Job Discussion Forums

[The Ever-changing Cleric]

I saw an interesting survey/essay topic for students in one of the Topway books. The question was:

[Qaaolchoura]

I think it depends much more on the teacher, though the culture the teacher comes from plays a role. I once took Japanese and Arabic simultaneously, both classes not taught by native teachers. The Japanese class consisted of 3 class sessions a weekwhere we practiced simple conversation, 2 speaking sessions where we practiced complex conversation, and grammatical principles were neatly explained in a book by the head of the Japanese department.

In Arabic, the professor assigned three exercises--basically fill in the blank. We would then come up one by one, and write one line of the exercise on the board, and read what we wrote. This filled the class. I kid you not. At one point, I asked him when we would do more speaking. "This is not a speaking course," he explained helpfully. Also, he would offhandedly mention words or grammatical concepts, then two weeks later ask about them. When we looked at him blankly he would exclaim. "I told you that, didn't I tell you that!? Lazy brains!" It's all kind of funny in hindsight.

The sum total of the time I spent in Japanese that semester was less than that spent in Arabic, but needless to say, I learned a lot more. Of course, being the genius I am, I continued with Arabic, first through him, then through a speaking program offered through Five College collaboration. I basically relearned everything except the alphabet from the ground up.

The point being, the best and worst language instructors I had were native speakers. On the other hand, I had a Spanish teacher who was almost as good as the Japanese women, who had merely lived in Spain for three years, while I've never taken a class with a non-native who came close to being as bad a teacher as my Arabic professor. So I suppose it's possible that being a non-native teacher prevents gross incompetence. But then, by their nature, non-native teachers are held to a higher standard in most places. Though it sounds like China might be the exception to this rule.

[randyj]

[cormac]

Well, from a completely learning stance then I would consider it would depend on the teacher and their skills. I've seen native speakers who were "naturals" in the classroom, who could teach really well, and I've seen other teachers with the same training who couldn't teach beyond the material provided by the school.

However, I believe that learning English comes down to more than learning the formal context of grammar and pronunciation. Chinese students see the manner in which native speakers use English words in a less formal context, which is particularly important if they wish to live outside of China for any period of time. The structure of the sentences and the choosing of the words to fill those sentences is in many ways as important as the technical aptitude with grammar and such. Especially when their level of English is being taken into account for the hiring of specific working roles.

I totally agree with what was said about grammar above. I had terrible difficulties explaining grammar to students. Sure, I knew the rules, and yet for many questions I felt like answering "it just sounds better"
. Took me quite some time to get past that... hehe

[JGC458]

Well a current trend points out that most speakers of English in the world speak English as non-native speakers (NNS) and so many English learners may never get to speak with a native speaker (NS) and so have no need to sound like one. Also, NNS tend to find it easier to understand each other when speaking English, and find it harder to understand a NS. With this in mind, it seems to follow that NNS would be better teachers (and if they also speak the learner's 1st language then would seem better placed to teach English as an additional language).

With English as a global language (or ELF - English as a lingua franca), (some people might say) it also no longer follows that native English speaker countries ('core' countries like England, the US, Australia, etc.) should feel that they have the 'right' to control the language or impose 'rules' on who is the better speaker or which version/s of English is/are the best or the proper 'standard/s'. If there are more NNS, then why shouldn't it be they who decide the fate of English and whether it changes into something easier for them to understand/learn/pronounce and which version becomes the global standard (if any).

Also, (some people might point out that) English as a 'gateway' language - a language that may lead to better job prospects, etc. (in theory) - is for many people effectively a barrier to a better life. If the NS speaker goal of English language proficiency is maintained then an unnecessarily high level is set which might often only serve to reinforce current social (international) inequalities.

There's more, but I can't remember it right now (a while back I studied for a masters in applied linguistics).

[Qaaolchoura]

JGC, you've got an interesting point. A language is governed by its speakers, and with a language like Esperanto, which has almost no native speaker, the non-native speakers govern. English, however, still has a substantial number of native speakers. However you've also got cases like India and Guyana, where the speakers grow up learning English and speaking a language that is basically a creole, in linguistics an acrolect and basiolect. I've met native speakers from both those countries--they grew up understanding standard English, but had to learn to speak it before or after coming to the US, because standard English speakers can't understand them.

In a similar way, if the purpose of English is to communicate with other foreigners, it doesn't hurt to learn the standard forms. Certainly English slang, idioms, and contractions can be confusing, but non-native speakers will tend to speak a stripped-down form of English any rate, and this will be intelligible to both native speakers and other foreigners. Whereas what works with other foreigners may be confusing to natives. English classes in the States often do focus on idioms and slang, which are necessary to understand native speakers here. But a good native teacher in a foreign country should be able to teach English which intelligible to natives without all the colloquialisms necessary in everyday use.

Of course I'm focusing on English as a lingua franca here, rather than the English needed to pass a test. I've met all too many Political Science majors who studied Arabic to say they studied it, with no interest in actually using the language. For Chinese speakers who take the same attitude towards English, I agree, you want somebody who knows the test.

[ScreamingCube]

[Halapo]

In China the test is the goal.

Students put a lot of trust and faith in their Chinese teachers. Also, education in China is all about memorizing things, there is nothing about thinking/creating. I am betting most native speaking teachers ask questions that require thought and teach in such a manner. So our teaching style is also confusing at first to students.

I spend most of my day answering question from the Chinese English teachers. The students don't come to me with grammar questions. They know I have the right answer, but trying to explain to them why it's the right one... that never goes well.

[Qaaolchoura]

[markcmc]

I don't believe that native speakers are automatically better English teachers. Being a good teacher involves many qualities, and having good command of the language is only one of these. Although a pretty important one. Native speakers can make excellent teachers, and so can non-natives. The opposite is also true.

The situation in China is a little strange, compared to other countries, in that native speakers are used as conversation teachers, and the teaching of grammar is often reserved for Chinese teachers. This protects jobs, and allows them to hire untrained teachers, who are cheaper. Given the vast population, this might not be a bad idea, although frustrating if you are able to do more than give a conversation class.

[Teatime of Soul]

If by teaching English you mean teaching students to memorize the exact patterns, if not exact answers to a written test that would be nearly incomprehensible to a native Speaker of the language, then hands down Chinese teachers win the contest.

As a bonus, Chinese teachers inculcate young learners into the lifelong habit of correctly pronouncing the hidden "uh" sound that follows every other English word, something that all native English speakers are woefully ignorant of.

[Howie]

[mdovell]

In the end it depends as to the objectives of the student later. Native speakers are good for a language to get a bit more deeper into it. I've taken Chinese but I've taken French as well..both by native speakers. If the professors were reversed I doubt I'd get the same thing out of the class.

Sometimes it's the little bits and pieces of a language that don't always work out well with non natives. I remember trying to explain what "In a nutshell" means to someone from Egypt. The other day I had to explain what a "Guinea pig" was to someone from china.

Also reminds me where I used to work a man from Asia was laughing hysterically when he asked what was in box and they said it was a "canopy" he took it piece by piece and thought we were selling cans of urine!