Let's get rid of language teaching certification.

When I googled language teaching certificates I got 2.8 million pages. When I spoke to the Canadian Immigration Service language department about the possibility of using LingQ for immigrant language learning, (LingQ was, of course, dismissed with scorn), one reason offered was that not all of our tutors were certified.

Yet many people that I talk to who have taken these courses to obtain language teaching certification, find them largely a waste of time. I am not surprised. Languages cannot be taught. They can only be learned.

I would replace these language teaching certificates with language learning certificates, as a useful credential for a language teacher to have. People taking these courses would learn how to learn languages. What is more they would have to have completed at least 1000 hours of learning activity in at least two languages as a requirement to take the course. The certification course itself would be short. There really is not that much to say. If the person has put in the time learning one or two languages, a lot will already be obvious.

These would be  meaningful certificates or credentials for a language teacher, unlike the present TEFL, TESL etc. certificates.

I mean language learning is a skill. Would you take piano lessons from someone who was a poor piano player, or tennis lessons from a poor tennis player? Would it matter if they had a teaching certificate in something that they did not know how to do themselves?

Comments

[David Martin]

Many of the English teachers at the academies I worked for in Spain couldn't speak Spanish (or any other language for that matter) to save their lives.

If a 'teacher' speaks the language of his or her students, then even at the beginning stages of language learning there can be interesting dialogue between the 'teacher' and the student, with each speaker conversing in their respective native tongue and learning by listening.

Of course in reality in this situation both individuals are both teachers and learners and benefit from each other simultaneously.

I'm still in the beginning stages of my Chinese learning right now and so cannot (and do not want to) speak, but I like to have conversations on Skype with native Chinese speakers where they talk in Chinese and I talk in English. This is much less stressful and allows you to jump right into conversing without having to produce any language, which I consider to be detrimental that early on.

[Diogo]

... on the other hand, if all of your tutors had this teaching certification, you would be braging about it saying,"all of our tutors have international teaching certification, you can trust...we are certified..." and bla, bla, bla... in order to promote LingQ. Wouldn't you? I know I would!

[Vincent]

Diogo, he is right when he said: 'Languages cannot be taught. They can only be learnt!'
It's not just an argument to promote LingQ. It's the truth!

[NB]

Although I'm in the ESL industry, I don't have any formal certificates. I do think that my own struggles and successes with learning French, Chinese, Korean, and now Japanese -- builds a lot more credibility with the adult learners I work with. I'm much more able to empathize and understand just what's involved with learning a language rather than simply teaching a skill/language (I hate being labelled an ESL 'teacher')

Perhaps when I was first starting out, some direction in classroom management would've been helpful, but nothing beats being thrown in the classroom and being forced to adapt. The only real knowledge I had to help students was again, my own struggles with learning a variety of languages.

Sadly, most of the ESL instructors/teachers I've run into are so focused on forcing grammar and vocabulary on students. Too bad these instructors spend no time empathizing with their students and remembering what it was like to sit in a desk and have someone 'teach' grammar, verb conjugations, vocab out of context, etc. Zzzzzz. Sorry for the long rant!

[Diogo]

Vicent,
I totally agree L1 can't be taught, according to Chomsky's theory. However L2 can! I've been a L2 teacher for 5 years (as well as L1), and what I have seen over these years is that my students have all succesfully learned the L2, that is, they were instructed well.
My question is - weren't I well certified and didn't I have an academic background where I learned how to pass on the information, would they still be succesfully? Or just because I speak their target language, I can teach?

I don't know, but to think of one learning L2 by himself without being inserted in a country of the target language and without having any kind of formal instruction, doesn't sound right.
(of course we're not talking about ACQUIRING L2 according to Krashen, which is a different discussion)
Cheers!!

[Valina]

Funny thing about Japan, if you are non-japanese and preferably blond haired, and you breath you are considered to be an English teacher (even if you are not, and even if English is not your native language). The odd thing is Japan tends to require certifications for nearly everything.

The language "teacher" here is required to just speak english. In fact, they don't care at all if you can speak japanese, and they tell you not to. And a good majority of the english "teachers" here don't speak another language...

I am working on my third. I know how this is done. I have told hundreds of people of how to do it, to which nearly nobody ever takes my advice.

[Steve Kaufmann]

Diogo, I am curious. What is your native language and which language do you teach?

[Yousef]

The idea that language teachers should be language learners as well is such a basic, common sense idea that it's amazing how much it is ignored. I'm very frustrated with my ESL co workers who have been doing the job for years and never even bothered to learn a second language. I feel those "teachers" have no right telling students that they have to learn...

When I did my TESOL degree they make us take a second language course to get a feel of being a beginner in a new language. While the idea was in the right place, it was very poorly executed- only 6 hours of Russian doesn't teach you anything!

[Diogo]

Steve,
I speak Brazilian Portuguese as L1 and teach ESL.
Rgds

[Steve Kaufmann]

Diogo,

I assume you are an enthusiastic and dedicated teacher. In my Portuguese learning I listened to a lot of audio books by Reubem Alves. I love listening to his voice, his Portuguese. and his message. The key role of a teacher is to create hunger for learning, not to teach the technicalities of language, in his view and in mine.

[Diogo]

Steve,
I think my post didn't get through, anyway, here I am again.
What you said "The key role of a teacher is to create hunger for learning..." is exacly what I wanted to mean, and maybe I wasn't accurate. I don't mean to teach the technicalities of language, that would be an absurd, my students don't want to be teachers! All they want is to communicate well in social situations.

However, I think I need the technicalities' knowledge on how to create hunger. Don't you agree?
Rgds.

[Naruwan]

If you do a search for ESL jobs the most common certification requirement is CELTA. Google 'CELTA' and you get nearly 9 million pages. It's a one-month course (1000 hours) which prepares teachers to teach ESL to adults via the communicative approach, rather than by grammar. Teachers don't have to learn another language but an equivalent qualification, the CertTESOL, has a 4-hour component in which teachers have to learn an "unknown language".

I teach English in Taiwan and I don't have a formal teaching qualification. I found that learning Chinese over the years has really helped me develop my teaching skills. The main thing it does is heighten your awareness of what the students really need. I always find myself asking: Would I find this interesting or useful if I was being taught this in Chinese class? This is really important when you're tasked with teaching English to unmotivated teenagers!

[Terry]

Sorry Steve, but as a teacher and administrator of
ESL, I have to express dissent.
When I first decided to become a teacher, I decided to simply go to another country and just do it, without any formal training. I subsequently decided to take the CERTESL course offered by VCC and the U. of Sask. My eyes were quickly opened to what clear methodology would do, and I was thankful that I had the training to deal with many aspects of any student's approach to learning. The issue you bring up is one of many that are actually dealt with and discussed in any good ESL training course. My course took two years to complete and equipped me very well.

Over the course of some fifteen years, I've seen the quality and motivation of teachers decline, some of whom I've hired after they had taken perhaps six weeks of training, simply because there was a lack of gifted, and trained, teachers. Nonetheless, my training prepared me for any and all aspects of language ...uhhh... learning, if you like, and although your opinion is valid, I believe you only see it from one aspect.
All students are not the same, and to dismiss ESL qualification out of hand is something that you express, I believe, from a somewhat myopic and evangelical perspective. Although you may believe that your experience qualifies you to say that ESL trained teachers are unnecessary, what I would say is: take a valid course, and then tell me that my ESL training is irrelevant.

[Steve Kaufmann]

I am not about to take and ESL training course. The kind of discussion that I come across on language teacher listservs and the like, does not make me inclined to spend my time there. To each his own.

[Chris]

I've been teaching in Taiwan for the past four years and I've been surprised at the number of teachers who don't speak Chinese. My thinking is surely, if you know how to teach, then you'll know how to study.

Though much of the English teaching here is driven by the need to 'progress'. English teachers are just cogs in a big system. Tests both at schools and cramp school drive the English teaching here. There's limited room for teachers to experiment, and usually (in my school anyway) as the standard of English increases, the more book based it gets.

The more book based it gets, the further from being a langauge it becomes. There are some Grammar books that are truly horrendous. It's definitely becomes very hard to motivate students with these materials and using them just tends to make English seems unnecessarily complicated.

My Chinese is ok but it's not that good for being here for four years. It's improved a lot this year, mainly because I've put more emphasis on listening then on speaking. Though I can transfer some of this experience to teaching, it's basically different to the system I found myself in.

As for Celta, it's useful for teaching in the current system they have for teaching English. It certainly made it easier for me to teach and the principals are generally good.

The certificate is useful for the current setup. Whether you agree with the current setup, might be the difference.