Job Discussion Forums

[Talkdoc]

[Taishan]

If you're correct and the school have been forging something that the didn't need to.

However, I remember Roger mention once that there is a subtle difference between the types of status that you gain if working for a school or uni on a Z visa.

I think there is a possibilty that at a school a teacher can still have 'foreign expert' status if they are a school pronounciation teacher, and don't have a degree.

Even if this is not the case I doubt that the school commits forgery. I suspect hat they may 'buy' their way around this problem.

[Taishan]

Also at which stage?

The stage of getting a letter of invitation?

or

The stage of getting the certificate?

As one stage comes before the other.

Or at both stages?

[Aramas]

It would appear, from this thread and others, that pedantic tw*ts require a four year degree, a TEFL qualification, two years teaching experience and a pre-arranged job/Z visa in order to teach in China. Everyone else can get by with a spine and a pulse.

I feel so much better for having endured the posturing of one or two self-proclaimed sino-cognoscenti. I expect it will prove to have been a valuable experience when I'm stuck in a staff room with one of their ilk. I've been wondering whether I should splash out on an mp3 player before I venture to parts foreign. Now I know.

[Talkdoc]

Wow, you really felt it was necessary to revive a 5-week old thread solely for the purposes of being personally insulting to a couple of posters?

A bachelor's degree, at least two years of experience and a Z-Visa are what are required to work here legally. A TEFL certificate as well as grandiose self-defenses, e.g., impertinence and arrogance (particularly in the absence of having met the minimum requirements), are completely optional (but very common).

Doc

[tofuman]

"A bachelor's degree, at least two years of experience and a Z-Visa are what are required to work here legally. "

Doc. As I pointed out in another thread, the language of the "statute" says "should have a bachelor's degree."

As particular as the Chinese are about certain aspects of English, I find it difficult to believe that "should" means "must" in this case. I mentioned a teacher with whom I am acquainted that is here perfectly legal and does not have a bachelor's degree, neither did he participate in any subterfuge to obtain his legal status.

I also provided authentic text from an American law school bulletin demonstrating the use of "must" in this context.

A person should never "violate" a contract but sometimes one feels he must. Me thinks it is time for you to find another horse because you are riding this one into the ground.

[cj750]

Again...we revisit..what is at the crux of the bizket......what is the meaning of legal in China.... away from Beijing ... the emperor is far away...and efficient methods of maintaining enforcement or even defining what is ment is up to the locals (take taxes for example, everyone who works is expected to pay them but how many FTs actually do, instead..they will beleave that the school has a special deal, that abides them to special treatment..so is it to far fetched to beleave that this same bending of regulation cannot take place as to permits)....what is legal in China..surely no one one these boards can tell you because the understanding of the law is left up to local needs and requirements...so if Beijing needs a degree for teaching..then the understanding of the law will change (locally) ..or the method to bring in teachers will alter to incl. Alian Work Visas as opposed to Foreign Expert Visas...what I am saying is don't get discouraged by those who tell you that it is not legal or whatever...everyone on this board has been informed by (1) others on this board, (2) Documents released in English, unless someone reads Chinese well enough, (3) Chinese Admins, which are never a good source..no mater what degree or position they may have. The Chinese have always been good at doing an end run around restrictive regulations and if it can be done ..they will do it.
The preceived need of FTs will drive the alteration of understanding of these laws and already have changed the landscape of what is tech. trade to include languages in adult schools...is it legal..no one knows..even the folks on this board..and the only way one will know if they can come to China is to try...
There seems to be a drive on this board to shut out others for not being as qualified...no BA or whatever..and this may be modivated by better educated member"s attitude towards what they see as their role in this educational and an effort to rase the bar of this industry to Western Standards..for their own satisfaction...

[Talkdoc]

[tofuman]

"I misjudged you Tofuman; I thought you were above such tactics."

Let the sinless one among you cast the first stone. What is it that you are not above, Doc? The continual pounding on those who do not meet your interpretation or that of the FAO of Hainan seems a bit low from where I sit

I did not suggest that a person with a high school diploma is qualified to come here as an expert in medicine. They could be qualified to teach English to pre-schoolers or young primary school children. If they happened to be an older child in a large family, they may well be more qualified that other candidates with a four year degree to teach young children. I thought that we agreed that the purpose of the statute is to keep unqualified people from teaching English.

When an employee of a government school has all the necessary documents, obtained without subterfuge, how can you say that the person is here illegally? You can say that only on the basis that it does not square with your interpretation of the law, or that of one provincial FAO. Suppose that the FAO of another province agrees with the implication of "should" rather than "must"? Then who is legal?

For practicall purposes, the local PSB decides who gets that status. Their interpretation of the matter supercedes that of an FAO. They issue the documents that make one legal.


The illustration of the law school that I provided makes my point. It is not an ABA accredited school, but it is accredited by the state bar. Several of its graduates have become district attorneys in different counties in the state. These individuals certainly demonstrated that one without a bachelor's degree may not only pass the bar, but rise to prominence in the field. Suppose a person without a bachelor's degree completes three years of a four year law program and then decides to take a break and come to China. The person only holds an associate's degree. Are they not as or more qualified to teach English than someone with a bachelor's in music?


People who are easy on themself and hard on others have issues to address, whatever degree they might hold, or hold not.

[Old Dog]

[joe greene]

The distinction between "must" and "should" is irrelevant. The quoted section is a translation of a Chinese regulation. The original Chinese language controls. Translations of any statute or regulation are for information purposes only and should not be relied upon in any cause of action or legal proceeding. This is a government regulation, not a private contract.

State bar associations are not in the business of accrediting law schools. They merely choose to allow or disallow graduates of schools unaccredited by the ABA to sit for the bar. Statistically, the graduates of these unaccredited schools have a low pass rate on the bar exam.

[tofuman]

OD, Interpretation of any document, particularly one provided in a language foreign to the issuers of the document, should take into consideration the intent of the framers of that document.

I maintain that the intent of the document is to provide a general baseline as to the qualifications of FTs. The purpose of the guidelines is to protect consumers from under qualified individuals masquerading as English teachers. The inflexible application of a standard can defeat its purpose.

I agree that, in most cases, a bachelor's degree is the minimum expectation. One poster pointed out that in some countries a bachelor's degree is a three year degree. Does the law intend to make a statement about the quality of education in different countries, the implication being that in certain countries, an individual can become qualified in three years, but other countries require four years? Doubtful.

Doc's interpretation or the interpretation of one provinvial FAO should not be the rule for all school's or institutions in every situation.

To suggest that a person with all legal documents is here illegally because he/she does not suit Doc's interpretation of the law is to ignore the more relevant interpretation of those individuals who have various positions and needs to fill.

[Talkdoc]

Tofuman, in addition to your arguments being completely disingenuous (you know fully well what the circumstances were surrounding my last job, because I clearly addressed them with you the last time you accused me of hypocrisy or worse), they are entirely specious. The reason your arguments are fallacious is because you are falsely and illogically interchanging the issue of credentials with what currently constitutes legal employment in China - they are entirely different issues (enforcement notwithstanding).

In fact, I have, on numerous occasions, made it clear that I do not consider it necessary for anyone to have a degree or teaching experience to practice English words with primary school children - those requirements are entirely superfluous in my opinion. In addition, I made it very clear to one gentleman in particular, on a recent thread, that I considered him to be far more qualified to teach the mechanics and technical aspects of English, with an associate's degree in English and a TESOL certificate, than I would ever be. However, and as much as this speaks to inequities or a certain lack of logic in the current regulations governed by the SAFEA, he cannot teach English in China legally although I can. (In fact, several months ago, I stated emphatically that I thought Rhonda Place was more qualified to work with primary school children than I am - and I meant that quite sincerely at the time and still do.)

The OP in the other thread raised the issue as to whether she could teach legally in China without a degree. Your initial response was:

[Road_runner]

To those who feel they should make the choice of coming to China and work without having had the intention to work, that is without the z visa: You are no different than the illegals who work the sweat shops and getting abused in the States. The illegals are likely ignorant of the laws and often times are economically desperate victims of con artists, but the tourists of China are deliberately violating the laws because they are too arrogant to adhere to them.
Somehow, I feel sympathy for the illegals but little sympathy for the arrogant tourists when they both fall victim to the shady operators.
Do we really need to put ourselves in the way of the shady operators?
Or we do it for the rush we get when we walk the tight rope?
Well, who says we have to be good citizens of the world?

[Roger]