Non-Proficient Or Second-Language English Teachers

This issue is endemic and rears its ugly head in far too many threads. Let’s keep it all under one roof. :bow:

Many new posters start out on f.com asking about teaching English in Taiwan. For many, English is their second language. For some, it’s their first language, but they often they seem to lack a fundamental grasp of basic grammar and spelling. These poor souls are frequently maligned and earnest attempts are made to dissuade them from pursuing “careers” in the EFL field.

Personally, I have met many who are excellent teachers, despite fundamental grammar failings. Also, many, as erudite as Shakespeare, who couldn’t teach a monkey to eat a banana.

Thoughts on this matter?

its, jimi, not it’s.

I’m in the monkey/banana category, mainly cos I’m a pedantic git. I think the point is, if you’re going to teach English, you should have the personal integrity to make sure your technical skills are up to scratch. Imagine, for example, if roads and buildings were designed and put together by people who had only a basic grasp, possibly a flawed one, of physical principles, materials science, systems theory, and aesthetics. And imagine that the general public is unaware of the woeful quality of their work because it’s a specialised field. Now have a look out your window.

I’m not saying teaching english is in anything like the same category, in terms of public risk, economic waste, etc., but if you’re getting paid to teach english, you should know, for example, that “wanna” is not a real word. There’s not much point being a great teacher if you’re teaching the wrong things; in fact, I’d say that’s actually worse than being a bad teacher teaching the wrong things (at least then nobody’s paying any attention). And if you are a good teacher, what’s wrong with bloody getting your act together and polishing up your fundamentals? I like polishing my fundamentals.

OTOH, at least two people I know who speak English as a second language speak it as well as their first, and I am completely in awe of such people.

[quote=“finley”]its, jimi, not it’s.
[/quote]
Damn. When one starts a thread like this, one should at least spend a minute proofreading one’s OP. :bluemad:

I think things like this are best left up to the market to decide. I’ve known second language speakers who are great teachers. They struggle to get a job, end up at a school that is desperate for a teacher, and work hard to do a good job. Then you get the proficient or non-proficient native speaker who gets a job they don’t deserve and are not competent in.

Second-language English speakers can have a good insight into the dynamics of learning English. They are experienced learners of English. Many native speakers of a language have no insight or awareness about their own language, or how to learn or teach it.

“The English have no respect for their language, and will not teach their children to speak it.” ~ George Bernard Shaw

Actually, I detect a lot of (a bunch of?) sour grapes from the detractors. When established long-timers see a young lad/lass posting about coming to Taiwan to teach English, they often nit-pick about their English ability potentially because they are aware of the vacuous nature of the general English-learning “industry” in Taiwan. Hell, I’m one of them. I feel genuinely threatened that someone with inferior skills, ability and experience is going to get my job merely by virtue of the fact that they are younger and better-looking.

I’ve been one of the detractors too; but Jimi, no-one could ever do what you do as well as you do it. You are the best. [insert kiss ass icon here]

I would not say younger and better looking -I’ve seen you in RL, Jimmi- but most of all cheaper, with less job choices and hence more easily manipulated and humilliated. See if they can pull some of the crap they do on illegal teachers ona certified, bona fide, experienced Native speaker.

This issue has many variations. There are the non-Natives who can teach legally thanks to double passports. There are the ones like yours truly who taught abroad and are experienced and know what we are doing. And then there are the students who come on a vacation to get money, just as legal and knowledgeable as a Native speaker who has no college preparation, has never taught and is in it only for the money.

And yes, I concede there are many who need not be a Native speaker or a certified teacher with a BA in Education. They are natural teachers, gifted with the skill to transfer knowledge to others. And this ability lies beyond technical university preparation, it is innate. I also know several Natives without degrees, alos jumping the hoops with visa runs, but boy, what a great loss it would be if they couldn’t teach.

That said, no one is entitled to a job. Neither the Native spekers should feel overconfident and push the others, nor these non-Natives feel cocky and flaunt their marketability. At the end, it is the mighty dollar that talks, and in the English industry, ability counts little, money matters more, he who charges less is king.

I’m with Charlie and Icon here.
On one hand, when we talk about the “English industry” (something i don’t take seriously):

and

On the other hand, when we talk about real education:

and

and

IOW, what matters is not being a native speaker but being competent.

Good point (although: how do we know whether our skills are up to scratch?)

It is not? Are you sure? :ponder:

Can you give me some examples of “wrong things” in this context? :slight_smile:

:popcorn:

Damn, I was hoping you wouldn’t notice. Yeah, it makes me real grouchy that these guys are probably earning more money than me :stuck_out_tongue: Although, I imagine they have to work pretty hard to keep up appearances.

[quote]I’m with Charlie and Icon here.
On one hand, when we talk about the “English industry” (something I don’t take seriously):
Charlie Phillips wrote:
I think things like this are best left up to the market to decide.[/quote]

Well, up to a point. You might say that if a buxiban manager is such a poor businessman that he can’t tell a good teacher from a bad one, or alternatively if a parent doesn’t actually care whether the teacher can speak English so long as he turns up and looks pale-skinned and blonde-haired, then that’s their own lookout. Take their money, run fast, and laugh till you piss yourself. My inner scumbag has a lot of sympathy with that view. OTOH, it gives a bad impression of ‘foreigners’ (I think on some level Taiwanese people realise the ‘English industry’ is all a scam) and purely from a selfish point of view, you’ll find yourself wasting a year or two of your life, doing nothing useful except shagging lots of teenage girls and spending all your money on beer and random crap … and, uh … I really didn’t think this argument through, did I?

No, it most definitely isn’t. It’s a phonetic rendition of ‘want to’ but some teachers don’t make that clear because they don’t know. That’s got to be confusing for students.

Ah, come on, your english looks nice - you know what I’m talking about. People who can’t spell, can’t punctuate, or in general can’t tell their assonance from a hole in the ground. The language does have norms, and if you don’t use them, you can’t communicate. At best, know-it-all british posters on forumosa will take the piss out of you.

Wanna, gonna, ain’t, hella, just to name a few off the top of my head. Teaching coloquialisms with teaching the “whys” and “whens” of usage. Poor punctuation, poor spelling, poor pronunciation.

No, it most definitely isn’t. It’s a phonetic rendition of ‘want to’ but some teachers don’t make that clear because they don’t know. That’s got to be confusing for students.[/quote]
Others will suggest it is the colloquial version of “want to”, meaning “wanna” is widely used and thus a word people should know. Of course, i would expect from those who see it that way that they would also explain when it is considered appropriate (= useful/ effective) to use that word and when not.

Ah, come on, your english looks nice - you know what I’m talking about.[/quote]
and

Wanna, gonna, ain’t, hella, just to name a few off the top of my head. Teaching coloquialisms with teaching the “whys” and “whens” of usage. Poor punctuation, poor spelling, poor pronunciation.[/quote]
I think i got you guys’ point (and i don’t disagree with the underlying sentiment), but i also think it very much worthwhile to think a bit deeper about the concept of “wrong” in the context of language teaching. You may make assessments as to what is “wrong”, others prefer to use such concepts as “not how native speakers would usually use the language”, “non-standard”, “not likely effective in a real communication situation” and so on. In fact, i am of that school myself - why? I have lived in several countries and experienced different varieties of English first hand, and i also work as translator. Also, as a long-term subscriber to translation related mailing lists i have seen enough discussions of “right” and “wrong” (related to word usage or grammatical points) where what some people considered “wrong” turned out to be “right” in other parts of the world (one example that comes to mind is the use of the contraction “i amn’t” for “i am not”: although many say it’s wrong (and should be “i aren’t”), we learned on that list that there is actually a region - in England, if my memory serves me correctly - where native speakers use English that way.

Nobody can know all variants of a language, especially not in the case of one that as widely used as English, so that’s why such surprises are possible. In addition, languages constantly change - there was a time when “no go” and “long time no see” and “how goes it?” would have been declared outright wrong, but in the US you can hear plenty of people use expressions like that (somewhat depending on the region). So, some of us dealing with languages - perhaps translators more likely than teachers - shy away from the idea of “right” vs. “wrong” and assess the issues at hand in other ways, that is to say, rather than taking a prescriptivist view of language (“this is how it should be”) we take a descriptivist view (“this is how it is”).

Anyway, i think English teachers need to be aware of this situation, even if they choose to be prescriptivist. :slight_smile:

I’m all for the market, but…

The thing is though that Taiwan doesn’t have a market-based system. What it has is rules that are sometimes enforced. Maybe Taiwanese are better at figuring out when a rule is flexible, or a line can be crossed, but I’m not even so sure there. If you have money and/or the right guanxi, it’s no doubt easier to figure out. Still, it can be bloody confusing for foreigners, and probably a lot of locals too.

Likewise, Taiwan doesn’t have a market-based system where people accept that it’s up to people to inform themselves. It has a rigid compulsory education system that actively discourages critical thinking and questioning of authority. There are foreigners who are gaming the system. There are plenty who aren’t and really don’t know that there is more to being an English teacher than simply being white and turning up somewhat sober. There are plenty of parents who naively trust those in authority, including teachers and including laobans of buxibans whom they probably assume at some level have something of an idea about education. For all the faults of public education in this country, there is a system in place for training teachers and assuring some level of standards, even if we think they’re crazy. As such, the average punter gets taken for an absolute ride because they’re thrown into a market with virtually no skills for surviving in the market.

This is my big problem with the English industry here. Want to have a true market-based system? Fine. Implement some critical thinking in the compulsory curriculum (or even abolish the thing all together). Then unleash the free-for-all. Want to have a population of drones? Then surely there’s some moral responsibility to actually follow through on their trust of authority figures and regulate this bloody farce. This country is one big kleptocracy and it eats its own.

nonono … there’s nothing at all wrong with making students aware that English is sometimes used in nonstandard ways. In fact that’s one of the best features of the language: you can mangle it any which way you like and not only be understood, but create new modes of expression.

My gripe (and presumably others’) was teachers who mix colloquialisms and nonstandard usage with ‘textbook’ diction and grammar because they don’t know the difference. “I aren’t” is a classic. We all know “to be” doesn’t decline like that, and if you teach a student that it does, then, at best, when the student gets another teacher - which he will at some point - he will be confused. At worst he will sound like a chav when he talks. If you’re a translator with a broad grasp of the language (and other languages!) you’re in a very different situation to a student whose trying to grasp the fundamentals.

It’s fine to teach advanced students that even native speakers don’t get their grammar right or use it differently to make a point. It’s fine to teach them that people say “long time no see” to express a simple concept in a simple way, say “wanna” (shouldn’t it be written “wann’a”?) or “ain’t” because that’s the way the words flow in speech, or use “their” as a singular because english has no singular pronoun with the sex unspecified [except “his/her”]. It’s not fine to teach them to use “wanna” and “ain’t” in a written essay (except in dialog), nor to teach them that “can’t” is written “ca’nt”, nor that “necessary” has two 'c’s. There are points of contention; points of flexibility; and Wrong.

But maybe that’s something for another thread :slight_smile:

[quote]Want to have a true market-based system? Fine. Implement some critical thinking in the compulsory curriculum (or even abolish the thing all together). Then unleash the free-for-all. Want to have a population of drones? Then surely there’s some moral responsibility to actually follow through on their trust of authority figures and regulate this bloody farce. This country is one big kleptocracy and it eats its own.
[/quote]
That’s definitely a whole different thread. Wonder if there’s a ‘market’ for real schools? Ones where students learn things?

[quote=“finley”][quote]Want to have a true market-based system? Fine. Implement some critical thinking in the compulsory curriculum (or even abolish the thing all together). Then unleash the free-for-all. Want to have a population of drones? Then surely there’s some moral responsibility to actually follow through on their trust of authority figures and regulate this bloody farce. This country is one big kleptocracy and it eats its own.
[/quote]
That’s definitely a whole different thread. Wonder if there’s a ‘market’ for real schools? Ones where students learn things?[/quote]
Not while you can lose students for not being “handsome” enough :unamused:

finley: I don’t think it’s entirely a different thread though. I think many of the issues in this thread to do with quality control stem from the inability of people to go about making informed decisions and having faith in those involved in education and a certain percentage of the population (not just in education) ruthlessly exploiting that.