Yes university qualified Australians are far, far superior to the rest. :discodance:
Three or more years of writing reports, essays, exams and the like cannot help but improve one’s English. Naturally. And it’s funny how the experience of forever citing other people’s work tends to make one a little more circumspect.
Just saying that a system full of “qualified” teachers isn’t effectively teaching English.
[quote=“Thelonlieste”]
Just saying that a system full of “qualified” teachers isn’t effectively teaching English.[/quote]
No, but it’s preferable to a bunch of liars who don’t know what a noun is. 
People who teach children are by nature fairly altruistic, fairly stupid or a mixture of both. It’s not financially rewarding, it is not respected by society and the majority of people I’ve met who do it find it difficult, repetitive, time-consuming and soul-destroying. Like it or not, people who have the potential to cure cancer, become captains of industry or compose great music (or whatever marker of high intelligence or attainment you choose) are not teaching your children how to read. I include myself in the ‘teacher’ group, before anyone feels I’m insulting others.
What if, they dont worry if someone has a degree and give them a well designed English test that will test their knowledge of English. And if they pass, they get a Bushiban certificate allowing them to teach bushiban. If not, no way. And also remove the restriction that the candidate must be from an English speaking country as well.
I met this friend of a friend who teaches English in Germany in a public school. Hes German but his English is excellent and he sounds just like a Brit too. Now someone like that couldnt teach at a bushiban in TAiwan because hes German and not from an English speaking country. Not saying he would want to. But hes certainly qualified in my opinion.
[quote=“tommy525”]What if, they dont worry if someone has a degree and give them a well designed English test that will test their knowledge of English. And if they pass, they get a Bushiban certificate allowing them to teach bushiban. If not, no way. And also remove the restriction that the candidate must be from an English speaking country as well.
I met this friend of a friend who teaches English in Germany in a public school. Hes German but his English is excellent and he sounds just like a Brit too. Now someone like that couldnt teach at a bushiban in TAiwan because hes German and not from an English speaking country. Not saying he would want to. But hes certainly qualified in my opinion.[/quote]
Who would write and administer the test?
This is pretty simple stuff. Who would you want teaching your children a foreign language?
Is the third option so undesirable as to merit government regulation preventing schools from employing such people? The Taiwanese people apparently think so.
[quote=“Gao Bohan”]This is pretty simple stuff. Who would you want teaching your children a foreign language?
Is the third option so undesirable as to merit government regulation preventing schools from employing such people? The Taiwanese people apparently think so.[/quote]
The problem is I have met many Taiwanese parents and school officials who don’t care about this, but would in any case prefer a blue-eyed blond teacher, even if he or she was not a native speaker of English, could not speak English well, and had no discernible teaching ability. Direct quote from a student: “My teacher is from Brazil, in America, so her English is really good.” Direct quote from a buxiban owner rejecting a native speaker teacher from Canada because ~, from Spain, could croak out a few English phrases: “~ has a green card, so his English is really good. Anyway, the parents won’t accept a non-American.” When my boss, a Taiwanese, first saw the photo of a new hire, she squealed in delight and kissed the photo - the teacher proved to look good, but was incompetent, and in fact ran away during her first teaching hour, never to return.
Well, this is an example of the Taiwanese government trying to intervene in market forces. By restricting the labor supply to teachers with college degrees, they have created a shortage; i.e., the demand for teachers exceeds the supply. The inevitable result is a black market of teachers with no degrees. Why not drop the regulations, and let the schools decide for themselves who to hire?
Because English would be taught entirely by non English speaking white transients within three months! The market may evolve slightly, but let’s just say the flob-ographic would alter significantly.
I should probably just keep my mouth shut on this one. This is one of those topics that endlessly appears on English teacher information boards with the same arguments over and over and over and over and over. It’s just plain silly of me to say anything now. So instead of writing about the actual intent of the post, I’ll just use my mind reading ability to address the intentions of some who comment on this topic here and elsewhere.
The funny thing about this issue is that people who argue all you need to be a good teacher is ‘personality’ usually don’t mean this for their own education or for their kid’s education. Usually the argument is phrased in such a way that it’s aimed at other people and their children. I always presume it means the children and parents that they’re working with.
On my blog, I occasionally get comments about teaching certificates and formal training in departments of Education. This is usually posted by readers who went to parochial schools or other institutions that hired general degree holders without teacher’s certificates. Such readers generally report satisfaction with their educations, ipso facto, all a teacher really needs is a general degree to be an adequate teacher.
I have yet to come across anyone working in language teaching who will admit that they either had a terrible education or they themselves are terrible teachers. I have yet to meet a language teacher in Taiwan who will admit to having only the vaguest idea of what they’re supposed to be doing. Interestingly, even instructors who have a year or so at a chain school or those whose only experience is with a single textbook seem to feel this way.
While it’s true that many parents here probably think any White boy off the plane is good enough, this is for an entirely different reason than what we’re talking about. The reason any body will do is not because background is irrelevant to teaching ability. It’s because what we are calling language teaching is not perceived as real education, so it’s irrelevant whether the body in question knows anything about it. Despite this, dancing foreign teachers with no knowledge of pedagogy, linguistics, academic subject areas, or anything outside a few games and songs continue to argue that their ability to attract customers comes from their ‘good teaching’.
Mr. Sommers, I could hear the ring of truth as I read your post.
[quote]This is pretty simple stuff. Who would you want teaching your children a foreign language?
Is the third option so undesirable as to merit government regulation preventing schools from employing such people? The Taiwanese people apparently think so.[/quote]
Hardly simple at all. Many people have degrees about things they know little about. Furthermore some people have not read anything about the subject they studied since they graduated. Of course the problem is the only way for someone with no knowledge of a field to discern whether someone else is qualified is whether they have a piece of paper. There are definitely people what have a master’s degree in linguistics who have not read a book about this subject since graduating. Some people get degrees to get jobs. Others are just interested in a subject and will continue to read about a subject on their own.
I would have to say that I have read more books since graduating university than in university, so should my majors be the sole judge of what I know and am qualified to do?
Buttercup wrote:
That may be true but that does not mean someone could not learn just as much about linguistics on their own.
As one can see in this thread some people just argue out of emotion and that is one reason candidate A might have a degree in linguists and candidate b does not. But candidate b actually knows more but is never given the chance because he doesn’t have the right degree. The point is that people with degrees want to protect the value of their degree whether it be subconsciously or consciously.
I think there are some pretty crap teachers out there, with degrees, who never put in the effort to learn anything about teaching. Then there might be an excellent teacher, without a degree, who reads and studies about teaching while working, and always tries to improve.
However, how does a company/school know who is going to turn out to be a good teacher?
There is probably the assumption that somebody who has gone through the four/seven/whatever years to get a degree might have also picked up some sense of responsibility, a certain amount of dedication to finish what they have started, or whatever other skills it takes to actually stay and finish that degree. Any person hiring an employee never really knows what they’re going to get, but there is probably the assumption that getting somebody who has finished a degree ups your chances a little bit.
This is a government rule. I don’t know if companies think that or not.
[quote=“steelersman”]
As one can see in this thread some people just argue out of emotion and that is one reason candidate A might have a degree in linguists and candidate b does not. But candidate b actually knows more but is never given the chance because he doesn’t have the right degree. The point is that people with degrees want to protect the value of their degree whether it be subconsciously or consciously.[/quote]
Of course, but it’s irrelevant in ‘real life’. Personally, I know a lot more about certain topics than I do about my work. It’s simply irrelevant because apart from the low pay illegal Taiwanese kindergarten job I did for a few months, I wouldn’t have got any of my teaching jobs or subsequent work. Why is this is only a debate in Asia?
It’s not about subject knowledge. I could teach high school history, English, French, Chinese, art, religious studies, social studies, etc. My subject knowledge is also probably higher than the average 22 year old grad because I read a lot and by virtue of having not died yet, I have absorbed more info. I don’t get to do it because that’s not allowed in the UK. Why? Because it isn’t. Is it different in your home country?
I don’t have ‘attachment’ to my education: it was eleven years ago and it’s hardly distinguished and something to be proud of. The thing is, you’ll never convince anyone that has any power that your viewpoint is a way forward for Taiwan, or for any other of the 20something ESL destinations. Even poorer countries don’t want educators without education. If a teacher isn’t able to get teaching certification, for whatever reason, at least they can be some kind of role model. It’s hard to teach if you have a lower level of education than your students. Where does your mandate to tell them anything come from?
There’s no ‘shame’ in not having a degree and I’m certainly not looking down on that or insulting those people. We all have anecdotes about driven, intelligent people who don’t who are successful, productive people. There IS shame in pretending to have one to get access to children/line your own pockets.
You’re right, it’s an emotive issue, but it’s not a complex one.
[quote]
It’s not about subject knowledge. I could teach high school history, English, French, Chinese, art, religious studies, social studies, etc. My subject knowledge is also probably higher than the average 22 year old grad because I read a lot and by virtue of having not died yet, I have absorbed more info. I don’t get to do it because that’s not allowed in the UK. Why? Because it isn’t. Is it different in your home country?[/quote]
Well due to the high demand for teachers in my country, as a result of uncontrollable students and low pay, you could get a job in some of those fields if you were able to pass the subject test that all teachers in that subject test need to past.
I also hear that one can get a provisional teacher’s license in the UK and a paid job if you pass certain standardized test that teachers need to pass. The shortage of teachers in the UK and the US has made this possible. In both cases you need to take the proper education classes while teaching. In the US these classes are taken at night.
[quote=“steelersman”]
I also hear that one can get a provisional teacher’s license in the UK and a paid job if you pass certain standardized test that teachers need to pass. The shortage of teachers in the UK and the US has made this possible. In both cases you need to take the proper education classes while teaching. In the US these classes are taken at night.[/quote]
That wasn’t the case in 2008, although things may have changed. Applications for teacher training are really high for 2009, apparently. Something to do with the perception of it being a steady job, in a difficult economy.
You can do the Graduate Training Scheme, if you have a non-education degree. It’s fairly difficult to get onto and heavily supervised. There isn’t a standardised test in the UK: QTS is awarded differently. But you need a first degree to get onto this scheme and a fairly good one if you want to teach something like English or French. It’s easier if you teach maths or sciences because there’s a shortage.
[quote]
It’s not about subject knowledge. I could teach high school history, English, French, Chinese, art, religious studies, social studies, etc. My subject knowledge is also probably higher than the average 22 year old grad because I read a lot and by virtue of having not died yet, I have absorbed more info. I don’t get to do it because that’s not allowed in the UK. Why? Because it isn’t. Is it different in your home country?[/quote]
Just arguing that is just the way it is, is no argument. Of course we may not be able to change it but that does not mean that is how it should be.
I don’t know about England but the US Foreign Service and CIA will accept candidates with only a high school diploma if you have exceptional real life experience. Why should teaching be different?
[quote]
You can do the Graduate Training Scheme, if you have a non-education degree. It’s fairly difficult to get onto and heavily supervised. There isn’t a standardised test in the UK: QTS is awarded differently. But you need a first degree to get onto this scheme and a fairly good one if you want to teach something like English or French. It’s easier if you teach maths or sciences because there’s a shortage.[/quote]
In the US there are definitely possibilities to teach many different subjects on a temporary license but you must work towards a permanent license. You do need a B.A. to be able to enter one of these programs.
I have to say the need for paper qualifications is probably higher in the government sector than in private sector jobs. People in the private sector want to find people who can do the job not someone with a paper qualification in an area they may or may not know much about.
Of course education is the worst for needing papers and taking test. Clearly the people have a greater desire to establish the worth of their paper qualifications. I wish I had the article my Taiwanese friend told me about. The foreign company managers complained that recent Taiwanese graduates don’t know how to do anything.
[quote=“steelersman”]
I could care less about their qualifications. Papers don’t make you qualified and most people don’t know how to do their jobs until they actually get one. Furthermore it is possible to become an accountant with out a B.A. in accounting.[/quote]
So does that mean you are able to care less, meaning you currently care at some level that is significant?
or does this really reflect a lack of understanding that the phrase actually should be “I couldn’t care less”, i.e. it would be difficult for me to care about it less than I currently do as I already care zero?
it seems that you DO care about people’s qualifications, as you point out that an accountant needs a B.A. in accounting (or a B. Comm., or a B. Ec.).
of course you need qualified teachers to teach, because otherwise you teach the students the same bad English that you seem to possess in spades. Merely being a native speaker does not automagically gift you a superlative command of the language, nor does it give you the skills necessary to understand what is needed to pass that on to others. Sure, you get better from practice, but (a) teaching degrees DO include practical training components, and (b), developing ad technique right from the start of your career because you don’t know any better is a really bad way to develop your relationship with students.