Job Discussion Forums

[Marcoregano]

Things may have changed since I graduated in the UK in 1983, but then, anyone with a humanities degree (history, for example) would (or should) have had English language abilities on a par with someone who took an English degree. I am not suggesting they would have a comparable knowledge of English literature - but then most NETs are not teaching literature.

Re. salaries, I never intended to suggest that your average expat would survive comfortably on the HK average salary (I think 11.5K is correct btw, but will double-check) - I just wanted to throw some comparative light on the matter. But I don't see the fact that many well educated expats do survive reasonably well in the private sector on much lower salaries than NETs as irrelevant. They are under the same expat pressures and exigencies as the rest of us.

Btw Bogey, your fixed outgoings seem a bit higher than average at 25K.

[Yes Sir I Can Bogey]

Quite obviously, someone "with a humanities degree (history, for example) would (or should) have had English language abilities on a par with someone who took an English degree", after all, they would most likely be native speakers of English (or would have native speaker competence) and would both be literate. But that is not the point. There is more to teaching English - especially as a second or foreign language - than merely possessing native speaker status or competence. Someone who took their degree in, say, chemistry, in the UK (or any other English-speaking country) would also have taken it in English, but it doesn't follow that they can teach English. I have a brain which works (at least reasonably well most of the time), but that does not mean I can teach neuroscience or psychology. I can ride a bike but it doesn't mean I can teach the physics of balance. If I drop a penny from my hand I know it will fall to the ground. I also know this is due to gravity, but I wouldn't dare attempt to teach the physics behind this. Similarly, native speakers of English 'know' that in one of the following it is more likely that Peter caught the ball: 'Bill threw the ball at Peter' vs. 'Bill threw the ball to Peter'. They 'know' that although you can say 'I threw the rubbish out', 'I threw it out', and 'I threw out the rubbish', you cannot say 'I threw out it'. They know that the 's' in 'cats' is realised as [s] and in 'dogs' as [z]. One could go on all day but the point is that such 'knowledge' doesn't mean they can teach the underlying rules which give rise to such intuitions to their students.

You have to draw a distinction between procedural knowledge (knowing how) and declarative knowledge (knowing that).

Anyway, even if someone is just hired as a 'teacher' of conversational/oral English then they still need to learn how best to structure and stage input, and how to respond to errors and mistakes, etc. This is especially true these days as, for some unknown reason, most if not all EFL/ESL teachers tend to be monolingual and so have never gone through the process of learning a foreign tongue and so cannot in any way relate to the task faced by their students.

Regarding salaries, as I say, perhaps we move in different circles. I take it you do not have children? If you did then your outgoings would go through the roof, and this is a major reason why many ex-pats are leaving HK, and why HK has serious problems recruiting serious, mature, experienced, stable (i.e., family-oriented) employees (The American Chamber of Commerce have produced a report detailing how, along with pollution, small housing, and cramped streets, educational costs for offspring - as well as availability of places in schools - deter quality recruits from taking up posts in HK). Some people I know have fixed monthly outgoings of HK$50,000 a month, so I do not think mine are in any way high or above average. Most people I know spend HK$30,000 a month on payday. Rent is normally at least between HK$8,000 and HK$10,000, tuition fees for ESF are HK$8,000 per child (some international schools charge in excess of HK$13,000 a month and have a whopping debenture to boot), a maid is HK$3,500 a month, travel is around HK$1,000 a month per family member, one has to put aside 10% of one's salary for tax, utilities are usually around HK$1,000, supermarket shopping for a family can total anywhere between HK$2,000 and HK$4,000. Already that totals around HK$25,000 a month, and that is assuming there is only one child. This is without any entertainment, clothing, trips, holidays, or purchases of any kind. Just a few weeks ago I read a post of yours in which you state that on your way home you picked up a take-away and a bottle of wine. You said it cost HK$500. I really would love to know how someone with a kid can keep their outgoings below HK$25,000 a month.....

But, anyway, let's get back to the issue at hand: the qualifications (or lack thereof) of 'teachers' of ESL/EFL. I do not think it at all odd that people should have some form of training for the job they do; I am just amazed at the frequency with which I have to 'defend' this stance! In what other industry/area of life would anyone have to argue that those doing a certain job should have training for that job? And, if it is argued/agreed/asserted that specific, professional training is not required, should anyone really be all too surprised if this is absence of specific requirements is reflected in salaries?

Also, on a practical front, why be in HK if one does not have the time and/or money to enjoy what HK has to offer? I know of people who now earn as much in the PRC as some here in HK. Who do you think has the better quality of life/standard of living? I saw a 'university' post here in HK advertised a few weeks ago for a paltry HK$22,000 a month. I know of a chap who pulls in RMB 18,000 at a uni in Shenzhen. The HK post does not offer housing or a housing allowance, the Shenzhen post gives the candidate a choice between on-campus housing and an allowance. The HK post entails around 10% tax and HK$1,000 a month MPF, the Shenzhen post has a tiny tax burden paid at source and no national insurance payments. After rent, tax, MPF, travel card top ups, shopping, etc., whoever takes the HK post will have a mere HK$8,000 a month to live on (and save from), whereas the Shenzhen guy has about RMB 15,000 of his RMB 18,000 salary to live with and save from. Which is the better deal? Also, the HK post stated there were to be 16 hours of teaching a week, plus office hours, meetings, ECAs, etc., but the Shenzhen post only has 14 hours a week contact with students and there are no office hours or any other commitments! As he has the time and money, the Shenzhen guy often comes to HK to enjoy things which many who live and work in HK simply cannot afford and do not have the time or energy to enjoy! How's that for irony?

[Marcoregano]

Crossed wires here YSICB - I never suggested that it was reasonable for NETs not to have QTS - totally agree they should have full teacher training. My point is/was that the original degree subject doesn't matter, so long as it's in the humanities. Someone up the thread made a comment about NETs having degrees in 'other subjects' or somesuch.

And I also agree that those in China who have a good job may well have it better than those in HK with a bad job. In fact, there are probably many parts of China I'd rather be living than HK. On the flip side I'd be very picky about where I'd work in the Mainland, and I don't think Shenzhen would make my list.

[waxwing]

[meiyoubanfa]

Hello 'Yes Sir I Can Bogey'

As much as you might be right in a university-esque environment, I nonetheless agree with Marco for the most part. I might go one further, however, and suggest that taking an elitist approach to language education in this instance does more damage despite the good points you made.

Hire someone to train my kids in physics who does not have a physics degree? Hell no. But then again, training in physics hardly compares to teaching kids "how are you?". As far as I know, there aren't millions of people thinking in physics in every moment of human interaction everyday, unless I am seriously out of the loop on that one. To my knowledge, there are that many speaking and using English everyday.

Yeah, you are right. Big deal, we can speak English. But let's be honest, we all know that second language learning has never been about professionalism or getting kids to write essays a year or two after starting to study. Any kids/students who wish to do so will acquire that level on their own, likely after they end up in University and after 100s/1000s of hours of study. Ok fine, so what motivates them to study?

Of course, if you are simply educating kids/students that are at that level, then sure, one can make a claim that you might have more to offer with an English major or masters/etc. But lets be honest, how many students are at that level? If you really want to dig into the darkest secrets of English learning, look to uni students that go abroad eventually and take English 101 at age 19-20. I know plenty that had grammatical errors in every sentence of their university essays who still managed to get a B (70% in Canada) in English. One could argue that High level students or near fluent students perhaps need high end teachers even less, in that regard.

Why? Because it all started with them liking English enough to continue pursuing it. It was never about how many mistakes they made. One could say the same thing about learning anything.

So, the demand for ESL training begins at the base level, with kids/students who know very little, and are possibly scared to death of speaking to a Native speaker. Our Jobs then are to make them comfortable, like English, like us, and get them on their way to wanting to learn more English.

Sure. It offends nearly every academic bone in my body. But the reality is, your students that want to study, will. The ones that don't, won't. And that will happen regardless of what degree you have, or how many linguistic rules you can explain. In that regard, all that is really left for you to do is win them over with a couple jokes, funny dialogues, games, hopefully get them to begin speaking, and above all else get them to like learning it. If you can inspire some kid to go out and speak to dorm-mates someday when he/she attends a university abroad rather than sitting in his room playing Playstation 3, or kids running in the streets to try and talk to a foreigner that walks by, I think you've done a good job.

I have gotten kids to speak in my classes (and outside) simply by doing/saying things I know they think are 'cool', and they end up speaking English to me because they want to try and talk to me, despite the fact that they HATE English. I think many people have similar stories.

Moreover, if you press anyone who hired you for a job they would eventually say that your toughest job is not teaching "proper" English or explaining away the "rules" in the English language, but making your classroom experience as close as possible to living abroad. Why? Because that is the best way to learn a language. And who lives in these countries anyway? Who will students have to interact with regardless of how good their teachers were? Oh yeah, all of us who do not have English degrees, never-mind teaching degrees. In this sense, I tend to think that saying only certified teachers in English should be teaching entry-level English is a lot like putting the cart before the horse.

Besides, there is no way in HELL Asia or the rest of the world will ever get a certified teacher in every school where English is being taught. As far as I understand it, even the NET scheme fails to do so.

[Marcoregano]

Meiyoubanfa, I agree that having QTS doesn't necessarily make that person a good teacher, and I have no doubt that there are many non-QTS TEFLers in HK and Asia who would make much better primary and secondary teachers than some of the 'journeymen' professional teachers who wind up here. Oh yes, I know that for a fact.

The problem is that a big employer - whether EdB or an international school or whatever - needs 'proof' of a teacher's training and commitment. A PGCE certainly isn't absolute proof, but it does give the employer some level of assurance about the individual they're about to employ. Without it they have less to go on. So my advice to those great TEFLers out there at the chalkface is to go and get their QTS sorted out - then they can get the financial rewards their ability deserves. The system won't change.

[Yes Sir I Can Bogey]

Meiyoubanfa, Thanks for your long and interesting response.

I don�t think what I wrote in any way constitutes an �elitist approach�. On the contrary, as I stated a few times above, I merely think that people who get paid to do a certain job should have some basic training in and for that very job. Again, I am staggered at the frequency with which I have to argue this! Besides, teaching � and education in general � to my mind at least, is not simply �just another job�. It is not like being a landscape gardener, plumber, or traffic warden; teachers � again, in my view � should be educated, responsible adults who know what they are doing. There is only one thing worse than no teacher and that is a bad teacher.

You refer to teaching kids how to say �How are you?�, so I guess that you teach at kindergarten level or, at most, primary level in Korea, and/or very young kids in a private training centre. You wouldn�t get very far as a teacher of English in Hong Kong either at sixth form, secondary, or even primary level with only teaching such basic greetings. I think you may find that the ex-British �O� level (represented here as the HKCEE) and �A� level (here, HKAL) system is quite different from the system(s) in Korea, and that may well go for standards and levels of English competence, too. Also, many students here take 'foreign exams' such as the International GCSE and the IBD. How can one take students through such curricula just by teaching �How are you?� Also, what about those of us who teach at under- and postgraduate level? And those of us who teach, say, English for Journalism courses, Academic Writing, and the like? Also, are you aware that here in HK there are EMI primary and secondary schools? Standards for many institutions and many students may be vastly higher than you may think (vastly higher than SK). I once taught at one local (DSS) secondary school-cum-sixth form college and the vast majority of students were �return home Chinese�, i.e., kids who were born in Canada or Australia to professionals who had emigrated and who now had come back to HK, usually as a result of their parents getting a posting here. Most if not all of these kids were native speakers of English. Another large difference between HK and SK is that many young middle class students here have English-speaking maids (who are curiously absent from SK, and Japan, too). There are an estimated 100,000 households in HK with such maids/domestic helpers/amahs.

You mention students who go abroad to Canada, make errors in essays, and who still get a �B�. I do not claim to know anything about the tertiary system in Canada, but having met some graduates of Canadian universities it would not surprise me at all if standards were indeed very low (except if they teach students how to be thrifty, in which case they do a grand job!). It is, however, irrelevant to the discussion. Students in HK either go to local universities (all of which are EMI), or typically go to the UK, Australia, or the US.

You say it all, ultimately, comes down to making students interested in the subject at a young age. I would tend to agree. As famously noted by none other than Chomsky himself in his �Language and Problems of Knowledge� (The Managua Lectures), �The truth of the matter is that about 99 percent of teaching is making the students feel interested in the material. Then the other 1 percent has to do with your methods.� (Although he is often criticised for being a paper and pencil theoretician, few people are aware that Chomsky was once a Sunday school teacher of Hebrew). However, again, unfortunately, I would have to say that here in HK it this simply irrelevant. Kids are not allowed to �have fun� here, it seems. Even primary level schooling is characterised by individual desks, individual tasks, uniforms, and learn by rote Confucian ideals, usually delivered in a full-on lecture style via a megaphone. Absurd �learning� tasks such as the dreaded �seen dictations� are commonplace, and it is a far from uncommon sight on the streets of HK to see kids overloaded with ridiculously oversized rucksacks and satchels for all their 'essential' textbooks.

So this in a sort of roundabout way brings us to the crux of your argument, and that of Marco, namely that teachers are to a large extent born, not made. This argument usually takes a form such as �I know of a teacher with a dozen degrees in education, and he is a terrible teacher, but I know another chap who has no qualifications at all and is an excellent teacher.� Some go even further and claim that a lack or complete absence of qualifications makes for an even better teacher than one with relevant training and qualifications (there is a hint of this claim in your post).

But I do not believe that anyone is born a good teacher. This is as I do not think �good� teachers are some sort of special caste. I would accept that some people, for whatever reason(s), may well have personalities which are highly conducive to teaching, but even such people can only hone and fine tune their skills through education and teacher training. In fact, this argument that specialist training is not required only differs marginally from the other classic argument often heard in places where a basic, undergraduate bachelors degree is not required. In China and Cambodia for example you can hear many claim that not having a university degree does not necessarily make them a bad teacher. The reasons given for this are typically either of the type above (i.e., �I know a teacher with a degree who is rubbish and another guy with no degree who is great�) and/or something akin to/along the lines of �How does having a degree unrelated to teaching/English/linguistics help someone teach?�

Leaving aside the question as to what constitutes a �good� teacher (not to mention the question of who is making the judgment and what qualifications they have that make them think they can decree who is and isn�t a 'good' teacher) where do you draw the line? So there is someone who says someone else is a good teacher despite the fact they do not hold a degree. Can we say the same with, say, literacy? �I know someone who is illiterate but who is a great teacher, and I know someone else who is literate but who is a bad teacher� sounds a bit odd to me at least. Or, how about if we drive this thesis to its ultimate conclusion? How about if we use a reductio ad absurdum: 'I know of a teacher who is dead but who is excellent at his job, and I know someone else who has a pulse but who is a terrible teacher'. After all, one could argue that, say, Plato was indeed an excellent teacher, and he has been dead for donkey's years. That does not, however, mean I would want any kids of mine to just be left alone in a room with Plato's 'The Dialogues'.

To repeat my main claim: I think there is infinitely more to effective teaching � at any �level� � than merely possessing native speaker status or competence.

[Marcoregano]

[FraidyCat]

Wow! This debate is fascinating. I was planning to apply for a position in HK after reading the following:

*********************

Contract Duration: 2 years

Location: All Across Hong Kong; Kowloon, Hong Kong Island and more!

Student Level: Teaching Primary School and Teaching Secondary School

Working Hours: 08:00-17:00, Monday to Friday

Monthly Salary: HK$22,985 - HK$48,400 (approx $3000-$6250 USD

Visa: Sponsored by the school

Housing: Housing allowance of HK$14,250/month (approx $1850 USD

Flight: Round trip flight reimbursed upon arrival; Airfare provided to families for up to 5 persons

Vacation: Summer Vacation, National Holidays

Health Insurance Allowance for Family Health Cares

Additional Benefits: Luggage allowance, Bonus Pay, Cash Advances on Salary

***************************

The thing that caught my eye was the airfare for families up to 5 persons and the allowance for family health care. But after reading your thread on the cost of living in HK, I'm not so sure anymore.

I am a single mother of three pre-teen girls, and wherever I go, they go. I wasn't planning to enroll my children in school. I think homeschooling is a better option for my family and my kids seem to like that idea. However, is it impractical to think that I can hire a sitter, preferably a college student, to care for my children while I'm working and offer this person English lessons in exchange with no money for their work? My kids would like someone young who will take them to the movies, parks or do other fun/hip things with them. They are old enough that their English (albeit, with a lot of American slang interspersed) is quite good and may be beneficial to someone seeking to improve their English, but I would supplement that with formal lessons as well. Is that a reasonable expectation?

My qualifications are a B.A. in Journalism, M.A.Ed in Adult Education and 25 years of work experience as a technical writer for some of the most well-known, high-tech computer companies. I've also done some corporate training. I do not have an EFL/ESL certification nor do I intend to seek one. HK is also attractive to me because of it's proximity to Shenzhen, where I might be able to land a job with a high-tech company once my teaching contract expires.

As an added note, my objective is to have a good time, not necessarily to save money for when I return home.

Based on the salary, housing allowance and other benefits in the ad above, what do you think my prospects are for surviving in HK? If you know of a better offer, please email me.

Thanks

[anninhk]

You might get a job as a SNET with those qualifications but without a TEFL certificate you probably won't get a PNET job.
If you do get a job your experience might not count as I presume you didn't teach in a school so you would be at the bottom of the scale.
Even though it mentions medical insurance it is not enough to get good medical cover so to get that you would have to supplement the money received - that said some people just use the public system and have found it adequate.
For a family with 3 teenagers you would need a reasonably large flat and depending where you live that will take quite a chunk out of your salary. I suggest you look at another post for a breakdown of costs.
Yes, you will be able to get a person to look after the kids and can often get a Phillipino who is well-qualified but they will live with you and that will add to your need to get a bigger flat.
You are probably too late now to get a job in August though as interviews are being held around now.

[FraidyCat]

anninhk, thanks for the response. I don't think I want to be a SNET or PNET. My experience lends itself more to teaching business English and/or writing, but I'm not sure how to find those types of jobs in HK or even if they exist. Teaching at the university level would be ideal if my quals would be sufficient. HK NET headhunters are interviewing in my town in May and I thought they were looking for people to start in the fall.

I suspected the medical allowance was just a come on, but something is better than nothing. When they say allowance, will they give you cash or just pay a portion of the premium?

I'm not too keen on a live-in, Filipino or otherwise. I like my privacy and the kiddies aren't that young that they need constant attention. I'm thinking more along the lines of a companion for a few hours a day. I don't know, maybe I need to look at another country because someone told me that the shopping in HK is supreme and with three girls, they're going to be in shopping heaven.

[meiyoubanfa]

Bogey.

To bring this back to the original topic, I guess that might be a major difference between HK and the mainland--The level among middle school students in China (in a semi private public school that I taught in, or high level in other words) was not much different from Korea. In other words, mostly low level students with a smattering of high level individuals good enough to likely be your co-teacher.

In that sense I suppose we should simply narrow the argument further, and admit that teaching in HK sounds (to me anyway) like a place with higher standards than perhaps the rest of Asia at least. Or should I say higher level students. Given that fact, it appears we are in fact talking about a solution to two very different realities. I would like to point out, however, that such high level students can also be found in centers like Beijing or inner Seoul, and that such students do exist but they are by no means the norm.

What percentage of students would be at such a high level in HK? The majority?

I would curious to know, however, what your co-teachers would tell you if you asked them what your job was. I do pray that at that particular level they no longer feel the need to say "make it fun and interesting!"

Actually, I teach in a High school. Yes, terrifying isn't it? Most of my students do not know how to respond to "how are you?", about 30% do not know what it means. There are, as you mentioned, the odd student here and there that has lived abroad and plans to return there for university. But since I cannot make lessons to challenge them (and therefore leave the rest in the dust), they have nothing to learn in my classes usually. Most teachers at the high school level report similar issues, except in special classes with the elite students.

I guess that can be a further amendment to Marco's post. Get good qualifications and therefore get a better salary and yourself out of the entertainment business, as it were.

[Yes Sir I Can Bogey]

Mei You, of course there is going to be vast gulf between the mainland and Hong Kong when it comes to abilities/levels of competence in English. In the former there is only one language, Mandarin (though this is something of a misnomer as in fact there are many different 'Mandarins'), or, in the South, Cantonese, but where 'Mandarin' is still the language of education and the national media. In the latter however English is one of the three official tongues, and, in theory at least, infants, children, and young adults get bombarded with a daily diet of English-language input. I mentioned this above.

Also, as I noted above, many schools in HK (around 50%, I believe) � both primary and secondary � are EMI institutions. Apart from international schools in China there are no English Medium of Instruction schools. And, as I mentioned above, many, many households in HK have an English-speaking 'maid'/domestic helper/amah. Indeed, one of the reasons why Filipino maids are the preferred choice (apart from their relative poverty and seemingly innate docile dispositions) appears to be their English language skills which, of course, parents hope can be passed onto their offspring (see Constable's excellent book, 'Maid in Hong Kong'). In other words, they are full-time, unpaid personal English tutors @ a mere HK$3,600 a month.

Also, remember that vastly more Hong Kongers have relatives and contacts abroad in English-speaking countries than do Mainlanders (about 95% of 'overseas Chinese' can trace their roots back to Guangdong/Hong Kong). In addition, apart from one or two courses at a few institutions, all the universities in HK are EMI. I do not think any university in China has English Medium of Instruction policy. So, in short, there is a whole host of reasons why your average Hong Kong kid is going to have vastly superior English language skills than your average Mainlander.

You are quite right when you say that there are high level students from China, especially from the larger cities. Indeed, the best students by far at university here in HK are Mainlanders, with many being pretty much indistinguishable from native speakers. But, these students are either from extremely privileged backgrounds and/or are highly gifted learners (if they weren't then they wouldn't be able to come to HK to do their degree in the first place).

I wouldn't know what percentage of students in HK would be at such a high level. At the so-called 'elite' schools such as Mary Knoll, DGS, DBS, Ying Wa, etc., etc., then most if not all students have native speaker-like competence, but, at the other end of the social spectrum (these things tend to be linked after all) most if not all students at Band 3 schools can barely say 'Hi'.

You ask about co-teachers, but at university level we do not have 'co-teachers'. And when I taught at a secondary-cum-sixth form college there were also no co-teachers. I think it is just at primary schools and low-band secondary schools that have this interesting arrangement.

And I would agree with your amendment, but I would go one step further. I would say that without QTS, a decent salary in HK is now all but unobtainable. You cannot go past around HK$35,000 a month without it at primary or secondary level, nor at tertiary level, even if you have an array of academic qualifications.

[meiyoubanfa]

Its funny you mention unis and offering classes in English. In Jinan city, capital of Shandong province, I just happen to KNOW a prof there who was given the job of creating a Department of Religion by offering classes in philosophy, Hebrew religion/ancient Judaism, etc, and all his students had to learn Hebrew taught through English. The university was pretty run of the mill in terms of quality, but his students didn't have any trouble understanding him (he was from Australia). Though I wonder if this was a freak-show case.

And well, by co-teachers I also meant your colleagues.
On second thought, you might not want to ask them. Another thing that was hard to get over in the Mainland was the overwhelming sense that any respect aimed your way was little more than an empty gesture. Many Chinese (but not all) often gave me the impression they have no reason to respect anyone working abroad in China--for all the obvious reasons that I hardly want to get into here. I can only hope people in HK might be different.

That's an interesting fact concerning maids. On the other hand, apparently many richer families in Korea do the same, but usually the Korean ability of the Filipino's (and Indians here) soon outdistances the English ability of all but the best children living in the household, and so it is not as effective as once thought. The only place it seems to work is in westernized bars with Filipino waitresses, where the clientele are native speakers. But they hardly need the practice.

Interesting stuff. From what you say it seems anyone who has a family to support will have a hard time making ends meet in HK. But i guess that points to what I originally wanted to say about higher 'English' education, and why I pointed out the difference between the mainland and HK in terms of English ability--that there are only a small percentage of learners at such a high level. From all accounts, HK is one such center boasting many of said learners. Therefore HK is one of the few places requiring teaching certificates for various jobs, etc, because, from all accounts, there are more students there in need of education beyond flashcards, games, and 'how are you-athons'. In this sense, one could argue that being a certified teacher and teaching in suburban/rural China or Korea (and perhaps even many countries and urban centers as well) is to find yourself grossly overqualified.

And so many teachers wanting a change from teaching in their own countries end up in upper end schools or unis in HK, or similar places around the globe. I guess given those facts, they should be paying you even more.

On the other hand, individuals like my sister who have completely their PhD in English would not be caught dead teaching overseas, university or not. Apparently doing so is to commit academic suicide in the west, though I hope that does not apply to my field..... But I digress...

[Hoffacurse]

Bogey wrote: