[NIFL-ESL:10014] Re: Fw: Diversity in staffing

From: bodman@ucc.edu
Date: Thu Mar 11 2004 - 19:06:55 EST


Return-Path: <nifl-esl@literacy.nifl.gov>
Received: from literacy (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by literacy.nifl.gov (8.10.2/8.10.2) with SMTP id i2C06tI22482; Thu, 11 Mar 2004 19:06:55 -0500 (EST)
Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2004 19:06:55 -0500 (EST)
Message-Id: <CFA0B6B409EBD411ABBF0000F8CD206C06FECD9A@CREXC01>
Errors-To: listowner@literacy.nifl.gov
Reply-To: nifl-esl@literacy.nifl.gov
Originator: nifl-esl@literacy.nifl.gov
Sender: nifl-esl@literacy.nifl.gov
Precedence: bulk
From: bodman@ucc.edu
To: Multiple recipients of list <nifl-esl@literacy.nifl.gov>
Subject: [NIFL-ESL:10014] Re: Fw: Diversity in staffing
X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas
Content-Type: text/plain;
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2655.55)
Status: O
Content-Length: 5742
Lines: 126

I am glad to see that people are becoming more willing to speak out
different points of view on this issue.  Certainly, Indian English is as
valid a form of English as American, or Australian, or British, or Canadian
English.  It is possible that beginning students who wish to learn American
English are so burdened by all they have to learn in English that they
cannot fully benefit from the niceties in the speech or word choice of a
native speaker as opposed to those used by a near-native speaker; it is also
possible that they might benefit more from native teachers as they move to
the advanced stages of learning.

I think that there are several issues beyond accent that are worthy of
consideration.  For example, research on the cross-cultural realization of
sociopragmatic features (often referred to as language functions)of
varieties of English and other languages have demonstrated that there are
significant differences in what is said, to whom it is said, and how it is
said. For example, American English differs more significantly at the
pragmatic level from British English than it does at the syntactic or
lexical levels.  Cross-cultural misunderstanding and miscommunication can
occur because conversational floors, frames, strategies, etc. differ among
speech communities in important ways.  With all the good intentions in the
world when one is attempting to communicate well, one can (when using a way
of speaking that is acceptable in one's speech community and not understood
in the same way in the target community) be regarded variously as rude,
pompous, crude, supercilious, lacking in comraderie, hopelessly uneducated,
and so on. These differences may not be important when teaching beginning
students who are indulged by native speakers; however, advanced students
must grapple with those features that may serve to keep them from being
accepted when they wish that acceptance.

Intellectual issues aside, I think, underneath, what we are really talking
about here is the issue of power in the marketplace.  Non-native speakers of
English want the same jobs that native speakers of English want.  Both are
trying to hold on to their piece of the pie.  In business terms, ESL has
become a "mature market."  Trained, experienced ESL teachers are not as rare
as they used to be twenty years ago.  The interviewing process is (or should
be) highly competitive.  And there are not enough jobs to go around anymore;
it is simply not possible to give everyone a bite at the apple.  Choices
must be made.  Whatever criteria are used to eliminate candidates, it seems
unfair and discriminatory to those not chosen.

What do you think?

Jean Bodman
bodman@ucc.edu
Work: 908-965-6096


-----Original Message-----
From: arconn@juno.com [mailto:arconn@juno.com]
Sent: Thursday, March 11, 2004 5:25 PM
To: Multiple recipients of list
Subject: [NIFL-ESL:10013] Re: Fw: Diversity in staffing


This was an interesting reply.  Two years ago I set up a class for people
who were all from Syria.  They insisted that they wanted a teacher who  
was    from the United states.   They said that they were first taught by
a Syrian and she reverted to  her native language when she was teaching
them.  They felt if someone did not understand  their language, they
would have to speak English.

So I guess it is up to what ever the student wants!


> Why then is it so essential to have native speakers of
> English perceived as being the most valid teachers of
> the language? On what grounds
> 
> A correct accent is essential in my opinion to teach any language. I 
> have a friend who teaches ESOL  with a very heavy Spanish accent, 
> She is not clearly intelligible in her pronunciation and her 
> emphasis is on the wrong syllable many times.  I, my self, wouldn't 
> want to learn  a language from someone who wasn't a native if I had 
> the choice.
> Tanya Tweeton GED and ESOL
> Fort Lauderdale, Florida
> > Maria,
> > 
> > Thanks again for another sensitive and well thought
> > out response. I was taught English in India. I grew up
> > speaking English, Hindi and Marathi (and understanding
> > Punjabi, Gujarati and Malvani) almost simultaneously.
> > And as Americans have pointed out, I *DO* have an
> > accent. An Indian accent from western India, and a
> > strong British pronunciation. Everyone has an accent. 
> > 
> > ESOL for me is similar to the FLE classes my son had
> > to take when he started school last year in France,
> > which is Francais Langue Etrangere, or French as a
> > Foreign Language. What matters is communication. The
> > difference between high school language lessons and
> > ESOL to me is the difference between learning Language
> > as a subject (and thus no real emphasis on speaking or
> > communicating or learning the living spoken language)
> > and learning a spoken living language. ESOL to me,
> > represents the latter. We hear this all the time, "I
> > had five years of Spanish/German/French in school and
> > still can't speak it." That to me is a subject. And
> > more often than not, we are taught this by non-native
> > speakers of the language. 
> > 
> > Why then is it so essential to have native speakers of
> > English perceived as being the most valid teachers of
> > the language? On what grounds? Seems more of a
> > sociopolitical thing to me, rather than something
> > based on research or inquiry. Should it not be mastery
> > of the language and the ability to teach it well be
> > the reason we hire teachers?
> > 
> > regards,
> > Ujwala Samant
> > 
> > Director
> > Learning for Life UK
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > __________________________________
> > Do you Yahoo!?
> > Yahoo! Search - Find what you're looking for faster
> > http://search.yahoo.com
> 
> 



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Thu Dec 23 2004 - 09:46:40 EST