Native vs. Non-Native Mandarin Teachers!!

[-葛亚辉-]

that's a great point, flameproof

[Jive Turkey]

Also, I would add, why are we assuming that the native-speaking chinese teacher's we're discussing were trained in China?

Because there are virtually no practical or postgraduate programs in TCSL in the west.

CSL teachers in China is one thing, but I think that native-speakers teaching CSL in the US were generally educated, at least in part, in the West,

Sure, but most native CSL teachers in the west haven't done any practical teacher training or higher degrees in language teaching. You'll get the odd one who did study language teaching for an MEd or PhD, but these people usually haven't done practicum since that requires a work visa in the US and Canada.

Most universities in the US and Canada look to hire native Chinese teachers with a Chinese lit background, not a background in language teaching. They want people who've published in lit crit or comp lit journals, not applied linguists who know anything about how to design a curriculum or testing system. And that is by and large what they get. I'd say 9 out of every 10 CSL teachers I've met in the west had done dissertations on things that are completely irrelevant to second language teaching. Of course some universities do look for people with a language teaching background, and some lit background teachers take up language teaching as a serious professional hobby, but in my experience, these are a very small minority.

and often speak English well enough to have access to scholarly materials about teaching language if they want to read them.

You hit the nail on the head. Why would a guy who was hired for a tenure track position because of his publications in literature oriented journals suddenly change tack and try to go into reading and doing research for which he's had no training? I sure wouldn't. That's quite a gamble to take for someone who's hoping to pass tenure review a few years later.

One of them has been trained in language teaching, in English.

What kind of training? If it was some kind of program that led to primary or secondary school teaching license, then is that really useful?

I agree that someone with teacher training is better than someone without, but it seems unfair to assume that native-speakers don't have that training

I don't think it's unfair. Most universities don't require it, so why would these teachers do it? Sure, you get the odd one who takes it up, but then you have the problem of there being extremely few decent programs with practicum in CSL.

The CSL courses I've taken have been designed by their teachers, based around a textbook, but actually, the most useful materials I've used to this point have been those that were prepared by the teachers themselves. (Seriously.)

That doesn't surprise me at all. However, where do you think they got their ideas for those materials they made? Even if they'd had no training in language teaching whatsoever, I guarantee that the design of those teachers' materials was based, albeit unconsciously, on research and theory. Most minimally trained or untrained teachers draw their ideas for supplementary materials from other materials they've seen and perhaps used before. In fact, I'd say that most people who haven't adapted and manipulated other teachers' materials to suit their own teaching situation will not really understand what they're reading when they do a module on curricula and methodology in an MA. Ultimately, decent teacher developed materials are adapted or inspired by things that were written by somebody with a strong theoretical understanding and then published by a publishing company that decided that the theoretical and practical foundations of that material were firm enough for it to sell.

I really don't agree that you need to understand any educational theory to design a good course anyway though. I'm sure that it helps, or can help, but it isn't a neccesary condition for a successful class, and nor does it guarantee one. I've taken plenty of great classes taught by people who haven't studied theory at all, and plenty of crappy ones from people who have. Educational theory, even linguistic theory that is more scientific than other edu-theory, is only a tool.

We'll just have to agree to disagree, then. And quit with the "Educational Theory" label. It makes me cringe. I've never once heard anyone involved in applied linguistics or or TESOL refer to the canon they read and contribute to as part of What DEd and MEd people call "Educational Theory."

There will always be individual teachers who can teach decently based on their own intuition and experience. I'd argue that this is the most basic requirement for anyone who wants to go into language teaching. However, running language teaching and assessment systems requires a critical mass of people who have both formal practical training and a good bit theoretical knowledge. I've had plenty of what I'd describe in hindsight as decent CSL teachers who had had no training or who had received some training in China. Their classroom skills and the quality of the materials and the overall programs in which they taught paled in comparison to even the average adult ESL program in the west.

[gato]

Because there are virtually no practical or postgraduate programs in TCSL in the west.

Does that mean non-native Mandarin teachers will have to go to China for training?

Most universities in the US and Canada look to hire native Chinese teachers with a Chinese lit background, not a background in language teaching.

Doesn't that mean non-native teachers hired probably would be a specialist in Chinese literature instead of applied linguistic or Teaching of Chinese as a Second Language?

What I'm getting out of this discussion is that it's impossible to compare apples to apples here. Most native Chinese teachers in the US probably have not had language teaching traininig. Those native teachers in China probably have had training but it's likely to be in the old methodology of rote-memorization. And the non-native Mandarin teacher with a superb mastery of Mandarin and who has been properly training in language teaching probably doesn't exist or is hard to find. Maybe Jive Turkey is one of them.

[Jive Turkey]

Does that mean non-native Mandarin teachers will have to go to China for training?

Actually, I've known a few licensed non-native teachers who have done that. For getting a license, it works differently in every state, but usually, nobody is able to get a full license in teaching Chinese as a foreign language because there are no teacher training programs in it, and in places where you might be able to take a course in it, there is still no practicum. Since you usually can't do a practicum in TCFL, I think most states are currently giving provisional sort of endorsements to teachers who are already licensed for teaching ESL or a foreign language (and have had to do a practicum in ESL or FL teaching to get that license). Most states still offer no coursework component for TCFL, so that is why some teachers end up going to China for short courses or doing some sort of course offered locally by the Chinese government. You can safely bet, though, that most NS or NNS teachers in public schools have done some sort of language teaching practicum.

Doesn't that mean non-native teachers hired probably would be a specialist in Chinese literature instead of applied linguistic or Teaching of Chinese as a Second Language?

Good question, and I can't really answer it. With so few non-natives getting jobs, there probably aren't enough of them to make generalizations. Most universities just won't hire a non-native, no matter how good he or she is or what they studied. I doubt they could get away with that if near-native French or Spanish teachers applied for a post in those languages, but people in US universities seems to think Chinese is somehow a special case. Just looking at three bigger NNS names in CFL teaching in the US who go into it years ago, two out of the three did PhDs in Linguistics, not literature:

John S. Rohsenow-Linguistics-he had a long background in ELT before getting on tenure track with Chinese.

Cornelius C Kubler-Linguistics

Victor Mair-literature

However, I have no idea what sort of education present NNS Chinese teaching job seekers have because so few posts are filled by NNSs. I've known a few people who had done PhDs in linguistics or applied linguistics in the PRC or Taiwan. I don't know of any of them getting tenure track positions in the US. They mostly ended up going to work for the US government or getting one or two year contracts taking students on exchange programs or serving as resident advisors at places like IUP or ICLP. I know one who has been paying the bills by continuing to do what got him through his PhD in the first place: teaching English at a university in Taiwan. Actually, some of these people financed part of their research and residency in the PRC or Taiwan by teaching English in universities.

Most native Chinese teachers in the US probably have not had language teaching traininig. Those native teachers in China probably have had training but it's likely to be in the old methodology of rote-memorization

That's why I said I think elementary and intermediate learners are best off with a mix of native and near native teachers. And I wouldn't be so hard on the training programs in the PRC or Taiwan. It's just that they're at least 20 years behind current programs in applied linguistics or TESOL in the west. I don't think TCSL MA students are taught that rote memorization is The Way, but when students are only exposed to superficial summaries of concepts, then they tend to fall back on what they know from their own experience.

And the non-native Mandarin teacher with a superb mastery of Mandarin and who has been properly training in language teaching probably doesn't exist or is hard to find. Maybe Jive Turkey is one of them.

Well I have met such people, but I definitely ain't one of them.

[-葛亚辉-]

Victor Mair is a CSL teacher? Of modern Chinese?

edit: He doesn't appear to be teaching it now

This brings up an interesting sidenote though. I wonder what the ratio of NNS to NS teachers is in teaching classical Chinese. I'd venture to say that they are nearly ALL NNS, although my university had a native speaker doing it who was very good (he also taught some modern chinese classes sometimes which is how I had him) but unfortunately he retired.

Victor Mair is a cool guy though. I met him last year. Amazingly varied interests too (albeit all tied in with China) but he can speak knowledgably about so many things, from the Zhuangzi to those Tarim mummies he loves, to Buddhism, etc. Very interesting guy.

[ooppzz]

1. Would you, as a Mandarin learner, prefer a native or a non-native speaker as a teacher?

Both native and non-native speakers

2.What do you think are the pro's and con's of Native teachers?

pro's - accurate pronounication

con's - they don't understand grammar...(mostly)

3. What do you think are the pro's and con's of Non-native teachers?

pro's - they understand grammar and structures

con's - they might have accents

4. How would you say the number of native teachers compares to the number of non-native teachers?

i would say 50/50.

[ex-Hongtongxian]

Many excellent points have been raised. As a non-native Chinese teacher looking for a job, I see the need to present my non-nativeness as a plus. I know that in Japan, schools prefer not to hire English teachers who are of East Asian ancestry, even if they were born and raised in the U.S.A., because they "look non-native." I suppose that looking Chinese would be an advantage in getting hired as a Chinese teacher. However, having learned Chinese as a teenager in China, my pronunciation is indistinguishable from a native on the telephone. Not seeing my face, the listener is sure I'm a native Chinese.