Foreign teachers at private English language schools
Foreign teachers at private English language schools
By Robert Shepherd
JAKARTA (JP): In his recent articles on the business of
English language training in Indonesia, John Phillips raises a
number of interesting questions.
He rightfully laments the lack of quality instruction in many
private English language schools, especially in regard to the use
and misuse of so-called "foreign experts". Too often, as he
points out, they are unqualified backpackers who happen to have
been born with white skin.
He is right on the money with his complaints about language
schools owned and operated by shifty businessmen for whom profit,
and not education, is the overriding concern. And he correctly
illustrates the discrimination faced by qualified local teachers.
But some of the questions he raises leave me somewhat
perplexed. To begin with, just how serious an issue is this?
Yes, a great many of the larger and more expensive private
language schools on Java and elsewhere in Indonesia employ
foreign teachers. But take a walk through any town or city on
Java and what will you see? Countless foreign language
'academies', 'institutes' and 'colleges', often doubling as
computer training centers, few of which employ foreigners. In
fact, I would be interested to know just how many Indonesian
language schools employ foreigners, legally or illegally. I
suspect it is far less than a majority.
Who, then, studies at those schools which do employ foreign
teachers? As any foreign teacher will tell you, most students are
drawn from two groups: the Chinese Indonesian business class and
wealthy bumiputera (to borrow the Malaysian term).
We can further sub-divide the latter into business and bupati
classes. Possessing as they do a culture which stresses the
importance of education, Chinese Indonesians are quite willing to
pay a premium for what is perceived to be 'quality' English
language instruction, while for many upper-class Indonesians,
particularly the young, the study of English is one more fashion
trend, as is Bon Jovi, Pierre Cardin and the Hard Rock Cafe.
Phillips asks if "Indonesia as a country can afford to waste
such resources on select individuals or groups who can afford to
pay?"
I would argue that in a free-market economy the question is
moot. Indonesia as a country does not waste resources on
educating select individuals at private language schools, select
individuals choose to dispose of their own resources at these
schools.
How these individuals have accumulated their resources and
whether these language schools are of any real value are
completely different questions. Phillips further asks how "all
Indonesians can benefit from having foreign 'experts'?" As
someone who has spent the last decade working in the development
field throughout Asia, I can only reply: and if we all had wings
we could fly to the moon.
English language instruction is no different than any other
field in which foreign "experts" are employed. No matter the
field, these "experts" usually turn out to be very average people
who have had the good fortune to be born and educated in a
wealthy, industrialized country. It gives them the opportunity to
live a privileged life in a less-developed country -- complete
with better housing and higher salaries than their local
colleagues. As the British say about Hong Kong, "Failed in
London, try Hong Kong". Are any foreign "experts" of value to
Indonesians as a whole?
As to what to do about the language school problems pointed
out by Phillips -- low-quality foreign teachers, unethical
business practices and salary discrimination against local
teachers -- the answer is: nothing. Free market forces will
eventually take care of these problems.
This is illustrated by looking at the state of English
language teaching in other Asian countries. Twenty years ago, the
situation in Japan was quite similar to that of Indonesia today.
Yet today, the quality of foreign language instruction is much
higher in Japan. No longer can backpackers get off a plane and
find a job teaching.
The situation is similar in Singapore, Hong Kong and South
Korea. From my own experience as a university teacher in Taiwan I
observed this trend beginning to take hold. Why? Because over-all
economic development in these countries has created a more savvy
and self-confident consumer class which values "quality" over
fashion.
In response to this heightened consumer demand, government
work visa requirements have been tightened, school management has
become more professional and unqualified foreign teachers are
much less common than in the past. Salary differences between
native and non-native teachers no doubt still exist, but I wonder
if this is not the same in any country. For example, who is paid
better in an American or British private language school
teaching, say, French: a native French speaker or an American? I
suspect the former.
In summary, Phillips is absolutely correct: Indonesians who
study at English language schools employing foreign teachers are,
too often, being hoodwinked. They pay a great deal of money for
nothing more than white skin. But until they are no longer
willing to do this -- that is, until the actual learning of
English becomes more highly valued than the opportunities for
socializing and entertainment that these schools present -- the
backpackers and drifters of the white world will continue to
descend on Indonesia.
For, like Japan of the 1970s or South Korea of the 1980s,
teaching in many of these schools is secondary to entertaining. I
would argue that this is partly why so many Indonesians
explicitly value a bule teacher over an Indonesian; the bule, or
foreigner, is good fun. Of course, there are many legitimate
English language schools which employ well-qualified foreign
teachers. But for most students, they get what they pay for.
To observe real teaching, drop by any of the countless small
language schools which do not employ foreign teachers. The
quality may vary greatly, but the Indonesian teachers staffing
these schools share one trait: they are serious about teaching.