Would you prefer a knowledgeable Native speaker with ESL training or a non-native speaker who has been through the language and reached a high level (even though he/she may still have an accent)? How about a team-teaching approach?
Best ESL Teachers: Native speakers, Non-native or both?
I think there's something to be said for a team-teaching approach, though I doubt it's all that common, probably because it's less practical for the teachers.
I think both kinds of teachers have their advantages. A native speaker is more likely to understand certain things, such as literary and pop culture references, the exact meaning and nuances of regional slang, etc., and it's certainly nice to have, but not essential. And, of course, a native speaker is guaranteed to have native-like pronunciation, though some caution is still necessary since some native accents are somewhat stigmatized (like strong southern accents in the U.S.)
On the other hand, a non-native speaker knows what it's like to learn the language and has some first-hand experience in what is and isn't easy to grasp. Also, non-native speakers tend to have a better grasp of the theoretical principles of grammar, which can certainly help, even though these principles don't always correspond 100% to reality.
- Kef
I think both kinds of teachers have their advantages. A native speaker is more likely to understand certain things, such as literary and pop culture references, the exact meaning and nuances of regional slang, etc., and it's certainly nice to have, but not essential. And, of course, a native speaker is guaranteed to have native-like pronunciation, though some caution is still necessary since some native accents are somewhat stigmatized (like strong southern accents in the U.S.)
On the other hand, a non-native speaker knows what it's like to learn the language and has some first-hand experience in what is and isn't easy to grasp. Also, non-native speakers tend to have a better grasp of the theoretical principles of grammar, which can certainly help, even though these principles don't always correspond 100% to reality.
- Kef
<<non-native speakers tend to have a better grasp of the theoretical principles of grammar, which can certainly help, even though these principles don't always correspond 100% to reality. >>
If this is true then what is the students' point of studying grammar? Except for the purpose of passing stupid grammar tests?
If this is true then what is the students' point of studying grammar? Except for the purpose of passing stupid grammar tests?
The purpose of a grammar, at least a descriptive rather than a prescriptive one, is to be a guide, not to be an absolute authority that cannot be deviated from. There always tend to be obscure exceptions to the rules, but that doesn't invalidate the general principles.
- Kef
- Kef
<<The purpose of a grammar, at least a descriptive rather than a prescriptive one, is to be a guide, not to be an absolute authority that cannot be deviated from>>
Conclusion drawn from this statement is that teachers should teach ESL students real english as how it is actually used on the streets by native speakers, instead of just the guides. And that includes slangs, swear words, etc.
I wonder why so many non-native speakers who are teaching english classes focus on grammar and writing 100%, and never teach speaking skills. Is it because they can't speak english well themselves? Or because they were taught that way when they were students?
Conclusion drawn from this statement is that teachers should teach ESL students real english as how it is actually used on the streets by native speakers, instead of just the guides. And that includes slangs, swear words, etc.
I wonder why so many non-native speakers who are teaching english classes focus on grammar and writing 100%, and never teach speaking skills. Is it because they can't speak english well themselves? Or because they were taught that way when they were students?