he's an admitted lazy teacher and he's admitted that that mindset is not tolerated in most other countries, if he goes back to China he gets to do very little (16 classes, 1 lesson plan!) whilst having plenty of time for drinking and chasing girls. He's not a teacher, he's an English speaking tourist looking to fund a lifelong vacation. http://www.eslteachersboard.com/cgi-bin/review/index.pl?read=61308

This comes from someone who has never worked in Chinese public education and has no clue whatsoever how things work at more decent schools than EF is in China.

Wrong, I worked at public schools in Taizhou, shushueng middle school and high school 17.

16 classes are a normal weekly teaching load for a full-time teaching position in ESL at public middle schools in China. That there is only one lesson plan may be due to the fact that the school requires the same teaching for the different classes (if any). If the FT does his 16 classes, turns up in time and the school is happy with his teaching and the way he treats students, then there is nothing wrong with it; it is hard and honest work, and the FT is no tourist looking fora life-long vacation. The latter is nothing else than defaming remark from the original poster of the input above.

Yes, it might be because they require the same for each class, but as anybody who has worked in public school in China knows, each class is graded and split by ability, all the kids are competing to get in to the best classes each year. So it means that each class will require a different level of lesson for students to remain engaged, so the same lesson plan will not be effective over 16 different classes. Or of course it could be (as the teacher I was talking about in my comment alluded to) because minimal preparation is all his students 'deserved'.

The same person, who made this defaming remark, also stated: “Students first”. Look at this statement and the remark about the “lazy” teacher above. There is an interesting connection in the mindset of that person that I can see. It suggests putting students first with the teacher not allowed to have fun in his free time after doing his 16 classes, not allowed to chase girls and not allowed to have a drink. As chasing girls does not automatically mean raping someone, or abusing female students and is a very normal thing to do for younger unmarried teachers, and since drinking does not necessarily mean that the teacher who has a drink has a problem with alcohol or turns up drunk in class (his school would certainly fire him for that, it won’t be tolerated in public schools, unlike at certain training centres), it would be an interesting question to ask what type of mindset is behind such unfounded accusations that must be called the defaming remarks aimed at character assassination that they are.

Except that I've never said teachers shouldn't do what they want in their free time. Go out, get wasted and hit on girls. What you do is your business, on the Condit it doesn't negatively impact your teaching by you turning up to teach hungover/drunk or canceling their lesson because you are too hungover to teach it. Nobody said anything about rape, sexual abuse or alcoholism, these are just emotive strawman arguments designed to distract from the very reasonable suggestion that being hungover in class is letting your students down. You really have to learn to differentiate between "don't drink on a school night" and "Don drink at all" they are two very different concepts.

There is a certain type of teacher who pretends to put student first and does not allow a private teacher life for others who work in the same field. If the teacher is then of middle age (around 40) and thus not sooo young anymore, is single, without own family and children and with an appearance that not necessarily everyone would find attractive, one is tempted to conclude that this same person puts students first, especially when they are at an age clearly before becoming young adults (14 - 15+ y/o), because these kids in class are substitute for his or her own children that h/she lacks. It’s an emotional and not rational thing if this was really the case.

This has been addressed above. As for the veiled insults about my age, looks and personal life, I'm quite far off 40 yet, I am quite comfortable with the way I look and I am in a relationship. Whether or not I have or want children is none of your business and nothing to do with the opinion that maintaining a high standard of lesson for your students should be a priority for a teacher!

First, putting students first without keeping the emotional distance towards indiviual students/pupils in class is against all the rules of a professional teacher. These kids are your students/pupils you are supposed to educate to the best of your abilities, but you are not supposed to see them as a substitute for your own kids in a family that you privately do not have. As a teacher, you have no right to do that as you are not their mother or father.

Another strawman generalisation. Expecting a high standard in the classroom is not akin to becoming emotionally attached to your students. Do I care about my students? Of course, but as their teacher, not their parent.

The same applies for teachers in classes with younger students that are older - you can under no circumtances maintain any love affair with them, not to mention the fact that it is necessary to refrain from any sexual relationship whatsoever with any of them. If the student was of minor age, this would be illegal anyway and would do tremendous harm to the student that you cannot want to happen as a responsible person. If the student was not of minor age and a young adult, there are other obvious reasons why you should refrain from such relationships as it makes you questionable in your status as a teacher.

That's what I've been saying from the start. Glad it's finally sunk in!

Second, the assumption to put students first with denying the teacher to have fun in his free time at the same time implies the expectation that the teacher sacrifices himself in the interest of the student’s need and be available, day and night, all the 24 hours the day, to attend to the student’s needs. It may also imply that the teacher has no right to attend to his own needs and should ignore them for the student’s benefit. This would be clearly a very unprofessional attitude to take as it is clear that not only students legitimate needs but also teacher. Furthermore, a teacher that does not attend to his own needs and sacrifices everything for the student, does rarely exist in real life, if at all. Third, a teacher that cannot attend to his own needs in his free time off class and school will not be happy, balanced, good and professional teacher in his behaviour towards students and colleagues at school. It would, in fact, produce that kind of teacher nobody could ever want because of the emotional, personal balance that this teacher would lose for himself and for his job as a teacher. Case studies of schools and homes for orphans run by Roman-Catholic nuns or monks, for example, have clearly shown that whenever there were actual cases of child abuse by paedophile clergy or other kind of children mistreatment like excessive beating up of children as “punishment” for minor “offences” by Catholic nuns, the persons in question doing the same were unbalanced in their personality with latent sexual frustration or other points in their personality that made them unbalanced, bitter and even hateful people. If the objective reasosn for this can be found in the special lifestyle that the church requires from clerg and nuns, then this is a pathological complex known as “ecclesiogene neurosis”. This type of “ecclesiogene neurosis” can also be found outside the church in certain cases whenever people are required to tacare of other people without taking good care of him/herself.

Sigh. Again, when I say your students come first, this is in relation to your working day. So you prepare good lessons instead of doing the bare minimum in order to get out of the office quicker. You take your time and you do your best. Why you are trying to confuse this with 24hour on call teacher is beyond me! It is possible to be dedicated and committed to your JOB and be professional enough to separate job and personal involvement!

Pastoral jobs are all those jobs where you have some kind of care for people - as a teacher, as a priest, as a medical doctor, as a nurse, as a psychologist or as a social worker. The main point is that you cannot be a good, balanced and professional helper for the benefit of others if you are unhappy, frustrated yourself or have other things that make your personal life a mess. Then, you would be the helpless helper - the person supposed to help others but unable to help yourself. I tell people in my organiztion always to sort out problems in their own life first before they can be admitted for serving others.

The deeper truth in all this is that you cannot help other people if you cannot help yourself and haven’t sorted out the problems that make your own life a mess. Another deeper insight is that the helper has needs that he needs to attend to as well as the people h/she is taking care of. There is no contradiction between all the those different needs of the different people involved; we need to see and understand that each of them forms one side of the same coin.

unnecessary waffle.

It's quite simple: Prepare good well-planned lessons. Don't go to work hungover. Don't start romantic relationships with your students. Teach because you love teaching, not because you want to fund an extended holiday.

It's really not that difficult to understand and doesn't require an indepth armchair psychologist analysis!