Job Discussion Forums

[HLJHLJ]

The centre I did my CELTA at is going to run a YLE later this year. I'm really quite keen to take it, but it means yet more financial layout, and I'm unsure whether it will be worth it in monetary terms.

In my pre-ESL life I worked with kids a lot, from early years through to teenagers, so I am fairly confident with things like classroom management and the general interaction side of things. I've also had 6 months or so experience of English teaching 1-1 with children and though it's been a steep learning curve I think I'm doing a reasonable job of it now.

But I still feel I would be a much better teacher if I had some formal instruction on teaching English to kids. I find it hard to predict what they will struggle with (whereas I can usually predict that pretty well with adults). I also run out of ideas sometimes. Especially with longer (1 1/2hr -2 hr) 1-1 sessions with tired fractious children who've already done a full day of school, and have a couple of hours of homework to do when they get home. It's hard to keep them motivated sometimes.

So I'd really like some feedback from people who've done the YLE. Did you find it useful? How much did it add to what you had already covered on the CELTA? Did you have any experience of working with kids before you did it? Was it worth the money? Would you recommend it in general?

TIA

[HLJHLJ]

No-one?! Really?

Hmm, OK a different question then, if no-one has done the YLE, why not? Is it mainly because of practical difficulties (e.g. so few places do it, extra expense, etc.) or mainly because you just don't see any advantage in taking it?

[naturegirl321]

I think because many of us get on the job training, or many employers simply don't ask for it.

[Jbhughes]

What follows is the impression I've got from this website and speaking to acquaintances.

A reasonable proportion of people going into TEFL would prefer to work with adults and see teaching young learners as a kind of 'necessary evil' while they are gaining experience in lower end language institutions/conversation schools/language mills. Once they have earned enough experience and gained a better reputation, they are able to transcend from these schools or specify to employers that they only want to teach adults.

With this mindset, many take the celtA to show employers they are focused on teaching adults/to improve their skills specifically in this area. Please someone correct me if I'm wrong, but the Trinity has a larger teaching younger learners element than the CELTA (the young learners part of my CELTA course was one 2 hour session).

Said people don't want to be 'pigeon holed' into teaching children so give the YL extension a miss. The next logical step would be MATESOL or deltA and heading for universities.


People who want to work with children / teenagers presumably would be more likely to do a PGCE (or country-equivalent) and would surely therefore find less value in the celtyl? Their 'necessary evil' seems to be doing 2 years in their home country before moving onto international schools. Alternatively, they would do the Trinity?



I note from the Cambridge ESOL website http://www.cambridgeesol.org/exams/teaching-awards/celtyl.html that the CELTYL is being discontinued:

'Please note that CELTYL will be withdrawn from January 2011. The YL extension to CELTA will remain in place. Information about additional provision for teachers of young learners will be added to the website in 2010.'


Should I be wrong, hopefully, someone with intimate knowledge can correct me and perhaps others with similar misconceptions (especially about the Trinity).

[Madame J]

I started out wanting to teach children, but decided against the YL as no job ad I came across ever asked for one.

It does scare me a bit as to how many language schools hire people with no young learner training. However, there are no real courses aside from a PGCE that really seem to go over the associated issues suitably thoroughly.

[fluffyhamster]

Actually, the impression I've got from the pleas for help one sometimes reads from state school (presumably subject=English) teachers is that even if they do learn to "teach" kids "thoroughly", they often appear to have no little or no real clue about LT pedagogy, grammar (communicative or otherwise), etc. And I suspect that quite a few of the FL PGCE "experts" are little better at teaching (even though they may be passably fluent in their chosen language). B.Eds meanwhile may be quite able to teach a range of subjects at real kiddy level, but again, FLs/CLT isn't one of them. So maybe we (us?) ELTers/TEFLers, supposedly so "unqualified", are in fact actually quite good at something after all (i.e. that thing we've put our minds and talents to - assuming we have indeed put our minds and talents to it!)? Not of course that any of that will or should stop employers from asking for experience if not supposed expertise in teaching children/YLs.

[HLJHLJ]

Thanks for the opinions.

I don't particularly want to be pigeon holed for adults or kids, I enjoy working with both. Also, for now at least, I don't want to work in a University or International School. Language Schools may not have the same perks or pay, but I've always been happier working in informal education settings.

I hadn't really thought about employers opinons of it TBH, I want to do it for myself, because I think I would be better at it with extra training. But not to the extent that I'm going to tie myself to a PGCE for a year, plus the NQT period. Also, I used to supervise trainee teachers on placements in the UK and I wasn't very impressed with what I saw. Not with the trainees, but a lot of the stuff they had to do seemed more about paperwork and ticking boxes, than anything to do with teaching. (Though thinking about it, with the current levels of paperwork for UK teachers, maybe that WAS good training for them).

I'm not sure an MA or DELTA would really be the answer for me, they are both pretty heavy on the theory, and really it's more practical training that I am looking for.

[naturegirl321]

[HLJHLJ]

I knew the DELTA was more pratical than most MAs but I thought it was still mostly (2/3 at least) theory. Is that not the case?

[nickpellatt]

I did a Trinity, and I would say its about as focused on young learners as a CELTA is. I think I only had up to 2 hours of input sessions on YL. This may vary from centre to centre, as I believe there is a core of structure the course must follow, but this is some flexibility in what each centres includes outside the core topics.

I had a friend who did a Trinity at the same time as me, but somewhere else. She had quite a lengthy look at course material and an assignment based on the analysis of a coursebook. I didnt. It could then follow that some centres may offer more YL instruction than others, but mine didnt.

[slang_tang]

From people's experiences, if you do get the YL are you immediately pigeon-holed into working only with young learners?

[naturegirl321]