ELT Vacancies Open For All – by Martin Sketchley

In my English teaching career, I have furthered my interest the recruitment and employment of English language teachers. I am currently responsible for the recruitment and employment of young learner teachers and have employed teachers from UK, USA as well as from Europe. Our school has zero tolerance against the discrimination of English teachers and we attempt to lead by example. We have employed teachers from Poland and Italy, and they are not seen any different in our school. This was great development where I had to work against deep-rooted discrimination in South Korea against native and non-native English speakers, as well as between the recruitment of English teachers from either America, Canada or the United Kingdom.

In a recent blog post on my website, I uncovered an advertisement by a language school in China seeking a professional with one catch: “no Asian face”.

pic 2

I was flabbergasted that recruiter would authorise such an advertisement with the requirement that those who are considered ‘Asian’ (whatever that means) should not apply for this position. One has to wonder whether there are still organisations in the world which need to learn that such discrimination in any language can be detrimental to both recruiters as well as the school seeking the teacher. This is the reason why I have developed a recruitment area on my website: to ensure that all English teachers, irrespective of their ethnicity or their country of origin, have equal opportunities.

Before a job post is accepted on my website, I personally review the post and then amend anything if required before it is agreed. However, from the limited success so far, I have not had to amend much and I was very surprised that a recent job post contained the clause: “English native speakers or Candidates from Europe, Latin America with clean accent.

Although it is not ideal to maintain teachers of English only have a ‘clean accent’ or to only focus on particular regions of the world, it is definitely a step in the right direction. Ideally, the advert would focus on all teachers of English around the world irrespective of nationality or ethnicity. However, this is a small success as Chinese recruiters are finally noticing that professional English teachers can be sourced from countries besides those that officially have English as their first language.

Furthermore, the many potential candidates that have registered on my website are speakers whose first language is not English. This is incredibly rewarding for me as I would really like to see more ‘non-native teachers’, some of whom I have had the pleasure of working with, have the same opportunities as native English teachers and if my website advocates equal opportunities in English language teaching, so much the better.

As Marek has mentioned in a previous blog post, non-native English teachers are just as suitable for employment opportunities as native English teachers and with 70% of online advertisements seeking for native English teachers, it tacitly disregards all suitable non-native English teachers for the post.

In fact, I received wonderful feedback (see screenshot below) about one particular job advertisement on my website from a person called Andy Barbeiro who said it was “the best job advert for an ELT position I have ever seen! Transparent, detailed and non-discriminatory (mother-tongue never mentioned once!) The proof that these kinds of job posts are so rare is in Hussein F. Allam ‘s previous comment. It’s clear from the post that all qualified teachers can apply. If I was still teaching, I’d jump at this opportunity.

pic 3

I’m so pleased to see that my hard-work is now being recognised and that it is gaining popularity among teachers no matter their nationality.

I do hope that teachers irrespective of their ethnicity or their nationality register and apply for employment opportunities as well as employers post teaching opportunities for applicants no matter their physical location on my website. It would be a great achievement to assist in the battle against negative stereotypes for non-native English teachers and ensure that the entire ELT profession is more highly respected by all: employers and recruiters.

martin sketchleyMartin Sketchley has been an English language teacher for over eleven years now, with teaching experience in South Korea, Romania as well as the UK. He is Young Learner Co-ordinator at LTC Eastbourne and teaches students from around the world. He is responsible for curriculum development, teacher training as well as organising formal and informal observations for teaching staff. Martin also is an Assistant Examiner for Cambridge ESOL Examinations and marks writing for the Cambridge exams (PET, FCE, etc.). He holds an MA in English Language Teaching from the University of Sussex, a Diploma, Trinity Young Learners Extension Certificate (TYLEC) as well as a CELTA. Finally, Martin runs a website (ELT Experiences) which focuses on teaching, lesson observations and recruitment and he also uploads videos to his YouTube Channel.

Making job specifications more specific by Alex Moore

The fact that you’ve visited this website and are reading this tells me you probably don’t need convincing that “native-speakerism” is a myth that discriminates against thousands of qualified teachers, for whom English happens not to be their native language.

I’m also going to assume you’ve read Marek’s post about “native speaker only” job adverts, and his suggested write-back campaign.

Advertising for native speakers only is considered discriminatory by TESOL International or IATEFL, and a breach of Article 14 of the European Convention on Human Rights. Writing back is an excellent way of reminding employers of this, and showing that teachers, of whatever background, care.

You can’t say “native speakers only” any more. However, there is a one-word dodge that could, potentially allow schools to continue the hiring practice.

Imagine you are the DoS or principal of a school where students, or their families, seem to prefer native speakers. You may know that academic opinion is against them on this, but it would be too hard to change their minds. You’re also worried that, if you tried, they might take offence or feel let down, and take their business to the school down the road who will tell them what they want to hear. TEFL Equity might be an admirable principle, but it’s a principle you can’t afford to have.

So you’d like to continue employing native speakers, but know you can’t explicitly advertise for them. You ask for native-level speakers instead. That one extra word send out the right message, “non-native speakers have a chance, if their English is good enough”, but retains all the power: “We decide who is native-level, and who isn’t”. A school could, covertly, still only hire native speakers. Instead of telling non-native applicants that they’re being turned down because of the crest on their passport, they could just say “Sorry, we don’t think your English is native-level”. End of chat.

This “native-level” phrase isn’t hard to find. Looking more or less randomly on the “International jobs board” at EslCafe.com, I found schools in Turkey and Russia that listed “NATIVE LEVEL”, in capitals, in the first line of their text. Another, in Hungary, asked for “native fluency” and one in Spain had a requirements list where, tellingly, “native level of English” was listed above “TEFL or CELTA”.

I found similar results at TEFL.com. A company that runs summer schools in the UK and elsewhere in Europe asked for applicants with an “English native level of competence” (sic), and similar phrases seem to be common throughout adverts for British summer schools. A full-time job advert in Poland, the country I currently work in, shouts that it wants an “ENGLISH NATIVE LEVEL SPEAKER” in the headline, though weirdly doesn’t mention this in the “qualifications” list later.

In all these cases, I have no idea what thought process lay behind the wording of the adverts. For all I know, these schools may give NNESTs a fair hearing, and may have many on their payroll. But, if I were a non-native, seeing that advert, I might still wonder: “Is there any point in applying for this?”

Also, all of these schools are in ECHR signatory countries, so are presumably aware of their Article 14 responsibility. Would they advertise for natives only, if they were legally free to do so? I don’t know, but we’re entitled to be suspicious.

So, inspired by the aforementioned write-back campaign against “native only” adverts, here is an alternative letter, aimed at the more widespread (in Europe) “native-level” phrase:

Dear __________,

I am writing in reply to your recent job advert for English teachers, posted at [web address].

Your advert lists “native-level” command of English as a requirement for candidates.

“Native-level” is a vague phrase. It is highly open to interpretation, both on the employers’ side and the potential applicants’. Many qualified teachers, for whom English happens to be a second language, might be put off from applying by this wording – a scenario where both parties potentially lose out.

As I’m sure you know, there are many ways of formally classifying language ability. If you specify a CEFR level, IELTS grade or Cambridge Suite exam grade, applicants will know the standard they are being judged against, and have an objective way of demonstrating their proficiency.

Furthermore, non-native speakers, as English teachers, can provide an inspiring example to your students, living proof that hard work, dedication and practice pay off. Compared to native speakers, they will also know the exam systems available to their students, having passed through one or more of them themselves.

Bearing this in mind, I hope you might consider amending the above-mentioned advert, and future adverts, to include a more precise phrase than “native-level”.

Thank you for your time. I look forward to hearing from you.

Regards,

This is not about telling schools who they should and should not hire. I am proud to say the company I currently work for requires candidates to have an IELTS band 8, or demonstrate a CEFR C2 level, and employers are perfectly entitled to set such high standards. But falling back on a weasel phrase like “native-level” is as good as not setting standards at all.

alex-mooreAlex Moore currently works in Poland. Before becoming an English teacher, he worked as a journalist for a local newspaper group in his native South Wales. After qualifying, his first spell abroad was in China, from 2011 to 2016 (“a six-month career break that got seriously out of hand”). During that time he played a key role in opening two new language school campuses in Chongqing and was appointed Foreign Teacher Manager by i2. Since then, he has worked at CSL in Swansea and is now at IH Bielsko-Biala.
Fun fact: In his very first placement in China, the school sent him back to the agency after three days, complaining he “stuttered too much”. Since then, his delivery has improved, or his DoSes have become more considerate, or both.

Native Speaker Privilege and Unprofessionalism within the ESL Industry by Kevin Hodgson 

These days, there is a lot of talk about privilege, particularly white male privilege, in English language media.  It is argued that people who fit these racial and gender profiles receive institutional benefits because they “…resemble the people who dominate the powerful positions in our institutions” (Kendall, 2002, p. 1).  However, others have argued that the term is problematic because the issue of inequity is much more dynamic or overlapping and ignores other important variables such as social and economic class.  A quick perusal of the comments section on any online article dealing with the topic will immediately reveal just how strongly opinionated people are on either side of the debate; it has only helped to create even more divisiveness in societies that are already ideologically separated by an ever growing political schism of conservatism vs. liberalism. 

Seen from a global perspective, however, one wonders why no mention is even given to another form of privilege in the English speaking media, one that affects over 7 billion people worldwide: native speakerism.  According to Peggy McIntosh (1998), white males believe that their privileges are “conditions of daily experience” universally available to all, but they are in reality, however, “unearned power conferred systematically”. Now, couldn’t the same statement be made about people who are born in countries where English is the native language, or more specifically, in Kachru’s ‘inner circle nations such as Britain, Canada or the United States of America?  Whether it is in competition for a career job with a successful international corporation or simply traveling overseas for pleasure, native English speakers, regardless of race or gender, always have an advantage, and, therefore, have privilege over those who are not.

There are many countries in the world, like Japan for example, where people who wish to attend a University must study English for 12 years and then pass an English language exam before they can even take their first course, and then, if they decide to have a professional career such as an engineer when they graduate, they must have a higher level of reading proficiency than the average native English speaker in order to keep up to date with the most current literature in their field. Similarly, in many other countries, like those in the Arabian Gulf, the situation is even more daunting because the person hoping to go to University not only has to pass an English Language entrance exam but also must study almost all faculty subjects in English.  If these non-native speakers then hope to compete for a career position with a successful, international corporation, they may have to compete with a native English speaker for whom a high level proficiency in a subsequent language was most likely an option rather than an obligation (while native speaking university students can focus on mastering their individual subject matter, non-native speakers must also master a foreign language, often one that is linguistically antithetical to her or his own, in addition to their major or study their major in a subsequent language).  Language acquisition requires an enormous investment of time, effort and finance, and the luxury of not having to make that investment is certainly a privilege that most people in the world have not been granted.

Even the simple and enjoyable act of traveling has numerous taken-for-granted privileges for native speakers. For as long as they are traveling to a popular tourist destination, the average native English speaker will not have to utter a single syllable in the local language in order to have their needs met, whereas most non-native speakers are going to have to learn some basic “survival” English in order to get past customs, make accommodation reservations, and, yes, even eat, a linguistic conundrum that very few native speaking travelers have had to experience. Personally, when I travel overseas, I always try to learn some local vocabulary and expressions prior to my trip.  I do this not only because I am an applied linguist and interested in languages but also because I am aware of my native speakerist privilege and try to show a little respect, something very few of my fellow native speakers seem to do.  This has become evident by the reactions of surprise I have received from locals when I simply ask them a one sentence question in their language before blabbing away in English: “Excuse me, do you speak English?”  It really doesn’t take much effort to learn one sentence, but you’d be surprised how many of my fellow native speaking colleagues even bother to do that much when they travel abroad.

Speaking of my colleagues, if native English speakers enjoy numerous privileges studying, working and traveling in international contexts, then Native speaking English language instructors enjoy extraordinary special privileges, particularly with attaining employment; it has been well documented that many, if not a majority of, employers of English language instructors adopt discriminatory hiring practices against non-native speakers (Mahboob & Golden, 2013).  What is not documented, however, but is plainly obvious to anyone who works in this field, is that a very large percentage of these native English speakers are also mono-lingual.  In my own personal experience, I have been working in this field for almost 17 years in 3 different countries, and I can state without hesitation that, generally speaking, mono-lingualism and mono-culturalism are the norm for the majority of native speakers I have worked with or met. This is very disturbing precisely because it shows how much the applied linguistics profession is affected by, and consequently condones and encourages, native-speakerist privilege.   After all, ESL is concerned with not only teaching English, but teaching it as a subsequent language, and, therefore, the personal experience of having acquired one should be a logical pre-requisite to teach; how many other professions would allow people to do a job without any personal and practical experience?  Moreover, having subsequent language proficiency only enhances a language’s instructor’s credentials because it increases their ability to meet their students’ affective and pedagogical needs. Instructors with subsequent language acquisition, particularly in their students’ mother tongue in EFL contexts, are more qualified to conduct contrastive analysis, adopt teaching practices that are context sensitive, and, most importantly, empathize with their students and act as a model of a successful language learner, thereby enhancing student motivation while simultaneously reducing accusations of adhering to ethnocentric pedagogical practices (Hodgson, 2008).

Personally, I would very much like to expose the depth of native-speakerist beliefs within this profession by conducting research on monolingual native speakers with regard to this topic.  However, inaction is less a result of my own lethargy but rather acknowledgement that any such attempt would be futile; it would be extremely difficult to get such people even to participate in such a study, and, if there were willing participants, it would be even harder to get them to do so honestly.  I believe I can assert this claim with confidence because of my experience with my native speaking colleagues over the years, especially when they have discovered my strong feelings against native-speakerism. 

Although the personal anecdotes from throughout my career are numerous, I will share only a few that I feel are the most revealing. Once when I was in an interview for a managerial position and my research interests became the topic of discussion, I was asked by one of the interviewers if my research findings would affect my hiring practices.  After replying in the affirmative, the interviewer then asked me how I felt about hiring all Indian instructors because they were willing to work for so much less.  I understand the point that the interviewer was trying to make, but to me it was irrelevant, and I responded that qualifications should be the main requirement and instructors should receive the same remuneration regardless of their passport or place of birth.  Nothing more about the matter was said and the interview switched to another line of query (for the reader’s interest, I did not get the job; however, I am honest and willing to admit that I may have had other shortcomings that resulted in the final decision).

Another time, after I had one of my manuscripts published, I was confronted by a mono-lingual native speaking colleague who disagreed strongly with my findings and related opinions.  The article in question dealt with the negative psycho-linguistic affect of adopting native speaker models of linguistic competence in English language teaching (Hodgson, 2014).  During the lengthy and uncomfortable conversation, it became evident that this colleague had read only the conclusion (even though teaching research skills at a tertiary institution was part of this person’s professional responsibilities!).  Whatever I said to this person simply feel on deaf ears and I was told very tersely that I was wrong and that only native English speakers are the most qualified to teach the English language.  Realizing it was impossible even to debate the matter with my interlocutor, I ended the discussion by suggesting that my colleague conduct research and then submit findings to a peer-reviewed journal for publication.  Although this confrontation with this person was a very unpleasant experience, it remains an even bitter memory because this person was well known for prioritizing personal financial gain over professional responsibilities by leaving campus during official working hours for supplementary IELTS work.

I mention these two examples because I believe they illustrate the crux of the matter; the affirmation of native-speakerist beliefs, and the corresponding privileges that accompany them, continues to provide unquestioned legitimacy for the financial security of mono-lingual, native speaking instructors in general and the relaxed, professionally inactive ones in particular; so long as both the general public and employers, students and teachers, all buy into the native-speaker fallacy, then the status quo will remain unquestioned, and, consequently, the main qualification of, and justification for, the native-speaking instructor’s professional and financial position will be his or her ‘nativeness’.  However, so long as this continues, we cannot justifiably consider applied linguistics a profession; without a universally accepted system of employment based solely on merit and ability, our profession can only be classified as an unethical industry in which the consumers have been convinced by unscrupulous advertising to buy a lesser quality product at an overpriced cost. 

If the main method to combat white privilege is through reflection and acknowledgement of the privilege and then its abolition (Kendall, 2002), then perhaps this tactic could be applied to native speaker privilege as well. For this to happen, however, it will require acknowledgement among native English speakers about their privilege (which, in turn, will require them to cease viewing division through their domestic lenses (at least temporarily) and see their shared privilege in international contexts), and resistance among non-native learners to support institutions financially that support the prolongation of such privileges.  The issue of native-speakerism has been discussed for decades now, and too many native speaker instructors have unjustly benefited from it while too many non-native learners and teachers have been unethically disadvantaged by it.  It is time to put theory into practice and make applied linguistics the respectful profession it deserves to be.

kevinKevin Hodgson has been teaching English at both the secondary and tertiary levels in Canada, Japan and the U.A.E for 15 years.  He holds a Master’s Degree in Applied Linguistics from Brock University, Canada, and his current research interests are in the fields of native-speakerism and psycho-linguistics..

References

  • Hodgson, K. (2008). Unloading the native speaking EFL instructor’s burden: The correlation between knowledge of students’ language and culture and the ability to meet their affective and pedagogical needs. Retrieved from here 
  • Hodgson, K. (2014). Mismatch: Globalization and Native Speaker Models of Linguistic Competence, RELC Journal.45 (2), 113-134.
  • Kendall, F. (2002). Understanding White Privilege. Retrieved from here. 
  • Mahboob & Golden, (2013). Looking for Native Speakers of English Discrimination in English Language Teaching Job Advertisements, Voices in Asia Journal, 1 (1), 72-81. 
  • McIntosh, P. (1988). White Privilege and Male Privilege: A Personal Account of Coming to See Correspondences Through  Work in Women’s Studies.  Retrieved from here.

 

Reflexión: lecciones aprendidas después de dos años contratando profesores de inglés no nativos

[note from the editor: this post was translated into Spanish from this article also published on the blog by Andrew Davison by Marina Escalada]

Mi experiencia en cuanto a trabajar con profesores de inglés no nativos (NNESTS en sus siglas en inglés), comenzó hace poco más de 2 años, cuando empecé mi negocio, Learn English Budapest. No somos una escuela de idiomas al uso, sino una agencia que pone en contacto a profesores de inglés con estudiantes de toda la ciudad. Cuando comencé, la meta era ofrecer una alternativa moda a los folletos y a anunciarse en foros de expatriados.

Durante los primeros meses, yo, al igual que otras muchas escuelas tristemente aún siguen haciendo, tenía una opinión negativa de los profesores no nativos. Asumía que los profesores nativos eran, simplemente, mejores a la hora de enseñar el idioma.

No fue hasta que fui contactado por Marek Kiczkowiak, fundador de TEFL Equity Advocates (Defensores de la Igualdad en TEFL), que realmente tuve la oportunidad de cuestionar mi opinión sobre el tema.

Lo que empezó como un intercambio de correos sobre el tema de nativos y no nativos (NESTS/NNESTS*) se convirtió en un experimento por mi parte. Decidí empezar a aceptar a NNESTS en mi equipo para ver que resultados obtenía y tan sólo unas pocas semanas después, me di cuenta de que había estado cometiendo un error al no contratarlos.

En aquel entonces, compartí un sumario de mis conclusiones en una entrevista. Hoy, vuelvo a estar aquí y me complace anunciar el lanzamiento de mi nuevo sitio web, Teacher Finder. Es el mismo concepto, excepto que esta vez pondremos a personas en contacto con profesores de idiomas en más de una docena de ciudades alrededor del mundo. También nos expandiremos incluyendo nuevos idiomas: Español, Italiano, Francés, Húngaro, Arabe y Alemán, entre otros. Por supuesto, los profesores no nativos son bienvenidos.

Para todos aquellos que se dedican a la gestión de agencias o escuelas de idiomas y que tengan dudas sobre trabajar con NNESTS, comparto aquí algunos de los resultados observados durante los últimos 2 años.

LA MAYORÍA DE ESTUDIANTES VALORAN LA EXPERIENCIA MÁS QUE LA LENGUA MATERNA

Cuando se trata de enseñar, es obvio que las requisitos más importantes son, la habilidad del profesor a la hora de explicar el tema y, obviamente, enseñar. Esto es particularmente cierto en cuanto a profesores de idiomas. En un mundo donde la lengua franca internacional es el inglés y el número de hablantes no nativos empieza a sobrepasar el de nativos, es ridículo pensar que los no nativos no pueden ser tan buenos profesores como los “elegidos”, que han nacido en un ambiente donde se habla inglés.

LOS ESTUDIANTES NO EXIGIRÁN UN PROFESOR NATIVO SI NO LES DAS LA OPCIÓN

Por supuesto, “nativo” sigue estando imbuido de un cierto estereotipo y, dada la opción, la mayoría de personas aún optan por un nativo. De hecho, solía haber una casilla en el formulario online de Learn English Budapest donde se leía: “¿Quieres un profesor nativo? Si/No. No es de sorprender que la mayoría de personas marcasen la casilla “nativo” o lo dejasen en blanco.

Decidí quitar esta casilla y reemplazarla con la siguiente pregunta dirigida a los estudiantes: “Describe como sería tu profesor perfecto”. Durante los siguientes meses, resultó evidente que los estudiantes no buscaban a alguien que fuera nativo. Estaban más interesados en encontrar a un profesor que compartiera sus intereses y pudiera explicar ampliamente el tópico en el que están interesados.

A partir de ese momento, no me ha contactado ningún estudiante para quejarse de haberle sido asignado un profesor no nativo de inglés. La mayoría están encantados al ver que los NNESTS pueden explicar gramática complicada (a menudo, mejor que los hablantes nativos) y establecer analogías con sus idiomas nativos.

LOS NNESTS PUEDEN SER MÁS DINÁMICOS

Uno de los factores que más favorece a los NNESTS es que tienen experiencia propia de haber aprendido el idioma. Poseen una gran comprensión de lo que los estudiantes están pasando y de cuáles pueden ser los mayores obstáculos para alcanzar la fluidez.

Su propia experiencia del aprendizaje del idioma, ha menudo les ha enseñado algunas técnicas innovadoras sobre cómo explicar mejor y entender inglés. Cuando pregunté a mis profesores cuales eran los consejos y trucos que les son de más ayuda a la hora de enseñar inglés, en seguida vi que los NNESTS eran los que sabían mucho más acerca de la manera de mejorar sus habilidades lingüísticas, (y las de sus alumnos).

LOS NNESTS TIENDEN A TENER MEJORES RECURSOS PARA LA ENSEÑANZA

De nuevo, ya que los NNESTS han pasado por la inmensa tarea de llegar a hablar otro idioma con fluidez, han explorado las posibilidades, dentro del panorama de recursos de aprendizaje de idiomas, para encontrar los mejores. Mientras que los NESTS cuentan con el lujo de poder contar siempre con el recurso de ser hablantes nativos y poder elaborar “recursos” improvisados, los NNESTS normalmente, cubren ese espacio preparándose mejor las lecciones.

También son los que comparten con los estudiantes más métodos de aprendizaje alternativos a los libros y les ayudan a mejorar más rápidamente el manejo del idioma. También he observado que, por norma general, también hacen más esfuerzo en crear sus propios recursos y combinar estrategias diferentes para encontrar la mejor manera de enseñar a cada alumno.

CUANDO SE TRATA DE ENSEÑAR A NIÑOS, LOS NNESTS, A MENUDO LO HACEN MEJOR

Cuando rememoro mis días en la escuela y las clases de idiomas que nos daban, no puedo acordarme de, ni tan siquiera, un profesor de idiomas nativo. Cuando se trata de principiantes y niños, la habilidad de explicar el idioma en su idioma nativo y limitar la presión que el estudiante siente, es irreemplazable.

Cuando era joven y estudiaba mis primeras lecciones en español, no hubiera podido sobrevivir frente a una persona española oyéndome imitar su idioma; por lo que he aprendido de los comentarios que recibo de los estudiantes, a menudo, estos se sienten igual cuando están empezando. Los más avanzados puede que se sientan cómodos siendo expuestos a más presión, pero los niños no suelen progresar en ese entorno.

CONCLUSIÓN: MIENTRAS QUE LOS ESTEREOTIPOS LIGADOS A LOS PROFESORES NATIVOS CONTINÚAN, LOS NNESTS ESTÁN, A MENUDO, MEJOR PREPARADOS PARA ENSEÑAR INGLÉS.

Incluso en Teacher Finder aún tenemos gente pidiendo profesores de inglés nativos pero, muy a menudo, no presionan sobre el tema. También hemos conseguido explicar con éxito los beneficios inherentes en el aprendizaje con profesores no nativos de inglés.

Diría que una de las ventajas de tener a un NNEST enseñándote, es que entiende perfectamente por lo que estás pasando como estudiante del idioma. Al haber pasado por el mismo esfuerzo frente a las cuestiones gramaticales, entiende lo que se necesita para poder explicar claramente las normas. Esto es particularmente importante con los niños, quienes pueden desanimarse si tienen a un profesor nativo.

A pesar de que, desafortunadamente, me tomó un tiempo llegar a darme cuenta, ahora se que los NNESTS pueden estar mejor equipados y preparados para enseñar que los profesores nativos. Al final, lo que realmente les importa a los estudiantes es encontrar a alguien con quien puedan conectar y que haga del aprendizaje del idioma algo ameno, indistintamente de si son nativos o no nativos.

andrew5041Andrew Davison es el fundador de Teacher Finder y también disfruta escribiendo y viajando en su tiempo libre. Vive entre Londres y Budapest.

*NEST(S): siglas en inglés de “Native English Teacher-s”. En español, Profesor(es) Nativo(s) de Inglés.

NNEST(S): siglas en inglés de “Non-Native English Teacher-s”. En español, Profesor(es) No-Nativo(s) de Inglés.

Attitudes to discrimination in ELT job ads – the importance of teaching experience by Dan Baines

The first article in this series of blogposts looked at the general attitudes to discrimination around the industry in general. This second piece will look at the disparity of belief between trainee and novice teacher and those who are more experienced.

Trainee teachers and native speakerism

When contrasting the views of trainee teachers with the rest of the industry it can be seen that some of the data is consistent with the overall tendencies whereas some shows more variation. Regarding visible tattoos, requiring EU passports, asking for C1 proficiency and employment of Caucasian teachers, there is very little difference in these attitudes except that trainee teachers seem marginally more likely (6%) to see a language requirement as justification and are slightly more likely (again 6%) to see racist hiring policies in China as unjustified.

However, there seems to be a much greater disparity with the issue of native speaker requirements. Promisingly, 68% of teachers in general found the requirement for native English speakers to be both discriminatory and unjustified while the number of trainee teachers stands at a much smaller 50% meaning that 50% find this practice either justifiable (20%) or simply not discriminatory at all (30%).

The data also suggests that teachers become more aware of native speakerism as a form of discrimination as they move through their career. As can be seen in chart 1, the likelihood of considering nativespeakerism to be an unjustifiable form of discrimination seem to rise with experience.

This data would seem to suggest one, or a combination, of scenarios.

untitled

1. As teachers become more experienced, they become less likely to see being a NNEST as being a hindrance or to see being a NEST as a legitimate “qualification”
2. The trainee teachers who believe being a NEST is a legitimate requirement simply leave the industry.
3. Perceptions of what a NES is change over time and therefore changes their attitude.

There also seems to be a difference in interpretation when respondents are considered by job (chart 2). The groups who found native speakerism the least justifiable are the people in jobs that typically require a greater amount of experience (academic management and teacher trainers). What is interesting in the case of academic management is that these are often the people responsible for the hiring of teachers, so, possibly due to market demand, directors of studies are enforcing prejudices they disagree with whilst adding to the further discrimination of NNESTs. What is striking is that 73% of ex-teachers felt that these hiring practices were unjustified, suggesting that the reason for the change in attitude is not down to teachers simply leaving the industry.

untitled

What is a native speaker?

There was much less variation between trainee teachers and more experienced teachers when it came to defining the term native speaker (they were instructed to choose as many as they agreed with, not to choose one definition). As can be seen from chart 3, the distribution is very similar with “born in an English speaking country” and “grew up speaking English at home” being the most chosen options by both groups. However, with the exception of other, each option was chosen more frequently overall than it was by the trainee teachers, suggesting that the more experienced were more confident about how to define this term. Some of the differences may suggest that trainee teachers are less knowledgeable about issues such as World Englishes and bilingualism. Twice as many trainees chose to fill in the “other” field, but many responses contained contained rather vague phrases such as “mother tongue” or “first language”.

untitled

The biggest surprise with the data was that there was no overall consensus on what being a native speaker means. 65% was the highest percentage, with nothing else breaking, or in many cases coming close to, the 60% mark. If the professionals that make up the industry can’t agree on what this term means, why do we see it nearly everywhere we look.

Conclusions

Textbook and non-textbook examples

At the outset it was expected that trainees’ interpretation of well-known forms of discrimination and non-discrimination (racism, sexism, ageism, relevant skills and qualifications) would mirror the overall tendencies of the group. However, whilst this was found to be true for racism and the requirement for a high English proficiency, others differed. The surrounding context of the women’s college and the summer camp led to variation in opinion, with many stating the requirements of this specific context as the reason to justify the discrimination.

With the issue of the native speaker requirement, on the other hand, there was no such contextual justification. Nothing about the country or the type of position was mentioned at any point, but just that students prefer it and that NEST may just be better in some areas. It’s not surprising that over time teachers encounter native speakerism within the profession, but how often is this addressed in pre-service and early service education? It wasn’t mentioned on my CELTA nor was there any mention of it on my DELTA or MA TESOL.

Reasons for individual differences

Above I outlined 3 possible reasons for the disparity between trainees and the rest of the industry on the issue of native speakerism, but the evidence presented seems to suggest that there is only one conceivable reason for it. Firstly, there doesn’t seem to be a huge shift in definitions of what a NES is. If you separate the charts and lay one on top of the other, the distribution is nearly identical with the only significant differences being the open-mindedness in general responses, indicated by the higher percentages for each descriptor. The idea that those unaware of native speakerism or those who feel it is justified are leaving the industry also seems to be unfounded as ex-teachers were one of the most likely to see native speaker based discrimination to be unjustifiable. Which takes us back to the first explanation that awareness of the issue comes with experience.

Native speakerism and teacher training

This begs a couple of very important questions. Why is it taking so long for more teachers to acknowledge the discrimination in ELT? Why isn’t there any focus on issues of discrimination in teacher education courses? It seems unlikely that there is some kind of conspiracy to keep this a secret to protect the interests of NESTs, but more likely that when trying to force methodology, language awareness, teaching practice etc. into 120 hours, some issues are seen as simply less important. Silvana Richardson’s recent IATEFL plenary was a great step forward in addressing the elephant that has been camped in the room for decades, but in many ways she was preaching to the choir. The standing ovation at the end was deserved and you could see the emotion in the eyes of those present as she described their experiences through her own, but these people are the industry. How are we sending the message to those who have yet to join?

Many institutions, TESOL France and IATEFL, to name a couple, have taken a firm stance on job advertisements with discriminatory language, but the fact still remains that dozens of ads are posted elsewhere everyday that go unchecked. The jobs themselves are frequently aimed at teachers with minimal classroom experience, instead preferring a place of birth as the experience to supplement CELTA/Cert TESOL, making them appealing for teachers fresh from training courses. As a result, many teachers unknowingly fuel the fire of this discrimination by applying for and accepting these jobs and furthering the idea that NS status makes a significant difference to one’s ability to do the job. If this is the case, teachers deserve to be fully informed about the myth they are perpetuating and the biases in the industry; some will inevitably exploit to their own ends, but others may take a stand and educate others.

There has been a lot of recent debate about whether initial teacher training courses privilege NEST and there have been many fine arguments put forward by both sides. However, what does remain clear is that there is definitely inadequate attention given to issues such as this despite there being so many opportunities for its inclusion. Most courses offer some kind of career support, so why not take 15 minutes to highlight the kind of prejudice that exists? Why not find an hour to look at qualities of good teaching/teachers and explore where this fits within the NEST/NNEST dichotomy?

[from the editor: If you’re looking for inspiration for activities, check out the article Dan Baines co-wrote with Marek Kiczkowiak and Karin Krummenacher, which is available here. You might also want to take a look at sample lesson plans here, or attend the upcoming webinar with Michael Griffin and Zhenya Polosatova entitled: Exploring NNS issues in a teacher training course.]

daniel bainesDaniel Baines is the Director of Studies at Oxford House Prague and a Trinity CertTESOL and DipTESOL tutor. He holds an MA TESOL from Sheffield Hallam University and has given talks at conferences in the Czech Republic, Slovakia, Spain and most recently at IATEFL in the UK. His primary research interests are native speakerism in ELT and reflection in initial teacher training. He was a finalist in the 2014 British Council ELT Masters Dissertation Award.

TEFL.com – et tu contra me? by Paulina Woźniak

To be or not to be…

I’ve never defined myself as a fighter. I’ve always followed the rules and believed that if everyone did so, the world would be a wonderful place to live. You might see my attitude as a little bit naïve but I’ve always believed in equality, in the end, we live in the 21st century, we’re getting smarter and more conscious every day. Nevertheless, until very recently I had not seen anything wrong about language schools wanting to hire only native speakers.

What has changed?

You might wonder how somebody, who’s always lived in their idealized bubble, finally realised that the world we lived in was not as perfect as it seemed. Well, it happened pretty much by accident. A couple of months ago, I attended a TESOL conference in Vitoria-Gasteiz. I had made a list of all the talks I wanted to attend, and the one about acting against native-speakerism was… not on my list. It was actually my boss who, the day before the conference, encouraged me to go to that talk. I had not had any expectations, and I think that’s why the talk affected me so much. I left the room with my legs shaking and a thousand thoughts running in my mind at the same time. I realised I had been a target and probably an object of discrimination. But, how was it possible that I hadn’t realized it before?

It’s all about being in the right place at the right time

After the talk, I started thinking about my “employment history” and I realised that luck was very important. Because of various reasons, I always looked for the job in the middle of school year. As you can probably imagine, if a language school looks for a substitute teacher in January or February, they need them asap. I have never been asked to pretend I am a native speaker or not to mention my origins. I just got the job I had been looking for without any problems. The life in my idealized bubble was just perfect. Thanks to the fact that I am a well-organized and hard-working person, usually modest too J, I’ve never had problems staying in a language school because my employers knew about my experience, qualifications and teaching style. Being a non-native was a fact but not a stumbling block.

All good things come to an end…

Some time ago, I started feeling a need to change something in my life. As an EFL teacher, I simply thought that it might not be a bad idea to change the place of living. My colleagues recommended I used tefl.com to apply for jobs. If you’ve ever used the webpage, you probably now that it’s full of job offers for EFL teachers you can apply for directly and instantly. At first I was pretty impressed by the number of offers. However, after some time, I realised that all of them had one thing in common: everyone was looking for native level English speakers.

 

1

Enter a caption

Well, there is nothing wrong or incorrect about looking for proficient English speakers. As a teacher I know that the better the teacher’s English (by which I also mean qualifications), the more students will possibly benefit from classes. What struck me the most though, is the fact that experience is not as valuable to some employers as language proficiency.

Time to apply

Whenever I see an interesting job offer, I jump at the chance and send my application. I started the whole process around April. Since that moment, I hadn’t had any problems until the moment when I wanted to apply for a job and I suddenly saw this notification on the screen:

At first I thought it was just a system bug. In the end the job offer said “native level English speaker”, and if you just have a quick look at my profile, you’ll see that there’s no higher level of language competence than “fluent”. However, before the questions about the foreign languages, there is one tricky question: “Are you a native level English speaker?”. To your surprise, my answer to the question was “No”. Why? Firstly, what does native-like even mean? It is already quite problematic to decide who a native speaker actually is not to mention a native-like speaker. Well, I was not born in an English-speaking-like country, my parents do not speak an English-like language and my education was never in an English-like language. Thus, my answer to the question was “No”. Therefore, I could not apply for the job mentioned above.

What’s actually worth discussing

Since that moment I have been thinking a lot about this loophole in TEFL.COM’s system. Wouldn’t it be better to simply use CEFR (the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages) which is widely accepted and respected to verify teachers’ English language proficiency? It is worth mentioning that according to CEFR a C2 English language speaker has “the capacity to deal with material which is academic or cognitively demanding, and to use language to good effect at a level of performance which may in certain respects be more advanced than that of an average native speaker”. You’ve probably noticed that being born and raised in an English speaking country is absolutely not a requirement here. Neither is an RP pronunciation. A C2 English speaker might actually have a better linguistic competence than a native speaker, now the question is, how does this influence the teaching process? Non-native speakers actually underwent the learning process themselves and know what it is like to be in students’ shoes. They quite often, just like me, have a teaching degree, postgraduate studies and CELTA. They’re simply prepared for the job because they’ve been working their whole life (or most of it) to do this job.

I am not a native speaker, a fact I am not ashamed of. Anyone who has studied a foreign language and is capable of teaching it knows how difficult and challenging this task is. I’ve found being judged, only on the basis of me being born and raised in a non-English speaking country, outrageous, offensive and unacceptable. I’ve been denied the possibility to apply for a job which is a pure example of discrimination. That was the moment my bubble burst and I felt the need to speak out against the discrimination of non-native English speaker teachers.

What’s the euphemism for irony?

If you’ve ever tried to post a job offer on tefl.com, you’ve probably seen this notification below which provides you with short information about what’s acceptable and unlawful within the EU.

First, Tefl.com inform school schools that it is illegal to advertise for native speakers. Consequently, the advertisers ask for “native-like” English speakers to comply with the law. At this point we have to be honest, those who advertise for “native-like level” are still looking for “native speakers”, they just put in politically correct words. As a result, unless I tick the box in my online resume that I am a ‘native-like level English speaker’, my application will be rejected right away.

The webpage’s terms and conditions are undoubtedly legal, but difficult to implement or stick to in practice thanks to the system which, probably, automatically discriminates against non-native-like speakers.

3

One more thing I have to clarify here. Before I did my CELTA, my application had also been rejected once or twice because I did not have “relevant” qualifications (some employers asked specifically for CELTA) which I found absolutely acceptable. But the very first moment I could not apply for a job because I was born and raised in Poland in a monolingual Polish speaking environment I decided to take an active stand.

“If moderation is a fault, then indifference is a crime.” ― Jack Kerouac

I have to admit, that even though discrimination itself is not a pleasant thing, it may be an eye-opening experience. After the talk in March, I was sort of aware that something similar might happen to me. However, what struck me even more than being discriminated on the grounds of my mother tongue, were my colleagues’ reactions. One of them, a teacher form Ireland, asked me directly why I did not say I was a native-like speaker in my profile (His justification – “Your English is better than mine”). He did admit I was right when I asked him if he would say that he was English instead of Irish in order to get a job.

I have no intention of denying who I am and where I come from. My colleague’s reactions showed me that we have to raise people’s awareness and highlight the current situation. We have to stand up to all those ridiculous requirements and fight for ourselves.

One for all and all for one

 

IMG_2131

Designed by @teflninja

 

As I said in the beginning, I’ve never defined myself as a fighter but I’ve realised that if we do not want to live in the world where all teachers are equal but some teachers are more equal than others, we have to take an active stand and speak out against the discrimination now.

paulina-wozniakPaulina Woźniak officially started teaching English in 2013, however she says that she actually started the job at the age of… four. In 2015, she started teaching English in Spain and she’s recently started a new teaching job in the south of Spain. As a teacher she likes the challenges involved in the job, believes that chocolate can solve all of the problems and tries to pass on her passion for English to her students. After doing her CELTA, she’s now looking for a new challenge.

Challenges of a FB admin by Steve Hirschhorn

As part of the admin team for a professional TEFL Facebook group hosting more than eight thousand members, we have recently faced the task of managing the many job ads which are posted on our page.

Needless to say, many of them feature discriminatory language such as ludicrous age ranges (25 – 45), gender and of course the ever-popular ‘native speakers only’.

As a small admin team we tend to get along pretty well and yet we couldn’t all agree on how to work out a sensible way to handle these ads.

Should we simply ban them? That would do a distinct disservice to our membership since many use our pages to find work.

Delete those that use objectionable terms? Much as above and we would be accused of censorship.

Warn and then delete? What about those who don’t have the freedom which some of enjoy? In some parts of the world, advertisers have literally no choice, they are bound by law.

Eventually, after much discussion we agreed to post this friendly advisory:

“Just to clarify, recruiters and school folks… Ads which specify ‘Native Speaker Teacher only’ should be avoided, as noted in the group description. That means we prefer that you don’t post them as we believe that Non-Native Speakers should be treated just as Native Speakers. If you do post such an ad and somebody reports it, we will delete it.”

And then the storm hit!

First we were told quite aggressively that we would be wasting the time of non-native applicants who would apply and then not succeed. We were asked if we would apply the same criteria to age discrimination. We were informed in no uncertain terms that our post demonstrated a “tone-deaf misunderstanding of the diverse cultures around the world”.

 

challenges-of-a-fb-admin1752983

[This graphic is not a genuine social media thread and is not associated with any particular FB group in any way] Designed by @tekhnologicblog

Under this rapid onslaught, we gathered our troops to counter-attack but had trouble getting a word in edgewise! We pointed out that our group description clearly states that we are against all kinds of discrimination but that the NS/NNS debate had surfaced and needed to be dealt with. Obviously I was then told that it was unrealistic to expect people to read the group descriptions!

In amongst all this to-ing and fro-ing, we were told that we should have consulted the group (of 8k members), can you imagine? And in fact we really were consulting since we were open to comments and actively asking for suggestions.

I have to say that there were very few active supporters of our position whether not wishing to stand in the line of fire or genuinely not supportive I can’t say, though my guess is the former. It’s pretty unpleasant to find yourself trying to support a clear anti-discrimination stance and being vilified for doing so – and all because one is working as an unpaid admin to help make services and ideas available to members!

Anyway, we drifted, like an overblown rubber dinghy into hackneyed waters where a somewhat bizarre discussion ensued about how students pick up non-native accents from non-native teachers – as though students actually pick up the accent of their teacher not to mention the self evident fact that many non-native speakers have excellent accents. Oh dear, we did toss and turn on that particular bit of ocean with claims of research on how learners would adopt their teachers’ erroneous accent – of course appropriate references never did appear because they don’t exist.

But then we got hit by another current and off we went in our flabby, by now somewhat tattered boat, off to the waters of what terminology might take the place of native speaker: native-like, near-native and so on. Levels of language were also mentioned with some wondering if the industry could insist on recognised language levels for teachers, C1, C2 and so on and then naturally we should apply the same criteria to native speakers shouldn’t we? Of course we should. All of these sometimes interesting and sometimes ridiculous topics interspersed with snipes at the admins for taking any sort of line at all on this!

And then, as is usually the case in these long, ill-tempered threads, someone writes ‘your’ instead of ‘you’re’ because they’re typing on a phone with a 3 inch screen and somebody else jumps on it because it’s evidence that non-natives shouldn’t be teachers!

It was around this time that several members became ex members, not through any admin intervention, you understand but because our position was so ‘absurd’, ‘unrealistic’ and ‘would change nothing’ oh, and one of my favourites: ‘perhaps you are unfit to lead this group’! Cheerio then.

Also around this point, we began to receive a little more support but that didn’t last long!

I don’t want to repeat myself but suffice to say, the argument went round and round for some time with some native speakers clinging to their rollocks (yes, back to the dinghy) in the vain hope of not sinking in what is rapidly becoming inevitable: the realisation that native speakers don’t own the language, don’t automatically make better teachers, can’t automatically speak better English and that non-native speakers should not suffer discrimination in our profession.

IMG_2145

As for our group, we agreed eventually to post this notice when ads cross the line: “We understand that it is normal to specify native speakers in certain parts of the world. However, we strongly disapprove as it is blatantly discriminatory and based on the completely incorrect premise that only “native speakers” make good teachers. Kindly pass that message on, please.

The more we say it, the more likely people are to begin to understand and change this way of thinking. Thank you.”

In addition, when the ad is within the EU, we post an additional notice to the effect that stipulating native speaker in ad is illegal according to article 21.

So that’s how we resolved it, I use the term ‘resolved’ loosely, you understand since every so often, someone launches themselves at either the ad poster or our standard comment, so we can’t really win.

steve-hirschWith an educational career spanning more than 40 years, Steve Hirschhorn has worked as a teacher, DoS, trainer, Senior Lecturer, Principal and Vice President in the ELT industry. Steve has lectured and delivered workshops all over the world and continues to do so. He has published numerous articles in professional magazines and journals and contributed a book chapter in 2014. In the 1980s Steve trained as a teacher in Silent Way and Suggestopedia in order to understand better how the Humanistic Approaches might inform current methodology.  He is currently working on Informed Eclecticism as well as continuing to engage with teachers all over the world as part of their own professional development. He has been External Examiner to three UK universities’ TESOL and English language related programmes and was nominated for the prestigious National Teaching Fellowship Scheme in 2004. Steve has been at the forefront of ELT innovation for many years and his long experience and insistence on quality combine to create a passionate and demanding professional who continues to contribute to the sum of knowledge in the industry.

Sexism, racism, ageism and native speakerism – job ads in ELT

Earlier this year Marek Kiczkowiak and I gave a talk at TESOL Spain in Vitoria-Gasteiz about native speakerism in teacher training (you can download the ppt here).  In preparation for the talk, I set up a survey on general issues of discrimination in ELT to get an idea of different attitudes about discrimination in general, but predominantly to look at native speakerism; that is, the prejudice against individuals based on their mother tongue or perceived ‘nativeness’.  The survey features a series of ELT job adverts with examples of language which could be interpreted as discriminatory.  Participants were simply asked to judge if the language was discriminatory and if it was, was the discrimination justified in the context provided.  The scenarios were as follows.

  • A women’s college in Saudi Arabia seeking only female teachers.
  • A summer camp for teenagers seeking only teachers aged 18-30.
  • A private language school in Prague seeking only native English speaker teachers.
  • A language school in China seeking only Caucasian teachers.
  • A language school in Japan unwilling to hire anyone with visual tattoos.
  • A university in Turkey seeking only teachers with C1 or above language proficiency.
  • A language school in Poland only willing to hire teachers with an EU passport.

Some of the adverts were genuine and taken from http://www.tefl.com whilst others were adapted to include the discriminatory language.  In total, over 580 people took part in the survey coming from all over the world and from every corner of the industry, from trainee teachers to teacher trainers to academics.

General tendencies

Looking at the collected data, some things were unsurprising.  Overall, 92% of respondents believed that a Turkish university requiring teachers to have a minimum language proficiency of C1 was completely reasonable with the majority stating that this is a necessary attribute for the job and, in theory, attainable by anyone.  A similar percentage (88%) felt that seeking a Caucasian teacher was unjustifiably discriminatory, the only surprise perhaps being that 6% felt it was in no way discriminatory.

The other ads were more divisive.  Half of the respondents felt that refusing to employ someone due to visible tattoos was unjustified discrimination with a quarter feeling that it was either justified or not discrimination at all.  Requiring a teacher to have an EU passport was only found to be discriminatory by 44% of those responding with 14% overall finding the discrimination justified.  The issue of the employment of only women for a women’s college in Saudi Arabia was the most controversial.  The majority (44%) felt that asking for female teachers wasn’t discriminatory whereas a third felt that despite being discriminatory, within the context provided, it was justified.  The two questions that showed the most similar attitudes were regarding the need for native speakers and for teachers to be within a certain age range with 68% and 62% respectively finding the terminology both discriminatory and unjustified.  In each case 12% found the language to be discriminatory but justified in some way.  Analysing the justifications given for the discrimination a few trends became clear.

Culture

The most common justification given for both the Saudi and the Japanese contexts was that of culture.  Many, for example, were keen to point out that having visible tattoos was not, in itself, a reason to refuse employment, but considering the connotations tattoos have in Japan e.g. organised crime, it may be culturally more sensitive to employ teachers who do not have tattoos on display.  Similarly, many pointed out that considering the political and religious climate in Saudi Arabia it may be necessary to only employ women to teach women.  However, many were also keen to express their dissatisfaction with what they saw as an incredibly oppressive regime with one stating that “Saudi is a patriarchal hellhole”.

Ability to do the job

Another trend that arose was discriminatory criteria that could affect the successful candidates’ ability to do the job in question.  The most common, unsurprisingly, was the requirement for a university teacher in Turkey to have a suitable level of English proficiency – one respondent even commented that they didn’t believe that C1 was high enough for such a position.  Ability to do the job was also the most commonly stated justification for the summer camp wanting employees under 30.  A number of participants stated that working at a summer camp requires a lot of energy and younger applicants may be better equipped to deal with those demands.  In addition to this, there were a number who believed that native English speakers would be better able to teach colloquial language and culture and therefore be more suitable to be English teachers and so justifying the discrimination in this case.

Language schools

The third major justificatory factor was that which was seen to be imposed on the language schools by external factors.  Market demand was often mentioned as a factor in both hiring native speakers and in hiring only Caucasian workers.  The general tone of such justification was that if that is what the customer wants, then the language school should do its best to meet those demands, even if it means not employing the most qualified or experienced teachers.  It was also felt that visa requirements set by the government could be an acceptable reason for discriminatory language in job advertisements.  It was pointed out many times that the process of getting a visa in the EU can be expensive and schools may not have the financial resources to sponsor this.

Conclusions

It’s clear from the responses to the survey that discrimination can be justified in a number of different ways.  However, much of the justification provided seems to shy away from individual responsibility to the situation.  Market demand is a convenient excuse to prefer Caucasian teachers as accusations of racism can then be firmly levelled at the customer in the same way that seeking NEST has frequently drawn the comment “I’d love to hire NNEST, but the students want natives”.  Despite the convenience though, it’s a cowardly and reckless response.   As long as language schools continue to persist with NEST/NNEST labels, they perpetuate the idea that there is somehow a difference between the two and no amount of insistence of market demand can abdicate them from the responsibility of creating such demand.  A demand, incidentally, that there is no academic evidence of.
Ability to do the job is a much more acceptable justification to prefer one group over another and would rarely be described as discrimination.  However, there is, again, no evidence that a NEST is any more capable of teaching idiomatic language or pronunciation  than a NNEST only that some individuals are better than others.  There are NNEST with tremendous language proficiency and phonological ability just as there are NEST with pronunciation and grammar that few would identify as native and vice-versa.

What isn’t clear is whether this discrimination is fuelled by a genuine ignorance to the fact that NEST are not intrinsically more capable, a genuine belief that this market demand is really there or whether the motives are something more sinister entirely such as attempts to maintain the NES dominance of the industry.  What is clear is that despite the percentage of respondents finding native speaker requirements unacceptable being encouraging (68%), the 32% minority at around one third of the industry is a noisy one.

The next post in this series will look at the perceptions of teachers in training and compare them to those of the industry in general. You might also be interested in a paper I co-wrote with Karin Krummenacher and Marek Kiczkowiak, where we suggest practical activities that could be used in initial teacher training programmes such as CELTA or Trinity CertTESOL to tackle native speakerism. The paper is available for free via ELTed journal here. You can also download it for free from academia.edu here or from researchgate.net here.

daniel bainesDaniel Baines is the Director of Studies at Oxford House Prague and a Trinity CertTESOL and DipTESOL tutor. He holds an MA TESOL from Sheffield Hallam University and has given talks at conferences in the Czech Republic, Slovakia, Spain and most recently at IATEFL in the UK. His primary research interests are native speakerism in ELT and reflection in initial teacher training. He was a finalist in the 2014 British Council ELT Masters Dissertation Award.

No more turning a blind eye to inequality in ELT – by Karima Ennouri

I was checking my Facebook account when I came across a post in one of the Facebook groups I’m a member of advertising a job opening in one of the English schools in Turkey. The job advertisement was short and lacking important information such as working hours, salary, etc. Since the advertiser said we could contact him for further information, and although he did write “native speakers will be preferred although not limited by them”, I said to myself “why not message him to ask for more information; since he said it is not limited to native speakers, I might still have a chance; do not be too proud of yourself” (having to write that now I realise how much negativity did this particular thought hold?!)

So I sent my message, within days I got the response which I was not hoping for!

This is my message

I would like to know all the information about your job opening for English Teachers. I am CELTA qualified with grade B but I am non-native.

This is his response

Thanks for your kind applications but we have to prioritise native speakers first. I am hoping to contact you again after those applications.

This is my reply

Thank you for your reply, I no longer have interest in the job. You stated that you have to prioritise native speakers, but being a native speaker doesn’t necessarily mean you are a good teacher; what you should prioritise instead is qualifications, not nationality. Look at those leading centers around the world like British Council or International House, which don’t discriminate, but offer jobs to both NNEST and NEST, based on their qualifications of course. Again thank you for your reply.

Best regards

Karima

I have got to tell you it took me couple of hours to respond to him as I was angry that he did not even give me a chance to send my CV. This is not ”preference for NESTs” as he stated in his post, because you need to have two options in front of you to say that you prefer option a) to option b). On the other hand, not even giving a chance or considering reading a NNESTs’ CVs before deciding whether to accept them is called discrimination. In addition, I think he should have put himself in my shoes as he himself is a non- native English teacher. Sadly, I did not get a reply to my last email.

This is not the first time and I do not expect it to be the last, as I have been through even worse situations. This preference for native speakers is almost everywhere in ELT. For example, I was once interviewed by the manager of one of the local centres here in my own country, Libya. None of their teachers had a CELTA, nor did they know what this certificate was. After I finished my interview and explained my qualifications, the manager said that they are first trying to bring NESTs. Only if they could not attract them, they would offer me the job, to which I said “if you think a NEST is better than a NNEST how come you think you are good enough to interview them since you are a NNEST yourself?!”.

I normally do not speak about this issue of inequality in ELT. However, this most recent case happened to me right after seeing Adam Beale tweet about it (you can read the write up of the Twitter conversation in Adam’s article Stand up and be counted here), so I thought why not do something about it as well. I tweeted screenshots of the messages and TEFL Equity suggested I wrote my story, which might encourage more teachers to stop turning a blind eye to the favoritism native speakers enjoy in ELT.

Design @teflninja

Design @teflninja

Finally, I would like to thank all the teachers around the globe who are trying to speak up against it. And for those who still do not want to take action perhaps because they think it is not their problem, turn the table: imagine I am the native and you are the non- native, would you like to be ignored or turned down just because of your mother tongue?. If not, then these are my suggested ways to help fight it:

  • Fight the “industry demand excuse” by educating students about it.
  • Collect your learners’ opinion about it by conducting a survey.
  • Discuss the matter with your employer.
  • Write about it and suggest ways to fight it.
  • Respond to it by sending email to the discriminatory employer.
  • Do a webinar or a workshop and explain it.

upload-i4acn9jd6rmbnip1n6cgjd5a92486191.JPG-final (1) [242054]My name is Karima Ennouri. I am secretary and I have just started a new job as part time EFL teacher. I am also responsible for managing and organizing English courses in a training centre based in Libya. I’ve been teaching officially but not constantly since doing my CELTA in March 2015 in Turkey. I am constantly trying to learn new teaching approaches as well as gaining more experience in teaching. I am also looking forward to continuing my professional development and starting my own blog.

TESOL Spain position statement against discrimination

Recently, TESOL Spain has issued a position statement against discrimination in ELT, opposing job ads that require the candidate to be a ‘native speaker’, have ‘native-like’ fluency, or speak with ‘standard’ English. I had a chance to talk to the current president of TESOL Spain, Annie Altamirano, to find out a bit more about the statement and why it was issued. We also had a chat about how TESOL Spain is planning to put the statement into practice, promoting equality in Spanish ELT and supporting both their ‘native’ and ‘non-native speaker’ members. We finished off by talking about ELT in Spain and what still needs to be done so that teachers are recruited and valued based on their skills, rather than their first language.

In compliance with Article 21 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU, TESOL-SPAIN stands in opposition to discrimination against teachers on the basis of their national, ethnic or linguistic background, religion, gender, gender identity and sexual orientation, in terms of hiring, promotion, recruitment for jobs, or employment conditions.

With respect to the common, long-standing notion, unsupported by research, that a certain ethnicity, accent, or national background gives a person an advantage as a teacher of English, TESOL-SPAIN firmly believes that all teachers should be evaluated and valued solely on the basis of their teaching competence, teaching experience, formal education and linguistic expertise. Therefore, TESOL-SPAIN does not condone job announcements that list “native English,” “native command of English,” “native-like fluency,” “standard accented English,” or similar, as required or desirable qualities.

The statement is available on TESOL Spain website here.