Job Discussion Forums

[spiral78]

We sometimes have wanna-be teachers on the boards who would like to present their travel experience as relevent to teaching EFL.

While most of us do travel extensively as a side effect of teaching EFL, I don't think that travel to a country or region is particularly relevant to a CV/resume.

When one is not
1. living in the local currency ("hey, everthing's cheap here because I've got euro/dollars/pounds/whatever to spend") or
2. arranging for long-term accomodation, or
3. handling job responsibilities,
it's simply not really being 'immersed in the culture' or experiencing what daily life is like there


What do you think?

[Guy Courchesne]

Travel experience is of minimal relevance to a job, agreed but I think it good to mention anyway. It may speak to one's ability to adapt to a new place making it easier to focus on the job.

I'm sure we've all met that person who started a job in a new country and having had difficulties adjusting to the culture or differences outside the classroom, was unable to stay at the job, or was unable to perform well in the job.

Mind you, listing your week long holiday junkets to Cancun, Bali, and the like is not what I consider travel experience.

[spiral78]

I've met lots of people who made 'extended' visits to Prague, but when they came as EFL teachers, the lustre wore off all-too-quickly. Their travel experience simply wasn't akin enough to actual daily life. Just taking them out of the tourist centre hotel and putting them in 'real' housing was enough to put some of them off entirely!


It doesn't seem in my experience that visiting in advance makes it significantly easier to get along in real life.

[Zero]

If you're applying to work in a given country, and you've been there before even if only briefly, I think it's worth mentioning. At least then they know you have some idea of what the country's like. To whatever extent possible, hiring managers want to hedge against someone getting there, having a look around and deciding "no way" and leaving a week later.

[HLJHLJ]

I agree with Zero, even a brief visit it better than nothing, so it's worth mentioning though maybe in the covering letter rather than on the CV.

In general I would not add details of my 'travels' to a CV. I would spend my spare time and money travelling regardless of what job I had and I don't think employers are really interested. Within ESL I would also be concerned that it would put the stereotype of a backpacker teacher into the reader's head.

[BadBeagleBad]

I agree with Spiral. In fact, I think visiting as a tourist, on a tourist budget, might be worse than never having been to a place. When you go someplace as a tourist, you stay in a hotel, eat in restaurants, often take taxis, don�t really think about spending money, buy whatever you want, and usually don�t go outside of tourist areas, which is many places are cleaner and more modern than other parts of a city. There can even be a concentration of stores that are familiar, giving the person the idea that it isn�t that different. So when they come to LIVE and just about everything is different from what they expected, it might be worse than having out of date ideas of how BAD it might be. I remember a while back someone was going to be living in Guadalajara but had never been to Mexico. She was asking some fairly naive questions about things she�d be able to find or not find there, as well some things that made it seem like she�d read a bad travel book from the 1940�s. I think someone like that would likely have an easier time, just because her ideas were so out of date that Guadalajara could have likely seemed like a paradise compared to what she THOUGHT it was going to be like. On the other hand, if a person has LIVED in another country, I think that might be relevant, even if just living as a spouse. Long enough to what what day to day life in another country/culture is like and being able to adapt could be useful anywhere.

[nomad soul]

Great topic, Spiral! A prospective employer is definitely more interested in knowing you're comfortable with/adapt well to diverse cultures (i.e., are culturally sensitive) versus what places you've traveled to, especially if those places might come across as "touristy."

In terms of my own resume, I indicate the places I've lived in outside the US and the length of time in each location because I was born and raised overseas. Interviewers always bring it up because this type of life experience is considered a plus. However, I omit countries I merely visited, although one might argue that this would be an advantage if say, you've visited Egypt, Tunisia, and Jordan and you're applying for a job in Lebanon---it shows interest in the region. But personally, I'd leave it off my resume/CV.

[spiral78]

To be honest, if I listed all the countries I've visited, my CV would have another page to it. I expect that many of us here are in a similar situation.

But I just don't think it's particularly relevant to jobs, so obviously I'm not going to bring it up.

If I were asked in the course of an interview, of course I'd be glad to expound at length on my extensive travels, but I don't see any reason to bore potential employers who may see it as irrelevant.

I've been on hiring committees, and frankly a candidates' travels were never considered useful or interesting to know about. Actually living somewhere is a different thing, even if one wasn't working.

[Guy Courchesne]

[Zero]

spiral,

Listing countries visited answers exactly one set of questions that a hiring manager might have: Is this person serious? He's been living in Omaha for the last 18 years, working in IT. If he accepts the job here in Siberia, will he even show up? Nancy is only a couple of years out of college. One she gets here to Burma, will she freak out when she realizes her mother isn't here to pack her lunch? In those cases, it might be nice to show a little travel experience, so they know you aren't just sitting in your bedroom and dreaming.

The people asking about whether to list countries visited are new entrants, or would-be entrants (I object to the word "wannabees"), to the field. They are just looking for something to give them an edge for a job. They will not be applying for any jobs involving a "hiring committee."

In your case it wouldn't help to list countries visited, since from your resume, they will see that you've already worked in Lithuania, Lichtenstein, Liberia, Luxembourg and Lagos. And they'll see you have the CELTA, DELTA, MATESOL, EAP, IB, TKT, FCE, IGCSE-eslnchVHujduJemslsikyjTgjdlxbcbctss ... wait, what was I talking about? Oh, yeah, they'll see that you are extremely serious and qualified EFL teacher. It isn't meaningful to compare what you would do to what new people should do.

[artemisia]

[spiral78]

[Glenski]

One does not have to stay abroad and work (item 3 from the OP) to have valuable experience overseas. One can, for example, spend several months to a year as an exchange student.

The point is travel abroad even for tourist reasons is still something of value, depending on what the employer wants. If it shows the person is willing/able to experience other cultures, then all the better. Many employers worry about their greenhorn teachers experiencing culture shock and doing a night run home (or worse, freaking out and staying). Even being a tourist can give people some measure of foreign culture. I wouldn't put it on a resume, but I would try to put it on a cover letter if possible, especially if the travel was frequent or extensive.

Staying abroad as a student might also include doing part-time work. Here in Japan, that's allowed, although I doubt a lot of HS exchange students ever have the language ability or time to do it. College students or language school students are more likely. But even if someone is a student and doesn't work, the cultural immersion is still there. It may not be work-related, but as I wrote above, it gives the person an edge over someone who has never traveled abroad, especially to the country where one is applying to work. That edge is in daily affairs to some degree, and it reduces the potential for culture shock. Not all of it, of course, but if all things were equal, an employer is more likely to hire the person with such experience over one who has none.

spiral78's item #2 says "long-term accommodation". I will ask just how long is long-term to be good enough? A 2-week vacation vs. a 6- or 12-month working holiday or WWOOF experience is quite the difference, and the latter 2 obviously offer more cultural immersion. If spiral is just trying to say that one has to have the experience in dealing with real estate agents to find an apartment vs. a hostel, I would disagree that it is a strict requirement for considering travel experience as relevant to teaching EFL.

If someone wants to start another thread about relevant things, how about this one? What sort of teaching/training experience should be considered relevant when one writes up a resume or cover letter? I throw this one out because we've all seen people who try to pass off YMCA classes in karate they may have taught, or scuba lessons they gave, or retail training to newbies, or Sunday school Bible classes as something close enough to teaching. At least, I have seen those on resumes!

[spiral78]

[ancient_dweller]