Help from TEFL teachers

[bundoi]

Being eloquent in your native language both in writing and speaking is better than being sub par in 2 languages.

I agree Z, what is your native language ?

[zeichen]

"I agree Z, what is your native language ?"

Take a wild guess.

[Jawnie]

"I still have a nagging suspicion that the TEFL industry possibly serves the needs of the TEFL industry better than it does the needs of the students in some cases."

Tell that to the millions upon millions of non native English speakers that now study abroad, do business and travel the globe.

I think that you actually should do some research into the field of education in general, language acquisition, and TESOL before you make such bold claims.

Personally, the only problem that I have is when parents push students to study a foreign language when they have no desire or lack the skill sets. Or when their native language skills suffer because they are forced to replace it with English.

I am fully proponent of multiculturalism and multilingualism, but hate when people put more value on English than their own native language. Being eloquent in your native language both in writing and speaking is better than being sub par in 2 languages.

"hate when people put more value on English than their own native language. Being eloquent in your native language both in writing and speaking is better than being sub par in 2 languages."

I agree with this only to a point, especially for Thais. Not only is the Thai educational system sub-par (placing students at a disadvantage per se) but because Thai is not a useful language anywhere other than in Thailand. This is not the same for English, Chinese, Spanish, etc. While I agree with the cultural importance of retaining one's native tongue, if Thais aren't learning other languages well enough to go elsewhere and thrive (other than marrying a westerner, Chinese, etc.) they are stuck in Thailand and subject to things like what is going on in the streets of Bangkok now.

[bundoi]

The point I want to make is that Thai and English are very, very different. That is to say, English is a difficult language for Thais and Thai is a very difficult language for English speakers. This really needs to be kept in mind and should moderate criticism of English-speaking Thais. As I said, I taught Thai professionals in many different fields: scientific, business, banking, the sciences, etc. All had studied English for many years, all were college graduates and most in technical or advanced business areas. Most still had great difficulty with word order, verb tenses, compound nouns, and pronunciation.

I agree completely that sensitivity to the learning process within the student is very important, I would say crucial. The best way to develop that understanding of the learning process is to be a language learner oneself, preferably in the student's 1st language.

Worth pointing out that classes comprising adult professionals are likely to be more motivated and smaller than, say, those in a government school. Any teacher who can survive and thrive and add genuine value in a government school deserves respect imho regardless of their preference for method.

[zeichen]

"Thai educational system sub-par (placing students at a disadvantage per se)"

What I find ironic is the fact you can say this and be a teacher. Perhaps you don't see it but if you teach then you are a part of the Thai educational system and are in fact saying that you place students as a disadvantage.

"Thai is not a useful language anywhere other than in Thailand. This is not the same for English, Chinese, Spanish, etc."

This is another StrawMan argument. It really isn't a valid statement. First of all language is important no matter which it is. For the majority of people from any country will primarily live, work and study in only that country. Traveling abroad isn't the goal for all people, nor should it be. There are advantages but also disadvantages.

"they are stuck in Thailand and subject to things like what is going on in the streets of Bangkok now."

Apart of the issues being faced in Thailand are from the people who have traveled, studied, worked abroad and are fluent in English.

For the average person in Thailand speaking broken English at the expense of having eloquence in Thai will hurt them more. People are judged by langauge. If someone cannot speak academic/precise/higher level language in their native tongue, they will be judged as lower.

University professors in the US who say "YO DOG< You, dun yu homwark?" "I axed you a question" Probably wouldn't be considered as intelligent as someone more eloquent in a standard academic vernacular.

I have had many Grad students who were forced to write their thesis and dissertations in English. Their papers were mediocre at best, the worst part was they weren't developing those high levels of written That that would make them stand out as academics.

[Jawnie]

"Thai educational system sub-par (placing students at a disadvantage per se)"

What I find ironic is the fact you can say this and be a teacher. Perhaps you don't see it but if you teach then you are a part of the Thai educational system and are in fact saying that you place students as a disadvantage.

"Thai is not a useful language anywhere other than in Thailand. This is not the same for English, Chinese, Spanish, etc."

This is another StrawMan argument. It really isn't a valid statement. First of all language is important no matter which it is. For the majority of people from any country will primarily live, work and study in only that country. Traveling abroad isn't the goal for all people, nor should it be. There are advantages but also disadvantages.

"they are stuck in Thailand and subject to things like what is going on in the streets of Bangkok now."

Apart of the issues being faced in Thailand are from the people who have traveled, studied, worked abroad and are fluent in English.

For the average person in Thailand speaking broken English at the expense of having eloquence in Thai will hurt them more. People are judged by langauge. If someone cannot speak academic/precise/higher level language in their native tongue, they will be judged as lower.

University professors in the US who say "YO DOG< You, dun yu homwark?" "I axed you a question" Probably wouldn't be considered as intelligent as someone more eloquent in a standard academic vernacular.

I have had many Grad students who were forced to write their thesis and dissertations in English. Their papers were mediocre at best, the worst part was they weren't developing those high levels of written That that would make them stand out as academics.

Not sure why your are being so defensive about some factually true statements. I'm not trying to 'talk down' about Thailand...I taught English in Bangkok for a few years, I didn't design and implement the Thai public education system over the last 30 years - chill out. I said I believe that keeping one's native tongue is important but, as you yourself prove, those Thais who speak English well typically studied outside of Thailand. It is well and good for those Thais who read, write, and speak Thai on a high level...it's just not going to help them anywhere outside of Thailand. English study doesn't yet have a 'heart beat" in Thailand as opposed to countries such as India, many African countries, and soon, China, where many people speak and write on a level approaching native speech.

Not sure how many US professors you've encountered who actually use ghetto slang as you claim, very few I'd image.

Edited December 23, 2013 by Jawnie

[zeichen]

"Not sure how many US professors you've encountered who actually use ghetto slang as you claim, very few I'd image."

None, that was my point. You don't meet people that are not eloquent in their native language in higher fields because we are judged in our language profiecency as a basis of our intelligence. NOt always fair but still happens.

I wasn't trying to sound defensive or aggressive, just stating that it grows pretty old that people blame the Thai education system but forget that they are actually apart of that. Education is as good as the teachers regardless of how insane the department of education/MOE is. A school is only as good as its teachers. Even in a restrictive environment good/effective teachers do what is needed for their students to prosper.

Thailand doesn't have an English heartbeat as you say, because it has never been a colony or occupied by an English speaking country. But compared to other countries like mainland China, Korea, Japan, Thai students do relatively the same. I know that my experiences are not the standard but I have had some very diligent and effective learners in Thailand that compare quite well with my students in those other countries.

I am currently, past 4 months, teaching at an international school in Beijing and my students here in grade 10 aren't any better in English than my grade 8 M2 students at Montfort College in CM.

I have been teaching in Thailand for over 12 years. In all that time I have got to know quite a few Thai people that were educated only in Thailand and are excellent in their field. Where the system fails is for those parents that trust the system and don't spend the time and effort assessing their own children's progress.

I do get a little tired of hearing Thai education sucks over and over. I have taught in the US for 4 years, in many asian countries and a few euorpean countries. One thing that I can tell you is that every system has problems. You cannot compare systems becaus the goal of education for each country is and needs to be different. The fault in your argument and logic is that you believe education is for people to study, live and work abroad. Why should that be the goal?

I love these other statistics like 70% of foreign teachers dont' have degrees. I really don't know where people pull these statistics out from. First of all, there has never been any research done on this. If 70% of the teachers that one knows don't have degrees, move towns and go to different places. I have met many ineffective teachers but never worked with any that didn't have a degree.

[Jawnie]

"Not sure how many US professors you've encountered who actually use ghetto slang as you claim, very few I'd image." None, that was my point. You don't meet people that are not eloquent in their native language in higher fields because we are judged in our language profiecency as a basis of our intelligence. NOt always fair but still happens. I wasn't trying to sound defensive or aggressive, just stating that it grows pretty old that people blame the Thai education system but forget that they are actually apart of that. Education is as good as the teachers regardless of how insane the department of education/MOE is. A school is only as good as its teachers. Even in a restrictive environment good/effective teachers do what is needed for their students to prosper. Thailand doesn't have an English heartbeat as you say, because it has never been a colony or occupied by an English speaking country. But compared to other countries like mainland China, Korea, Japan, Thai students do relatively the same. I know that my experiences are not the standard but I have had some very diligent and effective learners in Thailand that compare quite well with my students in those other countries. I am currently, past 4 months, teaching at an international school in Beijing and my students here in grade 10 aren't any better in English than my grade 8 M2 students at Montfort College in CM. I have been teaching in Thailand for over 12 years. In all that time I have got to know quite a few Thai people that were educated only in Thailand and are excellent in their field. Where the system fails is for those parents that trust the system and don't spend the time and effort assessing their own children's progress. I do get a little tired of hearing Thai education sucks over and over. I have taught in the US for 4 years, in many asian countries and a few euorpean countries. One thing that I can tell you is that every system has problems. You cannot compare systems becaus the goal of education for each country is and needs to be different. The fault in your argument and logic is that you believe education is for people to study, live and work abroad. Why should that be the goal? I love these other statistics like 70% of foreign teachers dont' have degrees. I really don't know where people pull these statistics out from. First of all, there has never been any research done on this. If 70% of the teachers that one knows don't have degrees, move towns and go to different places. I have met many ineffective teachers but never worked with any that didn't have a degree.

I did not say the Thai education system "sucks". Stop being so defensive.

Edited December 24, 2013 by Jawnie

[otherstuff1957]

I am a Science teacher at a bilingual school, so I never use Thai in the classroom. However, I did teach English at a government school when I first arrived in Thailand.

In my experience, using Thai in a classroom is very helpful when you are teaching a large class of absolute beginners. Sometimes saying a single word in Thai will save you many minutes of trying to teach a word through methods such as pantomime or drawing! As the students become more fluent, Thai should be phased out until you have an English only classroom.

When I first came to Thailand I made a real effort to learn to speak, read and write Thai. I have found that knowing basic Thai and being able to read simple sentences has made a huge difference, not so much in the classroom as in the staffroom. Thai teachers and students generally respect and like foreigners who have made an effort to learn their language more than those who havent.

[simon43]

In my experience, using Thai in a classroom is very helpful when you are teaching a large class of absolute beginners. Sometimes saying a single word in Thai will save you many minutes of trying to teach a word through methods such as pantomime or drawing!

Agreed, and that principle can apply to other countries as well. I teach primary grade in a Myanmar international school - my young students are confident in English language and I don't have to use any Myanmar language. But I also teach as a volunteer in a poor school for the same age range, and I MUST use some written and spoken Myanmar to get the initial message across within a very limited amount of class time.

Using the student's mother-tongue definitely has a place in 'beginner' English language classes.

Simon

[bundoi]

Thai teachers and students generally respect and like foreigners who have made an effort to learn their language more than those who havent.

This is a very important point imho. Someone on the main Ajarn forum recently raised the question about whether TEFL isn't just the new face of imperialism - "cultural imperialism"; and we all know that Thais are rightly proud of their historical independence. A teenage student can quickly sus you out, even if they don't speak your language very well. For example, I have been into country schools where the kids realise within a minute or two that I'm not the same as the previous missionary foreigners; I am told that they respond much more favourably to me (I hope this is true, but of course it is possible my Thai colleagues are just being polite). The fact that I know something about their language and I respect a lot of things about their culture creates a lot of resonance with them; it's not just a simple pedagogical trick.

Of course I know this might ruffle the feathers of those people committed to a target-language only approach (in most cases it's the only approach they can offer, so it's making a virtue out of a necessity). But please have the professional integrity at least to differentiate, if you can, between what you believe to be the most efficacious philosophy and the limitations of your own linguistic skills.

At school I studied 3 languages other than English, in each case using the native language (English) as the vehicle for communication, not the target language.

PS this mini-rant is not directed at the international schools, where the goal seems to be to churn out surrogate farangs.

[monkeyboots]

Thai teachers and students generally respect and like foreigners who have made an effort to learn their language more than those who havent.

This is a very important point imho. Someone on the main Ajarn forum recently raised the question about whether TEFL isn't just the new face of imperialism - "cultural imperialism"; and we all know that Thais are rightly proud of their historical independence. A teenage student can quickly sus you out, even if they don't speak your language very well. For example, I have been into country schools where the kids realise within a minute or two that I'm not the same as the previous missionary foreigners; I am told that they respond much more favourably to me (I hope this is true, but of course it is possible my Thai colleagues are just being polite). The fact that I know something about their language and I respect a lot of things about their culture creates a lot of resonance with them; it's not just a simple pedagogical trick.

Of course I know this might ruffle the feathers of those people committed to a target-language only approach (in most cases it's the only approach they can offer, so it's making a virtue out of a necessity). But please have the professional integrity at least to differentiate, if you can, between what you believe to be the most efficacious philosophy and the limitations of your own linguistic skills.

At school I studied 3 languages other than English, in each case using the native language (English) as the vehicle for communication, not the target language.

PS this mini-rant is not directed at the international schools, where the goal seems to be to churn out surrogate farangs.

OK, but this is a different issue. Having the ability to speak Thai (and respecting Thai culture) doesn't mean that it's a more effective way to teach a 2nd language in the classroom. You can gain respect from your students in this way outside the classroom, which can certainly influence their response inside.

[zeichen]

building a rapport, trust, routine, and structure with your students early on is essential. If you do it by speaking the language, knowing customs/traditions, food etc it is all the same. Teachers new to Thailand won't usually be able to speak the language but they can build this relationship in other ways.

I will agree that if a teacher makes no effort to learn the student's native language over their tenure, then it is a waste.

Those that speak Thai as a way to introduce vocabulary and context will be building a passive vocabulary and not an active vocabulary. I guess it fully depends on your goal as a teacher.

I have worked on several 1 year studies in Thailand with bilingual spoken lessons that were your traditional grammar, translation method vs. a mix of communicative approach, whole language learning with a student centered approach. Guess which students could understand new things in unfamiliar situations better, guess who could communicate their ideas better, guess who could explain concepts without the need of a dictionary.

But Bundoi go ahead and keep promote translation bilingual model of EFL, while you are at it, please do some research and find one case study in the past 10 years that supports your not so humble opinion.

I love how someone without a background in education nor EFL/ linguistics can be such a know it all and have such access to so many examples of teaching.

Please tell us how long you have been teaching EFL again, because in other posts you have stated that you haven't seen it since the 1970s

[bundoi]

Well the nub of the matter for me is the objective of the course/class/training/education.

Certain situations imho definitely favour the TEFL approach, some examples from discussions with teachers over the last year: familiarising Mexican housemaids for jobs in the USA; inducting immigrants into the UK who have very little or no English; crash courses for migrant EU labour.

But for students who are part of long-term educational programmes which have a defined curriculum, for example primary, secondary and university level students, I wouldn't rate TEFL methods too highly myself.

On a more conciliatory note I'd say that the more a teacher has in the toolbox the better, and a Happy New Year to all.

[NoshowJones]

I don't have a TEFL qual but I have a PGCE and I have been teaching English in Thailand, The TEFL is flawed because it is impossible to teach English well, without using any Thai. This is something that the companies who sell the TEFL courses say. "come over and teacher English to Thai kids, you don't need to speak Thai" They say this so they can sell lots of tefl courses. It is simply a money making scam. If you have a Thai teacher in the room when you are teaching then this will help a lot. Although most tefl agencies will put you in a room on your own. Having a foreign teacher in a school in Thailiand is more about status not actually improving the kids English. Hence a degree in David Beckham and a 4 week tefl course can qualify you to teach English anywhere in the country from the ages of 4-18....CRAZY

I do not have a Batchelors degree, but I did a TEFL course in Bangkok, as I wanted to teach children in a school with normal school hours. The course did me no good at all as it was geared towards teaching in a Language School, and there was to big an emphasis on grammar, but again, if I did not have that TEFL certificate I would not have got a teaching job which I did get and did for three years. I would still like to teach, but not for less pay than the Philipinos, who replaced me in both the teaching jobs that I had.

[zeichen]

"I wouldn't rate TEF youtethods too highly myself."

This is the issue that I have with your whole argument. Who do you think that you are. How many long term studies have you done. How many students have you worked with from absolute beginner to advanced speaker. How many students have you taken and helped them improve to a level where they failed IELTS/TOEFL or any other test and got them to a level where they passed and fulfilled their dreams?

You are talking absolute rubbish from a purely hypothetical viewpoint without actually knowing the field or education in general.

The field of EFL is huge. If you transformed your argument to only consider the basics of a TEFL program than I concur since it is just a basic introduction qualification.

Communicative approach is one aspect of EFL field and effective for taking students with higher passive vocabulary to an active usage. However since there are many educational methods and approaches that need more than communicative the average EFL teacher impliments a lot more than just that. Tasked based projects, with a balance of EFL strategies like whole language learning often helps students achieve the higher academic needs.

Trust me, very few students that study in a translation traditional Thai style of EFL cannot write well at all. The problem is that you are still thinking in your native language and not the target language so your grammar, style and structure don't flow well. Some of these students can pass a TOEFL/IELTS test but still aren't able to comprehend in unfamiliar situations and cannot communicate their knowledge without serious changes.

please stop using IMHO, because making bold claims without any logical or qualitative data to support your opinion is arrogant and not humble.

[NoshowJones]

I don't have a TEFL qual but I have a PGCE and I have been teaching English in Thailand, The TEFL is flawed because it is impossible to teach English well, without using any Thai. This is something that the companies who sell the TEFL courses say. "come over and teacher English to Thai kids, you don't need to speak Thai" They say this so they can sell lots of tefl courses. It is simply a money making scam. If you have a Thai teacher in the room when you are teaching then this will help a lot. Although most tefl agencies will put you in a room on your own. Having a foreign teacher in a school in Thailiand is more about status not actually improving the kids English. Hence a degree in David Beckham and a 4 week tefl course can qualify you to teach English anywhere in the country from the ages of 4-18....CRAZY

I'll bite.

Actually if you're teaching English as a Foreign Language, a TEFL qualification would be on par with a PGCE (Unless you took specific papers in Teaching English as a Second/Foreign Language).

As in general, a TEFL qualification focuses specifically on TEFL, and only briefly addresses many other teaching skills (Like curriculum development, teaching students with special needs and classroom management etc). However by comparison, a PGCE generally focuses much more attention on the other teaching skills, but only briefly addresses TEFL teaching skills/techniques.

Although in reality, both of these simply chart the course for a teacher, their own qualities are what will dictate whether they are a good teacher or not. In comparison, a BEdu covers more ground than a PGCE, particularly as it has more room for students to take papers related to TEFL.

Thai isn't required when teaching, although it does make some things easier. Particularly administrative tasks and informing students about the requirements for passing, it also prevents them from openly abusing you without your knowledge lol.

But if you had of done your TEFL certificate, rather than a PGCE, you'd likely have less problems Teaching English as a Foreign Language, and so wouldn't feel like speaking Thai was a requirement for teaching. But in saying that, if I'd taken a PGCE I'd probably gotten my M2 class under control within a few lessons, instead of spending half of last term "going to war" lol (They have 7 flamboyant ladyboys and 3 ADD kids constantly disrupting the lesson, without any discipline systems being in place by the school itself, so teachers need to enforce class discipline/control by themselves), but then the Thai teachers also consider teaching their class as a "visit to the zoo". So as I say, both qualifications chart the course, but neither will, by itself, make you a good TEFL teacher.

And yes, many schools in Thailand are more focused on their teachers being seen, than their teaching ability, but this doesn't mean that it's their only consideration, or that the same applies to all schools. Many schools recognise that most Thai bachelor degree holders, who majored in English, are far from proficient in the language. Likewise they recognise that someone who studied David Beckham at Oxford and has been speaking English every day for the past 40 years is probably more qualified to teach than a Thai teacher who graduated from Rajabhat Everyonepasses who can't even put 2 correct sentences together.

As a bit of a disclaimer, there are a lot of absolutely terrible teachers out there with TEFL certificates. This is due to the TEFL qualifications industry being largely unregulated, whereby some schools allow everyone to pass, or even offer courses which are 100% online. Likewise just by virtue of being a native English speaker (NES) doesn't mean that they'll be a good/suitable teacher (Some NESs do have less than ideal grammar, poor spelling and use excessive slang, while others simply don't have the personality traits which help to define a "good teacher"). Many registered teachers in western countries would also not be good TEFL teachers, as the personality traits required are different, much the same as kindergarten / primary school / high school require different personality traits from teachers.

@OP - Anyone who was teaching in 1977 would have been teaching EFL for over 35 years, I don't know if there are many teachers who could give you a comparison. Perhaps you could make your question a little more broad.

Good post here which I mostly agree with, I cannot speak for other TEFL courses, but the one I did, nobody was guaranteed to pass, in fact there is about a 20% drop out rate for various reasons, one being that the school will take you aside and tell you that you will not pass the course as you will not make a good teacher, and in some cases you will be allowed to sit the course again for no extra charge.

There were twelve students in my class including myself and two dropped out, I was the only student in my class who never attended University or College, and only the help of the other students and the teacher trainer, got me to graduate successfully. The course lasted about six weeks, and there were tests every two or three days.

[NoshowJones]

I don't have a TEFL qual but I have a PGCE and I have been teaching English in Thailand, The TEFL is flawed because it is impossible to teach English well, without using any Thai. This is something that the companies who sell the TEFL courses say. "come over and teacher English to Thai kids, you don't need to speak Thai" They say this so they can sell lots of tefl courses. It is simply a money making scam. If you have a Thai teacher in the room when you are teaching then this will help a lot. Although most tefl agencies will put you in a room on your own. Having a foreign teacher in a school in Thailiand is more about status not actually improving the kids English. Hence a degree in David Beckham and a 4 week tefl course can qualify you to teach English anywhere in the country from the ages of 4-18....CRAZY

I don't agree that English should be taught by using Thai in the classroom. This is how Thais teach English. It should be an English-only environment with language graded to the level of the student. it can be done and is effective. A PGCE doesn't equip people with those skills but a good TEFL course will.

Whatever TEFL course you want to take, make sure it is suitable for where you want to teach, ie in a Language school, or a government or private school. They are both completely different, also a language school is open seven days a week and also in the evenings, you could be working in the morning, have some hours free in the afternoon and be back again in the evening. In a government or private school, most times you will only work Mondays to Fridays, and finish about 4pm.

[NoshowJones]

I don't have a TEFL qual but I have a PGCE and I have been teaching English in Thailand, The TEFL is flawed because it is impossible to teach English well, without using any Thai. This is something that the companies who sell the TEFL courses say. "come over and teacher English to Thai kids, you don't need to speak Thai" They say this so they can sell lots of tefl courses. It is simply a money making scam. If you have a Thai teacher in the room when you are teaching then this will help a lot. Although most tefl agencies will put you in a room on your own. Having a foreign teacher in a school in Thailiand is more about status not actually improving the kids English. Hence a degree in David Beckham and a 4 week tefl course can qualify you to teach English anywhere in the country from the ages of 4-18....CRAZY

I don't agree that English should be taught by using Thai in the classroom. This is how Thais teach English. It should be an English-only environment with language graded to the level of the student. it can be done and is effective. A PGCE doesn't equip people with those skills but a good TEFL course will.

That's true, children are learning even a little English, from first grade or Kindergarten, they get more English lessons as they go through the grades. A Farang English teacher should not use Thai in the class room, although I did sometimes break that rule when giving commands, ie "keep quiet" or "sit down". If you go to a Language School to learn to speak Thai, you will find some schools don't allow teachers to speak English at all, in my opinion, this is wrong as people who want to learn to speak Thai will go to the Language school for about two or three hours a day five days a week and go for about six or seven months, then most of them will be quite fluent in Thai.

[NoshowJones]

I don't have a TEFL qual but I have a PGCE and I have been teaching English in Thailand, The TEFL is flawed because it is impossible to teach English well, without using any Thai. This is something that the companies who sell the TEFL courses say. "come over and teacher English to Thai kids, you don't need to speak Thai" They say this so they can sell lots of tefl courses. It is simply a money making scam. If you have a Thai teacher in the room when you are teaching then this will help a lot. Although most tefl agencies will put you in a room on your own. Having a foreign teacher in a school in Thailiand is more about status not actually improving the kids English. Hence a degree in David Beckham and a 4 week tefl course can qualify you to teach English anywhere in the country from the ages of 4-18....CRAZY

I don't agree that English should be taught by using Thai in the classroom. This is how Thais teach English. It should be an English-only environment with language graded to the level of the student. it can be done and is effective. A PGCE doesn't equip people with those skills but a good TEFL course will.

Where's a "good" TEFL course to be had? Anyone recommendable come to mind? I'm thinking particularly of the new 6 week courses - I rather fancy a bit less stress and have the time.

Read my posts #45, #47 and #48. The course I did was very intensive, as I believe most TEFL courses are. It may be against forum rules to give my complete opinion on the course I did. If I can be of any further help, PM me.

[NoshowJones]

There are 35 six year olds in a room. They don't speak any english. You don't speak any Thai. What you gonna do? They will be running round the room screaming and you think a TEFL course can prepare someone for that. I don't think so. I studied TEFL in Hua Hin but I never paid for the qual at the end as i knew i wouldn't need it. Having a Thai teacher to control the 6 year old and an NES to teach english works really well. Or learn how to say sit down and shut up in Thai and use it in the classrooms. What else can you do?

I made sure I did not teach classes below Prathom 5, where the ages are 10 and 11. I did break the rules and use Thai when giving a command, that's not hard to learn. Read my posts #45, #47 and #48. I did sometimes have a Thai teacher in the class room, but she never interfered in any lessons, only kept discipline. When I was by myself, I disciplined naughty children by telling them to stand up on their seats for a little while, or told them to stand outside at the door. They hated that, in case a Thai teacher would walk past, stop and give them a row.

[Shancloudy]

My School Director told me that I'm not allowed to talk thai language in the school and I'm not allowed to translate the vocabulary into thai language. Let them to think what you're talking about. Use a suitable teaching materials that could help to the students to understand the lesson.

[NoshowJones]

So who thinks you can teach a Thai kid what the meaning of an English word is without using the Thai translation, of course you need to know some Thai. I can't believe some of the dribble I read here. OK students the word today is "eat" or in Thai gin. Thank you very much. Oh, I know, some of you use charades, haha. Be real would you!

Using pictures or actions helps them to associate the word with an image in their head, rather than just x = y. As sometimes Thai and English words don't directly translate to the same meaning.

Also if you use Thai in the classroom, then the students will become lazy and just wait for you to speak in Thai. And instead of asking you questions in English, they'll ask in Thai.

Half of what we teach, isn't actually what we're teaching. It's all of the stuff in between, it's about putting the students in an environment where they have to listen to and speak in English.

Also sometimes what you've learnt in Thai isn't really the correct word. Or you might pronounce it incorrectly and have the students take you at face value. Can you imagine teaching near and far just via grammar translation, unless your Thai tones were quite good, you'd definitely want pictures or actions lol.

The Thai teachers can just tell the students the words in English and Thai. We're employed not only because we speak English, but also because the students don't expect us to speak Thai.

Definitely the best post so far on this thread. Everything spot on.

[inzman]

In response to all the "professional teachers" who decree the use of the native tounge in tefl classes, I am attaching a link to a US department of Education study that seems to indicate that judicious use of the students native language is advantageous to learning English. I am inclined to support that view, rather than the view of a select few " experts " on TV. A teacher would do his students a favor by being open minded and continue to improve his skills. That would include accessing all the current information available to our profession.

http://www.ncsall.net/index.html@id=189.html

[zeichen]

Inzman, you do realize that there is a big difference between learning a foreign language with limited to no access to that language other than classroom and an ESL environment like this report is focussed on.

You do also realize that this was focussed on adults who do not intuitevely thik creatively and are not used to creating language links to cognitive pattterns.

The other thing you might have examined is that they over emphasized the word judicious when using the student's native language.

I think the issue here is that most students in Thailand have been exposed to English over and over for many years. I think that the majority on this thread and forum in general aren't opposed to bilingual teachers, however since the majority of students specifically in Thailand have had that for multiple years and still lack comprehension, communication and a cultural understanding of the language, native speakers can teach all aspects of language without the need for translation, but as stated before for those students who have no exposure to English before it is difficult.

I don't think things need to be all or nothing. But the strength of a native speaker is more than just a vocab/pronunciation teacher.

[bundoi]

I think the issue here is that most students in Thailand have been exposed to English over and over for many years. I think that the majority on this thread and forum in general aren't opposed to bilingual teachers, however since the majority of students specifically in Thailand have had that for multiple years and still lack comprehension, communication and a cultural understanding of the language, native speakers can teach all aspects of language without the need for translation, but as stated before for those students who have no exposure to English before it is difficult.

I don't think things need to be all or nothing. But the strength of a native speaker is more than just a vocab/pronunciation teacher.

You make some good points Z but you know that some Thai school students have had exposure to NES as well as Thai teachers for many years and it still hasn't worked. I think the fundamental reason for this is that Thai and English are so different. And this is one reason why I strongly recommend NES teachers in Thailand to learn some Thai, at least to the point where they can begin to understand some of the key areas of difficulty that Thai students of English will face.

In general TEFL proposes a 1-size-fits-all approach (at least it did when I last checked); this has been historically necessary to satisfy the huge and rapidly increasing market demand for English language training over the last 40 years, but it doesn't necessarily make for the best approach in all circumstances in all countries.

You are obviously an experienced and committed teacher; I would be interested to know how you think a good NES teacher with no Thai language skills could communicate a difficult point of grammar to a Thai Mathayom student better/more quickly/more thoroughly than a good Thai bilingual teacher could (unlike some of my questions, this one isn't rhetorical :-) ).

Edited January 1, 2014 by bundoi

[tingtong]

You are obviously an experienced and committed teacher; I would be interested to know how you think a good NES teacher with no Thai language skills could communicate a difficult point of grammar to a Thai Mathayom student better/more quickly/more thoroughly than a good Thai bilingual teacher could (unlike some of my questions, this one isn't rhetorical :-) ).

I am neither a teacher, nor a NES, but since i learned both from NES and bilingual teachers, and English isnt my native language, just might add my 2 cents worth to this question....

The short version is: there is NO WAY!

I was thought English for 4 years, what you would call here the M3-M6 period ( high school).

Started out with NES only classes, and we, kids, first had surely some time to work out the meanings, drawing, pictures, the textbook ( English only) helped a lot, and we built up vocabulary pretty fast...

BUT for the finer aspects of grammar to understand, we have some classes with bilingual teachers, and that what really put grammar in order.

We didnt need many classes with the bilingual teacher, but about once a month was most useful to put the newly learned grammar rules into order.

Of course, there was very little to non-existing need to class management, no students with whatever difficulties, and was no automatic pass to next grade, quite the other way.

The same time, since HS was hospitality major, everyone understood that the language knowledge will be big part for future employments, so, everyone was motivated really.

Worth mention that Thai kids has a lot more exposure to English language than I had where/when I grew up.

Also like to add, that in elementary school ( here P. 5-M.2) I/all kids had to learn a different language, with strange new alphabet, and all kids had to learn to write and read by the end of the first year. That with only bilingual teachers.

So, I am rather critic with Thai kids unable to read/write English after 5-10 years of "learning".

Both language learning experience I had was regular, so called government school, not that there was any other options when I grew up. And it wasnt a so called Western country, with high standards of living, etc.

I hope this adds a little colour to the discussion here, and put a few thoughts into consideration when come to teaching to a non-native kid. None of the kids will be knowledgeable of studies, but they might have similar experiences as I had?

A possibility. ( and something I guess not many NES will understand, being a NES)

[Scott]

I don't use Thai in my classes. I do understand some Thai, but my spoken Thai is so bad it only brings about a big laugh. I certainly couldn't explain a complex grammatical concept. I think that requires a Thai teacher.

The students do sometimes ask me questions in Thai -- simply because they can't quite get it out in English. I will answer them in English and most of the time they understand. Make sure you back up the answer with some examples.

I no longer am active in the classroom very often and when I do, I am usually teaching a subject such as science.

I did teach a group of professionals at a factory for many, many years. They were great fun. I didn't use Thai, but they very often used their dictionaries and had to have one another explain things to them. They learned a lot quicker with some help. Over time, it became less and less Thai and more and more explanation in English.

[culicine]

Thanks SlyAnimal for an interesting and detailed response. I guess it's the disciplining and classroom management that has been the most difficult for me. Although you would think with a PGCE this would not be an issue. I never had any problems with unruly behavior when teaching in the UK. But my disciplining techniques will simply not work over here as I do not have to vocab to "tell them off". I got told Thai learners are respectful of their teachers. But it appears this is not always the case. In February I will be able to teach a different subject which i'm more passionate about and it will be to English speaking learners so i'm hoping I can rely on my old methods a little more.

Thanks again for the response

In my teaching course we did cover discipline and classroom management to some degree. However, this really was just the tip of the iceberg when it comes to teaching 'on the front line' so to speak. I've found at least half of the discipline issue stems from 1) lack of previous discipline from previous teachers and admin, and a lack of motivation to learn. I'd found motivation has partly been related to how accessible/doable the work is. If the work is too difficult kids lose interest, if it's too easy the same will happen. I guess most of us aim for the middle. I do that, but will have extra work prepared for the better students who finish early, or allow them to do other work. PGCE's and the like present a LOT of material, but it's the job of the teacher to go through it and see what works. No two classes are the same, so even the approaches will differ between those classes, even though the material that should be covered is the same.

In terms of respect, I have found that you need to earn that, regardless of what Thai teachers might say. They command it, even though their performance as a teacher and their relationships with students range from good to woeful. If you want respect, I suggest have clear-cut rules for the class and stick to them (hoping the admin will support you), have well prepared lessons that should interest the majority of students and be at their level. It's really difficult to use regular textbooks because they contain content that is of little interest to students - while you may have to use material from the book (keeping admin happy), you can supplement it with something of more interest to the kids. But you will have to find out what their interests are first:)