Job Discussion Forums

[North China Laowei]

[TESOUL]

Well, obviously grammar is a tiresome and done to death in Chinese schools. So, does that mean we should not discuss it? Have a look a "Teaching Language" by Diane Larsen Freeman. A different angle to look at grammar from. Interesting stuff and useful in the classroom. Part of the current 'Rethinking' TESL that EF is now encouraging. I do agree though- grammar, taught the way it is taught in Chinese schools is absurd.

I was simple listing some everyday terms- not trying to be pompous. Interlanguage= Chinglish. The language that forms between L1 and L2 while learning L2. Very useful, in that it highlights the issues that might need focus in the classroom. For example " I go shopping yesterday" is such a common problem because Chinese has a relatively simple way to form past tense. So, maybe we should focus on past tense. Oh no- but that would be teaching grammar. So let's just let our students become fluent but inaccurate speakers of English.

Of course, we should not teach lessons that only focus on grammar and there are great arguments for the benefit of "lexical approaches".

The "den of sharks' exist, I am sure. Let me just say, that the current upper management (Laowai side) have been attempting to get schools to engage in thinking about the teaching of ESL. It is not a set-in-stone doctrine after all. I mean, geez, for years in China teachers have been using out-dated methods specifically for students from Indo- European backgrounds and wondered why there success in China was limited. At least some are trying to evolve into what is best for the students.

I was just saying, that everyone wants to discuss money and and how bad each school is. Let's just get back to teaching.

And you are right- NCLaoWai- my othography is terrible. My spelling even worse.

Thanks for the comments though. I guess I have just been lucky to work at 2 decent EFs and heard so many horror stories about other schools, unis, and language institutions that have never happened at either EF i have worked at. Not saying it does not happen though.

[North China Laowei]

Thank you very much for a solid answer. I enjoyed reading it.

NCL

[sheeba]

Interlanguage= Chinglish


Maybe I sound a bit pedantic but I don't quite think that this is so.


I go shopping yesterday" is such a common problem because Chinese has a relatively simple way to form past tense

Do you think so?

Personally I see it more of a problem with language input from non-native environments creating incorrect attempts of contrasting functional discrepancies. I don't see how focusing on 'the past tense' will help in any way at all. Going back to functional uses of language via audiolingual methods I feel would benefit students with such errors. Teaching grammar concepts should be left for the more advanced students who are able to cope with metalinguistic explanations and are able to assimilate contrasting forms. 'I go shopping yesterday' errors(not mistakes) are generally made by elementary- pre-intermediate students. Ability to contrast grammatical concepts are pretty weak at this level therefore IMHO a waste of time.


So is that what you do at EF? Teach grammar? Not having a go. I'm just interested.

[TESOUL]

sheeba wrote

I see it more of a problem with language input from non-native environments creating incorrect attempts of contrasting functional discrepancies

Got me thinking. I guess the non- native environment is all the other Chinese English speakers. Who are speaking a form of English that has formed while learning English.

[vikuk]

[IanMWashburn]

EF is a worldwide organization, privately owned by one individual and his clan. EF purports to be the world's largest educational company, and in fact recently changed the name of its umbrella company from "English First" to "Education First". This was apparently done to add yet another level in the already labyrinthine structure of this company, to add greater layers of protection for the owners against legal liability.

After extensive research, it seems obvious that the guiding intention of the people who own and manage EF in its various forms, is and has always been the movement of cash into the owners' Swiss bank accounts.

This defines the corporate culture of EF. It is not intrinsically good or bad.

EF does well in China because, as with many Western companies, the owners and managers fit so nicely into the existing Chinese business culture. That is to say, China is a dream come true for those companies who care more about profit than the rule of law, fair, open and honest dealing, worker's rights, or anything resembling integrity.

In short, these companies will do whatever they think they can get away with. And when they're caught stepping over the line, they just buy their way out, writing off the expense as part of the cost of doing business.

The EF franchises are definitely a mixed bag. They are partially run from the franchiser's offices in Shanghai's Silver Tower, which in turn is run by an EF ownership clan member in Hong Kong.

The franchiser also directly operates schools in Shanghai, as well as conducting operations at Shanghai Normal University. However, this is not legally "direct", since EF operates under the cloak of a Chinese entity, whose name appears on employment contracts as "the employer". This Chinese entity is controlled by EF in collusion with a gentleman who also works as FAO for Shanghai Normal University. FECs that are generated for EF Shanghai employees, actually say that the employer is the University, even if the teacher works at Corporate Language Training, or one of the many Shanghai EF schools. (Or at least, this is my understanding of it.) We might ask the EF employee who posted above, what entity is listed as his employer on his FEC. In all likelihood, it will not say EF, but rather, some other Chinese company or school. In fact, I suggest that all FTs check to see whether the employer name on their contract is the same as the employer shown in their FEC. If they do not match, the FEC and/or the contract would appear to be fraudulent.

But why quibble? EF tends to pay as agreed, probably because they are primarily guided by the ethics of cash flow.

They are probably not different from about 90% of ESL employers worldwide.

It is a miserable industry, preying upon the hopes and aspirations of both naive students and idealistic teachers. It is a cash extraction operation disguised as education. But one might even ask to what extent even "legitimate" educational organizations are basically being run as businesses at this point.

(But maybe our corporate masters are not interested in a truly educated humanity, at least, not educated to the point of raising critical questions about the fundamental structures that we all must live under, wherever on the planet we happen to be.)

So if your motive is to get a job in China, EF might not be too bad for you. Come to China on a tourist visa? Well, that has been the widespread practice. Get an essentially fake FEC? Well, if it works to get the RPF, who cares?

But if your motive is to help the Chinese people, or whomever your students might be, then maybe you will do well to rethink the situation. If you're really qualified to teach under the laws of China, then consider doing yourself and the Chinese people a favor, and find a legitimate organization who will bring you to China under the letter of the law. Hold out for a professional rate of pay and decent working conditions that will be guaranteed under the terms of a real SAFEA employment contract.

That way, as you impart Western culture and language to your students, you will not have the nagging feeling in the back of your mind that you are not a real teacher, but just a paid mercenary in a cash extraction operation masquerading as education.

[flutterbayou]

Although I find the previous post well written, we should consider the fact that all education throughout the world has become big business. And without sidetracking the notion with examples that set the thread off track, let�s keep to the pros and cons of language schools that thrive and whether they are worth working for. The point here is that EF has become a successful business because its customer is unadvised and, consequently, non-discerning of the quality of the product being offered.

We all know that all that makes a contract is a bargain for exchange. People who enroll at EF do not expect to be able to enter a university abroad from any of its programs. EF is for the hotel consierge attendant, the tour guide, the floor manager at Walmart, and the airline ticket agent... none of whom intend to use the language socially, but all who need a touch of it to get by at work. The marketers at EF and other private language schools use a modicum of effort to meet those needs, and they charge fees that people are willing to pay.

In terms of employment, the question is whether a prospective employee sees him/herself as a match in this sort of scenario, delivering a quick-fix product and where a fast turn-over of staff creates a quick-fix, backpacker teacher profile.

Those of us who hope to educate students, to follow through with their success at applying and integrating the English language into their lives, find the university a more formidable venue for teaching. Then, again, we have to admit the business factor of English learning at universities in China: Chinese find English a necessity, and not an aesthetic, and so teaching at universities where resources are limited or nil are not settings where a good teacher will easily find means of helping anyone in the classroom. Packing 48 to 50 students in a small room and attempting to successfully facilitate pair and group work are real feats of classroom management few are able to sustain.

My view is narrow: I have taught at quality universities in China because I wanted to get to know my students well, and was able to follow through with them for a number of years. We exchanged on professional and cultural levels, and I worked with administrators who were open to using textbooks I prefer. Some of them are now married with children; others are abroad advancing their educations; one is a visiting scholar in the United States this year. Another completed his MBA at one of America�s finest entrepeneur programs. Another young man is a general manager for a company in Shanghai that is using his English skills. I can look back and feel a sense of accomplishment.

It�s simply a shame that for most, an education is no longer a passion, but a means of improving one�s job prospects. EF fits in with a world where everything is agreed on in the bargain for exchange.

[englishgibson]

[flutterbayou]

The main page lists nearly 50 cities in China as having EF centers, and most cities have more than one school.

http://www.ef.com.cn/englishfirst/schools/default.aspx

Seems the group has grown since your last tally, EG

[teacherbel]

I kept on receiving this topic in my email. Ok..let me say here my piece. As I read the responses and descriptions about EF, perhaps, we are not talking about the EF I know.

I have received an email from my nephew who teaches at one of the EFs in China. He is very happy there. I am pasting below his email re EF:

"Work has been great. I love it here. John and Jeffrey seem to like my performance. It's also easy to find friends here. "

He lives in the same apartment with his elder sister who teaches in another language center. Both are happy.

I know my nephew. He won't lie and has very little endurance for places that would make him miserable..!

I guess, we must be talking about different EFs..huh?

[teacherbel]

Or maybe because we are Filipinos..We are not interested about how much our employer is raking.

First, we want a job. Then, we want to do our job well, third, we receive the paycheck that was agreed upon..and last but not the least, we are happy with our job and with those we work with..

Simple, aint it??

[Song&Dance]

If you wish to work in China legally, a McJob at McEF is McGood.

Once in country, you can look around for something different after you complete your McContract.

[eddy-cool]

[vikuk]