haltes

The wavier actually says you did not give her the money.

I know that but divorce law states you are entitled to half the assets accrued during the marriage and if you can show the money came from you, you are still entitled to that half even IF you did sign the waiver.

So you realize that means you give your Thai g'friend/wife the place right? It will never be yours, forget divorce, etc. Never. It will be her place - period/full-stop. Not 50/50..

Why do people say stuff like this which is just not true and not based on the facts?

As a foreigner you are entitled to half the assets accrued in the course of the marriage and that includes half the value of any property bought even if you sgined the waiver if you can show that the money came from you either as a lump sum payment or over a period of time i.e. a mortgage.

I am not GOD, but i know, if i came into your house and buy just one sqarefoot of your livingroom, you would be upset. you don't expect guests in your house to have demands and rights. if you want to have the same rights (and duties) as thais, it's pretty easy: just give up your previous citizenship and become a thai (like your chinese and indians did!). but i guess you dare not to change! what you deign to call a 'free market' is the dream of every capitalist and speculator. why in god's name you aren't content with being able to live here, why do you want to buy parts of thai-land? you could rent and/or lease, just not sell land. did you know, that average thai people are not as business minded and no match for those clever 'barbarian' farangs.....it sure is protectionism, but desperatelly needed here (like you want to protect your children against evil wrongdoers). you pay the price for all those who slender our reputation every day. just look at our almighty western banks and their self compelled 'sub-prime-crisis'...would you educate your child to 'invest' his pocket money there??? so just relax yourself (instead of others) and enjoy the many advantages to live in the land of smiles.....

Some of us are not guests here, we work here, pay taxes here, have families/wives/children here. In short we consider ourselves to be residents here, not guests. In spite of the fact that it is very difficult to legally be recognised as having any rights here at all but not for Thais who go to live in our countries, it's again only the very rich (Thais) who mostly benefit from this and have dual citizenship etc.

It's a basic human right to provide for your family and part of that requires you to have a place to live. We can't take bits of "thai-land" (sic) away with us can we? Is Finland reserved only for the Fins; Scotland for the Scots?

Protectionism stifles growth. How much investment is NOT coming into the country because of these rules? I would guess it's a lot. Money that would be good for the economy and good for the people here; especially good for small builders and not those who have the capabilities and financing to build huge condos all over the place and then sell them at what are quite expensive prices

The sub prime situation might be a problem now and some banks/institutions may go to the wall but most will survive, make a loss and carry on but hopefullly will not be as greedy next time. But in any case, any money there is a lot safer than any investment made here which can be capriciously taken away at some future point or even modified retrospectively!

God knows why they have this aversion to letting foreigners buying a place to live, they let the Chinese and Indian Thais eventually have the right to own land; poor Thais who cannot buy are priced out by RICH Thais not by the few westerners who might like to buy a house.

Relaxing the laws to create a free market would bring in a lot of investment, Thailand is not that cheap when compared to other countries and this image of barbarian house buyers at the gate who are just chomping at the bit to buy up all the precious Thai land is really getting a bit much.

The band descriptors for public consumption are online, just search for them.

Task 2 writing are here : http://www.ielts.org/pdf/UOBDs_WritingT2.pdf

The rest you can find at http://www.ielts.org/

Band 7 is quite high for nurses but I would imagine they would do the general training module and not the academic one.

You can determine the level of the student by either having them take another standardised test and then put together a degree or corrolation between the two e.g. TOEIC/TOEFL OR you can design your own test and make it equivelent to the IELTS test scores.

There are many ways to approach this and I hope you are charging a lot of money for this because it's a lot of work!

If you like the Sopranos you should take a look at

Deadwood - a western (as in wild west) series

Entourage - the male version of sex and city

There is also :

http://forum.teflschoolreviews.com already up and running with the old stuff from Thai school watch

Any school that insists on keeping back some of your salary is IMHE one that should be avoided.

Not only does it mean that they might not know how to treat staff very well, but it's also technically illegal.

Stamp, Steven has always taken IMHO a fair minded approach and is entitled to be cynical.

He doesn't have to do these tests and there could be many reasons. I also don't have to do them as I have a post graduate qualification in Education which seems to be the level the tests is trying to measure AND at the moment I don't work in the Thai school system.

I also think that you don't need this kind of knowledge to teach TEFL or convervational English, but you should need it to teach other subjects.

There are many kinds of knowledge related to teaching, but these tests only seem to address the Pedagogical knowledge aspect and unless the TCT release the criteria for passing/communicate just what learning outcomes these tests are supposed to measure, it's not a fair test (let's leave aside the alleged plagiarism of questions from a "native" speakers test) for the moment, the tests have no way to measure any subject matter knowledge that is required in ALL Subjects. All in all even from any minded approach, it seems like the tests are flawed although I can agree with the inentation behind them in some aspects.

If she has refused to attend court the bank can take possession without her attendance at a court hearing.

IF the bank took possession and forced a sale, she is still in debt for any load amount still outstanding.

It sounds a bit fishy to me. If the deed was not in the ex's name or if it was in joint names then he has no need to keep up payments and it is very unlikely that any debt in her name only would be covered by any alimony.

"S" I agree wholeheartedly with all the points you make and I wish the powers that be did not take a one size fits all approach to teaching in schools. IMHO a CELTA or equivelent is enough to teach English language in schools but I do feel that to teach other subjects then the intention behind the tests is ok.

They will probably have to make the tests easier if no one can pass them without having the background educational knowledge that they seem to want these days and I do agree with the previous poster that people should not expect to be able to pass "right off the bat" without any background reading or training and I think that for some, the unfortunate ramifications of the whole scheme will make it very difficult for people who have put down any kind of roots here and also will deter a lot of people who will simply go elsewhere.

I would just add this caveat.

The only way that a job could be construed it was temporary and would avoid the need for severance pay would be where someone is employed through a third party or where it was a temporary job e.g. to cover maternity leave.

We are getting into the diferences between contract law and Statute Law.

As the job of teacher is not temporary it does not matter as to what the contract says as a contract cannot take precedence over Statute or indeed over common law as the important thing is the intention behind the statute i.e. the labor Act which is there with the intention of protecting employees from employers who try to avoid paying severence or try to avoid the responsibilities of being an employer. Courts and judges normally take a dim view of companies or people trying to avoid their statutary responsibilities in such a cynical way and the interpretation of the statute is very clear as is the principle of legal precedence.

Being a contractor is a very different situation where you get no holiday pay, no sick pay, are on a daily rate etc. etc.

Sorry to say Bild766, the role of teacher is not a temporary one and if contested in court the teacher would probably win damages AND the severence pay they are claiming.

Did you bother to read the OP? He was complaining that he couldn't understand the wording of the questions. He later pointed out that his native speaking colleagues couldn't understand the wording of the question. I have never failed an exam in my life but would be worried about a test, which was written in such a way, where I couldn't understand the questions.

There could be many reasons why (leaving out that the English might have not been understandable), the most obvious one being:

Perhaps he didn't understand the questions because he did not have the appropriate vocabulary to understand them as he had never studied education before. Every field has it's own terms that need to be understood. Could you understand what "proletarianisation" was if you had never studied sociology or "mens rea" if you had never studied law? No you couldn't and therefore you could not answer any questions based on terms for which you had no knowledge. e.g. ADDIE, ZPD, Scaffolding, model, vicarious reinforcement, response cost, schema etc. etc.

In any case, my point that a test of this kind could be appropriate in ensuring that teachers have the requisite knowledge and ability to actually achieve something in the classroom is stll valid and related to the original post.

Petch01, I do understand and would like to say that you (and all in the same situation) have my sympathies at the cack handed, inept, incompetent way that these tests have been implemented without any discussion at all BUT I can also on the other hand understand the idea behind the testing plan which is to try to ensure that teachers have the appropriate pedagogical knowledge to do their job properly.

If people feel they lack the knowledge to pass these tests, they can always do a course or do some reading up on some theory in order to pass the tests.

I am not sure what the end result of the tests will be. Will there be any teachers left? Will anyone want to try and pass these tests? Will it deter people from coming to teach here and act as the catalyst forcing people to leave?

I have my own ideas as to the answers to these questions but I will say that I think a lot of schools will find it more and more difficult to recruit and retain teachers legally and it won't only be the teachers who will suffer.

Alas the dice are cast...

Why do you have to close the thread because you don't agree with what I said?

Any educator should know about multiple intelligences theory (Howard Gardner) , it is basic knowledge.

I haven't seen the tests yet myself as I don't have to do them, but they look like they test some basic knowledge that is covered in any teaching qualification course.

Seems quite easy if the test takers have any background in education at all.

I would be interested to know some of the content, not specific questions.

Did it ask about models of curriculm design?

Development psychology? Piaget, Vygotsky

Learning theory? Gardner etc

Bloom: cognitive, affective, psycho motor domains?

What do they mean by successful completion of the IELTS test?

Band 5?

Band 6?

Band 7?

Overall on in which skills?

Try to clarify the goals (score required) before you choose texts and so forth.

Teaching IELTS to Pre Intermediate students is mostly a waste of time in any case.

You never say I'll have a tea or I'll have a water.

But you can say I'll have a coffee or I'll have a coke.

My Thai GF, who I have been with for 7 months now wants to divorce her scottish husband. She has not heard or seen for 14 months from him.

You just know this is going to end badly....

Transcripts?????

The real issue is that most Thais who interview don't know enough to test people out at the interview.

IF someone has a sociology degree ask them questions on Weber, Marx, Durkheim, Parsons

If somone says they have a degree in business, ask them questions on merketing mix, core competenices etc

The interviewers are crap and they can't tell if a candidate is genuine in relation to their qualifications.

Get some better educated interviewers and they will be able to rip a false claim to shreds in just a few minutes.

If you are a contractor on a daily rate that it would be hard to prove you are not temporary but if you are in a position for a period of time or you have been in a position that someone else has had before you or someone else will take over after you then that proves the position is not a temporary one.

If you have a contract, work permit, pay taxes, have worked for the minimum qualifying period then not extending your contract is the same as terminating you and you are entitled to severence pay.

If you're going to terminate somone (and that includes not extending a contract) you need to make sure that paper trail is there unless there is gross misconduct. The normal procedure should be:

Verbal warning (documented), written warning 1, written warning 2, gone!

"The provisions of paragraph one of this Section shall not apply to an Employee

whose employment is for a define period and the employment is terminated at the end of that period."

This only applies to temporarary workers. You cannot cirumvent labour law in this way. If you are in a job that is permanent even though it is on a year by year basis based on an annual contract renewel, it doesn't matter you are still entitled to severence pay.

Thai schools (private or otherwise) are not exempt following the law although they might think they are.

Actaully you are still entitled to severence pay even though you are on a one year contract as long as the position is not a temporary one.