There are good teachers and bad teachers here. And then a bunch of average ones in between. Just like in every profession. There’s definitely people teaching here that have no place in the classroom. But I think the number of truly irredeemable bad teachers is blown out of proportion by anti-foreigner media, and… well… threads like this. Some “bad teachers” are just inexperienced and in their first year, and they become good through trial and error over the next few years. The really bad ones usually cycle out after a year or two, or end up the subject of a sensational Apple Daily news piece for getting forehead tats, smoking weed outside Taipei 101, murdering other teachers or whatever stupid shit lands them as the new anti-foreigner scapegoat du jour.
So Confucius walks into a bar and sees three guys sitting there and he asks them: “which of yous is my teacher?” And none of them reply cos they aren’t accredited.
As others have already pointed out here, the term “teacher” has been used, and is still used, very broadly in both the East and the West. I mean when I was a kid I had a “karate teacher,” but I don’t think he had any kind of pedagogical qualification. Nor for that matter do most professors – aka university teachers – have any kind of teaching qualification.
Of course, the Taiwanese authorities could implement and enforce, if they wanted to, regulations whereby only properly accredited teachers could work in buxibans etc. But that would greatly limit the number of Taiwanese children able to learn English with a native speaker.
I nevertheless sympathise with the OP’s implicit sentiment, namely, that ESL teaching can be a highly challenging vocation demanding both substantial theoretical as well as practice knowledge. I can understand why serious professionals working in the ESL industry would rightfully feel indignant to see themselves lumped together with much less committed much less able teachers.
’Course, if you asked me (no one ever does), I’d say close down dem damned booshy-bans and inspire the children to sip from the sweet stream of autodidacticism.
I do understand that this is primarily aimed at English Teachers but the term “Teacher”, as mentioned , can be a very broad description of both duties and skill-level. The dichotomy appears to evolve from lumping those with little qualification and/or experience, teaching the very young , with those whom have spent many years obtaining certification and training .
Naturally, qualifications do not always make a great Educator and I think that is a separate debate ; the reason many may feel aggrieved is that supply and demand and economics play a huge part in remuneration .
I think that a good person teaching at a Kindy School deserves a good wage, depending on performance, but wages are suppressed when there is supply a plenty. More advanced , well qualified Teachers , who may be more competent , with experience, should get higher pay.
I guess the Job title is a secondary "Status " issue for those that care.
“Teacher” is a very broad term.
I used to instruct a specific discipline. They found me from my past history and “qualifications” from various licensing Bodies. The normal terminology for the job description had always been “Instructor”. Apple daily description of me … Teacher 
Taiwan seems to juxtapose all similar jobs… just Vox Populi.
“Buxiban Aids” is going to be a bit tough for the sales team.
Come to HESS. Have fun with our Aids!
in many countries, there are not enough licenced teachers, so, often unlicensed most educated persons in the area are teaching as “teachers” in regular schools. Are they not teachers but education consultants or aids? Or, people teaching in regular schools are teachers by your definition? If a buxiban teacher has a licence, the person is a teacher, but other people doing the same things at the same buxiban without licences are education Aids?
Tando, don’t spend any more time thinking about it. You’re trying to rationalize the usage of a word with someone who wants that word to mean more than it does. A bricklayer is a bricklayer, good and bad.
And here’s where I am more Adam Smith than you. Regulation and Nationalization mean squat if you don’t know how languages are learned.
No sir. I’d much rather the free hand of the market take care of business. The market is wide open for a paradigm shift. Whoever comes up with that can completely change the dynamic.
It is all good and fine to whine about the employees not being teachers, a sentiment to which I wholeheartedly have concurred, but as long as the free hand of the market is driving curriculum and hiring practices, I say great.
I carve out a nice little niche with my training systems and anyone else is free to give it a go. Loots (sic) of people willing to invest time and money in this here English product, so have at her everyone (with an APRC…hehehe). Create a better way and change the paradigm.
Don’t just whinge. Do something.
The person moaning about teachers hasn’t even been ‘here’ for at least a decade or more lol…
Same people pushing the same narrative …Newbies get dragged in for entertainment .
Ah, you know, I like this kind of threads.
To me, in a manner similar to Taiwan, that reflects the regulatory weaknesses of the said country you describe.
In your scenarios, I would describe the certified person as the teacher, and since you discuss two hypothetical situations, the person is the country you describe with a shortage of teachers would a Consultant. For the buxiban scenario, they are also Consultants or EAs.
You sound like a nativist Taiwan straw-wearing-hat DPP supporter. What? That person was not born in Taiwan or lives in Taiwan? How dare they comment!!! They are not real Taiwanese. 
I just wonder from curiosity. What is your definition of a word of educator?
I see educator as a much more generic word than teacher, which in a regulatory sense, I believe should be used just by people that have that certification. When I am taking my 8-year old through Greek or Roman ruins on vacation, and informing him about history etc., I am being an educator.
And babysitter?
And babysitter! 
Ah, no. What is your dedefinition of babysitter?
Imo, babysitter is a professional occupation that requires certain credentials, so we should not refer someone who doesn’t have the credentials to a babysitter.
Someone who looks after the emotional/basic needs, rather than intellectual needs, of young children. Speaking of correct nomenclature, this ad is perfect in terms of differentiating and using the correct terms. Notice it does not use teacher: https://www.under5s.co.nz/shop/Hot+Topics+Articles/Services+For+Kids/Choosing+a+nanny+or+homebased+educator.html
In Taiwan, babysitter (居家托育人 員, 保母) is a professional occupation, which need a certification or to complete certain courses at school, and to be registered. Using the word for those who don’t have the required credentials waters down the value of their profession. 