KJ, within your questions and remarks to cynthia w you write: It is my belief that most disgruntled employees that post here are those who have naively accepted positions with private schools. Said private schools are rarely administered by educators - meaning that they are the ones who fall into the category of institutions that are strictly profit motivated. Furthermore, they are the ones who not only treat foreign teachers unfairly but are also the ones who deprive their students of proper education by hiring unqualified teachers. Moreover they are bilking parents out of their hard earned cash.

You make a somewhat valid point, but what seems to be largely missing for the characterization many people make regarding public universities vs. private schools is what is often called the International Department at number of public universities. The rise of these so-called International Departments at public universities is increasing at an alarming rate.

I recently concluded hands-down the most horrendous work experience in China at a public university. My students were not the true students of the university as the Dean confessed to me (after signing the contract under misleading information). She continued that my chosen students would be the very spoiled children of very rich parents. A greater understatement has perhaps never been uttered.

Seven of out ten groups of my students had failed the gaokao, and so their parents paid between 30,000-40,000 RMB per child, to BUY them a seat in the university (which of course, was gladly accepted by the International Department). These parents were assured their very spoiled children could enter an Australian or UK institution to complete their education. Special arrangements (whatever that means) had been made for these students to enter these selected, partner institutions also without having to take or pass the IELTS examination. The only thing required for these students to move toward these outside institutions was to pass a few oral assessment exams given by the foreign teacher (plus writing and readings tests administered by Chinese instructors). A passing grade of 60% was required for students to continue in the program.

When I began teaching in China a number of years ago, I was amazed to see how most students would quickly notate any and all words I would write on the blackboard (and I write a lot when I teach). I found I had to encourage students to take down only what they felt was useful, not every single word I wrote.

At this recent university, my students (despite pleas from me and their Chinese teachers) never brought paper or pencil to class. They openly expressed no interest in learning, speaking, or improving their English skills. They were almost defiant in their apathy because they knew the IELTS was not required for them to enter Australia or England, and that no matter how well they performed (or not) in these foreign institutions, Mama and Baba were holding ready-made positions for them when they returned home.

Due to this collective attitude, naturally, a great many of the students could not pass the FTs oral assessment test. The FT that preceded me in the position was dismissed by the International Department because the students complained that he was too strict. About half of the students (I had a total of 297 students in these groups that would only meet with me once a week) failed to achieve the required 60% passing grade.

The Dean of the International Department implored me (on the same day she confessed all these things to me) to alter the scores of the previous FTs so that these students could continue. I declined to be involved with that. Guess what? Somehow, miraculously, all the students soon had passing scores of 60%, or higher! So many academic miracles in China! Also, one of the Chinese teachers in the program was also moved to another division in the university because he refused to dumb down his assessment tests.

Needless to say, I resigned from the position aoon thereafter, giving the full two-month notice (!!!) of termination as required by the contract.

In a special nighttime program the university had arranged for me, my remaining three groups (out of ten) were actual, meritorious students of the university. These students entered the university as legitimately as possible (under the gaokao system) and were far more engaged, focused, and a genuine pleasure to teach. However, these good students told me they were miserable at this university. Because they paid the public rate of tuition (i.e. much lower than what the spoiled children of very rich parents had paid) they lived in the worst conditions on campus: Eight students (sometimes nine) to one dorm room, cold water, etc. All of these students are computer science majors but they are not allowed to have computers in their room. They feel the university impairs their ability to succeed, and favors the students whose parents paid far more than the standard tuition rate.

I was paid a standard hourly rate to prepare them for the IELTS spoken exam, so that they could enter a selected university in Australia. In other words, the good students ARE required to pass the IELTS with a 6.5 score. I had three groups of 22 students (66 total) in these IELTS training classes. The university charged each of these students an additional 5000 RMB for my class (a total of approx. 350,000 RMB) for which I received 2900 RMB a month. No teaching materials, textbooks were provided. I prepared all the lessons and activities myself. The school gave me no support (other than a messy classroom), but managed to pocket lots of money from my efforts.

Most of my teaching has been in private schools, and as you pointed out, these places are also likely riddled with problems which of course, is true! However, no teaching situation Ive previously held in China will compare to the one I just freed myself from at a public university.

I know what you characterize about the advantages of public vs. private is largely true; but FTs should REALLY avoid having anything to do with International Departments of public universities. These non-academic ventures are little more than private businesses operating out of university buildings and yet they pay the FT the standard public university rate of salary. The FTs contract will read: The University of. but the teacher (nor the students) will have little or no relationship with the actual university.

And by the way, what exactly does read deeply into the contract mean?