Job Discussion Forums

[lauramalmberg]

Ok, I am a Canadian female looking for an EFL teaching position in HK. I am doing my job search from New York (my current residence) and just had my first official interview. What a trip. Is it customary to ask for HIGH SCHOOL marks and not University or TEFL Certificate marks? Is it customary to be requested (with much insistence) to "read" to your interviewer pretending they are a two year old? And after explaining carefully that you lack proper materials but give a carefully thought out explanation on how you would set up the class room, book you may choose to read, materials you would use to accompany the story, learning out comes you wish to achieve, how you would draw kids that young into interactive learning you get "dismissed" once again and are told "no, just read anything and pretend I am a two year old" Following this rather humiliating experience (especially after having taught and developed curriculum for this specific age group in Taiwan) I was then "assigned" a two page writing assignment on my thoughts about coming to Hong Kong in order to check my writing ability. Had we not been talking for over an hour on the phone not to mention exchanging several emails, hello!? University Degree top 15% of my class!? Top 5% of my TEFL!? What is this woman thinking?

Ok that is off my chest. After fuming for days and kicking myself in the butt for letting this person make me feel like my entire life is a failure and my salary expectations WAY out of wack (15000-20000 for full time including prep, teaching and travel hours) I decided to pose some questions. I think I need some pointers on how to get myself hired preferably before leaving the US in August.

1) Is this normal, my phone interview? I can understand the need to thoroughly check a candidate especially one you don�t have in front of you. My skills were not inquired about and every time I tried to show my teaching abilities I was shot down (see the two year old thing above as just ONE example). I could not figure out what this woman wanted, she was more interested in my Husband and the fact that I am not working in the States for the summer because I don�t have a working visa.
2) How should I go about selling my skills? I set up class room scenarios, mentioned games, materials, classroom ice-breakers I have used. I said how many classroom hours I have taught. How I developed curriculum for my schools and private clients. Was I being to pushy? Arrogant? I asked as many questions about her school set up and curriculum, made notes about it, and did what I thought was my best to show how I could be a benefit to her school.
3) Should I just go to HK with out and job and find work when I am there? Yes I know about the working visa situation. What about working illegally? How much could I make tutoring private clients?
Other suggestions are welcome. I don�t need to be told to take a chill pill or grow a thicker skin, I already know that, I hoped that a bit of drama might get me some creative and quick responses. The above interview rendition is pretty close to accurate, just expand it by an hour and a half and end it with �you want how much? You must be kidding!�

Laura Brine [email protected]

[Roger]

Two answers to your long query, from a former HK resident and teacher:
What was wrong with the interviewer requesting that you pretend reading aloud to a two-year old?
You are interested in a position in a foreign country, with kids whose first language is Chinese. Can you convince a Chinese interviewer that you can empathise with young learners juswt by telling him or her how you would set the classroom? I do not think so!
It is common in China to actually give a trial lesson - and often students are the judges! This may be unfair to good expat teachers (it often is!), but in the case of toddlers it is an absolute must!

Second aspect: Put any hope of working in HK illegally definitely out of your mind! Not only is this pretty self-defeating, you would be acting most despicably in many ways! There are many qualified teachers in HK that currently are on the dole! Due to SARS, the unemployment rate has hit a new record high of 8.3%, and is forecast to keep rising!

[prplfairy]

Your interviewer is way off the mark. How are you suppose to read a text over the phone the way you would in a classroom? There is no eye contact, no body language, no illustrations. Unless the interviewer plans on locking you in a closet and having you teach from inside it what was asked of you is not just stupid but a bit rude as well. Teaching a show lesson is sometimes required but only after an intial interview, and of course in person not on the phone. Although, I can see it now... a group of toddlers huddled around a speaker phone while you read them a story.

The fact is that Hong Kong employers have no HR expereince. I've been in interview after interview where I have to answer questions that are clearly written on my CV(eg. Have you worked in HK before? Where are you from?). What employers here often fail to understand is that an interview is an opprotunity to find out what kind of a person the applicant is and how they would fit into the work environment. What were you suppose to do on that call put on a funny voice and read slowly? Check for comprehension? Any slob can do that. A good interviewer wouldn't need you to clown around like that they would ask you queations regard tecnhiques and discern from other questions if you were personally equipped to do the job. Rodger has it all wrong. I'm afraid that was an ametuer that you were dealing with and not standard proceedure in Hong Kong.

As far as coming to Hong Kong and looking for a job it is true that you have a better chance, especially with local schools. That having been said I would try to get something first and then start looking for a better position once you get here because you never know how long it will take you to find something and HK can be pricey.

Working illegally? Go for it! I know people who do it and do alright. Usually it is part time work under less than perfect conditions but it is something. I don't know why it would be so terrible for a quaified teacher to work illegally. The HK government won't allow non-residents to work part time and many learning centres don't want to go through the hassel, it's not nearly as bad as they make it out to be, of sponsoring someone. What does this mean? It means that semi-literate bar flies and undereducated people with no prospects get teaching jobs simply because they are white Hong Kong residents. Should you feel bad about taking a job from one of them? Absolutely not.

I guess the unemployment rate quote is there to put you off coming to HK but I can tell you that if you are qualified (relevant degree, TESOL, expereinced, etc.) then you will most likely find something.

Good luck

[growler]

Hummmm, I haven't work in Hong Kong for long but this is what I've seen so far.

There are a lot RUBBISH (I wouldn't care to elaborate on the rubbish) and ILLEGAL people calling themselves NETs. Being a native English speaker with easily obtained TEFL certs does not make one qualified to be an English teacher.

I am the only NET teacher in my school so the principal had placed me in charge of recruiting more NET teachers for the school. Unfortunately, being a bad judge of character as well as my lack of experience in the HR field, people came and left, keep coming and keep leaving. Their 'leaving' was not their choice but mine along with an agreeing force around me. I always ask questions at the interview which I can see the answer to on the CV, however, the answers don't come out the same. Some people don't even bother to memorise the lies they put on their CVs.

The unemployment rate continues to rise and there are NETs in an abundance without jobs at the moment. Hong Kong does not need anymore unqualified or illegal NETs wannabe. If you are indeed a qualified teacher, then I'm sure you can get here through the proper channels.

[prplfairy]

growler,

No one is saying we need more unqualified people but HR practices as the one Laura went through are ill advised. Also, you said there are lots of qualified NETs with no jobs but that if this woman is qualified she would find a job. That's neither here nor there but illegal part-time work is often done in addition to full-time jobs by those with and without work visas and qualifications. The HK govenment only allows those with residency to work part-time and as we see in the large number of illegal English teachers there are more part-time jobs than there are native English speaking residents willing or able to fill them. Therefore we see that Hong Kong DOES NEED illegal English teachers, or at least needs to change the law and allow sposored teachers teachers to have more than one employer or to simply work part-time.

I think it was quite unfair of your school to put you in a hiring position like that. It's equivalent of telling the black guy he should be the basketball coach. There are HR experts just as there are stock market experts. You should not be asked to be an HR expert anymore than you should be giving the school advise on a stock portfolio.

The school, however, should supply you with the resources to do the job. All it takes is the ability to make overseas phone calls and you can confirm a person's CV. I've had several jobs in Hong Kong and have had endless number of interviews and not once did one single employer or potential employer actually check my references. Not once!

Qualified applicants such as myself offer former employers' web pages, e-mail contacts, recommendations and phone numbers for potential employers to check the validity of our diplomas, certificates and experience. Instead of using those resources they ask if I have secondary school experiences when it clearly states on my resume that I do! If a teacher does not offer anything other than a CV then they can be asked to provide the previously mentioned information as well as examples of past lesson plans. In many cases a teacher is also asked to teach a lesson for the potential employer as well.

I'm no HR expert but I'm so tired of hearing schools and learning centers complain of low quality teachers when they do not take even the most basic precautions against hiring frauds and the unqualified or inexperienced. If these places are so concerned with the quality of teaching they should consider the quality of their hiring practices and invest the nominal funds and time needed to do so. Obviously, some bad teachers would still get through, although fewer I would assert, but at least the schools would have the peace of mind of knowing that they did everything in their power to avoid getting an unsatisfactory teacher.

[Roger]

I think, condoning working illegally in Hong Kong makes you an accomplice. Do you know the first poster? Why does she want to work in Hong Kong rather than in Canada or in the mainland?
Alright, the questions she heard may appear to be weird. SO what? Put up with it AND shut up, is my motto! Maybe the interviewer would not even give her a chance of reading a story to a two-year old if he had a chance of seeing her! Maybe... I am NOT saying this at all.

Another point:
A two-year old is NOT a student; she or he is a toddler with just the beginning of a language to serve her communication needs. Teaching preschoolers is a totally different job than teaching students. The formal requirements for jobseekers are not at all comparable! I know this because I have done kindergarten teaching now for several yewars, and I wish I had been trained for this; I was not, so I had to learn the ropes all by myself, and it was a steep learning curve! Now that I have enough experience I can see what a difference it makes when a young newbie arrives here - either she has a formal kindergarten teaching background, or she is a regular teacher - in which case she might be unsuitable (I could have been 'unsuitable' too, but I learnt fast, perhaps because I knew from teaching at higher levels including college level what local teachers fail to do well).
So, if this Canadian female is interested in a position where she has to look after two-year olds, the question might be asked: Do you have relevant education? Are you motivated enough to teach small children whose first tongue you do not know???

I really find it appalling that someone stands up in favour of those many illegal opportunists! Why do these people come here in the first place??? What potential contributions can THEY make to the local communities???

[prplfairy]

Roger in response to your questions.

1.Do I know the poster? No I don't know the poster.

2.Why does she want to come to HK and not Canada or China?
Most likely because, teaching ESL in English speaking countries, English is one of Canada's official languages, is not lucrative in most cases and Hong Kong is one of the best places to earn a good wage. She probably, like me, wants to live abroad but make some decent money while doing it which is not the case in China and most places where ESL work is easily obtained. Perhaps she has personal reasons and this is really the point: she doesn't need a reason. And besides, Canada is boring.

3. Why do THESE PEOPLE come here in the first place?
The same reason most of us came here. No one wants to be an illegal worker. No one is sitting at home in England or the US or Australia saying, "I've got it! The answer to all my problems. I'll go to Hong Kong and be an illegal teacher!" Teachers working illegally risk more than those working legally by having no contracts and no way of getting owed money other than a businessperson's good word. In addition they usually make less per hour and on salary and have no job stability at all. They often work in far out places at low band schools in the New Territories where most teachers can't be bothered to go. With all these risks, do you think they came here to work illegally? This isn't Thailand where any backpacking white nitwit can teach, and everyone knows it. People come here to find good jobs. Many of these people have come over after having got a job only to have their jobs crumble around them for one reason or another and they don't want to leave. In fact they want a full-time good job. No one wants these crappy little jobs on a sporadic basis and to live hand to mouth. I find it appalling that you would deny people the right to earn a wage over technicalities in Hong Kong law.

4. What can THEY contribute to local communities?
Is your contention that only legal workers make a contribution to local communities? Or that legal workers make any contributions at all? In terms of tax dollars, legal workers do contribute more because they make more. Most illegal teachers would be hard pressed to meet even the lowest tax brackets requirements of about $110,000 HK a year. Therefore, even if they were legal they still wouldn't be paying taxes! I've seen the contribution legal expat workers make in Wan Chai and Mongkok strip bars and other similar establishments. Is this your idea of contributing to society? Furthermore, what exactly are all these NETs living out on Park Island and other elitist fortresses contributing? Money for another Adidas store or Starbucks for the shopping mall they live in. Is this your idea of contributing to society? Again, the point is not do legal workers make more of a contribution than illegal workers but that it is not the issue. This idea that your legal status dictates your ability or willingness to contribute to a community is absurd, flawed and arbitrary to the core. You might as well say that the color of your socks dictates what breakfast cereal you eat. BTW, Black=Frosted Flakes

Do you want to see someone shopping, eating drinking, talking, and living with real locals who contributes times, energy and cultural awareness? Find an illegal English teacher because he or she will be living in a small flat in an old Chinese building in the middle of nowhere surrounded by average Hong Kongers, not the educated class or business class in new sky rise apartment complexes.


The heart of your argument is the same one that falls flat in Western countries, this illusion that illegal workers are stealing all the good jobs. Get real. You cannot get a job in a primary school, secondary school, college, or university, the highest paying teaching jobs in HK, without degrees, certificates, experience and a work visa. Period. You cannot even get into reputable learning centers without those things. The jobs THESE PEOPLE are filling are marginalized irregular employment opportunities and to deny them even that merge sustenance is unconscionable. So, am I, in your words, an accomplice? Damn right I am!

MY MOTTO: DON'T PUT UP WITH IT AND GET WHAT YOU DESERVE BY HOOK OR BY CROOK.

[growler]

I still believe that if you're qualified enough and good enough, you'll get here through the proper channels.

Taking risks and being subjected to inferior living conditions and pay does legitimise these illegitimate people. If they insist on coming over here knowing the risks, so they should get what they deserve. My country is so. oooo boring and I have no choice but to sneak somewhere else and live like a rat, that should be okay" says the Qualified Applicant who does not like Canada.

The high paid NETs and elitists are spending and boosting the economy aren't they? Money does go round.

Again, Hong Kong does not need more illegal NETs wannabe anymore than the world need CROOKS. I wouldn't want to live in a society without some law and order however tedious others might think them to be.

Crooked teacher hmmmm, I better watch out for that one.

[Roger]

prplfairy,
your answer to my latest reply is, ahem, illogical. it seems it is turning in circles.
You said that most expats come to HK because of the "good money" to be earned there, - legitimate, no objection there! Also, your own country is 'boring', anyway, Canada is! That is relative and subjective, but it is your opinion. Is HK the opposite of 'boring'? Again, very subjective. It maybe a happening place - but Shanghai is much more happening! That is an objective fact. Still, why not HK? There is no objective reasoning. SOmeone might like HK, many don't. I have known HK since the 1980's, and by Gosh! It used to be "my place", but it isn't my place anymore.
But your biggest problem is your lack of logic: If the good money you can earn here is ONE of the reasons, why deride those who spend a good portion of it in HK? What's elitist? A NET is a high-income earner, so let these people lead the good life to which they are entitled. Some save most of their salaries for back home - their right.
But why should a newcomer aspire to a high income if she is only interested in getting away from Canada? SHe might simply pack her rucksack and start a trip around the world! She could, of course, go and work for a charity. She might teach anywhere in the THird-World. After all, and this is what irks me: Aspiring TEFLers think they have a marketable asset - their mother tongue. Sorry, this is no asset. This is a tool that you had to learn, and the fact that others learn it too give you no privilege. There are plenty of excellent English teachers all over the world who could do a much better job teaching a two-year old HK child than a monolinugal Canadian does!
As for 'contributions', you have singled out the fiancial ones - taxes to the government, spending in the community. Has it never occurred to you that the actual work called 'teaching' is a kind of contribution too, so long as it is a quality service? A good teacher is irreplaceable. His or her first tongue does not matter, his or her character, teaching skills and social skills do!
Now if someone is so desperate as to try to work in HK illegally, isn't that persobn's character compromised?
How long is such a teacher likely to show loyalty to her employer?
There is hardly any question of me fearing an II taking over my job; I do think a "brain drain" from the West to CHina, including HK, is a good thing - provided the job aspirants are willing to contribute!

But there is very limited chance for her to find a viable situation in HK without going through the motions of the law. We have moved on since the early 1990's when hundreds of backpackers were working as couriers, night shift watchmen and construction workers - illegally!
These days, the HK police catch several dozen illegal mainlanders every day, put them in prison and deport them back to the mainland!

[prplfairy]

Growler,

I agree with your first statement that if you are qualified you will most likely find a decent job. Where we part company is in sympathy for those forced into illegal work. I have it and you don't. Let me give you two personal experiences to demonstrate how not all people working illegally are "getting what they deserve" as you put it.

CASE A: A friend of mine was hired in the beginning of the year by a learning center. He enjoyed the job, had his work visa and was making decent money. He put down the required 2 months deposit for an apartment. Then SARS came and his company folded, see Deborah Kindergarten in Job Info Journal for another example. To get by he has taken illegal side work to see him through until he finds a full-time position. If he were to leave he'd lose about $2000 US on his deposit and his legal working status in Hong Kong, not to mention his friends and girl friend. Regardless, the fact is that he likes HK and doesn't want to leave. What is so wrong with him taking some illegal side work until he finds a good job, seeing that he was qualified enough to get a good job before? Nothing.

CASE B Last year I worked for an agent who placed me in a local school. After realizing that I was qualified to work at local schools and that the agent was taking a large chunk of my money I decided to apply to schools directly and in the end received a lucrative offer, because as you say I am such a qualified applicant. The problem? The school year ends in mid-July and does not begin again until September. To keep some cash flow coming I took some illegal work to see me through the summer months because no one would sponsor me for a month and a half. By your logic I should have just gone home or had no income because I wasn't legally employed for every minute of my time in Hong Kong. Instead I stayed, did the illegal work, prospered at my new job, got a $2000 HK a month raise this year at the same school and my family and I are better off for it.

So you see there are many cases where someone is not just some leech sitting in another country bored wanting to teach English yet having no qualifications as you tried to insinuate in your last posting. There is no reason to make a wholesale dismissal of people who work illegally because many of them have extenuating circumstances that lead them into working illegally. And as far as the NETs are concerned many of my friends are in the NET program. It's not that I dislike NETs it's that I don't understand why those on the top end of the pay scale, who do thankfully spend more money here, aren't willing to let others get a piece of the pie, even if that piece is infinitely smaller as in the case of illegal teachers.

I'm also disappointed that you felt that my description of the conditions of some illegal teachers shows how they "live like a rat". In reality, this is the lifestyle and economic level that the average Chinese person lives in in Hong Kong. I do not consider them rats and I think you should rethink your statement unless you do.

In addition, it seems a bit lowbrow to go around calling people names like "crooked teacher" when you don't know them. The "CROOK" bit was meant to infer that a useless and discriminatory labor law should not keep anyone from taking a job. Furthermore, your "law and order" statement basically compares non-residents working in part-time positions to violent criminals. Do you really feel as threatened by non-visa holding teachers as you do by murderers and rapists? And removing a discriminatory labor law does not equal removing basic civil society and order. Or maybe you're right... hmmmm ... if we let people work part time or for more than one employer maybe the system would collapse. I can see it now: you being dragged away by non-visa holding street ruffians yelling, "Soylent Green is made out of people! People!" It'd still be better than Canada.-See that's what we call in my country a joke, just as my quip about Canada being boring was a joke. I've been there many times and find it a perfectly enjoyable country, especially BC. We're not so different after all are we growler?

[prplfairy]

Roger,

I'm sorry to hear that you, ahem, failed to comprehend the logic of my previous argument as well as its major tenets. Let's try again, shall we?

So to keep everyone on the same page I'll take your last post point by point, I hope this organization is simple enough.

First of all, I'm not from Canada. I never said I was and I only used Canada as example the same way I used China because YOU mentioned Canada, and China, first in your posting of June 20th. And whoever said anyone, a monolingual one at that, is trying to escape Canada. You just made that up! No one said that! Only you. You're just making up characters to fit into some story you've made up about a bad monolingual, Canadian teacher not being able to teacher a two-year old from HK.

Next your position on the NETs. The NETs have every right to do what they want and to spend their money any way they want. I never said they didn't. You're boxing, or rater shadow boxing, with an opponent who doesn't exist. All I did was respond to your assertion that the NETs make some sort of larger contribution to society by showing some examples of NETs' and illegal teachers' lifestyles and how either can be seen to be "contributing" in the unspecified manner you offered. The final outcome of this, if one is sharp enough to catch it, is to reverse the dualism you offered to such a degree that the exact opposite can be shown to be true thus showing that any statement regarding "contributions" by NETs or non-NEts or illegal teachers is frivolous and pointless. That is, that one is not more or less inclined to contribute to society based on one's NET or illegal status.

Moving along, who argued that English is an asset that automatically means you're an English teacher? You get really upset about this and yet no one is saying that. You're having an argument with yourself again, that is "turning in circles" if I've ever seen it. Although one point to take you task on in this section is your inability to appreciate native speakers. Of course there are many examples when non-native speakers can do as good a job as a native speaker but as a whole when you have two equally qualified, trained, experienced English teachers you would logically choose the native speaker. If you disagree then it is you who are attacking the NETs.

You also got a bit hot under the collar when I mention taxes as a contribution. I only mentioned taxes because you failed to define what you meant by "contribution" in your posting of June 20th. You seemed to have looked over the part where I mentioned cultural exchange and living with average citizens as ways of making, as you put "potential contributions to local communities". I mentioned taxes because it is one of the only concrete "objective", as you seem to be keen on this word, ways of measuring an individuals contribution to a community.

Then once again you pull out the exclamation points to argue that teachers have skills to provide to communities and that good teachers are irreplaceable. And once again no one is arguing with you on this point. Once again you're turning in circles arguing only with yourself. You go on to say that illegal teacher loyalty is low, completely missing the very point I made that illegal teachers don't want those jobs anymore than you do, they want permanent jobs. However, in this economic climate even qualified teachers can't always find jobs. I never stood up for unqualified people taking anyone's job. The point, missed again it seems, is that sometimes qualified teachers take illegal work because of extenuating circumstances, please see my last posting to growler. The point is not that having unqualified teachers working legally or illegal, I hope no one really operates under the fantasy that only illegal teachers are unqualified, is good. We don't need or want any unqualified teachers but illegal does not equal unqualified. Is that clear enough for you?

Let's move on to the finale of your post. I agree and never stated otherwise that the proper legal channel is the way to go to get a good job with a good salary and benefits, only that there are other options in a pinch. What backpacker couriers have to do with that I don't know. But my favorite part is how you tell this Laura, who hasn't weighed in, that getting a job without the proper procedure is unadvised and then jump to telling us how many Mainland illegals get deported each day as if illegal English teachers have any connection whatsoever with deported Mainlanders. Are you trying to say that the Immigration department rounds up dozens of English teachers daily? If so, you're wrong and even if you're not trying to say that you are still misleading people either purposely or through a lack of knowledge on organization, diction, syntax and rhetoric.

In conclusion, you completely ignored relative points I made in my earlier post to express a deep dislike for illegal teachers. If you just don't like illegal teachers just because you don't like illegal teachers then just say so and we'll be done with it but I learned about objective/subjective in 3rd grade too Rog, no need to review. So Roger, this is the big boys' table. If you want to sit at the big boys table you better start acting like one.