Job Discussion Forums

[Robin53]

This topic was discussed quite a bit a few months ago but seems to have disappeared.
Basically the idea is very good - private education companies in China hire FT's to teach an Australian senior high-school curriculum which prepares them for the requirements expected for first year university study in overseas universities. The students learn the same skills they would learn in a foundation course at an overseas university except they do it while at high-school in China. The substantial fees the Chinese companies charge are similar to the actual costs of doing the same thing overseas.

Its a very good business idea right now in China where more and more parents want their children to get an overseas university degree. Instead of just teaching it, has anyone had experience of being involved as a partner in this business? From what I understand, they hire certified FT's cheaply at the normal range of salaries in China for FT's. Academic management of the programs is in the hands of Chinese graduates with masters degrees and English language ability. As a result, all sorts of cross-cultural problems exist, but it still has to be a very good educational business idea suited to the times.

[englishgibson]

darn, i've got this one on before...yes, it's lost somewhere down there on page whatever

yes, it's a greatly suitable academic program for chinese, although somewhat "tailored to their needs". it seems to have been carefully "prepared" for the chinese market. i bet the one called BEN (from the UK) that "prepared" it a few years back in shanghai would probably know more on topic..last time when he read my GAC thread that's somewhere on page whatever of this site, BEN said he was under some confidentiality clause with the ACT Education Solution Limited.

now, the head office in shanghai's got only chinese "academics" that lead the whole nation of GAC centers which means they don't have to worry about any confidentiality clauses of their workers anymore. you know how it goes with chinese employees, even if they are in the management office.

we get moderated by these fine chinese academic managers with MAs in whatever field and from wherever their chinese uni has had an exchange or cooperation with (whatever). it takes them 1-2 years to become so smart/clever to moderate us in any specialty subject of the GAC. but yes they say the final words come from sydney.

back to the greatness of this academic product, i'd like to believe that it is meant to help the talented students that have been left behind by the chinese educational system, or the ones that've not been given that opportunity to further their higher education in their homeland. however, i hate seeing the tendency with all kinda students and parents forcing their kids into certain countries or subjects of their own choice. GAC centers at times have little choice but work with what they actually have which is really really sad. it hurts us in classrooms as well. so, for example, teaching some kids business is just a mission impossible.

social sciences (i mentioned on another thread) is yet another tough one to teach 'casue chinese do not learn the subject in their high schools. it takes a longer introduction prior to the first module or you get in trouble later..teaching the language rather than the subject

there's a really sensitive issue to this program and that is the ACT prep that some or more than some centers seem to want to do. it seems that a large number of students (or their parents) opt for the US unis and so it is necessary to take this entry exam. well, unless they choose a public uni where they most likely will have to take a SAT entry exam. speaking of the ACT vs SAT competition in the US. and, ACT chose the large chinese market as it looks first and with some really interesting pitch in ACT Education Solution Limited which has coinsidentally their name in. GAC and ACT are two different products although in one plan if a student goes to the US. otherwise no ACT is needed as no other unis around the world take it really.

over all, i enjoy teaching GAC. it gives you a plan/goal that other programs may lack. it prepares the high school grads for western unis pretty well and in a few different areas. it's too bad and to the program's disadvantage that either IELTS or TOEFL get in a way. students tend to believe (and the system doesn't help) that the proficiency exam is the end of the program with the GAC. i wish they took the proficiency exams last and after the GAC's over but that's not feesible for the centers. also, the GAC should be given a larger role in the student visas arrangement as the proficiency exams do. it's just my dream i guess.

cheers and beers to the GAC that's got me out of the monkey business in language mills

[Robin53]

Thanks for the reply English. Is there any way some experienced GAC teachers could get together to start up a GAC program in China? From what I understand, there is a legal requirement for a layer of Chinese management, and a Chinese CEO. However there seem to be many problems at the moment because the GAC program requires licensed foreign high-school teachers who understand how to teach the GAC syllabus.

The Chinese GAC managers don't have the overseas teaching experience and are only interested in controlling the foreign teachers without really understanding the program. As a result there are many problems. Also, there are many opportunities for providing fake student results.

The GAC syllabus books for students and teachers are really good. They actually deliver the results - providing a foundation of skills for Chinese students who want to get a university degree overseas. This looks like another very good idea for China which is doomed to fail because of short-term greed, and lack of understanding of overseas education methods.

There has to be a way where experienced overseas high-school teachers, and honest Chinese school management get together to produce something which will benefit Chinese students and their parents.

[Mister Al]

[englishgibson]

if you're in a complete control of your subjects you facilitate/teach and have only the well qualified and experienced to supervise you or moderate your assessments, it's got to work.


i wouldn't write the GAC off yet. it's designed for all english speaking countries unis which provides the centers with a great potential.

[Mister Al]

[Neilhrd]

After two years teaching GAC and 9 months as DOS I have thought about trying to become a GAC franchisee.

I have the capital and the experience but have decided against for several reasons.

1. GAC is a high level programme which requires not only upper intermediate English skills but also a level of study skills, personal maturity, general knowledge and life experience which very few Chinese students have. I don't see this situation improving in the near future so from a business point of view I see little prospect of recruiting sufficient students with the necessary level to become viable. Of course centres could offer lower level courses such as PET and FCE to bring students to the required entry standard. But I sense general hostility among the Chinese towards the idea that such steps are needed and an unwillingness on the part of students and especially parents to invest the time and money.

2. The GAC programme is controlled from Shanghai. In reality Australia has little to do with it. Franchisees have to commit to delivering the prescribed programme. I can see why because there have to be consistent standards for the qualification to have any credibility for university entry. But in my experience the application of those standards is arbitrary and inconsistent and the RAMs don't have the academic competence to make many judgements but adopt a holier than though attitude which is bound to alienate foreign teachers. Therefore any prospective franchisee inherits a problem of recruiting, and more importantly retaining, the necessary calibre of teachers.

3. Furthermore in my experience the Shanghai office has neither the interest nor the capability to improve the materials. The reason may be partly fear of losing face by admitting that the Chinese can't do it themselves, or it may be govt censorship, or both. However the result is the same. The programme could and should be far better than it is and sooner or later it is going to lose out in competition with the other international tests available in China.

4. Related to that GAC lacks the clout to stand alone as a passport to entry into most seripous western universities. Therefore the teaching programme will always be compromised by students sitting IELTS, TOEFL, ACT etc at the same time when these tests require completely different skill sets. I have yet to see any plan from the GAC bosses to address this issue and without that the programme doesn't make business or educational sense to me.

5. Most important GAC requires that franchisees operate on a recognised university or high school campus. This is great in theory. But they can't or won't force the host universities to provide the academic resources to support the programme. In my present centre we get no support whatsoever from the host university and I sense an undercurrent of hostility to our being here at all. Either GAC has to get tough with the Chinese authorities about this or centralise their operations in larger, regional campuses of their own. But again I see no recognition of the problem let alone plans to solve it.

Sadly I see little future for GAC in China under its present management. So I have decided not to renew my contract when it expires in July and will take a break before seeking fresh pastures in the Autumn. I will leave GAC with some happy memories. It has been challenging and it has stretched and improved me to some degree and I would like to think benefitted some promising students. But I also leave with a strong sense of frustration and regret about a wasted opportunity.

[Robin53]

That was a fine summary of your efforts teaching and supervising a GAC program Neilhrd. You also give very good reasons about why it would be difficult to start one up where the program can be taught by licensed teachers with full cooperation and mentoring by senior academic staff such as would be found in a high-school in a western country. GAC has the teachers, the curriculum, and the students, but the recipe is flawed because of reasons you describe.

Something similar to GAC was Beijing-WITT. This was a joint-venture company set up about 6 years ago. It was a partnership between a small part of a very big company in Beijing which was possibly state funded, and a New Zealand polytechnic's ESL department. The NZ partner wrote an excellent 1 year course focusing on reading and writing skills designed to get good passes in IELTS exams. They also hired licensed teachers and the program, which was supervised by NZ academic advisors based in BJ, did indeed teach writing for a year or two at state high-schools in several provinces. A year later there was an internal "coup" and the writing course was dropped, to be replaced by a speaking course using Cambridge textbooks. Then the partnership was taken over by the Chinese company, the well qualified academic advisors downgraded, and the salaries lowered. Also the requirement for licensed teachers was removed. I think Beijing-WITT still exists, but as a sort of recruiter supplying FT's to high-schools.

From your description, and from what I have heard it seems as if GAC is headed the same way. I know of a school which crammed Levels 1, 2, and 3 into 1 year and have a crop of students headed overseas already. The company which oversees the project in the school is now advertising for teachers at a lower salary, and they will be managed by the same people you describe as well as the Shanghai head office. It seems they are interested in loosing their academic credibility as fast as possible.

But isn't this a tiny part of a much bigger picture? I mean the history of mergers with or partnerships with overseas companies in industry. The story of Beijing-WITT and GAC I think would be a common one in the whole range of transfer of western technology and expertise to China in the past 20 years.

There are exceptions though. Mister Al describes one which seems to be working well at the moment. Also, franchises such as Dulwich College produce the same product to the same standards as the parent school in the UK. This must also be the case with the genuine International Schools which teach courses such as the International Baccalaureate. I think there would be no fiddling with grade results or sloppy academic advice in those places. And to comply with the rules, those schools must also have a layer of Chinese management at senior levels. Why do they work, and GAC doesn't?

[waxwing]

[GoPies]

[englishgibson]

[malu]

I escaped from China a year ago and now teach science at an Indonesian high school which offers GAC alongside the national curriculum over 3 years.

I think GAC was originally designed to fit around the needs of SE Asian private schools whose students mostly choose Australia as a study destination and it has since been extended (for business resaons) to the China market among others. In SE Asia senior high school typically takes 3 years (so IB DP as a 2yr program doesn't fit in too well) and the local curriculum is heavy on content but light on study skills, core concepts, independent thinking etc. As such, GAC complements the local high school curriculum rather than replacing it.

Properly run, with all GAC subjects TAUGHT IN ENGLISH AT ALL TIMES, it provides a route into a number of UK/Aus/US/Can universities without the need for a costly and pretty useless 'foundation course'.

I'm not sure it would translate to China quite so well unless everyone teaching it is at least a highly proficient English speaker, the school doesn't insist it is a route into Harvard or Cambridge (hee hee!), and the students' English ability is properly tested before admission.

[englishgibson]

[malu]

[Robin53]

I totally agree with you about the madness Malu. It so refreshing to have an international view of how the program is taught elsewhere.

One reason I think it gets so crazy, stressful and mean for the students and teachers here (and probably the several categories of people who have to wield the whip and control the teachers and students) is money. I've heard it costs 80, 000 RMB a year for the parents to have a teenage child in the GAC program. When you deduct the teachers and supervisors salaries, and other fairly minimal costs, a huge profit is being made.

The supervising organisations pay nothing for the accommodation and other expenses for the teachers This is paid by the schools which sign into the program. They also have to get the license to have a FT and pay for that.

Its no wonder those in charge just don't care about what happens down the food-chain except for maintaining mindless and total control. As far as I know, the teacher salaries can be slightly better (or the same) than other places, but the workload is a whole lot more.