I don't have a degree but I believe I can teach...

[AnotherOneAmerican]

In certain contexts, either fruits or fruit is correct.  More often than not it is "fruit" in American English.

Fine. However, I've never used "fruits" in my life and I'm not an American.

You've never said the phrase, "It's important to eat fruits and vegetables" in your entire life?

Nope .. I'm British. I would say it's important to eat fruit and vegetables.

But never mind. It can be said as in your post. But generally fruit is used. And I doubt many people describe fruit as fruits!

Sent from my XT1032 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

'Fruits' in English is gay men.
Example, "they are a bunch of fruits"

[AnotherOneAmerican]

Personally, I think your all a bunch a fruits....
but perhaps we should move back to the topic!

You're!

[Thaddeus]

 

 

In certain contexts, either fruits or fruit is correct.  More often than not it is "fruit" in American English.

Fine. However, I've never used "fruits" in my life and I'm not an American.

 

You've never said the phrase, "It's important to eat fruits and vegetables" in your entire life? 

 

 

 

I'm very English and I would use the word 'fruits' but, only in the right context.

 

For example a basket full of apples, would be a basket of fruit, a basket containing apples, pears, oranges etc would still be a basket of fruit, but it could be labelled as 'containing fruits of the field'

 

When the plural precedes the singular, like a sea full of fish, or fishes of the sea.

 

That is the only time.

 

Doesn't work with sheep ;)

 

 

 

but perhaps we should move back to the topic!

 

 

 

 

 

I quite agree Scott.

[Arwon]

I have been in teaching for 40+ years now, when you walk around the classrooms the "teachers" stand out, they know what they are doing, they have studied in a respected teaching college or university, got their bits of paper, done their prac teaching, paid their dues and are respected by their peers. I have seen a lot of the "others" and their performance is usually very disappointing. Students deserve the very best. Teaching is a profession and needs to be treated as such. If you want to become a teacher, welcome!

[casualbiker]

I have been in teaching for 40+ years now, when you walk around the classrooms the "teachers" stand out, they know what they are doing, they have studied in a respected teaching college or university, got their bits of paper, done their prac teaching, paid their dues and are respected by their peers. I have seen a lot of the "others" and their performance is usually very disappointing. Students deserve the very best. Teaching is a profession and needs to be treated as such. If you want to become a teacher, welcome!

All of what you say is true. Question : Have you ever taught in Thailand?

Do you understand exactly WHAT a English conversation teacher does here in Thai schools?

We are TEFL (speak + listen) teachers. Not subject teachers. Maybe a better term would be conversation supervisor.

And actually the subject teachers here in Thailand have to have a 5 year B'ed so THEY don't even have to have a degree in the subject they are teaching, just a general teaching degree. How does THAT improve teaching?

Surely for TEFL conversation teaching in Thailand it would be more beneficial for them to organise extended TEFL certification to meet the requirements that they want. Currently they will not even accept a 3 year bachelors in TEFL. Which is kinda strange as that's the work being done!
Your thought's?

Sent from my XT1032 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

[inutil]

To be honest, he did say 'IN teaching' rather than 'a TEACHER'. Curious distinction. But its all by the by anyway. The reason quaified teachers are very good at their job is because they have extensive supervised training. They dont just pass their exams then get sent out into the wild blue yonder to teach Not only do they have a full year of practical on the job training. After they garner that qualification they (usually) have a further two years of mentoring. They also have professional development seminars as a core part of their ongoing training. 

 

Now compare: 

 

Your average ESLer gets plonked in a school in front of a class and told to teach. 

 

They have no training. Training comes from the job. When they ask for advice or details on what to teach, theyre told "youre doing fine, dont worry! Teach them anything!". No one is supervising you. No one particularly cares what you do. Are the kids generally happy? Does it 'sound like' English is going on? Yay! well done you, oh great teacher Onizuka!

 

The seminars and 'training' they do have (a once a year, 2 day affair if even that), will be more experienced ESLers saying little more than 'well, i tried this, and it worked! have you thought about trying this?' Youll get the occasional class on learning types or classroom management, but the classroom management seminars wil alwas end up in just a bunch of annoyed teachers bitching and complaining, whilst the learning types will have no practical value and no hands on component, making it arguably useless. You might as well be reading wikipedia on it. Theres just no feasible way to follow through and apply these things in your classroom because theres no one supervising you or checking your lesson plans and asking you those pertinent questions. Training is purely for the government to say 'theyre trained!' rather than an exercise in genuine professional development.  

 

For actual ongoing training and development, you need to front the cash and take the time out of your job to complete it. It will also be very much unpaid because theres no way in hell your school or BOE is either paying for it, or accepting you taking a month off during term time to finish it. If you want training, you need to sacrifice your meager savings, and youll be doing it with absolutely no guarantee that its even going to push you up the ladder.

 

This ladder is of course notoriously built on market demands. Something as innocuous as the Kpop boom coinciding with the western recession helped put Korea on the map, and this in turn has driven wages and benefits down. Its also an image driven industry with education a strong THIRD place behind image and cost. Are you a young 20 something fresh out of university and willing to work for 2.1mill? Welcome to Korea! Are you a middle aged guy with 15 years of experience and wonderful reports, but now on the top tier band pay scale for EPIK resulting in us having to pay you 2.6mill? Do you look a bit... 'scary or 'intimidating'? Are you in any way not white? sorry dude. We can get this cute white girl from the US for 2.1! Sure she doesnt know how to teach, but thats the job of the Korean teachers to be honest!

 

And so the cycle of untrained idiots teaching untrained idiots continues unabated. 

 

This market is not an education market. I sound bitter perhaps, but im not at all!  Im still very cute and to be honest, it genuinely helps me as much as it hurts me (though i am moving into my late thirties...eeep!). Id love to suggest that we are as competent and professional as teachers with QTS, but (on the whole) we arent. The real heart of the issue though is whether thats the fault of the individual teacher at the end of the day, or whether its the fault of an industry that offers only the most token nod to education whilst treating ESL teachers like a commodity on a conveyor belt. And its genuinely understandable, they have no incentive to train, invest or develop our skills because this will probably lead to us dumping them for another hotter school offering something sexier. The market is what it is. Its a weird little world. Comparing it to Public education is a massive misnomer that misses the huge differences involved.

Edited July 31, 2014 by inutil

[kimamey]

 

 

The majority of the world that employs EFL teachers demand a degree as the minimum requirement for employment.
From and academic perspective, how can someone without a degree be a role model for future generations to further their education?  It isn't always about ability or intelligence it is about academic achievement.
 
Unrelated degrees are an academic qualification and train people in skills not just knowledge. The skills that one picks up allows them to be more independent acquiring knowledge.  A lot of the skills that I learned was about analyzing the quality of information. I doubt most uneducated people have that skill when it comes to acquiring information outside of their field or knowledge circle.

Are you saying that people without university degree are uneducated?
 
When I was at school, none of the teachers said anything about their degrees and we never thought about it. Therefore, just because the teacher has, or does not have, a degree, it is irrelevant as far as providing a role model. Had I known that the incompetent, useless teachers I had were the product of universities, it would have just made me even more convinced that I didn't need a degree.
 
To say that I can't assess the quality of information because I never went to uni is just insulting and arrogant. It is also a trait of many of the uni degree holders that I have met, but it does not, in fact, mean that they are in any way competent or have any common sense. Many of the Drs that I worked with lacked even a modicum of common sense, though they were undoubtedly intelligent.

 

Common sense is not something that can be taught.

PS
The world has moved on from the stage where any ex-service man could become a teacher.
Which is how many teachers got their jobs after WW2, and taught in the 50s-60s-70s.

PPS
I spoke too soon, apparently the UK will be doing that again from next year.
http://www.theguardian.com/education/2013/jun/07/former-soldiers-qualify-teachers-government

 

 

I don't know what's happening with that scheme but I think it's a political move as the Tories are cutting back the military and a lot of unemployed ex soldiers won't look good.
 

[up-country_sinclair]

 

I have been in teaching for 40+ years now, when you walk around the classrooms the "teachers" stand out, they know what they are doing, they have studied in a respected teaching college or university, got their bits of paper, done their prac teaching, paid their dues and are respected by their peers. I have seen a lot of the "others" and their performance is usually very disappointing. Students deserve the very best. Teaching is a profession and needs to be treated as such. If you want to become a teacher, welcome!

All of what you say is true. Question : Have you ever taught in Thailand?

Do you understand exactly WHAT a English conversation teacher does here in Thai schools?

We are TEFL (speak + listen) teachers. Not subject teachers. Maybe a better term would be conversation supervisor.

 

 

Maybe this is a contributing factor as to why Thai students' oral and aural proficiency is generally so abysmal.
 

[kimamey]

I don't have a driving licence but I believe 

I can drive

Have kept out of this forum but it is getting silly

Teaching or facilitating learning or whatever it is called nowadays requires a fairly complex set of competences

No BEd./PGCE/TESOL/TEFL course I have ever encountered begins to equip a person to guide a bunch of children/teenagers/adults to become responsible for taking on board for themselves what they (or someone else) believe they are desirous of learning as regards English.

In Thailand no-one has taken seriously the absence of the alphabet; much teaching by Thai teachers requires the transliteration of Thai sounds into approximately English ones. It is a disaster. Though interestingly many Thais can read and write English; they just cannot speak it!

If The British Council were serious they would at least have programmes to help Thai teachers in the linguistic competences of the English language.

This is not supposed to sound 'discriminatory', but it is at least "interesting" that many Chinese people, Germans and Scandinavians, also the Dutch acquire English, almost perfectly. Thais, Japanese, French struggle while others cannot rid themselves of their native accents!!

 

Here is a summary of a standard TEFL course

As far as I can see it might as well be happening on the moon with no students Thai or otherwise present

Pre-Course Grammar Module

 

Unit 1: The Study of English

 

Module 1 – Grammar: Reading

 

Module 2 – Pronunciation, Stress and Intonation: 

 

Module 3 – Lexis: .

 

Unit 2: The Teaching and Learning of ESOL

 

Module 1 - The Basic Principles of TESOL.

Module 2 - Listening and Reading: 

Module 3 - Speaking and Writing: 

 

Module 4 - Visual Aids: 

 

Module 5 - Error

 

Unit 3: Lesson Planning

 

Module 1 - Classroom Management and Assessment: 

Module 2 - Lesson Stages and Plans: .

 

Thematic Unit

 

Visual Aids?? Good grief

 

How about a few Learning Outcomes? 

You know !!: If you complete this 'module' you will demonstrate that you will be able to:!!!

 

 

I did a TEFL course which was part online. There was also a 2 day part taken by a guy who had actualy taught in Thailand. That part was good and showed how difficult teaching can be. I did it just to get an idea what was involved. The online portion was, to be honest rubbish but in both parts learning outcomes were covered. In your example wouldn't it be part of lesson planning?

[casualbiker]

 

I have been in teaching for 40+ years now, when you walk around the classrooms the "teachers" stand out, they know what they are doing, they have studied in a respected teaching college or university, got their bits of paper, done their prac teaching, paid their dues and are respected by their peers. I have seen a lot of the "others" and their performance is usually very disappointing. Students deserve the very best. Teaching is a profession and needs to be treated as such. If you want to become a teacher, welcome!

All of what you say is true. Question : Have you ever taught in Thailand?

Do you understand exactly WHAT a English conversation teacher does here in Thai schools?

We are TEFL (speak + listen) teachers. Not subject teachers. Maybe a better term would be conversation supervisor.


 

 
Maybe this is a contributing factor as to why Thai students' oral and aural proficiency is generally so abysmal.
 

Do you honestly think that having a 50 minute lesson with a native speaker once a week, generally THE ONLY time they can actually speak and listen to English is the contributing factor? If so you are clearly delusional!

Actually thinking about it the fact that at my school they ONLY get 50 minutes of speaking and listening (if their lucky) is the reason. They have an additional 5 lessons with a Thai teacher. And your blaming the TEFL teachers ..!

They should have more chances to speak and listen BUT are unlikely to if they continue down the path of over regulation of TEFL teaching!

Your thoughts?

Sent from my XT1032 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app Edited July 31, 2014 by casualbiker

[up-country_sinclair]

 

Your thoughts?

 

 

 

 

My thoughts are that schools in Thailand have been employing native English language speakers with a TEFL certificate for a very long time and I don't think anyone could point to real improvements in the students' speaking and listening skills.   For whatever reason, it just doesn't seem to be a successful model to foster achievement and maybe it's time to consider a different model.  For example, employing twice as many Filipinos at half the price and reducing the number of students in the classroom.   The improvement of listening skills could easily be accomplished with context relevant audio and video files and (most importantly) a well designed accompanying textbook.  And for the speaking skills, I don't see any problem with having Thai students learning to speak English with something resembling a Filipino accent.  After all, they're most likely going to be speaking with other non-native speakers of English (Chinese, Russians, Koreans). 

 

[casualbiker]

 

Your thoughts?
 
 

 
 
My thoughts are that schools in Thailand have been employing native English language speakers with a TEFL certificate for a very long time and I don't think anyone could point to real improvements in the students' speaking and listening skills.   For whatever reason, it just doesn't seem to be a successful model to foster achievement and maybe it's time to consider a different model.  For example, employing twice as many Filipinos at half the price and reducing the number of students in the classroom.   The improvement of listening skills could easily be accomplished with context relevant audio and video files and (most importantly) a well designed accompanying textbook.  And for the speaking skills, I don't see any problem with having Thai students learning to speak English with something resembling a Filipino accent.  After all, they're most likely going to be speaking with other non-native speakers of English (Chinese, Russians, Koreans). 
 

I absolutely agree about a well designed text book. I kinda agree about Filipinos as Thais in Thailand will always generally have an accent.

I don't agree about improvement.

English has only been taught by native speakers for about 10-12 years or so (at a meaningful level) and bearing in mind that's generally 1 or maybe 2 lessons a week I personally see great improvements in English and the confidence to try and speak it, both at school and out and about 7/11, Lotus etc. You obviously don't see that!

Sent from my XT1032 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

[brucetefl]

This might be interesting to some.

 

A few years ago we had a lot of students taking our TEFL course in Ban Phe.  We always went to one school to do our Teaching Practice (each of our students had to teach eight lessons to real students in a real Thai school).  The school was not a good one academically.  People who cared sent their kids to Rayong to the bigger and better schools.

 

When we first started visiting the school the kids were afraid of the teachers and could say nothing to them.  But we kept visiting that school month after month.  It was 80 to 120 hours of free classes per month at the school.

 

After a few months the students attitudes completely changed.  As soon as we arrived at the school the students would gather around the van and greet the teachers, ask them simple questions and chat with them.  There was a marked improvement in the students' English listening and speaking ability.

 

Then, quite suddenly, the director of the school told us we were no longer welcome.  The students had not improved their scores in their grammar-centric exams!