The context you’ve missed is the rest of tando’s sentence you’ve removed.
3 Likes
Yes well if “legitimate reason” etc “is discrimination” etc. is the only missing context then I guess I didn’t miss much context.
The whole point of requiring native speakers is the idea that only native speakers can teach their native language. As if anyone under the age of 50 walking down the street in Germany / Denmark / Norway / Switzerland / France doesn’t know English better than most Taiwanese university level, PhD earned in then US, English teachers here. Added bonus is that none of them went to cram school to learn English and yet they turned out more competent than most Taiwanese people who spent their entire childhood in those prisons, so they might have some clues on effective language acquisition. But the Taiwanese Government doesn’t want that because the kids “might pick up an accent” or “the speech will be unnatural”. This appears to be the one and only thing about second language acquisition that the government wants to enforce. Call it discrimination, sure.
my point is, if there is no legally acceptable reason that their teachers should be from specific countries, limiting their nationality to the 7 countries is illegal.
We discussed on it here.
Well, it seemed clear to me what tando meant.
We’ve had lengthy discussions on here as to the legality or even existence of the 7 nation passport rule. IIRC the conclusion was that a holder of a passport of a country that has English as an official language can teach English in Taiwan, unless other qualifications are required. As always there are a few anomalies, such as some countries that don’t have English as an official language but are clearly NES are allowed.
You are correct that limiting it to 7 countries would be illegal and discriminatory, but the MOE doesn’t limit it to 7 countries. They just say that your passport needs to be from an English-speaking country. The job posting on the other thread that was posted was from a recruiter, but MOE itself doesn’t limit hiring to those listed countries, as apparently concluded in the other thread. Hence my comment on the FET from Saint Vincent.
Also, the law itself is ironic, since the US, officially, is not English speaking, since there is no official language of the US (as @BiggusDickus pointed out, this does happen), yet Taiwan wants to teach 美語, not 英語.
1 Like
yes, you are right that MOE doesn’t limit. In my reply to 11173, I used they to refer to HESS.
I feel like we’re going in circles here.
Because you’re not understanding seemingly simple statements.
Okedoke
I overlooked that maybe you must clear this condition to work at public school.
銓敘部民國五十四年九月二日（54）臺銓為參字第 ０六八八五號函
對於聘僱外籍人士擔任我國公職，在下列三項原則範圍內可予聘僱：（一）在才具方面：以具有專長或特殊技能而本國不易覓得之人才為限。（二）在職位方面：以擔任技術性、科學性不涉及國家機密之職務為限。（三）在任使性質方面：應採取約聘方式以避免涉及我國公務人員任用範圍。
Hi, I am new here. Do I have to get another police clearance certificate from my country after being here for almost a year? I had to get one for my marriage arc. All my original documents were handed in at NIA. My arc is in the process of being renewed for 3 years.
That’s a question for the people processing your papers. Each time I’ve gone to renew my ARC (every year), they’ve asked for something different. I kept a running list on my phone. The most recent time I went, they didn’t “need” about 80% of the paperwork that I brought, which was paperwork they did need the year before.