Job Discussion Forums

[J-Pop]

[Capergirl]

[johnslat]

Dear Fellow-Threaders,
I'm going to take what would seem to be an unpopular stance here: defending scot47's style. The way I see it, a lot of scot47's posts inject a healthy dose of bracing reality into many threads. And, what's MOST important ( to me, anyway ), I don't get any feeling of " nastiness " from what he writes. I'd say he's kind of a proponent of the " tough love " school of advice. Now personally, I don't believe that this is always the best way to go, but it can and does have its merits. Moreover, I strongly suspect that underneath that crusty exterior, beats the heart of ( believe it or not ) an old softy - someone who really DOES care about others. So, although I don't always applaud his style, I do think he's quite a handy guy to have around.
Regards,
John

[dduck]

I agree and disagree with John. Why should oldies hammer newbies for their mistakes and poorly thought-out questions? Especially when teachers should be encouraging their students. Why should we treat each other any differently? Is trial-by-fire better than constructive criticism?

If we want to build a sense of community shouldn't we care for one another?
Iain

[Glenski]

Sorry, but I don't support john's method of responding.

Bosnian simply asked about the job market, and he/she even stated a preference for the Middle East or North Africa, yet john slammed back with this...

[J-Pop]

[denise]

johnslat-- (& scot47, too, since you are now the topic of the thread...)

The "tough love" approach does have its merits--preparing people for "the real world" (although the real world is not always that bad! it can be downright pleasant sometimes!).

The problem is the medium of transmission. Tone is difficult to read online. Cute little emoticons help, but they cannot truly represent the feeling behind a post. In scot47's messages, I think the "tough" comes across a lot more than the "love."

I feel like a broken record at this point, as several posters have said this on several threads several times (and someone even mentioned it a few posts back on this thread), but it is very possible to give constructive criticism without it sounding mean.

d

[guest of Japan]

Everyone is pretty quick on the attack of scot47, but so far he is the only person to give any useful information to the original poster.

[scot47]

You are all horrid. You hate me and I am going to tell my mummy.
I don't want to play with you any more. So there !

[AKA]

A range of opinions ain't gonna hurt. We live in different places, in different worlds really, so it's to be expected. If anyone weeps in their cornflakes because scot47 said something horrid, they probably should stay in their Mum's basement. [Why is it so many TEFLers seemed to exist "there" before coming "here"?].

[scot47]

"Why is it so many TEFLers seemed to exist "there" before coming "here"?"


Could you explain ? Please ? Pretty please ?

(You now see the new, caring, touchy-feelly Scot47)

[Capergirl]

[daveryan]

As a newcomer to the world of TEFL I have found this website of immense help. I have found it particularly helpful to draw on the advice offered by experienced hands including Scott 47. It does however baffle me as to why some of you more experienced teachers insist on treating us 'newbies' in such an objectionable manner.....there really is no need. It is a shame that you allow this to detract from the otherwise valuable contribution that you have to make.

Dave

[dyak]

Perhaps a system of fonts or colours for:

Sarcasm
Patronising
Tough love (call it the �Oprah/scott47� font)
The �I�m having a bad day� font
The �posting under the influence� font
The �touchy feely� font (call it the scott47/Oprah font)

Any others?

[johnslat]

Dear Fellow-Threaders,
How we post on these pages, the stlyes we adopt, is determined, I'd say, largely by our individual personalities and our worldviews. Even if we are only " assuming a persona ", our choice of " mask " is likely revealing in itself. Judging just from scot47's postings that I've read, I'd venture ( a little " armchair psychoanalysis " here ) to guess that he tends to regard the world as ( more or less ) a battleground - which it surely can be - a dog-eat-dog sort of place where you've got to be strong to survive. And considering what most of us do - that is, leave the relative safety and security of " home " and venture out into the wild blue, pretty much on our own - well, I guess that would likely require more gumption than many
possess. Not that it's only or always a harsh, cold place out there, but the chances of its being so, and the fact that we're usually doing a high-wire act without any net, would make it much more probable ( I believe ) that we'd need to be above-average self-relient and tough. If I'm right about scot47, he - like the Drill Instructors at Parris Island - is trying to prepare the " new recruits " for what they may well encounter, and probably trying as well to " weed out " those who are likely unsuited for the vicissitudes and uncertainties of this field. As I mentioned before, I don't always share his " style ", nor do I always agree with what he says or how he puts it. But I do think scot47's postings add a lot to these boards and I, for one, would find Dave's Cafe much less interesting were he ever to stop writing. My bottom line on this is what I perceive as scot47's motivation and purpose - why he posts as he does. I don't detect any gratuitous nastiness in what he writes, but what I do see is an intent to
make especially newcomers understand just what they may be getting themselves into. In his own admittedly often gruff and irascible way, I see scot47 ( hold onto your hats here ) as a kind of " Catcher in the Rye ".
Regards,
John