Unprofessional and unskilled English Teacher's do you feel guilty?

[puukao]

There are many pages because of all the unknown variables.

do you love to teach and help kids learn?

do you love to study your craft?

are you passionate about the english language?

can you handle low wages?

are you naturally good with people?

most people, i'm sure, don't work in a career that they are passionate about. so how can you expect greatness? or maybe passionate and then burned out. this happens.

it only took me about 35 years to be honest with myself........do something you actually like to do, not just for more cash

[Loles]

Man, you take in your medicine as fast as you can otherwise I will inform your doctor you don't do it again.

[Blindside]

"The camps usually aren't worthwhile educationally, but might be a bit of fun."

Absolutely true. Most camps are crap. The one's who should be ashamed are the school owners / directors who run said camps for profit.

Teachers who are unqualified and or not native speakers are less of a problem than Thai teachers teaching English and sexpats / "tourists on non-B's" teaching English - for different reasons obviously. Many Filipino teachers are very dedicated and caring teachers - often quite well qualified. Granted there is an accent and sometimes grammatical problems with many, but at least most of them give a toss.

You haven't considered then what benefits however tangential a "camp" might have - sitting down and learning grammar isn't the whole of learning English - if a person spends some time in an informal situation where English is the main factor, even if they think they've learned nothing, the chances are they have been exposed to aspects of English that they never knew before or wouldn't have experienced in a classroom - that's why they are at "camps".

I agree with you in principle.

I think we might have a different idea of "camps". Are you referring to the ones run by professional groups or reputable international schools?

Or are you referring to the ones run by government and private schools that are often referred to as "summer schools" or "summer camps"

There is a gulf between those two. I have had the opportunity to have done work on both ends. My response to your point would rest upon what we mean by "camps"

[wilcopops]

"The camps usually aren't worthwhile educationally, but might be a bit of fun."

Absolutely true. Most camps are crap. The one's who should be ashamed are the school owners / directors who run said camps for profit.

Teachers who are unqualified and or not native speakers are less of a problem than Thai teachers teaching English and sexpats / "tourists on non-B's" teaching English - for different reasons obviously. Many Filipino teachers are very dedicated and caring teachers - often quite well qualified. Granted there is an accent and sometimes grammatical problems with many, but at least most of them give a toss.

You haven't considered then what benefits however tangential a "camp" might have - sitting down and learning grammar isn't the whole of learning English - if a person spends some time in an informal situation where English is the main factor, even if they think they've learned nothing, the chances are they have been exposed to aspects of English that they never knew before or wouldn't have experienced in a classroom - that's why they are at "camps".

I agree with you in principle.

I think we might have a different idea of "camps". Are you referring to the ones run by professional groups or reputable international schools?

Or are you referring to the ones run by government and private schools that are often referred to as "summer schools" or "summer camps"

There is a gulf between those two. I have had the opportunity to have done work on both ends. My response to your point would rest upon what we mean by "camps"

It really doesn't matter; both will have some benefits to a greater or lesser extent. I said in an earlier post that there are a lot of flaky practitioners in EL but one cannot dismiss out of hand camps regardless of which side of the fence they are on. IBTW i wasn't referring to either, that was you.

[chrisinth]

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

Chris from Belfast, Steve from Glasgow, Bill from Liverpool & Phil from Newcastle.

All native English speaking people, all with varying degrees and all eligible to take TEFL or whatever other foreign teaching courses there are.

Truth, they all find it difficult understanding each other let alone, on the basis of being a native speaker, teaching English to others.

Of course the above is hypothetical, but does demonstrate a side of native language speaking that shouldn't be ignored.

More nonsense - accent has little or nothing to do with it.........as anyone in a place like Pattaya will tell you they, they talk in English with native speakers from all over the world with no problem. I have many friends with strong regional British accents and only one do I find difficult to understand and that's not because of his accent; he just speaks indistinctly.

Any Scots person will tell you that when outside their home region they consciously or subconsciously tone down their dialect so as to communicate more easily with

Problems seldom come from accent, of you need to know what an accent is before thou make that assertion - the problems arrive from regional dialect or slang and even more often lack of CLARITY. You can watch TV anywhere in the world and 99% of the time as a native speaker you'll understand it fine.

with Thai speakers the problems come with rhythm and stress - but I doubt if anyone has paid much consideration to that even in their own speech.

The point of the post had nothing to do with adult people talking to each other in Pattaya. The point of the post was how a child could comprehend what was being taught to them. Your wisdom indicates that accents have nothing to do with it, I would beg to differ.

Oh, from your comments to another post, I do indeed realize that teaching doesn't only relate to children, but I believe to OP was referring to children at camp, hence the continued reference to children.

[wilcopops]

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

Chris from Belfast, Steve from Glasgow, Bill from Liverpool & Phil from Newcastle.

All native English speaking people, all with varying degrees and all eligible to take TEFL or whatever other foreign teaching courses there are.

Truth, they all find it difficult understanding each other let alone, on the basis of being a native speaker, teaching English to others.

Of course the above is hypothetical, but does demonstrate a side of native language speaking that shouldn't be ignored.

More nonsense - accent has little or nothing to do with it.........as anyone in a place like Pattaya will tell you they, they talk in English with native speakers from all over the world with no problem. I have many friends with strong regional British accents and only one do I find difficult to understand and that's not because of his accent; he just speaks indistinctly.

Any Scots person will tell you that when outside their home region they consciously or subconsciously tone down their dialect so as to communicate more easily with

Problems seldom come from accent, of you need to know what an accent is before thou make that assertion - the problems arrive from regional dialect or slang and even more often lack of CLARITY. You can watch TV anywhere in the world and 99% of the time as a native speaker you'll understand it fine.

with Thai speakers the problems come with rhythm and stress - but I doubt if anyone has paid much consideration to that even in their own speech.

The point of the post had nothing to do with adult people talking to each other in Pattaya. The point of the post was how a child could comprehend what was being taught to them. Your wisdom indicates that accents have nothing to do with it, I would beg to differ.

Oh, from your comments to another post, I do indeed realize that teaching doesn't only relate to children, but I believe to OP was referring to children at camp, hence the continued reference to children.

Beg all you like, you have the wrong end of the stick and appear to be able to grasp a simple analogy. If you think changing your goalposts changes the argument or the evidence one iota your are thoroughly mistaken.

Edited May 30, 2014 by wilcopops

[enuff said]

.

The original topic of "UNPROFESSIONAL and UNSKILLED" English teachers feeling shame has digressed to a shouting match about regional dialects. The thought that any NES is unprofessional or unskilled because he doesn't speak like a BBC news reader is inane.

Unprofessional:

1. Tardiness, frequent absence, abuse of sick leave policy

2. Disregarding a good personal appearance, unshaven, unpressed clothing, hygiene problems

3. Showing up with bloodshot eyes, reeking of drink and still half in the bag from the previous nights binge

4. Ogling and/or flirtation with students or other members of staff regardless of age. Inappropriate touching

5. Making no effort to improve ones skill set or abilities

6. Foul mouthed, bad tempered, chip on the shoulder behaviour

Unskilled:

1. No lesson plans or learning aids

2. Too much "teacher talk" incomprehensible to students

3. Material not based on students actual abilities

4. No activities, games or events to aid in retention of the lesson

5. No lesson integrated music and song

6. Speaking too fast

7. Overuse of choralization; no echoing, rebounding, or reflexive cognition

8. Overusing teacher correction/ inability to elicit peer correction or self correction

9. Not taking advantage of random events in the classroom to advance students understanding

If you don't give a hoot about your students and are just in it for the money and party time, you should feel ashamed. IMHO

I wonder why this topic hasn't been moved to the teaching forum?

'nuff said

sent from my Timex/Sinclair 1000 w/ 16k memory block

[Yooyung]

.

The original topic of "UNPROFESSIONAL and UNSKILLED" English teachers feeling shame has digressed to a shouting match about regional dialects. The thought that any NES is unprofessional or unskilled because he doesn't speak like a BBC news reader is inane.

Unprofessional:

1. Tardiness, frequent absence, abuse of sick leave policy

2. Disregarding a good personal appearance, unshaven, unpressed clothing, hygiene problems

3. Showing up with bloodshot eyes, reeking of drink and still half in the bag from the previous nights binge

4. Ogling and/or flirtation with students or other members of staff regardless of age. Inappropriate touching

5. Making no effort to improve ones skill set or abilities

6. Foul mouthed, bad tempered, chip on the shoulder behaviour

Unskilled:

1. No lesson plans or learning aids

2. Too much "teacher talk" incomprehensible to students

3. Material not based on students actual abilities

4. No activities, games or events to aid in retention of the lesson

5. No lesson integrated music and song

6. Speaking too fast

7. Overuse of choralization; no echoing, rebounding, or reflexive cognition

8. Overusing teacher correction/ inability to elicit peer correction or self correction

9. Not taking advantage of random events in the classroom to advance students understanding

If you don't give a hoot about your students and are just in it for the money and party time, you should feel ashamed. IMHO

I wonder why this topic hasn't been moved to the teaching forum?

'nuff said

sent from my Timex/Sinclair 1000 w/ 16k memory block

Well put......and the fact is actually putting all that into practice isnt really that hard ,if you havent got a 7 large BeerChang hangover and 1 1/2 hours sleep.

[Soutpeel]

Unskilled:

1. No lesson plans or learning aids

2. Too much "teacher talk" incomprehensible to students

3. Material not based on students actual abilities

4. No activities, games or events to aid in retention of the lesson

5. No lesson integrated music and song

6. Speaking too fast

7. Overuse of choralization; no echoing, rebounding, or reflexive cognition

8. Overusing teacher correction/ inability to elicit peer correction or self correction

9. Not taking advantage of random events in the classroom to advance students understanding

If you don't give a hoot about your students and are just in it for the money and party time, you should feel ashamed. IMHO

I wonder why this topic hasn't been moved to the teaching forum?

'nuff said

sent from my Timex/Sinclair 1000 w/ 16k memory block

10. over emphasis on teaching grammar when it is not needed..

[thailiketoo]

10. over emphasis on teaching grammar when it is not needed..

I really agree. Can you imagine what a shot in the arm it would be for Thailand if the entire population spoke English to the level of a 7 year old native English speaker.

7 year olds don't learn any grammar. Heck even if all Thais were taught to understand only a couple of simple phrases, 1. "Where is the toilet?" and "Where is the bar?"

If anyone of importance in Thailand is reading this, "Get rid of all the grammar nonsense and speak English like a 7 year old."

[Naam]

a question concerning teaching English in Thailand. are the Thai students taught English or American?

-whom to blame for the bad behaviour of my neighbour?

or

-who to blame for the bad behavior of my neighbor?

disclaimer: i don't mind the spelling difference but my neckhair raises when i hear "who to blame?"

[thailiketoo]

a question concerning teaching English in Thailand. are the Thai students taught English or American?

-whom to blame for the bad behaviour of my neighbour?

or

-who to blame for the bad behavior of my neighbor?

disclaimer: i don't mind the spelling difference but my neckhair raises when i hear "who to blame?"

Whom is only used in written English and in formal spoken English. Who is normally used as the object of a verb or preposition, but immediately after a preposition whom is generally used: the man with whom she lived. It would, however, be more natural to say: the man she lived with.

Except for pendants you can forget about whom as it is not necessary to be understood. But it is people like you with quirky beliefs about language that make learning a horrific experience for Thai children.

Edited May 31, 2014 by thailiketoo

[BugJackBaron]

a question concerning teaching English in Thailand. are the Thai students taught English or American?

-whom to blame for the bad behaviour of my neighbour?

or

-who to blame for the bad behavior of my neighbor?

disclaimer: i don't mind the spelling difference but my neckhair raises when i hear "who to blame?"

Whom is only used in written English and in formal spoken English. Who is normally used as the object of a verb or preposition, but immediately after a preposition whom is generally used: the man with whom she lived. It would, however, be more natural to say: the man she lived with.

Except for pendants you can forget about whom as it is not necessary to be understood. But it is people like you with quirky beliefs about language that make learning a horrific experience for Thai children.

Your explanation is good.

I often ask "to whom am I speaking" on the phone(I get a lot of spam calls) but I understand that some Americans use "who" in this case.

Edited May 31, 2014 by BugJackBaron

[thailiketoo]

a question concerning teaching English in Thailand. are the Thai students taught English or American?

-whom to blame for the bad behaviour of my neighbour?

or

-who to blame for the bad behavior of my neighbor?

disclaimer: i don't mind the spelling difference but my neckhair raises when i hear "who to blame?"

Whom is only used in written English and in formal spoken English. Who is normally used as the object of a verb or preposition, but immediately after a preposition whom is generally used: the man with whom she lived. It would, however, be more natural to say: the man she lived with.

Except for pendants you can forget about whom as it is not necessary to be understood. But it is people like you with quirky beliefs about language that make learning a horrific experience for Thai children.

As I say to my students, "good job".

I often ask "to whom am I speaking" on the phone(I get a lot of spam calls) but I understand that some Americans use "who" in this case.

Am I to understand you try and teach Thai students when to use who and when to use whom?

[Water Buffalo]

No more guilty than the unprofessional and unskilled teachers i was taught by at primary school, secondary school, and college in the UK.

If the UK has such teachers, why shouldn't Thailand? Countries will progress as they progress.

Why don't you come down off your high-horse or find something better to do with your time.

And please try to remember where exactly we are. Thailand offers the worst salaries compared to cost of living for miles around. Not to mention, we get screwed over by the schools and agents regardless of our abilities or professionalism. The conditions and contracts are awful. No holiday pay for most which means we have to work illegally to survive the summer. This is why most of the "good" teachers leave. Don't blame us for the mess created by others.

Unskilled teachers are better than no teachers at all. And the entire education system is a mess - not just the English department.

Edited May 31, 2014 by Water Buffalo

[mesquite]

"Why I ask this is because my GF sister's kids that live in the countryside with their grandma were calling their mum that does not have a lot of money asking could they get money for an English Learning Weekend Camp.

Now she didn't have the money for it but felt bad so she borrowed some cash of my GF to pay for it.

Now I know enough that most of these Falang teachers on these English Camp are not even trained teachers and a lot of them are not even Native English speakers!

I think this is wrong! What is your opinion?"

Maybe you could teach them.

[BugJackBaron]

a question concerning teaching English in Thailand. are the Thai students taught English or American?

-whom to blame for the bad behaviour of my neighbour?

or

-who to blame for the bad behavior of my neighbor?

disclaimer: i don't mind the spelling difference but my neckhair raises when i hear "who to blame?"

Whom is only used in written English and in formal spoken English. Who is normally used as the object of a verb or preposition, but immediately after a preposition whom is generally used: the man with whom she lived. It would, however, be more natural to say: the man she lived with.

Except for pendants you can forget about whom as it is not necessary to be understood. But it is people like you with quirky beliefs about language that make learning a horrific experience for Thai children.

As I say to my students, "good job".

I often ask "to whom am I speaking" on the phone(I get a lot of spam calls) but I understand that some Americans use "who" in this case.

Am I to understand you try and teach Thai students when to use who and when to use whom?

If I have non-beginner students, I sometimes do. It may come up in things like the TOEFL for example.

[thailiketoo]

Whom is only used in written English and in formal spoken English. Who is normally used as the object of a verb or preposition, but immediately after a preposition whom is generally used: the man with whom she lived. It would, however, be more natural to say: the man she lived with.

Except for pendants you can forget about whom as it is not necessary to be understood. But it is people like you with quirky beliefs about language that make learning a horrific experience for Thai children.

As I say to my students, "good job".

I often ask "to whom am I speaking" on the phone(I get a lot of spam calls) but I understand that some Americans use "who" in this case.

Am I to understand you try and teach Thai students when to use who and when to use whom?

If I have non-beginner students, I sometimes do. It may come up in things like the TOEFL for example.

Oh come on........ Reality check?

However I don't think we are talking about TOEFL preparation in this thread. Hence my attitude.

Edited May 31, 2014 by thailiketoo

[enuff said]

.

"Why I ask this is because my GF sister's kids that live in the countryside with their grandma were calling their mum that does not have a lot of money asking could they get money for an English Learning Weekend Camp.

Now she didn't have the money for it but felt bad so she borrowed some cash of my GF to pay for it.

Now I know enough that most of these Falang teachers on these English Camp are not even trained teachers and a lot of them are not even Native English speakers!

I think this is wrong! What is your opinion?"

Maybe you could teach them.

Yes there are companies that set up and run weekend English camps, day camps, seminars, you name it, with and without NES (Native English Speaker) personnel. Some are good, well thought out programs. Some less so.

My opinion, and thank you for asking, is that these camps take learning out of the classroom per se and show, by necessity, how English is used in daily activities. Many Thai students have never been in the same room with a foreigner, let alone spent a day or two with one. It gives teachers, Thai and foreign, a chance to show the students their human side; a la "we're in this together" mode.

Thai students have a keen eye and remarkable observation skills. Time spent with someone from another culture does much to dispel stereotypes (Thai AND foreigner) and increases the confidence of students when they attempt to communicate with someone who is otherwise alien to them.

The top few English students in each grade level involved should be offered free admission, as they will help the others greatly in the camp situation and it is an apt reward for their classroom diligence.

So, overall, they are a good thing in my opinion.

'nuff said

~

[duanebigsby]

What pray, is a "neutral accent?

E.G. - "I'm from Edinburgh and I don't have an accent"??

A gray area I admit. I know nothing of Edinburgh, but I'd suggest a heavy Scottish accent to be outside of what my school would accept. Most Canadian accents are acceptable, but the Maritimes , well I can't follow someone from Nova Scotia. Many southern states have incredibly harsh accents. I can't really say the "not normal" because, of course , I have to say it from my (and the school's) perspective. They consider a West coast, Midwest, or Canadian accent as neutral.

"acceptable" to who??????? Accent has NOTHING to do with it, it isn't a grey area, you're barking up the wrong tree.

The "I'm from Edinburgh" refers to a well-known joke about how people perceive accents - EVERYONE has an accent.

Acceptable to the Thai school boards who are hiring.

Your joke isn't well known to many outside the UK. Of course EVERYONE has an accent. Some are more readily understood around the world than others. A person from Liverpool is going to have more of a problem being understood as he travels than someone from California. A person who is otherwise ok with understanding basic English might have problems with a Scouse, South Carolina, Scottish, or Newfoundland accent. I'm just saying the accents are a concern for the Thai schools.

[farang000999]

So the grandmother "borrowed" the money from the gf who got it from you?

Stop lying to yourself.

[whooshbang]

10. over emphasis on teaching grammar when it is not needed..

I really agree. Can you imagine what a shot in the arm it would be for Thailand if the entire population spoke English to the level of a 7 year old native English speaker.

7 year olds don't learn any grammar. Heck even if all Thais were taught to understand only a couple of simple phrases, 1. "Where is the toilet?" and "Where is the bar?"

If anyone of importance in Thailand is reading this, "Get rid of all the grammar nonsense and speak English like a 7 year old."

Do i detect an American accent?

[wilcopops]

a question concerning teaching English in Thailand. are the Thai students taught English or American?

-whom to blame for the bad behaviour of my neighbour?

or

-who to blame for the bad behavior of my neighbor?

disclaimer: i don't mind the spelling difference but my neckhair raises when i hear "who to blame?"

EL is a user driven language - it is not static........this makes a uniquely democratic tool. Unfortunately for you the use of whom is dropping out of any form of English US, international, Aussie, Indian, and British...they all are losing it.

"Whom" is the objective case - we still use it in some pronouns but it most other circumstances it has fallen out of use along with all the other cases. This is also the case with verb agreements.

If you went back a few hundred years or side stepped into other languages you would have to deal with many more case forms in many more words......

Anyone who has studied Latin will recognise the 6 (maybe even 7) cases -

1. Nominative

2. Vocative

3. Accusative

4. Genitive

5. Dative

6. Ablative

7. Locative

Also with gender and singular or plural; each requiring a different form of the noun - for instance:- datum/data (datorum even!), visum (singular, as used in Dutch) or visa the plural used in English

For example, German still uses some cases and together with French, has a full range of verb agreements. In English we dropped most of the changes in verb endings 800 to 200 years ago. Inexplicably, we retain the “s” in third person singular positive present simple (from Scandinavian origins I believe)

The possessive apostrophe “s” probably originated from the genitive case in Germanic which ended in “es”; the apostrophe denoting the missing “e”

Changes are not always concurrent; oddly enough it is the US that holds on to more vestiges of older English than the UK as after the revolution, they remained relatively isolated for some time and retained a lot of structures and forms that fell out of use in UK - “Fall” for Autumn, “Gotten” rather than “got” and “for sure” instead of “Yes” come to mind.

There are many reasons for this “loss”, but a lot has to do with the fact that English is a VAST language in terms of numbers of words and sources and we simply don't need those cases to make ourselves understood.

So, changes happen - get used to it.........

PS - "who is to blame" would be a more modern syntax and makes "who" the subject, "to blame whom" (object) sounds rather clumsy by today's standards

Edited May 31, 2014 by wilcopops

[wilcopops]

10. over emphasis on teaching grammar when it is not needed..

I really agree. Can you imagine what a shot in the arm it would be for Thailand if the entire population spoke English to the level of a 7 year old native English speaker.

7 year olds don't learn any grammar. Heck even if all Thais were taught to understand only a couple of simple phrases, 1. "Where is the toilet?" and "Where is the bar?"

If anyone of importance in Thailand is reading this, "Get rid of all the grammar nonsense and speak English like a 7 year old."

Do i detect an American accent?

..and quite understandable too.

but this is not an exercise in her ability to speak English as such -it is a prepared piece - Is she reading or reciting? I doubt very much if this is a genuine example of "free speaking"

one couldn't asses her conversational or reading abilities on this, let alone listening or comprehension. - this would be required to establish her "reading age" in English

Edited May 31, 2014 by wilcopops

[wilcopops]

.

The original topic of "UNPROFESSIONAL and UNSKILLED" English teachers feeling shame has digressed to a shouting match about regional dialects. The thought that any NES is unprofessional or unskilled because he doesn't speak like a BBC news reader is inane.

Unprofessional:

1. Tardiness, frequent absence, abuse of sick leave policy

2. Disregarding a good personal appearance, unshaven, unpressed clothing, hygiene problems

3. Showing up with bloodshot eyes, reeking of drink and still half in the bag from the previous nights binge

4. Ogling and/or flirtation with students or other members of staff regardless of age. Inappropriate touching

5. Making no effort to improve ones skill set or abilities

6. Foul mouthed, bad tempered, chip on the shoulder behaviour

Unskilled:

1. No lesson plans or learning aids

2. Too much "teacher talk" incomprehensible to students

3. Material not based on students actual abilities

4. No activities, games or events to aid in retention of the lesson

5. No lesson integrated music and song

6. Speaking too fast

7. Overuse of choralization; no echoing, rebounding, or reflexive cognition

8. Overusing teacher correction/ inability to elicit peer correction or self correction

9. Not taking advantage of random events in the classroom to advance students understanding

If you don't give a hoot about your students and are just in it for the money and party time, you should feel ashamed. IMHO

I wonder why this topic hasn't been moved to the teaching forum?

'nuff said

sent from my Timex/Sinclair 1000 w/ 16k memory block

not impressed by lists - all a bit anal if you ask me - there are BOOKS written on how to teach and trying to sum it up in a list of 10 or so is rather "schoolboy homework" isn't it?

[wilcopops]

So the grandmother "borrowed" the money from the gf who got it from you?

Stop lying to yourself.

Interesting how many English speakers can't differentiate between the meanings of "borrow" and "lend"

e.g. - "I can lend a fiver?"

Bet they would still have something to say on this thread though......

Edited May 31, 2014 by wilcopops

[pigeonjake]

a question concerning teaching English in Thailand. are the Thai students taught English or American?

-whom to blame for the bad behaviour of my neighbour?

or

-who to blame for the bad behavior of my neighbor?

disclaimer: i don't mind the spelling difference but my neckhair raises when i hear "who to blame?"

EL is a user driven language - it is not static........this makes a uniquely democratic tool. Unfortunately for you the use of whom is dropping out of any form of English US, international, Aussie, Indian, and British...they all are losing it.

"Whom" is the objective case - we still use it in some pronouns but it most other circumstances it has fallen out of use along with all the other cases. This is also the case with verb agreements.

If you went back a few hundred years or side stepped into other languages you would have to deal with many more case forms in many more words......

Anyone who has studied Latin will recognise the 6 (maybe even 7) cases -

1. Nominative

2. Vocative

3. Accusative

4. Genitive

5. Dative

6. Ablative

7. Locative

Also with gender and singular or plural; each requiring a different form of the noun - for instance:- datum/data (datorum even!), visum (singular, as used in Dutch) or visa the plural used in English

For example, German still uses some cases and together with French, has a full range of verb agreements. In English we dropped most of the changes in verb endings 800 to 200 years ago. Inexplicably, we retain the “s” in third person singular positive present simple (from Scandinavian origins I believe)

The possessive apostrophe “s” probably originated from the genitive case in Germanic which ended in “es”; the apostrophe denoting the missing “e”

Changes are not always concurrent; oddly enough it is the US that holds on to more vestiges of older English than the UK as after the revolution, they remained relatively isolated for some time and retained a lot of structures and forms that fell out of use in UK - “Fall” for Autumn, “Gotten” rather than “got” and “for sure” instead of “Yes” come to mind.

There are many reasons for this “loss”, but a lot has to do with the fact that English is a VAST language in terms of numbers of words and sources and we simply don't need those cases to make ourselves understood.

So, changes happen - get used to it.........

PS - "who is to blame" would be a more modern syntax and makes "who" the subject, "to blame whom" (object) sounds rather clumsy by today's standards

good example of copy and paisting,,,lol

[wilcopops]

No more guilty than the unprofessional and unskilled teachers i was taught by at primary school, secondary school, and college in the UK.

If the UK has such teachers, why shouldn't Thailand? Countries will progress as they progress.

Why don't you come down off your high-horse or find something better to do with your time.

And please try to remember where exactly we are. Thailand offers the worst salaries compared to cost of living for miles around. Not to mention, we get screwed over by the schools and agents regardless of our abilities or professionalism. The conditions and contracts are awful. No holiday pay for most which means we have to work illegally to survive the summer. This is why most of the "good" teachers leave. Don't blame us for the mess created by others.

Unskilled teachers are better than no teachers at all. And the entire education system is a mess - not just the English department.

I think you need to check entry salaries for EFL teachers around the world before making claims about salary/COL statements.

Certainly some countries appear better numerically - Japan, Saudi etc, but in Europe the starting salaries in places like Italy and Spain are ON A PAR monetarily with Thailand, making Thailand far better deal - at least for beginners in the business.

Edited May 31, 2014 by wilcopops

[wilcopops]

a question concerning teaching English in Thailand. are the Thai students taught English or American?

-whom to blame for the bad behaviour of my neighbour?

or

-who to blame for the bad behavior of my neighbor?

disclaimer: i don't mind the spelling difference but my neckhair raises when i hear "who to blame?"

EL is a user driven language - it is not static........this makes a uniquely democratic tool. Unfortunately for you the use of whom is dropping out of any form of English US, international, Aussie, Indian, and British...they all are losing it.

"Whom" is the objective case - we still use it in some pronouns but it most other circumstances it has fallen out of use along with all the other cases. This is also the case with verb agreements.

If you went back a few hundred years or side stepped into other languages you would have to deal with many more case forms in many more words......

Anyone who has studied Latin will recognise the 6 (maybe even 7) cases -

1. Nominative

2. Vocative

3. Accusative

4. Genitive

5. Dative

6. Ablative

7. Locative

Also with gender and singular or plural; each requiring a different form of the noun - for instance:- datum/data (datorum even!), visum (singular, as used in Dutch) or visa the plural used in English

For example, German still uses some cases and together with French, has a full range of verb agreements. In English we dropped most of the changes in verb endings 800 to 200 years ago. Inexplicably, we retain the “s” in third person singular positive present simple (from Scandinavian origins I believe)

The possessive apostrophe “s” probably originated from the genitive case in Germanic which ended in “es”; the apostrophe denoting the missing “e”

Changes are not always concurrent; oddly enough it is the US that holds on to more vestiges of older English than the UK as after the revolution, they remained relatively isolated for some time and retained a lot of structures and forms that fell out of use in UK - “Fall” for Autumn, “Gotten” rather than “got” and “for sure” instead of “Yes” come to mind.

There are many reasons for this “loss”, but a lot has to do with the fact that English is a VAST language in terms of numbers of words and sources and we simply don't need those cases to make ourselves understood.

So, changes happen - get used to it.........

PS - "who is to blame" would be a more modern syntax and makes "who" the subject, "to blame whom" (object) sounds rather clumsy by today's standards

good example of copy and paisting,,,lol

I'm glad to hear you've mastered it - are you going to do some more?

However if you think I didn't write it, than I take it as a compliment - says a bit about your range though?

Edited May 31, 2014 by wilcopops

[thailiketoo]

10. over emphasis on teaching grammar when it is not needed..

I really agree. Can you imagine what a shot in the arm it would be for Thailand if the entire population spoke English to the level of a 7 year old native English speaker.

7 year olds don't learn any grammar. Heck even if all Thais were taught to understand only a couple of simple phrases, 1. "Where is the toilet?" and "Where is the bar?"

If anyone of importance in Thailand is reading this, "Get rid of all the grammar nonsense and speak English like a 7 year old."

Do i detect an American accent?

..and quite understandable too.

but this is not an exercise in her ability to speak English as such -it is a prepared piece - Is she reading or reciting? I doubt very much if this is a genuine example of "free speaking"

one couldn't asses her conversational or reading abilities on this, let alone listening or comprehension. - this would be required to establish her "reading age" in English

http://www.babycenter.com/6_your-7-year-old-mastering-talking_10329595.bc

Your 7-year-old now

Typically, the vocabulary, pronunciation, and grammar of a child this age are all working at near-adult levels. Vocabulary and comprehension will continue to expand during the coming years — right through high school, in fact. But most lisps and common mispronunciations are outgrown by 7.

At 7, your child should be able to:

• pronounce sounds like th, s, ch, wh, l, y, and soft g ("giant")
• use a wide-ranging vocabulary when speaking (now as many as 20,000 words!)

My point was that 7 year olds don't learn much grammar. Wouldn't it be nice if the average Thai could speak English at a 7 year old level. Who cares whom does the teaching.