The Ethical Dilemmas of Teaching English Abroad

Are Foreigners Getting Paid More Than Local Teachers?

This is the question that has been bothering me the most lately. When I taught in Chile through the English Opens Doors Program this was not an issue. I was getting a stipend, and in fact was paid much less than the local teachers. Although it was annoying being on a stipend at times, it meant that I wasn’t compromising my morals in any way – and since I worked at a public school it also meant that I didn’t have to worry about any moral concerns regarding money and education.

In many countries, however, the wage gap is a serious problem, especially at private language centers. Not only do foreign teachers generally get paid more than local English teachers, but overall they are less experienced and less well trained. Local English teachers have to have studied education, taken an extensive exam, and many jobs require that they have prior teaching experience before even considering hiring them. On the other hand, the foreign teachers they hire only have to have the bare minimum requirements. 

The Economic & Social Research Council (ESRC) did some research on this topic, published in The Guardian, which showed that expat wages in six lower-income countries were 400-900 percent higher than locals' wages in the humanitarian aid and development sector. Additionally, they found that the wages were not correlated with experience or qualifications, but rather because expats come from higher-level economies and expect similar compensation. Although this was not a survey of teacher salaries, this shows that the wage discrepancy is across multiple sectors and is a much larger systemic problem. 

Some foreigners I've met brush this off as well, it’s just how it works. There is perhaps some twisted truth to this: companies invest more money in foreigners and have to lure them over, while they have a larger selection of local teachers to choose from. However, my belief is that there’s never a good reason for paying someone less who’s doing the same exact job as you. It’s like using the argument that women should be happy they get paid less than men because it means that the company is more likely to keep them during an economic recession. 

I'm also surprised at the lack of information out on this topic, specifically in regards to searches about teaching English abroad and the wage gap. Doing simple Google searches barely yielded any results. I did find an article by the Global Times highlighting this issue in China and essentially chalking it up to being a consequence of the market. 

It’s hard to compromise morals for a job. If you don’t feel comfortable with this, think long and hard before applying to a job at a private language center abroad. 

Is 100% English the Best Way to Teach?

Many language centers that employ foreign teachers use and believe in 100% English within classroom environments. I’m suspicious, however, that rather than this being the best approach for students, that this is the best (and perhaps only) way to fill these positions with foreign teachers since the majority of them don't speak the student's mother tongue. 

Let's put aside general concerns with not knowing the student's first language (how do you create relationships? how do students communicate if they're unsafe? etc), and just focus on if teaching in 100% English is effective. 

What Does the Research Say?

Although research is always a mixed bag, there’s a robust amount of research that has come out in support of moderate first language (L1) usage in language learning classes. Not only can L1 use help with explaining directions and translating difficult passages, but it can also make students feel more comfortable and build rapport and trust with the teacher. Of course, it's still stressed to use the target language (TL) as much as possible. 

Paker and Karaagac (2015) found that teachers used L1 the most to make their meaning clear, explain the topic,  give feedback, and to introduce new vocabulary. Interestingly, this differed from how teachers believed they used L1: they felt that they used L1 the most for building student rapport, talking to students outside of class, and for administrative information, such as deadlines.

“Keeping it in the Target Language” by Aleidine J. Moeller and Amy Roberts sums up the mainstream research well:

Several studies have confirmed that the first language can be beneficial as a cognitive tool that aids in second language learning (e.g. Anton & DiCamilla, 1998; Swain & Lapkin, 2000; Watanabe, 2008). Dickson (1992) found that it is not the quantity of exposure to TL that is important, but the quality of exposure. Such studies have provoked a reexamination of exclusive TL use resulting in advocacy for maximized target language use (Swain & Lapkin, 2000; Turnbull, 2001; Turnbull & Arnett, 2002). These scholars argue that by using L1 as a frame of reference, language can be more easily processed by the learners as language moves from input to intake (Turnbull, 2001, p. 533), resulting in a greater understanding of the TL (Dickson, 1992; Py, 1996). However, caution is advised against overuse of L1 (Ellis, 1984; Atkinson, 1995) as this can result in and lead to student de-motivation (MacDonald, 1993).

My Experiences With Teaching in 100% English

While in Chile, I was supposed to teach in 100% English but as my Spanish improved I didn’t. Grammar points and difficult sentence structures I chose to supplement using Spanish so that it decreased instruction time and maximized learning time. It also was a good way, in my opinion, to show students that I’m attempting to learn their language, and that it’s okay to not speak perfectly. 

My job in Chile made it very clear that the local English teacher was to be the one focusing more on difficult grammar, etc, because she could explain it in Spanish. My role was to focus on conversational English. So although I did utilize Spanish some, the split set-up between local teacher and foreign teacher allowed for students to learn both in their first language and the target language.

Additionally, the benefit of Spanish and English is that they have a ton of cognates: I was able to pick my words carefully in order to maximize student understanding in the target language. Other languages, such as Mandarin and Arabic, have next to no cognates so it's not feasible to structure TL in that way. 

My current position in China provides me with a teaching assistant (TA) in the classroom.. This is largely because we work with very young students, and it's necessary to have someone in the room who understands if there's a problem. Most of the TA's are university students, however, and their level of English varies. And although they're there, we're still told to only speak English in the classroom and set one of our rules as "no Chinese." It seems absurd to me that local teachers are still supposed to use the TA to translate in order to keep the image up that the teacher doesn't use Chinese.  

In a situation where a foreign teacher is the main teacher and there's no split set-up, I don't believe that 100% English is the best way to go. Spending time getting students to understand classroom rules, grammar points, and new verbs all in English not only takes more time, but it’s difficult to know if students actually understand what they’re saying. Although they may be able to produce the sentence structure, do they know the difference between “it’s a pencil”and “I have a pencil?” What about "I like burgers" and "I want a burger?" 

Additionally, I’m weary of forcing students to only use English in class, especially when they are beginner learners. What happens when they want to ask a question but can’t? And what happens when they do ask a question in their first language, but the teacher doesn’t understand it? (Some English language schools mitigate this issue by placing assistants in the classroom that can speak their first language to students when necessary.)

Lastly, for older students I also think it’s valuable to allow them time to process new sentence structures and compare them to how their sentences are built in their own language. It’s also beneficial for them to reflect on why the teacher taught something a specific way. 

Are Foreign English Teachers Qualified?

This is the biggest and most common concern people have with teaching English abroad, and it has been covered pretty extensively. Having a degree in any subject and being a native speaker of English aren’t the best qualifications, and no foreign language teacher I know of in the states has only those qualifications.  There are certainly some jobs, as well as some countries, that require a TEFL certification and/or a degree in education, so this isn’t the case in all situations. China’s work visa, for example, requires all foreign English teachers to have a 120-hour TEFL certificate. And most jobs in the Middle East require that the teacher have a teaching license. 

Although lack of knowledge of teaching methodology and classroom management  is a hindrance, most jobs do have some form of job training that helps to cover this (albeit very quickly). Additionally, sometimes this information is just best learned while on the job. I also worked for 3 years in schools in the U.S., but not as a teacher, before teaching abroad, so those interactions with students was incredibly helpful as well. 

My biggest concern is that English language speakers don't always have the tools and knowledge to be able to teach English. I obviously speak English fluently, but I didn’t (and still don’t) know all the nuances of grammar and phonics. I did get my TEFL (which honestly was somewhat of a joke), but there are questions that I ask myself about the English language daily that I have to look up the answers to. This is of course exacerbated by the fact that most foreign English teachers don't know the student's mother tongue. 

Are Foreign Teachers Really Helping Their Students?

This is twofold: I look at it in regards to the high turnover rate of foreign ESL teachers, and potential ineffective lesson planning/teaching. 

High Turnover Rate

Many English teaching programs are for 1-2 years, sometimes even less. What does this mean for consistency when it comes to student learning? And if you’re only teaching for one year (or leave early), how much are you really affecting the students? If you inherit a bunch of classes, how do you know what information the students have already been taught and what they haven’t been? With a constant revolving door it’s hard for students and longer-term staff alike to feel motivated to establish good relationships with new teachers.

Ineffective Lesson Planning

If you haven’t taught before, where do you start? If there’s no textbook or material guide being used, how can lessons be properly scaffolded? Or if there is material, is it what’s best for your students? 

I’ve been at both extremes: in Chile there was next to no guide when it came to lesson planning. We were supposed to co-plan with our local English teacher and prepare our lessons to fit into their plans, but often times this was difficult because the student’s level of English was so low that it made more sense to focus on basic conversational English than more advanced concepts. 

Then in China, my job gives us pre-made lesson plans for all class levels. Although this provides more of a structure and activities within the class could be altered, it means that there’s no flexibility when it comes to what specific classes and students need. 

Granted, this is a problem across teaching in all countries, so it isn’t just an ESL problem. However, it can be more pronounced when dealing with beginner teachers, and means that they can either be thrown into the deep end or coddled too much.