inutil

FYI ~ A.S.E.A.N. is just around the corner, and spear-headed by the Sino-Singaporeans. Those western (NES) teachers of Thailand (who do live in reality), will quickly get the drift, of things to come. Prepare to pack-up, and be homeward bound. The western school teacher party, is rapidly coming to and end, in East - SE Asia.

Any further explanation to this post????

and you blokes call Thai people stupid! Hey, Dream Lover! Again, in PLAIN English. Just like the gradual vanishing of the former British Colonies of East & SE Asia, Singaporeans are now, officially classified as being the only NES, member nation people of A.S.E.A.N. The Western Expat School Teacher's party, is soon to become history, in Thailand. CAPICHE? Now, if you a further explanation than this, then ask a 5 year-old Thai Kindergarten student, to explain it to you, K? .

Eugh. troll thee not. The party will still be raging. In fact, it'll get into full swing once the gulf in language starts affecting investment.

Hogwash oil is refined waste oil. You find it in the sewers.

To make hogwash oil, one takes the floating oil from sewer water or from leftover food thrown out of restaurants and then refines it...

A-tian monopolized access to the sewers in front of the hotels and restaurants. If business was good, he could retrieve 5�6 buckets of oil. He normally got four buckets a day.

Every day, A-tian carried the buckets home with his bicycle. When he had enough to fill his pond (about four tons of oil,) he would refine the oil. On average, he could earn 150 yuan (about US$20) for every two buckets he took home...

So what's the usefulness of hogwash oil? An insider said, "Some people refine hogwash oil themselves. The better-looking hogwash oil can be sold to restaurants. The inferior, darker looking hogwash oil is sold for frying bread dough. The darkest oil is sold to the chemical industry as raw material.

Others sell raw hogwash oil directly to oil refineries as industrial raw material. There are people selling raw hogwash oil to pig farmers to feed pigs. Except for that sold to the refineries, the rest tends to flow into restaurants."

Hope this helps

Love Thai street food. Im also a terribly fussy eater and have a bit of a germ-phobia (i cant drink out of the same glass, or eat off the same plate as someone else). Yeah, it can be grim. Ive had some real vomit inducing food out there. But it wasnt so much the cleanliness as the awful recipe. And when it rocks, youve just scored a ridiculously tasty meal for a 100th of the price youd pay back home. Whats not to love?

On the other hand, i currently live in China, and dont even dare eat in the restaurants. ive been sick several times (and once, so bad i was hospitalised). I kinda wondered why, until a friend pointed out the hogwash oil thing. Fancy eating food cooked in oil thats been recovered from sewers and filtered (with no legitimate or legal oversight)? Me neither. Chinese food can be yum now and again for sure, but ive rolled the dice enough times now to give up playing.

Thanks for all the responses. Even the tongue in cheek ones.

I feel like I'm starting to understand what to do and what to expect.

Some of you are asking why Bangkok. I have a friend there already, he's a teacher too. Oh, and of course I've met my Thai Soulmate online and we're going to get married... joke!

I'm going to start applying for jobs before I go. Maybe it is super easy to jump on a plane and get a job when you're there, but that would be kinda intense right? I mean, to land in a country where you don't know where anything is, and you don't speak the language, and you don't understand the culture all that well...

I think, at the very least, I would like to know I've actually got the job sorted.

Dont sweat the details man, getting a job is INCREDIBLY easy. It also gives you a month or so of acclimatizing to the whole "holy shit holy shit holy shit!" of it all.

Roll in, book a serviced apartment with a pool for a month, chill out for a few days to get your bearings. Take a few sojurns into town to see the main sights. Then after a week or so of adjusting to the heat (and if youre like me, only leaving the hotel after dusk because crotch rot/chafing is NASTY), get on your computer, post your resume up, send out some applications to agencies. And voila, within a week youll be picked up. If youre quick, well, you get to decide if youre going to suck up the loss on the service apartment and head to your new gig. If not, then youve got a month to score a job. The only people who need a month to score a job are the serious basket cases. And theres plenty of them in Thailand making you almost instantly marketable by comparison.

You'll need at best two days to pick up a paying gig around 30,000.

And none of this even speaks of just popping to nearby schools, dressed sharp, and clutching your CV in hand. Meet the head of English, ask them about their situation. If you have any kind of charm or charisma, you now get to price yourself into your job.

One word of warning:

Many agency contracts will contain a clause that means you are in effect a term by term employee. Understand that outside of those terms, you get paid squat. You need to supplement your income. Understand further, that Thailand schools take rather long holidays. This means somewhere around 9/12 months of pay and 3 months of whatever other work you can get. This is one of the advantages of calling your own wage and doorstepping. Agencies are in competition with other agencies for contracts, so its a race to the bottom. Speculative enquiries arent. If youre there, good to go, and the head of dept likes you, well, you have a bit more leeway.

Of course it also means that you are now beholden to your employer and dont have that buffer we all enjoy with the agency (if you screw up, or if the school just doesnt like you, agencies will look after you usually because they have more jobs than teachers). Swings and roundabouts.

What else?

Ah, if you hate public school teaching, dont fret. Have a crack at another age group or even private lessons. Private lessons usually pay better as well. They're also far easier than public school teaching. Lots of ways to make a buck so to speak. Dont just assume you hate teaching just because public school is a bit more... complicated

One last thing. DO TRY and stick with a contract for a full year. I know you might be tearing your hair out, but having at least one year experience under your wing means that you have the startings of a career. So long as youre still pretty young, one year of experience puts you above the people in your exact situation right now (outside the country, having to pick from a very small number of the actual positions (usually garbage), and looking just to get your foot in the door). This gives you opportunities in countries outside Thailand. If theres one great thing about Teaching in Thailand for me, its that you can get an entry level, no aggro job to at least learn some of the fundamentals and get that valuable classroom experience. Outside of Thailand, things get more picky and youre competing with cats with lots of experience, decent qualifications, and all for a limited number of placements. That one year experience puts you in the running for most ESL positions.

Anyways, good luck dude!

Its important above all to understand this one thing about teaching:

ESL teachers on message boards are often the most holier than thou avatars youll ever likely engage with. Dont sweat it. They dont mean anything of it, it's just something we all do. You'll do it too in a few years

With that proviso aside, let me advise you

Dress smart in your photo.

Refresh your CV on ajarn often.

Accept that with no experience youre not top billing.

But dont accept anything less than 30k.

Public school jobs are SIGNIFICANTLY more difficult... they re

I may have missed the point! The lesson plan still stands though because its too awesome!

Comparative BETTING!!!

Yeah, everyone will tell you its a terrible thing to teach your kids gambling, but its never failed.

Print out some fake money (or just er, photocopy a stack of real money if youre feeling lazy).

Cut it up into individual bills. Each group gets around 10, you need to cover losses in the game (and losses because kids destroy everything that isnt laminated) so figure out your math. I go with around 100 or so.

Anyways. do what youve got to do in the first 10-15 minutes of class to get them to this one tiny lousy easy as hell grammar point:

"A is [adj]~ER THAN B."

(a cat is faster than a mouse).

Thats literally the only thing your kids need to remember: "...~er than..."

Now break them into groups (assuming of course you can move desks at all and there arent in fact 79 kids in four or five lines in a tiny classroom with no gaps to maneuver - if thats the case, this game aint working... or youre gonna need another way to group them (boys v girls? I dunno).

Now you give each group one piece of A5 paper (at the most). On this paper they draw (or write or whatever), their team name.

You need two free desks at the front. Steal them from the students if you have to. It makes things chirpy.

Label one desk A and one B. This is important. Basically, the kids who think that A is bigger than B put their paper and money on the desk marked A, and the groups who think B is bigger than A put their papers on desk B. Simple right!

Now you do an introduction question. You MUST make this one phenomenally simple. Which is bigger, this school or the earth... i dunno. Your call, The funnier the better.

This is where the students learn that on that piece of paper they need to write down the answer. Dont let them use shorthand. You can be all teachery if you like at this point and punish poor spelling and grammar, but i prefer to keep the rules absolutely simple.

The students from each group then bring the paper to the relevant desk. Check check. Send them back until they get it right. This is just the test case. So youre just making sure they follow the procedure.

Hopefully everyone chose the same answer.

Now reveal the (obvious) answer, and start dishing out money. Give each group that got it right a dollar (or whatever currency youre using). At this point, eyes will light up.

Now get them to collect the papers.

Once collected its time to dish out the cash. Give each group however much you want (obviously you need to prep the stacks beforehand).

And now explain that they have to bet on the answers. Cue MASSIVE surge of excitement. The rule is, if they get it right, they get double their bet. If they get it wrong, you take their cash. So simple! YOU MUST RESTRICT THEIR BETS. Keep them on a super tight leash on how much they can bet. For example, first and second rounds are 1, third is two fourth is three. By the fifth round, youre close to the end anyway. Let them go all in (because its a trick question).

You can find your own comparisons on wikipedia (country sizes, animal speeds, celebrity birthdays, even teacher vs random student birthdays). Anything at all. Or...

Now everyone is primed, its time to kick off.

Q1: Which is faster, a pig or a chicken?

After the easy question, watch the dumbfounded looks. Its a moment to savor

Make sure they all give you 1 of your notes (i usually work in multiples of ten rather than 1s for the dramarama).

A: Pig = 17.6kph ; Chicken = 14.4 kph (use a bit of showmanship to draw it out and build tension).

Q2: Which is bigger, Thailand or (pick random country that everyone is going to assume is bigger than Thailand).

Go wikipedia the hell out of it.

Q3: Pick a random student and ask everyone whose birthday is earlier/later (depending on yours of course - you dont wanna make this easy!).

Q4: Pick a few celebrities. I always go with lady gaga. Who is taller, lady gaga or random normal height Thai soap opera star

Lady gaga is amazingly teensy tiny at 155cm. Just find anyone you like.

Q5: which is newer, the car or the motorbike?

Car 1889 ; Motorbike 1885.

Q6: do a local one. Anything they know about.

Whatevers for any other questions to push time:

But LAST QUESTION regardless of time:

Which is bigger, Bangkok or Washington DC. Play up how easy it is and youre being nice. Throw in that youre comparing one of the worlds biggest countries with Thailand.

Bangkok: 1567 sqkm ; Washington DC: 177 sqkm

Anyways, if you arent mean like me, you can throw in a few easier ones to get a few cheers and not cripple their interest. Think of it like playing pully games with a dog You need to let them win sometimes. Pick something from Thai history and pretend you thought it was reaaaaaallly difficult...

Sorry im not giving you the whole thing. Im not doing the thai research on celebrities and the like. Plus, the more local stuff you can add (particularly school stuff - they LOVE teacher comparisons - "who has been teaching here longer?" for example - if you have a co teacher, its a great way to bring them into the game by putting them on the spot for a random school based question).

Anyways, this game ALWAYS kills! its one of my absolute guarantees! you need to sell it a bit, ham it up a bit, and possibly have a bit of mischief about it. If you want, you can make the students come up with their own questions. Ive tried it though, and it does slow down the pace a bit (from my experience - though im more the showman type, maybe a better teacher-teacher will fit that style more and would rather feel more in control of the material).

Have fun. Hope i havent got you too late

What a load of nonsense, and whats this about sky fairies?

The simple fact is that nature, god, aliens, sky fairies (take your pick) have created a human reproductive system where you need 2 people of the opposite gender to have sex in order to reproduce and have babies. This is not a gay rights issue, it never has been and never will be because 2 people of the same sex cannot make babies!

Your example that 2 loving parents of the same sex is better then an abused child from a family comprising of mother and father is a childish comparison at best.

I would argue that a child brought up by 2 loving parents (mother and father) is better for the child then being raised by 2 loving parents of the same sex,, so if you are going to make comparisons make them real.

This is not homophobic, it is my opinion and I have no issues with people being gay at all. The only point I agree with you on is that people do not chose to be gay, you are either gay or you're not,, i don't think anyone wakes up one morning and choses their sexual preference.

I posted earlier that I am sure there are many gay couples who could create a really good argument as to why they should be able to raise a child with same sex parents. But, for some reason my heart tells me this isn't right,, I know people will shoot me for this (not literally) and i am generally pretty liberal about these kind of things but its the way I feel about it.. I cannot see how the child will not have a difficult time with it at some point in their life and also what effect it might have on their upbringing overall. Maybe at some point someone will convince me otherwise and I will change my view, sadly your post is not it.

Anyway the surrogacy point just seems very wrong to me.

Youre absolutely right! If only there was, i dunno, some kind of modern wizardry whereby we could fertilise an egg outside of the actual physical act of love making! I guess until such a magic exists, we'll just have to concede the point that it is physically impossible for two people of the same sex to, in any way, create a baby from their actual biological self! Just as its physically impossible for a human to take flight in some kind of gravity defying contraption and cross thousands of miles to do it! Are we now to believe ourselves birds? What utter nonsense! if we were intended to fly, then we would have been born with wings! If we were intended to breed outside of the confines of physical procreation we would have invented procedures and testable methods in order to do so! Absurd! I will send this message to you on the morrow by carrier pigeon!... Once of course i figure out what all these confounded symbols mean!

"And if they start giving me shit... Ill quit the old fashioned way: No show, no phone call!" (doug stanhope as president!)

You arent an indentured servant. No one has a gun to your head. Theres no organised blacklist. If you ever want to quit, then quit. If it requires a runner, then run.

Contract or no contract, so long as you can blag the gaps on your CV no one cares.

I suspect though this is more about getting paid for hours worked. Look at YOUR contract. Does it say anything about this? Are you willing to challenge the vilidity of x clause versus Thai labor law Again, contracts mean shit unless YOU can enforce them. If someone wants to screw you out of money, you have to make the decision if you have the time to dick around with a lawyer or not and take this to court. The easiest path is to get what youre owed, give notice and leave. If you dont trust them, get what you can, and leave. And if you think theyre pure scum and want to punish them, take them to court or threaten them with court.

What does your contract ACTUALLY say. Is there a clause that states the THAI version of the contract supercedes the English version? Can you read Thai? No? Get a lawyer who can, and ask them what they think. If theres a clause where they can demand reimbursement for fees (to a recruiter or airfare and the like), if you leave in the first six months, then you're going to have to get legal advice. Genuine legal advice. Not advice from teachers or forum users in general. Alternatively, no show, no phone call. Move. Problem solved. No one is chasing you across the country unless you owe them a tonne of money.

Dude, you got no money. You got no means to access money. You cant or wont get a plane ticket to go home.

Youve got all the information you need to make your choice.

You either get the money together and get out before you break the law.

Or you dont.

You arent a special case with super mitigating circumstances. If you run the risk of living in Thailand without a visa, you deal with the punishment when youre caught. Be a grown up and stop bitching. I dont care if you live beyond your means or not. I dont care if you decide to live in Thailand illegally or work illegally. I aint the police. I also couldnt care less about how much money you had. But youre now the one responsible for your next step. So man the <deleted> up and own your decision.

Truth is no one knows if they take to teaching until they actually give it a whirl. No reason why he shouldnt get his feet wet. It might take one whole class for him to tell everyone to go themselves and storm out, or he might just kill it and realise hed really like to do this a bit longer because its actually a blast!

Just as with every other fun TEFL site waste of time discussion, ive seen good teachers without degrees, awesome non-native English teachers who could teach circles around everyone else (despite having a bit of an accent), and amazingly charismatic teachers who came here for a gap year or two to see Asia, stayed a bit too long, and stumbled into a career entirely by accident. No one really knows if the spark is there and in what way until you give it a go. Maybe you just like to perform, and though you have naff all interest in the subject, youre just born to fire imaginations and inspire students. Maybe you just like the shenanigans of kids and can tailor your student-centric lessons naturally to them in a way that Mr.bigstick grammar translation cant or wont. Maybe you think intrinsic motivation is OBVIOUSLY far more important to your students than hanging a test over their heads and delighting in failing 30% of them.

I dunno. Maybe its exactly the opposite. Maybe you LOVE giving students a clear, structured groundwork with obvious standards of success and achievement instead of just waffling on about 'intrinsic motivation' or 'student centric approaches' whilst your class descends into chaos... etc etc. Ive seen teachers of all styles and shapes, and the only bad teachers i ever saw were (are) those who think that one size fits all. Then again, im all hippy 'intrinsic motivation' so er, glass houses etc.

Still, if youre even up for considering it, no matter your motivation (yes, even boredom), have a go. I really believe you should have a go, because for me, its the most fun job you can do. You might love it! Which means boredom will no longer be your motivation (i genuinely defy you to be bored teaching, anyway!). And if you find you actually hate it, everyone wins as well. Now you'll know from experience just how hard working a job it is trying to get 20-60 young teens all with their own varying interests, motivations, and skills on point and learning something they didnt know before they walked into your class. Love it! love it! love it! Exhausting, demoralising, hilarious, frustrating, exciting, energising, maddening, draining and rewarding in the space of a single lesson. Its a ridiculous job

TEFL does teach grammar. Of course it does. Well, contingent on just how gung ho your tefl agency is i guess... its just basic stuff though: Tenses, parts of speech, um... hang on... im sure there were other things...

...

...nah, lost it.

Anyway, it teaches grammar. It gets a day or two of your month long course. Not a ridiculous amount by any stretch, but genuinely, its sort of right. I'm an experienced teacher. I've got plenty of classroom experience whilst almost everyone i did the course with had no classroom experience. Six demo lessons got them over that bunny in the headlights terror. By around demonstration 10 they were really getting their fluidity and confidence in front of their classes. Realistically then, observed teaching just feels more of an appropriate use of the time. You get feedback, its constructive, its all safety net and actually lets you start the new gig with a bit of confidence and some decent classroom experience.

I know the grammar nerds get mad about it, but you get your basic grammar down reasonably quick (allowing for further study and professional development later on if you want to go into a bit more depth). In terms of training and observed lessons from there on in, i can tell you (anecdotaly) that observed classroom teaching (where I am the actual subject under observation (and not my coteacher)) has been around... ooooh... 6 or 7 lessons... in about 9 years of teaching. Whee! so screw the grammar component. That classroom experience and observation is gold dust!

Particularly in Thailand Public schools, you're going to be thrown into the deep end. Well, more like the shark pool to be honest. Yes yes, no one seemed to care what i did in my class, so there is that. But for that 1 hour where youre on your own with a class of 50 plus students (and barely 10% of them are in any way focused or can be regarded as 'keeping up with' the material (let alone surpassing it)), you're going to be eaten alive. The tefl wont save you of course, but it will at least give you that safety net those first terrifying few times where you spectacularly screw up your timings, or lose your temper, or lose your materials, or forget what youre doing, or have absolutely no response to your 15 minutes you set aside for your self intro Q and A and have nothing else left on the table to pull you out of a hole except er... hangman??? Bingo??? Um... HALP?!??!!! A little look back to the twelve or so classes you taught, and the classes you saw your mates teach at least gives you some ideas on how to switch things up a bit.

Also, for Non native ESL teachers (as in teachers who learned English as a second language), grammar should be the LEAST of your worries. Unlike most of us, you actually learned all this stuff. I mean, someone physically explained it instead of said "right, in today's English class you're going to write a book report on yadayadayada" (followed by lots of red pen corrections and random "Paragraph!!!" or "Sp!" interjections). That's what i remember from English GCSE... Then again, i &lt;deleted&gt; around a lot in school... so you know...

You know what, Thailand blows my freaking mind on that exact point for the exact opposite reason you gave. 

Schooling is a clusterfk (at least it was for my short stint). 

Ive taught in Japan (6 years), Korea (2 years), and China (1 year), all middle school. The students I taught in Thailand (P4-M3) had far and away the lowest level English. Far and away! 

I was gobsmacked to watch M2 students struggle to read a P4 passage ("This is my sister. Her name is... She likes... Her birthday is..."). 

I was jaw on the floor when they couldnt answer questions beyond "what's your name?" (what do you like?, do you like...?, do you have any brothers or sisters? - these are the very easy warm up questions i usually give to the students in the middle or low sets to try and ease them to the comparatives, pronouns, tense, direction questions et al). It was wide-scale. I even had to get my co-teacher to come sit-in on some of these tests (and even do some) to make sure a) it wasnt my speed/deliver/terminology; and b ) That i wasn't imagining it. 

But you know what i found most amazing?

I can pretty much get around anywhere in Thailand without a lick of Thai. Theres enough survival English in the general population to make speaking Thai utterly unnecessary. Its far more prolific in the general population than either of the countries already mentioned. I mean, i can get by wherever, but i dont even need some basic workaround phrases. Its just not an issue at all. In Korea youve got a bit of a chance if youre in a big city or speaking to some uni aged students. In japan, no chance, and in China, its pretty much non existent outside of schools (but inside schools, its kind of amazing). 

Its a weird weird thing that i could never wrap my head around. Either its the tourism industry at proper work, or every Thai person above the age of 23 has to go to an English boot-camp for 6 months as some kind of pseudo military service. Its just ass backwards. Schooling is incredibly poor. But after school, it just blossoms. Amazing Thailand. :) 

Truth be told, id assume its a knee jerk thing at the moment. Rumours of clampdowns and all that spilling out into issues like Visa exemption lockouts and ed visa problems will have led to people just waiting it out a bit and doing a spot of travelling elsewhere (or popping home for a few months).

Right now Tourist Visas are still on the cards though. For your run of the mill illegal teacher and your run of the mill employer looking to hire someone under ACTUAL market price (when you remove the supply of under the counter teachers), then rationally its business as usual. As i mentioned in another thread, so long as theres no enforcement at the schools themselves, and so long as the back to back tourist visa still remains unchanged (and both seem pretty much the same), then any employers with a bit of a shifty edge to them are just going to move away from their employee being sent on quick exemption in-out runs, to week-off hikes to a proper consulate for a 60 day Tourist visa (or Double Entry TV). I reckon they wont even have the good grace to pay for it either. Youll be on the hook. Theyre breaking the law for you after all! Days off might be paid though. Thats nice. They were for my visa runs.

A bit of forward planning now, perhaps a week off to explore the sights and sounds of Phnom Penh and bish bosh, back you come to do the exact same job in the exact same industry with the exact same security and possible repercussions as before.

Possibly think of this term as a bit of a write off. Feelers are out and people will likely not be chancing things too much just in case suddenly the penalties for knowingly hiring an illegal alien shoot up, but come next school year (or maybe even just next term after this particularly busy August for pronouncements) everyone will have a good idea on where things actually stand and will start making the important changes.

Im not exactly confident that this whole thing is suddenly "solved". In fact it seems just a little more codified is all. But realistically things will go on much the same at the bottom of the ladder, the supply will return, wages will stay static for them without a degree. Possibly theyll go up for those with a degree, but very marginally since the general 'issues' keeping them low will pretty much remain without genuine enforcement at schools or a radical overhaul of the tourist visa.

So, the good teachers without degrees, as i suspected, will now find themselves employable (legally) as teaching assistants. The job will ABSOLUTELY be the same im sure, but they'll now clarify the role and restrictions in the coming months. So theres a way in it seems thats legal. But again, youre fighting for that 10% spot which is not exactly going to gift you job security. You might find yourself on teaching assistant/visa hopping rotation with another few farang to keep suspicions down, and quota's filled. If youre in though, i really advise you to do everything you can to upgrade your skills and get off that shit train. You're not really going to improve your options unless youre really really indispensable to the school. All it will mean is that one year in every two or three, you might have less visa annoyances.

For people with degrees i guess things got a little smoother since you dont count to that 10% due to the waiver. So long as that isnt pulled away, then obviously people might start looking to pay you a few thousand extra to not have to dick around with quotas. As i say though, so long as the supply of illegal teachers remain ballpark (and actually its much more convenient doing the back to back tourist visa runs over the 15 day exemption runs i had to do), then pay wont exactly skyrocket. If you need 3 teachers for your school, you get 1 on a waiver, and 2 either on the 10% quota or 2 rotating on the quota. You have three teachers and life goes on. So i wouldnt hold your breath

Again though, to the waivers, if Thailand is in your long term future, just jump through the hoops and become legit for heavens sake (as soon as they can offer you a test with a pass rate above zero percent, of course - always made me laugh, that one). Youll have a job for life in a country you love. And can ignore all the slimy shit going on at the bottom rung... which reminds me: The path to legitimacy is getting reviewed, and hopefully itll be less of a mess than the last one.

Win win all round then. Backpackers and transients still get to supplement their gig, just on a tourist visa. People who want a gig as a teacher get a chance to prove themselves utterly indispensable to the school and also get off the visa hop train. And waivers see their status slightly pop up (since the tourist visa thing might get clamped down on a bit in the future, and schools might get leaned on a bit to follow the guidelines making it in their interest for someone they can process easily and quickly. They also, no doubt will get a slightly more effective pathway to proper teacher legitimacy).

And of course legit teachers (either them that have QTS from back home or worked their butts off in Thailand for status). Well, you deserve a real pay grade anyways and unlike the rest of us, offer something genuinely marketable (no waivers, straight teaching staff, and of course skills, methodologies, and training). So really none of this affects you anyways... well, except of course all of the supply of NETs keeping wages down generally - then again, a NET presence in most schools means other schools feel compelled to have tehir own NET presence to keep the parents happy, simultaneously driving up demand - but probably not anywhere near enough. Cost of living! Just remember theres that in the end). Oh, but easier pathways to legitimacy is going to of course impact on your qualifications though as well... so i guess theres that as well. Basically you aint winning i think. But everyone else is. Shady schools get to still pick from the same list of options, and less shady schools still get to pick from a wide array of options staying within the law.

Reading that clause from the po-po in the other thread about support staff (well, education personnel), doesnt this leave a huge gap in that last little bit... ill bold it: 

Educational Personnel is:
Person performing librarian, guidance, educational technology, registration and evaluation, general administration, supporter of education as specified by the Private Education Commission  
(4)  In case of educational personnel, the alien must have degree or experience that meet the work requirement and the ratio of alien employees shall not exceed 10 percent of total teachers or instructors in a particular education institution.

 

Given that Thailand is struggling for teachers at the moment. Given that the current model is clearly not working smoothly to bring in those new teachers due to incredibly high standards, expectations (b.ed/m.ed), or just good old fashioned confusion and red tape. Could we be looking at the first little wellspring of a solution? Ive seen several posts about a second, less stringent, work visa criteria. It looks to me that this might be its genesis. I can see a few schools will be looking at that phrasing carefully to see if they can garner a visa for a TEFL certified and experienced 'supporter of education'. It sounds kinda like a demotion in the title might be on the cards to 'Assistant Language Teacher' with a possible stipulation that a 'real teacher' be present at all times (this is exactly the way they do it in Japan - though you must have a degree). 

The nice thing is that such a law wouldnt lower the bar entirely. Furthermore, it means that those teachers who currently qualify for an automatic work permit due to their actual teaching qualification would allow a school to by-pass the 1/10 rule, and also allow the foreign teacher to teach unassisted. This would mean the teacher keeps their value and status (as would someone on a two year waiver). The school has options for employing outside of the current strict remit, and us waiver teachers (degree holders but not B.ed) can no doubt slip betwixt the two as and when required. 

Perhaps im reading it wrong. It's not like i know the ins and outs of it or how it ties into other state department legislation, but it does seem to be importantly vague and offering some kind of allowance for schools to manage their own foreign support labor a bit more clearly than the current situation.

Can I politely ask the 'English' teachers posting in this thread to double check their posts before hitting the actual 'Post' button. The amount of grammar, punctuation and syntax errors in most posts is truly appalling. I am not a native English speaker but this thread clearly proves that it is better to have an educated and licensed non-native speaker teach English (whom I was taught by) than the typical uneducated native speaker most Thais encounter in these so-called language schools. No wonder the level of English proficiency is so low amongst Thais. It's about time an effort is made to get some real teachers.

Im assuming im the culprit here. No. Not really. :) 

Youre absolutely right. I concede the point. Good luck! hope it works out well for you! 

 

 

Here is my cue,
If you want them to speak English, they must live in a English speaking environment... Have watched this for years.. Any questions? Told some close Thai friends of this, their children went to foreign countries, and amazingly enough they learned English... It is no different in America.... So what is there to explain?
kilosierra

 

I have one! 

 

How on earth am i having fluent English conversations with an American accented Chinese dude at my local gym who has never left China? Did i wake up fluent in Chinese and havent realised it yet? 

 

 

 

Trying to make out that individual cases or personal experience is representative of the whole picture just seems to indicate how little the poster knows about either the issues or making a valid argument on any subject

 

I feel i must be misunderstanding you. Are you actually supporting the point that one must live in a country where English is spoken as a first language in order to be able to speak it? Do we no longer believe in teaching and education to deliver genuine results within a classroom? Arent you a teacher? Arent you teaching English in a country where English is not in fact spoken as a native language?

Am i completely failing to grasp your sarcasm or something? Or do you genuinely think the point im making is of one amazing person in a sea of billions who pulled himself up against all odds into fluency?  (a position, i might point out, which would catastrophically undermine the counterpoint i would hope i was actually making - given that it suggests that this person was an anomaly and somehow achieved success in the language despite his useless and ineffective language environment...)

So let me assume the best and only that i wasnt clear with my flippancy and thus remove the misunderstanding.

This isnt just a one off super genius who broke the mold. This is based on an education system that seems rather good (on a non individual basis) at delivering extremely high levels of English competency. Of course, i live in a nice part of a big city, so perhaps im being spoiled by all these kids. Then again, i also taught downtown with the same results... so hard to know. Let me assure you though, we arent just talking 'good'. We are talking functionally fluent and can hold a extensive conversation with you on a subject of your choosing (so long as its obviously within their own references - youre not going to have a 12 year old explain string theory). Of course, mileage varies on an INDIVIDUAL basis, but obviously  im actually not talking about individuals. Im talking about one person who is INDICATIVE of an entire educational system and its efficacy at delivering skilled English speakers. This random guy in the gym learned all his English from his schooling. Perhaps he supplemented it with movies or music for the whole accent part - or perhaps he did extra lessons from a native speaker. But it was all here, in China. What he didnt do though was move abroad. He learned his language thanks to the institutions that keep you and I in gainful employment.

His story, is the story of his education. He is honestly one of 100 i could tell you about. The standard of English in school here is rather high. Which can only lead me to conclude that the educational system here can in fact deliver results and that no, you dont need to live abroad to speak the language. So far from being a single isolated case, he is representative of an education system that does in fact deliver effective English. As a teacher, of course im not exactly shocked by this. Shouldnt it be a first principle of any subject teacher? If you didnt think you could teach your students your subject effectively, then why would you be a teacher?     

As i say, perhaps you felt i was using this person as an isolated example (despite this fundamentally undermining my point) and not paying any credit to the institutions that supported his learning. In which case this post should go some way to clearing this up. Or perhaps you do genuinely support the argument that English can only be learned in a country where its spoken as a first language in which case, well... you know... bit awkward... (:

 

Thats kinda the point though isnt it? You are within the law, but its actually things like this which lead to crackdowns and tightening of regulations. Its called a loophole. Loopholes are by their nature, legal. But against the spirit and intention of the law. You may well be a 'tourist' but its hard to imagine a 'tourist' living away from his native country for 9 months of the year (with up to 8 months - at least) being spent in a single country year after year. So im suggesting that perhaps you might be undermining your own point by proclaiming yourself 'a tourist' given that it might lead someone to ask the simple question: how is a tourist able to stay here for 2/3rds to 3/4s of the year... year after year? Arent they just defacto immigrants? 

 

You suggest i got on my soapbox unfairly. But your earlier dolphin/tuna comment followed by your rejoinder on those pesky teachers making it hard for everyone else, only told one side of the story. I offered simply a fair correction.I didnt bring it up out of the blue. I brought it up because you seemed to be under the impression that having to do a visa run was some kind of deliberate attempt to flout the law and work under the counter. I was correcting a point you yourself (flippantly) initiated.

 

Secondly, and in addition, the reason i brought up my degree wasnt to show you im qualified, but to offer evidence to back up the claim that i am making in correcting your position. If i want to undermine the implication that teachers selfishly caused this issue you may be facing (point 1) and that the only people with these problems are teachers without degrees, (point 2) then possession of my degree clearly illustrates that (point 1), this benefited me not a jot, and (point 2), as a teacher with said documents and totally willing to complete the visa process, i was being hindered by forces completely outside of my control. So again, it was entirely relevant. It not only undermined your claim that only teachers without degrees have problems. But also further advanced my point that employers appear to be in no hurry to make their employees legal. Thus all teachers will possibly have had to deal with this nonsense depending upon factors completely outside of their qualifications. 

 

This brings me to the last point. You also suggested that the in-out visa clampdown should stop 90% of the issues. Ive explained why it wont. Again, if its beneficial for the school to have their teacher exploit a visa loophole, then you can bet that they will do exactly this (see above). If it means giving them a week off once every 90 days (paid or unpaid) to do a full tourist run to the nearest Thai consulate handing out Double-entry tourist visas, then we are back at square one. Its a loophole. It will be looked at. And sooner no doubt rather than later. And the reason it will be looked at isnt because of the fly by night teacher, but because employers will try and find a way to flout legality through either a) hiring people ineligible for the visa, or hiring people eligible for a visa but for reasons on a case by case and instance by instance basis, appear reluctant to do so. So i hope you understand: im simply correcting your own rather cheeky points holding teachers to blame for a situation completely outside of their control. 

 

Who says what I'm doing is a loophole?  Only you, and other nosey westerners.  Show me where even once the Thai government has raised such a concern. You can't, because the opposite is actually true. They've gone out of their way to say real tourists continue to be welcome, meaning people who aren't working here and have their own funds.  They don't seem to care at all how long real tourists stays, so long as they're able to support themselves. Some nationalities even qualify for triple entry visas, which allow a stay of up to 270 days on a single visa.  Do you see yet?  The Thai government doesn't need you minding its business for it.  

 

"how is a tourist able to stay here for 2/3rds to 3/4s of the year... year after year? Arent they just defacto immigrants?"

 

No, they are not de facto immigrants, because their legal status doesn't change. If there was automatic residency for people staying consecutive years, who were being granted stay based on a set of criteria, and I was accumulating time toward residency as a tourist, THAT would be a loophole.  Also, you imply that because it isn't the norm, because most people don't have enough money to do what I'm doing, there's something inherently wrong about it That's just your own prejudice surfacing. Not my problem.                                   

 

Your interpretation of my analogy is off base. Tuna is not meant to be a condescending jab (they're actually majestic animals, a top predator and a delicacy in many cultures). Again, it's a question of being able to grasp the plot: the analogy is about a hunted animal (tuna as teacher) leading to the capture of another (dolphin as tourist), not species hierarchy. lol. 

 

Regardless of your situation, the simple truth is that by and large it's degreeless teachers who have the biggest visa headaches.  Moreover, no one's forcing anyone to stay and work illegally. There are any number of countries that treat their TEFLers better than Thailand.  You choose to stay here, and you choose to remain employed by people who don't respect you enough to get you legal. Don't whine to me about that. Put on your big boy pants and do something about it. Leave.  If not from the country than at the end of the term at least from the school.  There is no shortage of places hiring.

 

Likewise, if I can't stay legal on a tourist visa, I'm prepared to stay in another country. 

 

"You also suggested that the in-out visa clampdown should stop 90% of the issues. I've explained why it wont."

 

And I explained how it could: upon application for even a second tourist visa inside of twelve months, the applicant must show funds originating from outside the country. A bank statement will suffice, just like it does for retirees.  

 

Lastly, I couldn't disagree more with your last point. There's no way Thai schools are gonna give TEFLers one to two weeks off every three months. But time will tell, I guess.  

 

Welll, lets be honest. I couldnt care less what you do, or who the (official) person suggesting such a thing might be. But theyre going to suggest it and youre going to be caught up in it. Its coming. Loophole or er... well, its a loophole. Sorry you dont like that word.

And just as they didnt care less how many times you popped in and out of Cham Yeam, or just as they didnt care how many tourist visas you had in your passport, or how long you overstayed so they currently dont care what a tourist is. Youre right. But the point isnt right now. Its whats coming. And its coming BECAUSE the loophole is still open, its just shifted to tourist visas and (suitably timed) back to back entries.  You might find they suddenly feel a need to clarify the matter.  

Secondly, thank you! at last! a clear and resounding denial that you arent slagging off teachers just trying to do their job. Tuna are poor majestic animals, just like dolphins, caught up in... oh wait, you clearly couldnt hold that in for long. Next paragraph starts well, and then slides invariably into "well, its their own fault for taking the job!" So, you know. Kinda validates my reasons for my interjections then after all. It seems you are blaming teachers and holding them culpable for a visa circus that existed long before them, and will continue to exist after they leave because, as i keep pointing it out, teachers arent the problem here. Its the employers failing to provide the paperwork and passing this problem down to the teachers. 

Fortunately, its far more annoying, because these employers are in turn beholden to an immigration process that is a) sporadic; b.) unenforced; c) convoluted; d) expensive; e) drawn out; f) overly restrictive and absolutely in no way keeping with the reality of the wider TEFL market. Clearly the incentive on employers is to ignore the law and go the much more efficient route of sending the teacher off on a visa run. And so long as a loophole exists allowing them to do this, they'll go this way every time because its the rational thing for them to do. Even now! I know, right!?? 

Third. And slightly on the point, I teach in China now. I did leave. I left for several reasons, but i promise you, having 7 Cambodian visas taking up my brand new passport pages whilst being stonewalled by both the agency i worked for and the school i worked for, were at the forefront of my decision. I dont need this nonsense. I can work elsewhere, im legal as i said, so why carry on bashing my head against a wall? Of course it took more than a few months for the penny to really drop and realise that the procrastination was potentially endless, but why wouldnt i assume they'd be sorting it out and their assurances that theyre just waiting for the director to be in school/sign/someone to DRIVE the papers to the school? Im potentially legal. Hell, i even have an apostille on both my degree certificate and my criminal records check. Im supra-legal! Surely its in their interests to sort this out? Oh, wait, no it isnt (see above). 

Fourth. Oh yes they will! You bet they will. I had a clause in my contract that allowed me to take up to 2 days off per month to do a visa run. I was also allowed to take as many days i needed if i planned on completing a full tourist visa run (but would lose pay for any time i took over those two days). Transport would be paid by the company, visa would be paid for by me. If you dont think agencies or schools will have more up-to-date clauses prepared reflecting those changes (4-5 working days every two months - with any extra time borne by employee) as standard cost of doing business with schools, youre naive. 

Finally, the whole "showing finances" had everything to do with visa exempt stamps and nothing to do with back to back tourist visas. So once again, no it wont. People will still be sent to get their tourist visa by the school (at cost to the employee), and the loophole will be put under the spotlight. NamkangMan makes the excellent point that you wont be the first to have thought of this. And now that the visa exempt loophole is being shut down, those people, like yourself, or even those scurrilous teachers like me, will now switch their attention to other means. And the first and most obvious one will be the Tourist visa. Perhaps it will involve simply a hike in the price, or perhaps a maximum amount of days/renewals. Possibly it will involve a trip back to your home country in the future plus cancellation stamp. Or perhaps just a good old fashioned decently equipped bank account, but its going to be looked at soon. So fingers crossed. I want the loophole closed so employers will have to actually sort out the non-immi-B visa quickly and efficiently, and you want it closed so that teachers dont abuse it leading to further restrictions. Peace at last! peace at last! 

Thats kinda the point though isnt it? You are within the law, but its actually things like this which lead to crackdowns and tightening of regulations. Its called a loophole. Loopholes are by their nature, legal. But against the spirit and intention of the law. You may well be a 'tourist' but its hard to imagine a 'tourist' living away from his native country for 9 months of the year (with up to 8 months - at least) being spent in a single country year after year. So im suggesting that perhaps you might be undermining your own point by proclaiming yourself 'a tourist' given that it might lead someone to ask the simple question: how is a tourist able to stay here for 2/3rds to 3/4s of the year... year after year? Arent they just defacto immigrants? 

You suggest i got on my soapbox unfairly. But your earlier dolphin/tuna comment followed by your rejoinder on those pesky teachers making it hard for everyone else, only told one side of the story. I offered simply a fair correction.I didnt bring it up out of the blue. I brought it up because you seemed to be under the impression that having to do a visa run was some kind of deliberate attempt to flout the law and work under the counter. I was correcting a point you yourself (flippantly) initiated.

Secondly, and in addition, the reason i brought up my degree wasnt to show you im qualified, but to offer evidence to back up the claim that i am making in correcting your position. If i want to undermine the implication that teachers selfishly caused this issue you may be facing (point 1) and that the only people with these problems are teachers without degrees, (point 2) then possession of my degree clearly illustrates that (point 1), this benefited me not a jot, and (point 2), as a teacher with said documents and totally willing to complete the visa process, i was being hindered by forces completely outside of my control. So again, it was entirely relevant. It not only undermined your claim that only teachers without degrees have problems. But also further advanced my point that employers appear to be in no hurry to make their employees legal. Thus all teachers will possibly have had to deal with this nonsense depending upon factors completely outside of their qualifications. 

This brings me to the last point. You also suggested that the in-out visa clampdown should stop 90% of the issues. Ive explained why it wont. Again, if its beneficial for the school to have their teacher exploit a visa loophole, then you can bet that they will do exactly this (see above). If it means giving them a week off once every 90 days (paid or unpaid) to do a full tourist run to the nearest Thai consulate handing out Double-entry tourist visas, then they will do exactly this and we are back at square one. Its a loophole. It will be looked at. And sooner no doubt rather than later. And the reason it will be looked at isnt because of the fly by night teacher, but because employers will try and find a way to flout legality through either a) hiring people ineligible for a work permit and encouraging them to do these back to back runs, or  b ) hiring people eligible for a visa but for reasons on a case by case and instance by instance basis, appear reluctant to do so, thus encouraging them to do back to back visa runs. So i hope you understand: im simply correcting your own rather cheeky points holding teachers to blame for a situation completely outside of their control. 

Here is my cue,
If you want them to speak English, they must live in a English speaking environment... Have watched this for years.. Any questions? Told some close Thai friends of this, their children went to foreign countries, and amazingly enough they learned English... It is no different in America.... So what is there to explain?
kilosierra

I have one! 

How on earth am i having fluent English conversations with an American accented Chinese dude at my local gym who has never left China? Did i wake up fluent in Chinese and havent realised it yet? 

Im totally on board of course. Well, in a couple of years. But to be truly valuable it needs to carry beyond Thailand. I think realistically we all know that the enforcement of B.ed/M.ed will never rightly happen. I mean, they might try and flirt with it, but theres very little chance of it being enforced.

So to be truly valuable internationally, it needs to not direct itself on those requirements. They will be softened or phased out. And for an 18 month course (i was kinda hoping for 12 to be honest), then you need serious accreditation. I dont really want to use it in Thailand to be honest. I want to use it to garner a cheap bit of career advancement saving me a trip back home and a fortune in tuition and living costs. Arguably im not your main market then, but i am representative of perhaps a wider market looking to stay in Asia, advance their career, and do it on the (relative) cheap (mainly from living costs to be honest). 

 

Absolutely true. The OP himself has stated clearly in his first post that he's misusing the visa to effectively live in Thailand. If he wants to live in Thailand then he needs to go through the correct channels. Its amazing how he thinks his shit doesnt stink because he's not working illegally as if that makes some kind of huge difference. He also doesnt understand that teachers here are sent on these stupid visa runs because of their employers reluctance to either fork over the cash for a non-immi B or just terrified at the prospect of organising the relevant documents (think of it like a carrot to keep the poor schmuck on an endless 'probation period' and on their toes).

 

No one wants to work illegally, but this is Thailand, and the advantages are usually in the hands of the Thai employers over the employee. So if its in their interest to keep you on a short leash and withhold the visa for reasons... then they can and will do this. Ask yourself this. Why on earth would any employee want to be illegal and have no recourse or protection against their employer? 

 

If they are serious, then the next thing to be looked at will be the back to back single/double entry tourist visa. Because you can bet your ass that youre local backpacking tefler is now popping to Laos or Phnom Penh and doing exactly this every 60 or 90 days. And unlike the OP  theyll be doing it because its in their employers interest to keep them working illegally, not because theyre trying to game the system.  

 

 

Show us where it officially states a max limit to the number of days a tourist can spend in the kingdom.  Oh that's right, you can't, because there is no limit. I'm doing nothing illegal.  You're the one who needs to get over himself, trying to interpret policies here that the Thais themselves haven't implemented. 

 

And you're also wrong thinking I don't know what a TEFLer goes through.  Before giving up on the Thai education system and embracing the tourist life, I taught at both a technical college and at the pratom level.  I never had problems with visas.  And the only teachers I come across who do have visa issues are those without degrees, i.e., those who are here illegally.  

 

It's ridiculous how you direct your ire at me though, when it's the very people you're sticking up for who caused this issue to pop up on the radar in the first place.  Your argument would be laughable if it wasn't so pathetic.  Run along now.   

 

Three quick corrections:

1. What ire? 

2. I have all the documents my side to legally work in Thailand as a teacher. 

3. I like the clampdowns. They close loopholes that were used AGAINST me whether by schools, agencies, or supply and demand (wages and conditions from the mass of native english speaking talent that can be drawn upon utilising said loopholes). Alas, i think the back to back tourist visa is also a loophole, and until that one is shut down, teachers with the right credentials will still be 'encouraged' to do exactly that. 

 

Absolutely true. The OP himself has stated clearly in his first post that he's misusing the visa to effectively live in Thailand. If he wants to live in Thailand then he needs to go through the correct channels. Its amazing how he thinks his shit doesnt stink because he's not working illegally as if that makes some kind of huge difference. He also doesnt understand that teachers here are sent on these stupid visa runs because of their employers reluctance to either fork over the cash for a non-immi B or just terrified at the prospect of organising the relevant documents (think of it like a carrot to keep the poor schmuck on an endless 'probation period' and on their toes).

 

No one wants to work illegally, but this is Thailand, and the advantages are usually in the hands of the Thai employers over the employee. So if its in their interest to keep you on a short leash and withhold the visa for reasons... then they can and will do this. Ask yourself this. Why on earth would any employee want to be illegal and have no recourse or protection against their employer? 

 

If they are serious, then the next thing to be looked at will be the back to back single/double entry tourist visa. Because you can bet your ass that youre local backpacking tefler is now popping to Laos or Phnom Penh and doing exactly this every 60 or 90 days. And unlike the OP  theyll be doing it because its in their employers interest to keep them working illegally, not because theyre trying to game the system.  

 

He does not appear to be living here full time. He looks like a tourist to me. He has never left and re-entered on the same day.

Trips for over 2 weeks out of the country and then 3 months out.

 

He clearly is. His intention is to continually return to thailand. Anyone could take a 'holiday' for two weeks in Phnom Penh and then pop back whilst continuing to live and work in the country. And i reckon thats exactly what will be happening. 

Absolutely true. The OP himself has stated clearly in his first post that he's misusing the visa to effectively live in Thailand. If he wants to live in Thailand then he needs to go through the correct channels. Its amazing how he thinks his shit doesnt stink because he's not working illegally as if that makes some kind of huge difference. He also doesnt understand that teachers here are sent on these stupid visa runs because of their employers reluctance to either fork over the cash for a non-immi B or just terrified at the prospect of organising the relevant documents (think of it like a carrot to keep the poor schmuck on an endless 'probation period' and on their toes).

No one wants to work illegally, but this is Thailand, and the advantages are usually in the hands of the Thai employers over the employee. So if its in their interest to keep you on a short leash and withhold the visa for reasons... then they can and will do this. Ask yourself this. Why on earth would any employee want to be illegal and have no recourse or protection against their employer? 

If they are serious, then the next thing to be looked at will be the back to back single/double entry tourist visa. Because you can bet your ass that youre local backpacking tefler is now popping to Laos or Phnom Penh and doing exactly this every 60 or 90 days. And unlike the OP  theyll be doing it because its in their employers interest to keep them working illegally, not because theyre trying to game the system.