|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
edwardcatflap
Joined: 22 Mar 2009
|
 Posted: Fri Feb 25, 2011 9:11 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| Quote: |
It's not that I think a program like CELTA is bad, it's not, or more to the point I'm not in a position to say that it's bad. My problem with it is that it's not a heuristic program and I don't think non-heuristic education is a worthwhile investment for people who are educated at a university level. If there are true value in these courses, then employers should provide them or at least offer serious incentive to take them. In Korea, for example, there seems to be a token preference for people with CELTA or the like but with no real connection how the program connects to what Koreans are trying to accomplish.
|
The CELTA is heuristic in the sense that you are thrown into a teaching situation in a class room almost from day one. I don't see how there could be heuristic training in a work situation as the trainee would have to be experimenting on real adults who had paid good money to be taught properly. The CELTA isn't cheap so it doesn't make much sense to me for a school to invest 2,000 dollars or so in someone who has never taught before and might not be suitable. A lot of places however do offer serious incentives (some pay half the cost) of further courses for current employees, such as the DELTA or MAs in TESOL. The CELTA was designed to give people basic training in teaching adults EFL so if you think there's a better way of specifically doing this I'd like your, or anyone else's views on it.
As for what you said about Korea, I agree that the CELTA is not very relevant to teaching young learners in a hogwan or public school situation, although I think it's still useful. The best program I've seen for PS teaching is ICELT, which trains Korean public school teachers while they are teaching. It's very stressful for the teachers but having observed teachers before and after doing this training you can clearly see the improvement. There's no way the Korean government would pay for NETS to do training like this however when they might only stay a year |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
silkhighway
Joined: 24 Oct 2010
Location: Canada
|
| Posted: Fri Feb 25, 2011 10:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I'm more of a believer in a "top-down" than "bottom up" approach when it comes to improving the EFL industry and schools need to self-regulate themselves before the teachers they employ would be capable of doing the same. By incentivizing teachers, I don't necessarily mean schools subsidize or provide formal course training. I meant they demanded the skillsets, and if the incentives were there, teachers would do what they need to do. CELTA may or may not be one route to that.
As an analogy from another industry, you probaby need absolutely no formal qualifications to work for Google, but good luck getting past even the first of ten rounds of interviews if you don't know what you're talking about. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
edwardcatflap
Joined: 22 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Fri Feb 25, 2011 10:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Yes but presumably if you got a job with Google out of university you wouldn't be told to give a presentation to 30 share holders on your first day of work. Big companies like that can afford to lavish time and money on in house training. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
siwawalter
Joined: 16 Feb 2011
|
| Posted: Fri Feb 25, 2011 11:27 pm Post subject: Re: Is 30 the new 60? |
|
|
As long as you're qualified and prepared, you can do anything at any age.
| Weigookin74 wrote: |
| Is 30 the new 60? I'd be curious to know how many older teachers in their 30's and 40's are having a hard time or easy time finding a job. Also is it in the public school or private schools? Are you looking for work in the cities or rural areas? There are probably other factors such as experience teaching in Korea, race, North American vs other places, good looking or average looking, male or female, etc. Not sure what to expect or what any of us should expect. Specifically, I'd like to know if there have been problems applying or getting a job over the past year or not. What seems to be the feeling or pulse nowadays? |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
happiness
Joined: 04 Sep 2010
|
| Posted: Sat Feb 26, 2011 2:13 am Post subject: |
|
|
Are you speaking in Korea or in general? A lot of people in Korea seem to have a perception that teaching at a university level is prestigious, and that's just not the case. [/quote]
i know, it just seems its the ultimate job in the esl game here..i guess its coveted because of the vacation time is a lot, but i have this feeling, that may be limited soon.
ive done hagwon, kindie, business, private HS (where I had alot of free time, too much) and now Im back at kindie and after all of that, its not that bad. perspective is a good thing |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
PatrickGHBusan
Joined: 24 Jun 2008
Location: Busan (1997-2008) Canada 2008 -
|
| Posted: Sat Feb 26, 2011 3:50 am Post subject: |
|
|
| silkhighway wrote: |
I'm more of a believer in a "top-down" than "bottom up" approach when it comes to improving the EFL industry and schools need to self-regulate themselves before the teachers they employ would be capable of doing the same. By incentivizing teachers, I don't necessarily mean schools subsidize or provide formal course training. I meant they demanded the skillsets, and if the incentives were there, teachers would do what they need to do. CELTA may or may not be one route to that.
As an analogy from another industry, you probaby need absolutely no formal qualifications to work for Google, but good luck getting past even the first of ten rounds of interviews if you don't know what you're talking about. |
Basically you mean Korea should raise the bar when it comes to the selection criteria for its teaching visas.
Schools would not do that on their own however.
Either way, raising the requirement level would likely improve the overall quality of applicants and could lead to better teachers arriving in Korea. The self-regulation of the schools would then become important as these schools would have to know how to properly utilise their teachers (ie get the most out of them in terms of effectiveness and impact in the school). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
silkhighway
Joined: 24 Oct 2010
Location: Canada
|
| Posted: Sat Feb 26, 2011 6:42 am Post subject: |
|
|
| edwardcatflap wrote: |
| Yes but presumably if you got a job with Google out of university you wouldn't be told to give a presentation to 30 share holders on your first day of work. Big companies like that can afford to lavish time and money on in house training. |
Maybe Google is a bad example. The same can be said for any small firm in almost any industry. I think in EFL there is a lot of room for on the job training. Giving a mediocre lesson to a class of adults is hardly a life or death situation. Sure you may lose a few students if it's consistent, but that's where the market is capable of deciding. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
silkhighway
Joined: 24 Oct 2010
Location: Canada
|
| Posted: Sat Feb 26, 2011 6:51 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| Basically you mean Korea should raise the bar when it comes to the selection criteria for its teaching visas. |
If teachers are failing to deliver a quality product, then yes. Is that really the case? This thread is about age and other superficial feature discrimination. Is raising the bar on teacher qualifications really going to improve an industry where that type of discrimination exists?
| Quote: |
Schools would not do that on their own however.
|
If it meant good business, then why not? Schools are more organized than teachers are through their hagwon associations and lobby groups. They are the ones profiting from this business.
If it doesn't mean good business, we don't even need to be discussing this.
| Quote: |
Either way, raising the requirement level would likely improve the overall quality of applicants and could lead to better teachers arriving in Korea. The self-regulation of the schools would then become important as these schools would have to know how to properly utilise their teachers (ie get the most out of them in terms of effectiveness and impact in the school). |
I'm not convinced that's true. It's trying to solve a rotting core by throwing a coat of paint on it. There's something peverse about blaming a poor and unprofessional system on the qualifications of the employees hired to work in it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Junior
Joined: 18 Nov 2005
Location: the eye
|
| Posted: Sat Feb 26, 2011 7:22 am Post subject: |
|
|
| silkhighway wrote: |
| If there are true value in these courses, then employers should provide them or at least offer serious incentive to take them. |
But that is just typical of the industry: it would be taking english education too seriously  . Korea (and others) have typically underestimated the value of proper English teaching, and consistently refused to raise standards- even when they could easily have afforded to do so.
| edwardcatflap wrote: |
| the CELTA is not very relevant to teaching young learners in a hogwan or public school situation, although I think it's still useful. |
I found it gives a very good basic methodology, philosophy and approach, no matter what agegroup.
I've seen many FT's in Korea making basic errors that would have been eliminated by the CELTA.
| Quote: |
| The best program I've seen for PS teaching is ICELT, which trains Korean public school teachers while they are teaching. |
Interesting. What does that entail? I had imagined the korean certificate to be somewhat full of impractical confucian approaches- rote learning, heirarchical structures. that sort of thing. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
silkhighway
Joined: 24 Oct 2010
Location: Canada
|
| Posted: Sat Feb 26, 2011 7:39 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Junior wrote: |
| edwardcatflap wrote: |
| the CELTA is not very relevant to teaching young learners in a hogwan or public school situation, although I think it's still useful. |
I found it gives a very good basic methodology, philosophy and approach, no matter what agegroup.
I've seen many FT's in Korea making basic errors that would have been eliminated by the CELTA. |
Eliminating basic errors according to who though...the CELTA trainers or the people who design the program? CELTA is a self-accredited..
I think CELTA can be valuable in that eases teachers into classrooms and provides teachers with relevant and valuable feedback. However it could also be defeating in that it may train teachers there's a "right" way and a "wrong" way, when that's almost certainly not the case. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
West Coast Tatterdemalion
Joined: 31 Aug 2010
|
| Posted: Sat Feb 26, 2011 8:01 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Guys, a Unigwon isn't prestigious. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
shifty
Joined: 21 Jun 2004
|
| Posted: Sat Feb 26, 2011 8:20 am Post subject: |
|
|
| silkhighway wrote: |
| Quote: |
| Basically you mean Korea should raise the bar when it comes to the selection criteria for its teaching visas. |
If teachers are failing to deliver a quality product, then yes. Is that really the case? This thread is about age and other superficial feature discrimination. Is raising the bar on teacher qualifications really going to improve an industry where that type of discrimination exists?
| Quote: |
Schools would not do that on their own however.
|
If it meant good business, then why not? Schools are more organized than teachers are through their hagwon associations and lobby groups. They are the ones profiting from this business.
If it doesn't mean good business, we don't even need to be discussing this.
| Quote: |
Either way, raising the requirement level would likely improve the overall quality of applicants and could lead to better teachers arriving in Korea. The self-regulation of the schools would then become important as these schools would have to know how to properly utilise their teachers (ie get the most out of them in terms of effectiveness and impact in the school). |
I'm not convinced that's true. It's trying to solve a rotting core by throwing a coat of paint on it. There's something peverse about blaming a poor and unprofessional system on the qualifications of the employees hired to work in it. |
A great post. Please don't go away silkhighway, we need you!! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Junior
Joined: 18 Nov 2005
Location: the eye
|
| Posted: Sat Feb 26, 2011 8:22 am Post subject: |
|
|
| silkhighway wrote: |
| CELTA is a self-accredited.. |
I believe it is accredited by the Office of the Qualifications and Examinations Regulation.
Apart from that, it is the most widely recognized tefl qualification in the world- that speaks for itself.
| Quote: |
Eliminating basic errors according to who though...
However it could also be defeating in that it may train teachers there's a "right" way and a "wrong" way, when that's almost certainly not the case. |
There most definitely is though- a right way and wrong way to many aspects and methods of teaching.
Unless you are an academic nihilist who believes that ....... obstructing information on the board, writing too small so none of the students can see, talking to the floor, mixing different levels in the same class, lecturing the students most of the time with minimal participation on their part..etc....are all just a matter of subjective relative judgement and are neither right nor wrong.
If thats your view then you may as well let the students watch cartoons every lesson. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Weigookin74
Joined: 26 Oct 2009
|
| Posted: Sat Feb 26, 2011 9:56 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Vagabundo wrote: |
| Quote: |
| I'm in my 30's, but will start getting into my late 30's in a couple of more years. |
this kind of deductive reasoning shouldn't be wasted on a career in ESL.
Ever thought of a more challenging career path?  |
Already did that in my 20's. Hated it with a passion. Just want to kick my own butt for wasting so much time in the rat race. I think of friends back home and I feel so sorry for them. Why anyone wants to leave this life is beyond me; but we all have our reasons. Selfishly, it's good for me if more people leave and the market has less English teachers in it. I control my own curriculum and like teaching my own material. I mostly like what I do. But hate the superficial discrimination that goes on here. As for upgrading my skills, the most important thing to me is to improve my Korean language skills before I do anything else. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jinks
Joined: 27 Oct 2004
Location: Formerly: Lower North Island
|
| Posted: Sat Feb 26, 2011 1:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Vagabundo wrote: |
...also, unless you're a boozer, at 50 plus in Korea you'll be living a monastic lifestyle, socially speaking, so why not live the same lifestyle in the Middle East while earning double or more what you'd make here?
|
What?
Do you actually know anyone over 50? Do you know what 'monastic' means?
Middle eastern schools institute a 10% mandatory fail curve in their university classes, so students are forever hussling teachers and pulling on networks to pressure the foreign teachers NOT to fail them. Also in the oil rich countries, just about everyone is a prince of some sort and act like they want to be treated like one. Some people find that a LOT harder to deal with than Option A (not clubbing in Hongdae with the 20 somethings). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
