Crackdown On Foreign Teachers

[x3mist]

Yes. it's another impossible quest for the authorties. No country can make any perfect implementations.

But, it is a must to have a standard operating procedure, I just hope that they first made a background study on this action- and be ready for any amount of negative impact, hopefully most of it would be positive- and i hope, that they haven't crossed any agreements with any country as their campaign seems not making any exemptions.

But- maybe, the Thais are now slowly feeling insecure, and felt less safe as more and more Foreigners are coming in without proper screening. Obviosuly Thailand is more attractive than their neighboring Vietnam, Cambodia and Laos.

another maybe- the message is: we foreigners must be sensitive and be respectful to their culture- and be more honest when it comes to declaring their credentials.

My only concern is, they must a allow waivers for some schools who have to adjust to comply with these requirements as all these things involve great amount of money.

having an HONEST "business-ship" is never easy.

regarding effective teaching: it lies greatly to the individual teacher himself. Hiring pure Chinese teachers doesn't help learn chinese better if he/ she cannot properly explain and communicate with the students... plus the fact that English movies here are still with subtitles, and the music industry is 80% Thai... wherever you point you fingers at, they are not really as interested to learn as other countries.

[Nemo.]

My guess is that if the "new rules" are actually enforced the quality of teachers will FALL LOWER. The good teachers will move on/be deterred from coming to Thailand. Schools will just hire any backpacker illegally. 3months one teacher then a next etc. A paradise for the unqualified and child molesters!

Also there are "diploma mills" (fake unis) and "unaccredited" unis that offer full confirmation services. You get a degree, transcipts and a phone number + address for confimations! Even those with legit degrees may have to resort to buying this service as many unis wont confirm a degree

And many people change their names............

And I dont have a transcript, British unis never gave them out!

[sting01]

Let me start by saying great post. On the bit that I have coloured in bold, you know this gives me a great idea of how to get a new LOW COST mia noi. I have been asked on several occasions by girls to give them "English" lessons, but have declined... Maybe I will read an English textbook after all.

It's how PhilinBangkok (ajarn.com) claim he met his wife. The family asked him to teach the daughter and after a while .... wedding

[Scott]

I am in charge of an educational program. Much of this is doable. When we receive an application for a teacher. His passport information along with a copy of his degree are sent to the MOE which issues a letter to a Thai Embassy/consulate for the Non-immigrant B Visa. The MOE is (as I understand it) responsible to check with the University to see that the person attended.

For previous employees, I have had to write to the University to get confirmation that they attended and received a degree. (we don't get transcripts and haven't been asked for them).

All of this is rather easily done by email. For people with a name change, all we need is the court document changing the name, which gives the original name. The request to the University is made with the original name.

There are Universities that have closed or merged and I haven't run into this problem yet, but I am sure the records are kept by someone (such as the Higher Education Department/Ministry etc.).

Now, when teachers go to get their teacher's license, they must have the original degree with them. There are also some changes on getting licensed as a teacher in Thailand.

[TAWP]

Trying to remove unwanted/bad teachers is a good thing. God knows there are far to many bad teachers out there. But sadly they aren't limited to the non-credentials. Neither is raising the demands automatically going to raise the standard in English in the country.

And lets face it, Malaysia and Singapore are so far ahead in English it's silly (Yes, I know their history, but still...). Being able to fail students when they lack any knowledge in a course would be a start.

But what is needed is perhaps not the implementation of sharply raising the minimum demands, this will only increase salarys and sharply decrease the teacherpool to draw upon. It's to increase/add incentive for teachers to get validated and certified.

Set clear dividers as to what requirements you should have for each 'paygrade' as a teacher. Anyone wanting to live here is going to want to increase their possible salary and might get certified. And schools can set demands (or not, if they can't afford, don't want too) for what level the applicants should have.

A non-certified teacher is better then none or someone really crappy - aslong as they want to teach.

And besides, if not even most countries in europe can come close to filling teacher-slots with 'teachers with proper credentials' only, then how on earth will Thailand be able too? The same work, the pay in peanuts. Sounds like a dream, huh?

[buddhafly]

there's nothing wrong with schools wanting qualified teachers.

but they should realize that people with bachelor degrees are probably going to be more expensive.

can they handle that?

[astral]

The deputy Prime Minister of the UK is an ex merchant seaman,

Yes and look what an ass he made of himself last week, praising Malaysia for its policy of freedom and equal opportunity for all.

It only goes to emphasise the need for qualifications to do a job.

On the point about being able to speak English therefore I can teach it........

That is like saying the ability to drive a car makes you a motor mechanic.

This is why I never volunteer to teach English, even though I do have a bachelor degree and a post graduate teaching certificate.

[rexall]

A non-certified teacher is better then none or someone really crappy - aslong as they want to teach.

Mon 06 Nov 06, 9:33 a.m.

Hi TAWP, all,

A tiered system has some obvious appeal and advantages. It also has the potential for abuse such as employers saving money and red tape by hiring staff at the bottom tier but assigning those teachers to top-tier responsibilities.

Be that as it may, it is a pity that the bachelors is the baseline qualification in all cases. Certification, even rigorous certification, is something that a motivated individual could realistically undertake. With the appropriate motivation, personality and training, you can produce a wonderful teacher. If, however, someone is lacking a bachelors, for all practical purposes, it is impossible to get one; 120 semester credits (by the U.S. system), four years, and thousands of dollars, plus the loss of income during those four years. And for one of those groovy $800/mo. jobs? I don't think so!

Too bad. There is a better way here . . . somewhere. But I am not holding my breath.

Aloha,

Rex

[Jamnjam]

ROFL

Maybe you are right - if the students have good level of english already then foreign teachers are good.

In most cases, especially with kids, they have a very poor level of English. In this case the teacher should speak fluent Thai.

I have a number of friends (foreigners) teaching English in Thailand. They are often put in front of students who dont speak any English and then expected to teach them the rules of the language.

Foreign "teachers" are often employed because they are white and not because they are good teachers. There is too much emphasis on grammar and not enough of vocabulary.

Bar girls speak the best English - so maybe this is the future of Thailand.

I suppose you'd argue that bar girls were taught English by Thai teachers. Hmmmm....

[Richard W]

The reason for this is that many native English speakers do not know the rules of the language - as they have never been "taught" english formally.

To which rathole of the former British empire are you referring? In the colonies called USA, we had to take courses in English (including grammar and pronunciation) for twelve years, and more advanced courses for a BA. But if you mean the pedantic rules of grammar, and all the nomenclature for the subjunctive past perfect continuous passive, I would not have been being bothered to have been learning that.

Probably England. The formalised grammar content of our English Language 'O' level was covered in one lesson, much to general disbelief. That was thirty-odd years ago. Of course, there was far more correctional teaching over one's time in school, but it was not so formal. Indeed, a common complaint of teachers of foreign languages in England has been that they have to teach the grammatical terminology needed for the grammars of languages of Europe.

As to the normal pronunciation of '1.58 p.m.', that is a topic in itself. Let me just say that saying "two to two 'p' 'm'" would get you some odd looks, as indeed would "two to two", however many times it may in fact have been uttered.

The rules of English spelling are fascinating. I found a monograph discussing them once, and I wish I'd made a note of its title so I could get myself a copy. There were many that were not mentioned in school. The rules of English stress have been a research topic, and as native speakers we were barely taught any of them. Some of them really come under the heading of how to read - for a lot of vocabulary, it really is doubtful that the spoken form is the primary form.

In short, for an English speaker to teach the rules of English, he must make an explicit study of them, and I have severe doubts as to the adequacy of what is taught in school in England for this purpose.

[adjan jb]

- Teachers from countries where English is not an official language must present evidence of English-language fluency, in the form of standardized test results with the following minimum scores: IELTS 5.5; or TOEFL 550 or TOEIC 600.

If this applies to non native English speakers looking for a position as English teacher, it probably makes a lot of sense.

But if it applies to all foreign teachers, then it doesn't make any sense. Why would I need to speak fluent English as I teach French, my native language ? What will happen to my Chinese and Japanese colleagues who don't speak English at all ? (on the other hand some of them speak, read and write Thai)

Confused in Chiang Mai.

[sting01]

The reason for this is that many native English speakers do not know the rules of the language - as they have never been "taught" english formally.

To which rathole of the former British empire are you referring? In the colonies called USA, we had to take courses in English (including grammar and pronunciation) for twelve years, and more advanced courses for a BA. But if you mean the pedantic rules of grammar, and all the nomenclature for the subjunctive past perfect continuous passive, I would not have been being bothered to have been learning that.

Probably England. The formalised grammar content of our English Language 'O' level was covered in one lesson, much to general disbelief. That was thirty-odd years ago. Of course, there was far more correctional teaching over one's time in school, but it was not so formal. Indeed, a common complaint of teachers of foreign languages in England has been that they have to teach the grammatical terminology needed for the grammars of languages of Europe.

As to the normal pronunciation of '1.58 p.m.', that is a topic in itself. Let me just say that saying "two to two 'p' 'm'" would get you some odd looks, as indeed would "two to two", however many times it may in fact have been uttered.

The rules of English spelling are fascinating. I found a monograph discussing them once, and I wish I'd made a note of its title so I could get myself a copy. There were many that were not mentioned in school. The rules of English stress have been a research topic, and as native speakers we were barely taught any of them. Some of them really come under the heading of how to read - for a lot of vocabulary, it really is doubtful that the spoken form is the primary form.

In short, for an English speaker to teach the rules of English, he must make an explicit study of them, and I have severe doubts as to the adequacy of what is taught in school in England for this purpose.

The two to two was posted by me, so allow me to discuss it a bit.

During my school time (including University time) I was told the best would be to make it easy and pronouce 'two to two pm' as : one fifty height pm And the case was given to us as the exemple to never use (because obviously useless). But I do repeat there is place(s) in LOS where thai teachers (namely in the boy' school in Chayaphum) who still teach the kids : it's two to two o'clock !!!!!!!!!!!!!!! (please notice also the o'clock, no kidding).

So does it need some certification to NOT teach things like that? Does it need some certification to laught when suddently a kid tell the time by this way? Or does it simply need people trully fluent in conversational english to correct the kids and tell them (not teach them, but tell them) no one will say that?

So yes, teachers , Kru we should say, have to be hightly qualified, but repetitors , Ajarn let say, have simply to have enought knowledge.

[Jamnjam]

Lots of folks reading this thread...

Remember, please, people, that TEACHING covers two entirely different kettles of fish here.

On the one hand, we have SUBJECT TEACHERS. For that group, I agree with the most stringent and restrictive of the posters here- bachelor's degree or higher, vetting, the works.

However, the TEFL market simply can't get people with these qualifications for the money they offer- and it is very dubious whether people teaching such a skill really need that much higher education- and it is a very important and needed group of instructors (more than teachers) in Thailand. It's the only way country schools can get contact with native speakers. TEFLs are really enough in many cases.

"Steven"

Well put Steven.

[PeaceBlondie]

The 'two to two' example is a good one, that I use for a pun: "Oh, my watch has two to two, too."

There are numerous ways of telling time in every culture I've known, and the key factor IMHO is whether words communicate. One trick in teaching EFL is to know all the variations, and be able to say which variations are okay. Also, you need to know at which level it would communicate. If a non-English speaker calls their wristwatch a clock, I don't argue (Spanish uses the same word, reloj for both). But I reply with a proper use of wristwatch that teaches the student without causing him to lose face.

Experience - such as teaching EFL in Thailand for two years, full time - is a great substitute or replacement or equivalence for formal training in pedagogy and grammar.

[madi]

The Thai people have a plan here.

First, before I begin, I must say that I do have a REAL degree and so this entire thing will not matter to me. I do feel nad for those who could lose jobs over this stupid move.

But anyway-----

The Thai people are just moving on with the way they have been moving. They DO NOT want farangs here and so they are getting rid of more and more of the group. I am a farang.

What percentage of the farang teachers do you guess have REAL degrees?

I bet it is 10% or less.

Thai love Thai is what this thing is all about.

They would rather have a Thai teacher then have a farang teacher that has no degree.

It is a pride thing.

Is it smart of them?

NO

But this is Thailand.

[sting01]

The 'two to two' example is a good one, that I use for a pun: "Oh, my watch has two to two, too."

There are numerous ways of telling time in every culture I've known, and the key factor IMHO is whether words communicate. One trick in teaching EFL is to know all the variations, and be able to say which variations are okay. Also, you need to know at which level it would communicate. If a non-English speaker calls their wristwatch a clock, I don't argue (Spanish uses the same word, reloj for both). But I reply with a proper use of wristwatch that teaches the student without causing him to lose face.

Experience - such as teaching EFL in Thailand for two years, full time - is a great substitute or replacement or equivalence for formal training in pedagogy and grammar.

That was my point in a previous post : Does a certification or a diploma is needed to pedagogically behave by this way, or experience (or willingness to aquire this experience) is enought?

I do believe, because I witnessed it years ago, there is no need to have a diploma for that, assuming people who give conversational skills to students are NOT teachers. Assistant, repetitor, tutor .... whatever you want to call them is good as long as it's not teacher. They do not teach, they make students fluent in a foreign language!! Is it looking down to those people who do certainly a good job? Not at all, maybe that is semantic, maybe it's simply to point they must have skills that are not necessary learn in school or university.

[Ijustwannateach]

Certain posters here seem to have misunderstood that teaching *conversation* (what TEFL teachers generally do) is not teaching *grammar* (what TEFL teachers generally don't). *Thai* English teachers teach formal grammar/mechanics/pronunciation rules- that's what they do well, and is why very little English is ever spoken in Thai-taught Thai classrooms.

Let's take a little example and see if our "educated" commentators can help me out:

When I was a TEFLer, I ran into a bit of a pronunciation mystery. The words photo, photograph, and photographer all have different stress patterns and vowel sounds on the 2nd syllables. There *is* a rule that accounts for this, but I never found out what it was called- a friend of mine who'd done a masters specialising in GRAMMAR & MECHANICS (sounds awful, doesn't it?) did happen to know about it, but he'd forgotten specifically what the rule was called.

So here's the challenge.

1. What's the rule? Name it specifically and quote your source.

2. Explain how knowing the name of this rule and teaching it to Thai elementary/high school students could possibly make any difference in their study of English- as it is, after all, "one of the rules."

I *did* actually teach the pronunciation changes, which is all that any native speaker I have ever met (except for that one guy I just mentioned with the master's degree) has ever known about.

To know "all the rules of grammar" literally means an entire encyclopedia of detail, and I doubt that anyone without an academic specialisation in the matter knows even most of them, or that it would ever, ever matter in the typical TEFL environment even if such an environment could pay the kinds of people who would know.

"Steven"

P.S. A No-Prize to the first person who comes up with the rule, especially if it is without googling.

[johnnyk]

Degrees and paper qualifications don't make anyone educated or a good teacher.

Most of us have worked with MAs & Ph.Ds who can't change a lightbulb or go shopping on their own.

We've also worked with TESOL/TESL/TEFL holders who can't teach a dog how to chase a ball.

That said, papers are a better initial filter than the ones now in widespread use:

1) You are falang (check)

2) You have an Inglit vocab greater than the boss and sometimes speak in grammatically correct sentences (check)

3) You will accept peanuts money because you just love this 'really groovy country' (check).

Proper qualifications and experience go hand in hand with better salaries and working conditions.

The hirers have to unnastan this if things are going to improve.

[Richard W]

When I was a TEFLer, I ran into a bit of a pronunciation mystery. The words photo, photograph, and photographer all have different stress patterns and vowel sounds on the 2nd syllables. There *is* a rule that accounts for this, but I never found out what it was called- a friend of mine who'd done a masters specialising in GRAMMAR & MECHANICS (sounds awful, doesn't it?) did happen to know about it, but he'd forgotten specifically what the rule was called.

So here's the challenge.

1. What's the rule? Name it specifically and quote your source.

I'll try not to spoil it for everyone else, but I'll stake my claim as I think you're asking the impossible.

Very similar rules also occur in Latin, Classical Sanskrit (not Vedic) and Arabic, and I've never seen it given a name for these languages. (I could invent one that's particularly appropriate for your examples, but would be singularly inappropriate for verbs.) What's exceptional in English is that the language-specific 'customisation' is different for nouns, adjectives and verbs.

I first saw the tweaks necessary to fit English stress in a linguistics research journal. The relevant volume (or part volume) appeared in the period 1979 to early 1982. (I don't recall it being traced back to SPE, but then that work keeps to the doctrine that spelling is entirely secondary to pronuciation. It's long been known that the stress placement of English is similar to that of Latin.) Unfortunately, I can remember neither the author nor the name of the journal. The article was analysing stress in terms of feet, rather than the very complex system of primary, secondary and tertiary stresses that has been unreliably assigned to English.

2. Explain how knowing the name of this rule and teaching it to Thai elementary/high school students could possibly make any difference in their study of English- as it is, after all, "one of the rules."

The name is probably of no use - I don't need it to locate Latin stress.

It tells them how to pronounce place names like 'Chappaquiddick'. According to the research paper, it was actually tested on a raft of similarly obscure names, with consistent results. The rule functions as a reading rule - and for a Thai much more of English vocabulary is unfamiliar enough to need reading rules. This particularly applies to scientific terminology. (Some of us native speakers would have benefited from being taught the rule.)

[sriracha john]

That's exactly what three of us in the back of the classroom had on our cheat sheets...

Do we pass, Teach?

[Scott]

I absolutely don't get it. People who think that a degree (or certification) means nothing--well, the next time your sick, just go to someone without a medical degree and see how comfortable you are. Next time you see a bridge that was built by people with no degrees in engineering, see how long it lasts.

This is ludicrous. Degrees don't make good teachers, however, it's the easiest and best place to start. I've worked with a bunch of non-degreed people and somewhere after grade 3 they started getting lost in the grammar and content.

Come on people--do you want your children in the classroom with the majority of these "teachers."

[yoshiwara]

I absolutely don't get it. People who think that a degree (or certification) means nothing--well, the next time your sick, just go to someone without a medical degree and see how comfortable you are. Next time you see a bridge that was built by people with no degrees in engineering, see how long it lasts.

This is ludicrous. Degrees don't make good teachers, however, it's the easiest and best place to start. I've worked with a bunch of non-degreed people and somewhere after grade 3 they started getting lost in the grammar and content.

Come on people--do you want your children in the classroom with the majority of these "teachers."

Tend to agree...

...many school learners expect at some time to be assessed....a qualified teacher gives more confidence that they understand and appreciate the general assessment process...you cannot teach in the UK without a degree, so why should Thailand be different? and anyway who hasn't got a degree?

[TAWP]

Next time you see a bridge that was built by people with no degrees in engineering, see how long it lasts.

I thought most bridges here was constructed by people without any degree in engineering. I'm only hoping someone that planned it atleast had...

[rexall]

Proper qualifications and experience go hand in hand with better salaries and working conditions.

The hirers have to unnastan this if things are going to improve.

This is perhaps a little off-topic, but all of this should serve as a red flag to anyone who imagines that TEFL is some kind of "career" as opposed to a gig that you do for a couple of years until you are prepared to get a life. The exception, of course, are those few who are truly motivated, on track to obtain a post graduate degree or degrees, and capable of publishing and otherwise duking it out in the academic jungles. Without this sort of dedicated career-pathing, most teachers are going to quickly reach the top of the pay scale (which is not all that different from the bottom!) and stay there. Beyond a couple of years, experience doesn't count for much, and many employers would be just as happy to replace you with a younger, cheaper model with a bright & shiny BA + TEFL who is less demanding financially and about working conditions.

Aloha,

Rex

[PeaceBlondie]

rexall makes a good point about career and salary advancement in TEFL, generally and in Thailand. Teaching EFL in Thailand is not, generally, something you'd want your nephew/niece to do as a career for decades. As rexall says, if you want to go B.Ed - M.Ed - PhD and so forth, that's another thing.

I look at it from a hormonal angle. Most TEFLers don't come here just for sex, but being human, they start having orgasms with a nubile Thai who becomes pregnant, and before they know what's happened, they're a Daddy. Their new family can't go home to farangland and there's no other work, so they keep earning 33K and then 38K and then they're stuck.

I've always echoed Scott's remarks about degrees: educators who educate Thais want staff who are educated enough to educate the Thais. Duhhh. To those who say "any fool, brickie or lout can teach English conversation in Thailand," try teaching four hours to classes of 50 in a hot day without air conditioning. Careful, don't step on the classroom dog; he thinks he belongs there.

Thai students don't ask, "What's an adverb?" but their lessons in their books require the teacher to explain it, to demonstrate the difference between adverbs and adjectives. You can't teach a language without understanding grammar, how to pronounce things. And that means to explain it very clearly in a few simple words in a foreign language that will communicate. Not an easy task.

[sting01]

Certain posters here seem to have misunderstood that teaching *conversation* (what TEFL teachers generally do) is not teaching *grammar* (what TEFL teachers generally don't). *Thai* English teachers teach formal grammar/mechanics/pronunciation rules- that's what they do well, and is why very little English is ever spoken in Thai-taught Thai classrooms.

Let's take a little example and see if our "educated" commentators can help me out:

When I was a TEFLer, I ran into a bit of a pronunciation mystery. The words photo, photograph, and photographer all have different stress patterns and vowel sounds on the 2nd syllables. There *is* a rule that accounts for this, but I never found out what it was called- a friend of mine who'd done a masters specialising in GRAMMAR & MECHANICS (sounds awful, doesn't it?) did happen to know about it, but he'd forgotten specifically what the rule was called.

So here's the challenge.

1. What's the rule? Name it specifically and quote your source.

2. Explain how knowing the name of this rule and teaching it to Thai elementary/high school students could possibly make any difference in their study of English- as it is, after all, "one of the rules."

I *did* actually teach the pronunciation changes, which is all that any native speaker I have ever met (except for that one guy I just mentioned with the master's degree) has ever known about.

To know "all the rules of grammar" literally means an entire encyclopedia of detail, and I doubt that anyone without an academic specialisation in the matter knows even most of them, or that it would ever, ever matter in the typical TEFL environment even if such an environment could pay the kinds of people who would know.

"Steven"

P.S. A No-Prize to the first person who comes up with the rule, especially if it is without googling.

I think it's related to the origin (ethymology) of those words. Photo is obviously old greek, photograph could be french (if yes so the usual stress rules will not apply) photographer is definitively english. By so, photograph (with other words such as 'buffet') will not follow any of the usual stress rules, I do believe photo and photographer do follow the usual stress rules (but as I am a frog I can be totally wrong, is not it?)

One point (a pedantic one) if I recall Cambridge position of this subject , those differences (stress and prononciation) apply only in english english, but all of them will have the prononciation of photograph in american english

Edited November 7, 2006 by sting01

[Ijustwannateach]

Whatever the rule is, I think I've made the point that none of the armchair academics here actually knows it (though we get close- and yes, the pronunciation changes in American English, too, plus all the t's are flap t's except in photographer, where the stress makes it a hard t like the British use). Only specialists know "all the rules of grammar," and that doesn't include the average B.Ed. or even M.Ed. teacher.

And once again, most English teachers in Thailand are teaching things like:

"How are you?"

"What colour is this?"

"Where do you live?"

"What did you do yesterday?"

...ad nauseum to kids who are between 6 and 15 years old. Trust me, it doesn't take a college degree. And if you're not paying more than 25k, you're not going to get a teacher with one to do that, either.

"Steven"

[Scott]

When I first started working in a school, it was pretty basic stuff. Now, after quite a few years, the program has grown and changed. We have foreign teachers teaching advanced math, chemistry. physics. In addition, there is social studies, and the actual English language courses include reading novels (we have moved from graded readers to regular novels).

This does require teachers with degrees in the subjects they teach.

Part of the point is that in order to progress in the English education area, there needs to be an increase in the ability of the teachers.

It wasn't until we got rid of a lot of the less well educated teachers and they were replaced with better qualified people, that the program began to move forward. Teachers need to know when to move forward, when to wait etc. There needs to be curriculum development so that what is learned one year is built on the next year, rather than just repeated.

This requires people who know there stuff.

[Ijustwannateach]

^That's *not* TEFL.

I entirely agree with what you say about subject teachers' qualifications- I've already said it myself on this very same thread.

But it's *not* TEFL.

There is a distinction between the two, which I think it is important not to blur.

"Steven"

[sting01]

When I first started working in a school, it was pretty basic stuff. Now, after quite a few years, the program has grown and changed. We have foreign teachers teaching advanced math, chemistry. physics. In addition, there is social studies, and the actual English language courses include reading novels (we have moved from graded readers to regular novels).

This does require teachers with degrees in the subjects they teach.

Part of the point is that in order to progress in the English education area, there needs to be an increase in the ability of the teachers.

It wasn't until we got rid of a lot of the less well educated teachers and they were replaced with better qualified people, that the program began to move forward. Teachers need to know when to move forward, when to wait etc. There needs to be curriculum development so that what is learned one year is built on the next year, rather than just repeated.

This requires people who know there stuff.

Yes, that is professors. Nothing related with the 'monkey work' of make student speak a foreign language.

As it was stated earlier, there is no need to have a Phd to ask : how are you? What's your name? ....

and that is what it's all about. What kids need to speak a foreign language (here or somewhere else) : to be in contact with people fluent in this foriegn language. What the kids need to learn a foreign language : a teacher who know how to teach this foreign language. 2 different jobs, 2 differents qualifications. Saddly here those 2 jobs have the same name.

For what I witnessed upcountry, I do believe even me could be qualified to help kids to speak english. On the other hand, I would never ever imagine one single second I could pretend to be an english teacher.

There are several flaws, but to avod to address any of them, the new legislation handle all the foreign people in the education area/field by the same way :

the designation is confused and confusing : what is a teacher in fact? the guy who teach, or the guy doing the monkey job? Why not address that simple problem? Well, it's still a face question, because a part of thai teacher who teach englsih are not qualified to do so (I would say they voluntered to do so by good intentions but still are not qualified in english)

the money problem : as teacher cover both the person whoi have skills and knowledge and the person who have only some fluency, so salary have to be the same for both , aligned on the lowest. Is it necessaryto precise why this slave trade was not addressed?

The visa problem : following a recent pitfall with Karr (even if the guy is looser, I am still waiting to see any legal action against him. In fact he fantasmed about his sad life ... as many farang do when in Thailand or in their own country), to avoid a loose of face (or more accuratly to avoid to have the feeling Thailand could have loose face) the visa system was reformed for the worst. Sure the VOA and the 30 days exemptin was totally abused by visa runners (I count myself as visa runner) but why not simply address the problem of the people who work in the schools. Does the primary school in Nong Muand (Lopbury Province) need a certified english teacher? I do not think so, but yes the kids need to have contact with a farang that will speak english with them.

Worst, but really the most worst (sorry to be grammatically incorrect and redundant), is by those new rules the establishment have secceed to make the expat community explode. Right now each group is fighting for itelf and against the others. Things that are not related to the teachers crackdown are for exemple : what if you are married with a thai wife and earn about 32 000 bht a month? You simply can not stay here (too poor, and it make me laught to hear that in a country where the main part of the population earn less than 7 000 a month). What if you invest 3 000 000 in a condo? Can not stay here too .... Long list. But that long list is forgotten because people right now are divided.

The teacher problem is one amongst other (e pluribus sunum if I recall well). Fact also, as it's well know a part of the so called 'english teachers' are or looser, or people in great problems, as it's also well know they easily raise their voice, the fact to hit them simply cover the real acting. Smoke cloud or kinda.