Exactly, a teacher's role is not that of an entertainer. Being an entertainer which is often expected by Chinese TC owners is the role of a white monkey in a muppet show.

Ultimately an entertainer is more concerned with themselves and their performance whereas a teacher puts their students first and seeks ways to get the most out of them. To do this in the field of ESL a teacher needs to allow his or her students to take centre stage, encouraging them to interact and use the language as much as possible. While a teacher may often provide the initial topic and/or stimulus for a discussion they should also know when to step back, mediate and observe - not the sort of thing most entertainers do in their day to day jobs.

I remember that stupid corrupt/failed ex-lawyer who started the equally useless "teaching by movies" ( holistic English ) business. He used to come on here and talk about how the regular posters were "uneducated", rude, arrogant, lowlife, and gutless wonders.

He was a total hypocrite, and like you said, that person has no credibility , never has had, should not be in Asia, he knows nothing about teaching, should not be involved in teaching ESL, he is a disgrace.

No! Those you are talking about would not be the most qualified and your examples are a bit out of the common line. Martin Wolff, a failed lawyer, is a good case in point. In the US, he was convicted of felony, was banned and could not work as a lawyer anymore. He went to China and founded "holistic English", which means mainly showing movies to learn English. A lawyer who is not a professional in education nor in English and ESL now sells himself off as the grand man of ESL teaching in China. If that was true, we could close down all teacher training colleges and all Departments of English at uni. And this will never happen...hahahaha

In brief, someone calling himself a "teacher" in ESL and who cannot explain the difference between interesting and interested, for example ( a common mistake/error made by Chinese students of English), is not a real teacher and just a deecher (= pretend teacher). There is so much pretence in the ESL business industry, and a pretend teacher forms part of that muppet show.

Last not least, to explain the difference between interested and interesting requires at least two kinds of competencies: (i) You must know something about language and (ii) about pedagogy, that is, knowing how to explain it.

Mere Oral teachers of English who can't do that due to their educational requirements largely lacking are most typically the kind of white monkeys we find acting in the muppet show of crappy training centres.

The most qualified would be (for example) someone who's been on radio, does audiobooks, public speaking or actually a stand-up comedian would be among the most perfectly qualified. The problem is that a lot of failed young men who have teaching degrees in the west go to China for jobs and desperately try and pretend they are 'Qualified' and find people who are 'less qualified' because they are petty and insecure.

To be a Qualified ESL teacher (oral english presenter) you don't need a bachelors in English, Teaching or any kind of University. The most qualified would be (for example) someone who's been on radio, does audiobooks, public speaking or actually a stand-up comedian would be among the most perfectly qualified. The problem is that a lot of failed young men who have teaching degrees in the west go to China for jobs and desperately try and pretend they are 'Qualified' and find people who are 'less qualified' because they are petty and insecure.

Truth is - Oral English presenters without college or University experience are most often better (and more qualified) than these failed Bachelor or Master Teaching Degree "iCouldIFIwantedTO' teachers. (btw: almost NONE of them ever got those jobs in those public schools back home. or were fired. but in China suddenly they are pretending to complain about the 'not qualified' who are often doing better than them hehe).

If Jake's topic would have been just that, it would have been a question relating to a "career" in the ESL industry (which in fact is none for obvious reasons), and it also would have been clear that a TEFL cert online does not make him a qualified and good teacher. As a qualified teacher, you need to have at least these things to be really qualified:

1. Years of study at college and/or uni in the subject area you will be teaching later. You need to know your subject well if you are going to teach it. For ESL, this subject area could only be a major in English.

2. Sound teacher training. For ESL, this does not only include a 4-week a superficial crash course in practical teaching skills; you need to know the theory behind all this and need to be trained to apply it to your practical needs in teaching well; you need to be able to critically reflect on textbooks and their approaches, so you will need some training in the history of ESL methodologies, why a certain methodology came about, what are its pros and cons; you need to have some understanding of first and second language acquisition, etc. Such a sound teacher training will at least take another year to complete successfully and necessarily would include teaching practicums covering all aspects of teaching ESL: On the other hand, what commercial providers offer in their crash courses is compared to what I have outlined Mickey Mouse bullshit, and does not make you a real qualified teacher. Instead, it will prepare for acting like a monkey in a crappy Chinese kindergarten or other training centre, use some games and songs. But it will not qualify you to teach English composition writing or to teach reading skills at a more advanced level. Don't maker a mistake to equate ESL with acting as a white monkey in a muppet show at a rubbish Chinese kindergarten or training centre; professionally it's really more than that.

3.Practical teaching experience at real decent schools and not only at crappy Chinese kindergartens and training centres. The latter ism not of much value in your professional record; teachiing at middle scvhools or at unis ism much better and would attest to your professional quality.

4. In addition to knowledge in the subject area and in teaching and all practical teaching experience, you will need to develop a personality that makes you a thoughtful and responsibke teacher developing a work ethics that pertains to this profession. Your only chance to develop that and to mature and grow in it is to work in a professional environment with the iompacts of a peer community that they have on you and you on them. It's not rhe environmemt of rubbish kindergartens and crappy training centres in China but an ordinary work ernvironment of decent schools, unis and colleges. One of the key issues will be to see why as a professional educator you should never put commercial concerns over educational ones.

Unless you meet this profile in all 4 points I have listed, you cannot call yourself a qualified teacher. The process of becoming a qualified teacher is one of hard and disciplined study, practice, and of gradual and continuing growing and maturing. Jake's input attests to the fact that he sees teaching as pure business and that questioning justified complaints from concerned teachers in crappy training centres is more important than discussing such complaints themselves in their subtance. This makes Jake appear a professisonal businessman who knows how to run a crappy training centre with all it cheat for maximum profit, but it does not make him a professional teacher, As simple as that.

As for jake, i think he refers to the angry baboons as the middleaged men whose last resort was go to China due to bad luck at getting jobs back home. They go to China with their masters in education that they most likely did as an online course.

I think we can all agree that teaching is a profession that requires on the job experience. However, you shouldn't turn your nose up at the qualifications that are out there as they can provide you with a valuable insight into teaching methodology. Indeed what are generally considered the 'better' qualifications both for teaching ESL and in education in general all require time spent in the classroom while gaining the certificate.

I'm not sure i can agree that a year spent teaching 3-6year olds will necessarily lead you to be able to teach middle school students successfully. These two age groups require an entirely different approach. Wasn't it Sir Ken Robinson who said that a 3year old is not half a 6year old. And so on and so on

I can read, speak and write Chinese.

For the rest of your input, you may be right with kindergarten students. On the other hand, these points are standard topics in training to teach; not all students of ESL are at kindergarten level.

Else, 说中文吗？Then- you can explain grammar to them better. I don't see a 5 year old Chinese comprehending an english explanation about grammar. It'd be more effective for them to hear it in Chinese.

I don't think you need to know these differences if you want to teach in kindergarten / middleschool

Especially because your english class (in some cases) is secondary to the Chinese teacher whose been given the job to do just that - teach grammar.

Else, 说中文吗？Then- you can explain grammar to them better. I don't see a 5 year old Chinese comprehending an english explanation about grammar. It'd be more effective for them to hear it in Chinese.

Like I have stated in a previous post, I am getting my tefl. But that is compounded by a bachelor's which I already have. However, we have senile human beings who wants to kick up a geological atmosphere of fuss over something they never asked me about. No wonder rumors have been passed about ESL forums being overrun by angry old men. It's more as if the angry old men devolved into simpler primates who give class lessons much like the one on exhibit with the thread below mine, roflmao.