|
Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Students and Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
rogerwallace
Joined: 24 Nov 2004
Posts: 66
Location: California
|
 Posted: Fri Jan 29, 2010 5:41 am Post subject: Liberal means not rote |
 |
|
Henry David T. ment that in those days, education was all rote and he avocated experiencial learning, which is why he moved to Walden Pond.
gnostics were those outside the mainstream belief and not orthodox.it was later twisted to mean non beliefers by the Roman Church.
Word meaning change with the times(a sharp shooter was not someone who was a marksman but someone who shot with a Sharps Rifle).
Orwell called this doublespeak a future in which language would conform to policy and politics=new world order speak. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Rooster_2006
Joined: 24 Sep 2007
Posts: 984
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 29, 2010 8:13 am Post subject: Re: What ever happened to the best man for the job. |
|
|
| tudodude wrote: |
Over the last 5 years I have seen more and more doors closed to those not degree qualified.
Is it fair???
Does a degree in Liberal Arts at age 22 with ZERO teaching experience mean you will be better than a 7 year pro who loves to teach and see students grow?
If it does I will pooh myself.
I am not sure it is fair, but I understand the direction and why the industry is going in that direction.
Discuss (this old cheastnut again) please.
Dizzy |
Your statement has a blatant contradiction in it.
You say it's okay to arbitrarily exclude a 22-year-old, but not okay to arbitrarily exclude a non-degree-holder.
I'd argue that at least a 22-year-old with a degree hasn't screwed up his life. A 30-year-old or 40-year-old with no degree? What has he been doing with his life, watching television and eating ice cream? How hard is it to cobble together ten credit hours a year for 12 years? Someone with a level of intellectual curiosity that low would not make a good teacher, in my mind.
I think both types of arbitrary exclusion are "pooh," to put it in your words.
Whether or not prospective teachers get visas should be based on a points system like this one, with the required number of points being adjusted depending on the need for English teachers.
| Quote: |
TEFL Qualifications:
Got an accredited 120-hour TEFL certificate? +5
Got a TEFL diploma like DELTA? +10
Got an MA TESOL or PhD in TESOL? +20
Degrees:
Got only a high school diploma? +0
Got an AA/AS? +3
Got a BA/BS? +5
Got an MA/MS? +7
Got a PhD? +10
Chinese Skills:
Got an HSK evaluation of "basic" or proof on a college transcript of studying at least one semester of Chinese? +3
Got an HSK evaluation of "elementary/intermediate?" +5
Got an HSK evaluation of "advanced?" +10
Experience:
None: +0
<3 years: +5
3+ years: +10
10+ years: +20
English Skills:
Fluent (as measured by TOEFL, TOEIC, or IELTS), but Non-Native: +0
Native: +10 |
Right now, I doubt most foreign English teachers anywhere in Asia could muster much more than a 15. Advanced, immigration-oriented countries like Canada and the UK already use a points system, so why not China, Korea, Japan, and the other EFL countries?
BTW, just for kicks I'm going to calculate my own score on this system that I just created: 26
Someone with a PhD in TESOL, fluent Chinese, 10+ years of experience, and who was a native speaker would get 70.
I think that right now, China couldn't afford to set the bar higher than maybe 15 and still have any teachers, but as the market professionalizes, the bar could rise a little bit. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
fat_chris
Joined: 10 Sep 2003
Posts: 3198
Location: Beijing
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 29, 2010 10:46 am Post subject: |
|
|
I got 62 points on that scale.
Regards,
fat_chris |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
rogerwallace
Joined: 24 Nov 2004
Posts: 66
Location: California
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 29, 2010 5:14 pm Post subject: points on points |
|
|
| my score came to 57. how can a 22 y.o. or a non degree get anything much higher than 20? The future is having some paper(not a copy of deploma but transcripts). From someone who has had to make up a lot of ground because of past folks who had these so called low scores, I would welcome those with higher type scores! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Rooster_2006
Joined: 24 Sep 2007
Posts: 984
|
| Posted: Sat Jan 30, 2010 1:47 am Post subject: Re: points on points |
|
|
| rogerwallace wrote: |
| my score came to 57. how can a 22 y.o. or a non degree get anything much higher than 20? The future is having some paper(not a copy of deploma but transcripts). From someone who has had to make up a lot of ground because of past folks who had these so called low scores, I would welcome those with higher type scores! |
Wow, 57 is pretty good, as is the 62 of the previous poster.
I'm 23 years old, by the way, and therefore a member of the group the OP is railing against.
I suppose my points system does make it hard for a young person to score decently. I still think I could beat the average 40-year-old who decided to take a year off from real estate, though. There are plenty of unqualified middle-aged people, too -- it's not just young people.
Honestly, to have enough FTs to staff its buxiban and public schools, China would have to set the bar low, like 15 points. Any higher and it'd price itself right out of the market. Still, I maintain that a points system is a fairer way to evaluate incoming teachers than age or number of irrelevant degrees completed. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kezzaNZ
Joined: 14 Jan 2010
Posts: 6
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 31, 2010 10:14 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Im afraid this is the reality in all forms of employment these days, you often end up with an idiot getting employed over you!! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
barabbas
Joined: 22 Aug 2009
Posts: 58
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 31, 2010 3:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Since when is this anything new? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Justin Trullinger
Joined: 28 Jan 2005
Posts: 3110
Location: Seoul, South Korea and Myanmar for a bit
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 31, 2010 9:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
At a glance, I'm probably high fifties or low sixties on the scale proposed.
Does this mean we should get better jobs than all yall?
I've got to admit that I'm not a fan of the "any degree will do" idea imposed by some employers and a lot of immigration rules. Got a guy on our TESOL course right now who technically doesn't have a degree. (Got some kind of a professional qualification in business, as they were in Ireland 20 years ago.)
BUT...who cares? There's another course participant with a degree in dairy science. Interesting, but not really teacher prep...
Best,
Justin |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
JZer
Joined: 16 Jan 2005
Posts: 3898
Location: Pittsburgh
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 31, 2010 11:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Justin Trullinger wrote: |
At a glance, I'm probably high fifties or low sixties on the scale proposed.
Does this mean we should get better jobs than all yall?
I've got to admit that I'm not a fan of the "any degree will do" idea imposed by some employers and a lot of immigration rules. Got a guy on our TESOL course right now who technically doesn't have a degree. (Got some kind of a professional qualification in business, as they were in Ireland 20 years ago.)
BUT...who cares? There's another course participant with a degree in dairy science. Interesting, but not really teacher prep...
Best,
Justin |
I think that any degree will do is fine. It is impossible to know who is a good teacher until they start doing it. Some people who studied non-related subjects will end up being good teachers. Some people who have a teacher's license don't make good teachers. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
gaijinalways
Joined: 29 Nov 2005
Posts: 2279
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 01, 2010 8:38 am Post subject: |
|
|
ruemeister posted
| Quote: |
| The enormous elephant in the room you seem to be leaving out is the history, which is something he decidedly did not make up. It is not merely "his opinion" or "his ideas" - it is what definitely happened; how our schools were definitely formed. What he says about the current state of our education system is the least important part, even though it is also very true (except for his solutions, which ARE a matter of his worldview and opinions, and here I don't feel bound to agree with him and might even agree with you sometimes). But the critical fact of the history and purpose for which the schools were designed is something you haven't touched on at all, yet that is the whole point of reading the history - is to understand how our system got in the state it is in and produces the result that it does. And speaking from Russia, I can say that the school system is in an arguably better state, if not by a lot, while spending hardly 1% of what is spent in the US. But again, what about the history? Does anybody else miss the implications of using the exact same model used by Nazi Germany? |
Better education in Russia? What propaganda sheet did you pull that from? I suppose only the government is getting in the way of people looking for work there. And of course everyone I know is rushing to be educated there. Wait, they're not   ?
As to whether something is the same as used by someone you don't like, does that mean you don't want to model yourself after any successful people or system because you don't like them or it personally? Though I see this issue was addressed already, but it seems like a glaring oversight on your part.
Aw, history. No, I didn't forget about it, I just don't think things are as bad as Gatto claims. By the way, what are all of the details on when Gatto was released? He makes it sound like a conspiracy story with him being 'fired' for a while.
By the way I'm not sure examining the history of the system is necessarily going to help you to solve any educational problems you might have. I think looking at other countries' education systems and how their results compare now might be more helpful, but that's just my opinion. I think the US needs to update and push math and science more. And yes, classes should be more project orientated with individual and group projects.
Getting hysterical about the roots of education in the US is not the best way to solve anything.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
rogerwallace
Joined: 24 Nov 2004
Posts: 66
Location: California
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 01, 2010 1:43 pm Post subject: knowing where you came from |
|
|
How do you know where your going if you don't know whgere you came from? Teaching to the test is the old/rote method and only good for dislodging educator unions from having any say.
Experiencial learning, real-time projects, and a post-modern curriculum is whats needed. Too bad the right -wing politics get in the way.
Now that social science is not in favor, every student has to be a math/science major... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sashadroogie
Joined: 17 Apr 2007
Posts: 11061
Location: Moskva, The Workers' Paradise
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 01, 2010 8:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| gaijinalways wrote: |
Better education in Russia? What propaganda sheet did you pull that from? I suppose only the government is getting in the way of people looking for work there. And of course everyone I know is rushing to be educated there. Wait, they're not ?
|
Actually, Russia has quite a long history of foreign students in her universities, especially in the Soviet era, though many of the students were from the developing world. As a more economic alternative to expensive Western European courses, with a fairly high standard, they continue to be popular, though racism and corruption may soon put paid to that.
Though the Russian education sector has taken a beating in the past decade or so and has many problems, I'd back Rusmeister up on his point about the relative standards of education in the US and Russia. Most of the teens whom I teach do maths courses that appear to be at what I would consider university level. Fiendish stuff. As for literature, they are far better read than the same age group at home. History and geography etc. are not the mysteries they seem to be to some of my colleagues in the Teachers' Room. Quite dab hands at learning English too.
Oops, that's enough agit-prop. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Justin Trullinger
Joined: 28 Jan 2005
Posts: 3110
Location: Seoul, South Korea and Myanmar for a bit
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 01, 2010 9:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Now that you mention it SD, a LOT of people studied in the USSR when there was one.
I've worked in aviation training in Ecuador for a while, and a substantial percentage of aviation engineers, metalurgists, fuel specialists, and even some pilots, if they are over forty, speak Russian due to all the years they studied there. Many have Russian spouses.
Best,
Justin |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
rusmeister
Joined: 15 Jun 2006
Posts: 867
Location: Russia
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 02, 2010 1:44 am Post subject: |
|
|
| gaijinalways wrote: |
ruemeister posted
| Quote: |
| The enormous elephant in the room you seem to be leaving out is the history, which is something he decidedly did not make up. It is not merely "his opinion" or "his ideas" - it is what definitely happened; how our schools were definitely formed. What he says about the current state of our education system is the least important part, even though it is also very true (except for his solutions, which ARE a matter of his worldview and opinions, and here I don't feel bound to agree with him and might even agree with you sometimes). But the critical fact of the history and purpose for which the schools were designed is something you haven't touched on at all, yet that is the whole point of reading the history - is to understand how our system got in the state it is in and produces the result that it does. And speaking from Russia, I can say that the school system is in an arguably better state, if not by a lot, while spending hardly 1% of what is spent in the US. But again, what about the history? Does anybody else miss the implications of using the exact same model used by Nazi Germany? |
Better education in Russia? What propaganda sheet did you pull that from? I suppose only the government is getting in the way of people looking for work there. And of course everyone I know is rushing to be educated there. Wait, they're not ?
As to whether something is the same as used by someone you don't like, does that mean you don't want to model yourself after any successful people or system because you don't like them or it personally? Though I see this issue was addressed already, but it seems like a glaring oversight on your part.
Aw, history. No, I didn't forget about it, I just don't think things are as bad as Gatto claims. By the way, what are all of the details on when Gatto was released? He makes it sound like a conspiracy story with him being 'fired' for a while.
By the way I'm not sure examining the history of the system is necessarily going to help you to solve any educational problems you might have. I think looking at other countries' education systems and how their results compare now might be more helpful, but that's just my opinion. I think the US needs to update and push math and science more. And yes, classes should be more project orientated with individual and group projects.
Getting hysterical about the roots of education in the US is not the best way to solve anything. |
Hi, Gaijina,
One of the biggest problems in forum communication is the possibility of offense. I have offended many times over the years, and have been trying to learn not to while still communicating what I see to be true and responding to what others see. I don't think we need to raise hackles here, but context always helps understanding.
I'll admit that with little or no context, a lot of things I say probably do seem crazy. That said, I'll try to address what seem to be (the operating word, as always, being "seem") your concerns/observations.
I don't think I'm "getting hysterical" about anything. Yes, the conclusions are not those commonly held, but that doesn't make them hysterical, or even unreasonable. The reasonable thing to do would be to ask "Why do you think that?" (on what basis?) Generally this is not so necessary for conventional views, because everybody really does know the conventional assumptions - they are endlessly repeated in our society.
As to better education, I can only speak about general trends, and personal experience. Having taught public and private, in Russia and in the US, (east and west coasts in the latter), I think I have as much of an objective basis for comparison as anyone could have beyond hearsay. In addition, I have 2 Russian BILs both living in the US, and they got their start with H1B1 visas (which, for those that don't know, allow the hiring of foreigners because of lack of qualified citizens, in this case, knowledge of biology and physics), something extremely common in the US from Russia, and essentially unheard of for Americans in Russia. I do think the Russian system, in its efforts to more perfectly copy the US and other western systems - now much more identical - is degrading (as a result) and that in another 10 years, those H1B1 visas from Russia will slow down somewhat. But they won't dry up, either.
The trouble with modeling anything on "successful" behavior is that the meaning of the word "successful" varies depending on what you think important/true - in a word, your worldview. If I think it more important that the Prussian model teaches unquestioning obedience within its system and a general lack of genuine ability to really think for oneself than that it produces a product beneficial for an "efficient" empire that wants to develop and expand, then that is due to what I believe to be true in general. Thus, modern conventional cant always talks about "what the nation needs" when what that really adds up to is "what our plutocracy needs". People who believe that our democracy is actually a democracy, and that voting really does represent power and results in change won't see that. People, like me, who believe that modern democracy is a sham, that voting does not equal democracy, and that most of the world has now developed mechanisms of democracy but in fact are not democratic at all, even though they have the appearance of democracy, see things differently.
On history, what would you say if I started talking about America (or Russia, or Japan) and said, "One does not need to understand American history to understand America. One only needs to look at all other countries today in relationship to it to understand it.", what would you say to that? How can one claim genuine understanding of a thing if they do not know its history, where it came from, for what purposes it was originally designed for, what were the goals of the people establishing it? How can one claim to understand America if they know little to nothing about the British colonies, and how and why they were formed, about the formation of our government and the philosophy behind it, about slavery and the Civil War, or the history of immigration, etc? Can we really take that person seriously as an authority on what they are talking about? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
gaijinalways
Joined: 29 Nov 2005
Posts: 2279
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 02, 2010 8:56 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
This page is maintained by the one and only Dave Sperling.
Contact Dave's ESL Cafe
Copyright © 2018 Dave Sperling. All Rights Reserved.
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
