoning ability and your clarity of perception are truly awesome. Being ignorant myself, I would be interested to know if the teachers in question made their illiteracy known in their job application forms.

And then of course we have 'the right to choose' how we express our language, even recognising that some trivial items (like spelling, grammar) may be 'more appropriate than others'.

Truly awesome. It would seem that wisdom can be found almost anywhere.

.
.

[arioch36]

Lobster

[arioch36]

Bear Canada

[vikuk]

Bear I find your posts quite fascinating. You write -

[bearcanada]

vikuk, you raise an interesting point.

When I was in elementary school our teachers were probably what would today be considered fanatical about language skills and accuracy. Every spare 5 minutes, every rainy recess when we couldn't go out to play, were filled with grammar and spelling instruction.

I can recall hating it at the time, but for my whole life after that I have been grateful to those teachers. During my various careers, I can't recall the number of times my ability to write correctly has raised my status in the eyes of employers, clients, many kinds of people.

Countless times it was obvious (and often openly stated) that a person believed they were dealing with someone who was clearly intelligent and very well-educated, from that ability to write correctly. The respect that I have received, and still receive, simply from correct grammar, spelling and punctuation in my correspondence, has been substantial.

Perhaps my background affects my outlook today, but when I see sloppy writing, poor grammar and lousy spelling the first adjective that comes to mind is 'unintelligent', in that only a person lacking in mental ability would write, "I could of gone to the movie."

I realise that my conclusion may be unfair. When my children were in elementary school, I had the same opinion of their teachers. Nobody knew or cared about English accuracy or fluency. My children would bring home papers with an A grade that might have 20 or 30 glaring mistakes in grammar or spelling and the teachers just ignored those. Either they din't know what was correct (possible) or didn't care (certain).

That's the way it was. The entire elementary and high school system had abandoned language accuracy and fluency as worthy objectives. But when my children reached university they were given language tests - and they were all required to take an extra English course in their first semester. If they didn't score 80% or higher, they wouldn't be allowed to return for semester two.

But now, even the universities have abandoned the fight, and many graduates today are damned close to being functionally illiterate. It's too bad that many of these are English teachers.

.

[Shan-Shan]

[vikuk]