|
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 |
slothrop
Joined: 03 Feb 2003
|
 Posted: Tue Apr 24, 2012 2:40 am Post subject: |
 |
|
edit
Last edited by slothrop on Sun Apr 29, 2012 11:46 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
The Sultan of Seoul
Joined: 17 Apr 2012
Location: right... behind.. YOU
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 24, 2012 5:51 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Yeah online probably not best option. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Troglodyte
Joined: 06 Dec 2009
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 24, 2012 6:41 am Post subject: |
|
|
| slothrop wrote: |
| The Sultan of Seoul wrote: |
| slothrop wrote: |
does anyone have the list of required reading for TEFL and CELTA ? i would like to see what all the fuss is about and get the knowledge but don't really care about obtaining an actual certificate.
thanks |
TBH, and really, truly not wanting to sound like an advertiser, just reading is not the same.
For example, mayn things I learned I at first wanted to - and did - disclaim as nonsense or not reflecting my 7+ yrs experience etc. It was only in having these ideas suggested to me and then seeing them work in observations, discussing them in troubleshooting sessions etc that led me to try them out and then susprisingly realise that they were right and worked.
There is something to be said for having guidence and peer support and observations etc so you can apply the theories and ideas and evaluate them through experiencing what others are doing and evaluating what worked and what didn't etc. |
point taken. and a very valid point indeed. but taken to it's radical conclusion this would mean that any "online" or distance learning course is ultimately ineffective. and some people might want to peruse the literature before deciding whether or not to spend the money and time involved.
required reading list please?... |
In my opinion, most (probably all) online TEFL courses ARE ineffective. The same can be said for some in-class courses as well, but all-in-all you're better off with an in-class course.
If all you want is a pay raise, then take the cheapest, shortest, easiest TEFL course that your employer will accept. If you want to actually learn, there are probably a dozen books out there on the topic, most of them general course textbooks, some are on specialized topics. The CELTA and the Trinity TESOL courses are good and will get you jobs at good schools (good in that they care about the students actually learning). The CELTA will probably get you more job offers internationally because it seems to be a bit more well known.
As far as the reading list goes, the CELTA course now has it's own text book. The title is "The CELTA Course". I'm sure that a little searching will get you a pirated PDF copy of the student book and the teacher's book. I've seen both of them available online. You can also find other books by the big academic publishers that teach pretty much the same stuff. It's no big secret.
Here are some to check out:
The Practice of English Language Teaching
Learning Teaching - Scrivener (famous book)
Teaching English as a Foreign Language for Dummies
On any TEFL course (including CELTA) they will have a library of activity books, idea books and probably supplementary activities (more so if you do it at a large language school). Here are some common supplementary books.
Five-Minute Activities - Penny Ur (famous book)
Games for Language Learning
As has already been said, there's a big benefit of doing a course (an in-class course, that is) over just reading the book. The course SHOULD have practical work. It's the same as when some student says, I want to pass the IELTS or TOEFL test next month, so I'll just read lots of book on it. WRONG! Both teaching and learning a language are practical skills. If the course is any good, then they will have a lot of practical activities, and hopefully lots of opportunity for the trainees to teach stuff to real English students (or at the very least simulated students) and get feedback from not only the trainer by also their fellow trainees. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
diver
Joined: 16 Jun 2003
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bobbybigfoot
Joined: 05 May 2007
Location: Seoul
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 26, 2012 3:05 am Post subject: |
|
|
CELTA no doubt is quite valuable. It does, however, come at a cost. About $3000 with living expenses, more if you add a flight to Thailand. Less if you do it in your own country. And you need to factor in loss of income. For me, it's just too expensive.
Instead I read about teaching, talk to people, think about it, try new things. After five years in Korea, I'd say I've got a good handle on teaching. But it took some effort to get there.
You don't need certification to be a good teacher. But you do need effort. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jasonXkeller
Joined: 17 Jan 2012
Location: Redlands, CA
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 30, 2012 2:06 pm Post subject: Re: My advice to all teachers - get TEFL quals asap |
|
|
| pegasus64128 wrote: |
I highly recommend the CELTA. It's versatile enough as it's recognized. It's Cambridge, and a Cambridge inspector approves the quality of ALL CELTA centers. You have to pass 7 of the 8 observed classes (pass means nail them in CELTA). It's heavily centered on pair work and group work. There is also a sister program - YL (Young Learners) CELTA.
I can assure you, that the CELTA is very useful for teaching kids too, provided you understand the difference.
I had acquired some very useful tips and skills at training seminars with EPIK before I started the program, but I learned much more during the CELTA course.
In particular, I vastly improved the following:
-How to deliver a good vocabulary/lexis class. (I had that wrong)
-How to deliver a good reading class (I had that ALL wrong!)
-How to deliver a good grammar class. (tougher than you would think)
-How to facilitate students to participate more.
-Most importantly, how to make your class an engaging and learning environment.
There's a big focus on reducing TTT (Teacher Talking Time) in order to get the students speaking more, and you less, which is an important feature of any course that has focus on the communicative approach.
There's a good focus on how you locate yourself in the classroom to maintain Ss' concentration and focus.
The very latest practices on ESL education feature in the course. It includes the methodologies extolled by Stephen Krashen, who really only came onto the scene in the 1980's, so it's got the University of Southern California's work on ESL included. You will understand the difference between EFL and ESL and why that matters. I don't recall if I learned of Krashen in the course directly or from reading about him but you can be sure that his work features heavily in modern ESL teaching in many English language curricula, including the book I use in elementary school here in Korea.
A B.Ed. seems to trump all but there are other avenues you can go down.
At the very least, I would recommend reading the preface at the beginning of the book you use and try to find out what that means. If you don't want to bother doing a course, there are good books on the subject, like this one:
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Learning-Teaching-guidebook-language-teachers/dp/1405013990 |
Although I like some of Krashen's ideas, especially his Affective Filter Hypothesis, many of his ideas are hotly debated in the linguistics community. Mainly because many of his claims are unquantifiable, making them unscientific at best. I see the appeal to his (i+1) theory, if we could only define i That, and it has been studied extensively that OUTPUT is as important, if not more so, as intelligible input.
That was kind of "know it allish." I think the awareness of different theories of SLA are really important, but as a teacher we must examine them all and determine what is best for our students. Most often, it is not one extreme or the other, but somewhere in the middle. Input not the golden calf of SLA, nor is output. Avoiding error correction all together will almost certainly fail, but correcting every phonological or syntactical error instead of strategically correcting repeated ones or ones that interfere with meaning will also fail. We must be aware, deliberate and flexible.
On that note, I think a 100 hour TEFL cert or some equivalent is essential. I know some are partial to brand names, like CELTA etc..., there are many good ones out there. I tend to agree that online courses are borderline worthless, but like all things, you get from it what you put into it. That being said, if you're not going to get some manner of TEFL cert, an MA in TESOL would be immensely helpful. It will increase your earning power and is a more comprehensive study of language teaching. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
pegasus64128
Joined: 20 Aug 2011
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 30, 2012 6:44 pm Post subject: Re: My advice to all teachers - get TEFL quals asap |
|
|
| jasonXkeller wrote: |
Although I like some of Krashen's ideas, especially his Affective Filter Hypothesis, many of his ideas are hotly debated in the linguistics community. Mainly because many of his claims are unquantifiable, making them unscientific at best. I see the appeal to his (i+1) theory, if we could only define i That, and it has been studied extensively that OUTPUT is as important, if not more so, as intelligible input.
That was kind of "know it allish." I think the awareness of different theories of SLA are really important, but as a teacher we must examine them all and determine what is best for our students. Most often, it is not one extreme or the other, but somewhere in the middle. Input not the golden calf of SLA, nor is output. Avoiding error correction all together will almost certainly fail, but correcting every phonological or syntactical error instead of strategically correcting repeated ones or ones that interfere with meaning will also fail. We must be aware, deliberate and flexible.
|
Yes, but unquantifiable is a relative term. Teaching is not physics. There will always be proponents of methodologies, because the evidence backing it up is often highly contextual. It's not about arguing who is best or which theories you think are the best.
I also find Gouins' series very appealing. I like ZPD, and Long's focus on form. It's not that there's scientific data fully backing them up. It's a gut feeling that they work. You could theoretically argue forever about whether they truly work. I think they just make sense. It's the duty of those studying for their doctorates in education to debate on their applicability. I learn about the methodology, decide what stuff I think is useful and constructive in the classroom and I use it.
Krashen was just an example I used because I like his contributions. I found I was nodding affirmatively the most about his work, and I don't blame Koreans for mentioning him by name in the latest 대교 elementary books, as they mention several theoreticians by name, and explain the theory and how it's implemented in the books.
If another teacher doesn't agree with these methodologies, then they don't have to use them but I for one am happy that some Korean education companies are advocating a teaching style that I agree with for the most part.
I agree with everything else you said though. |
|
| 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
