Register now or log in to join your professional community.
Is their training comparable with "formally" trained teachers or are they taught to teach to a system?
TEFL and TESOL are acronyms which refer to subjects rather than teaching qualifications (beware of non-accredited TEFL qualifications). To get a teaching qualification you need to get Trinity, CELTA, DELTA, etc (which cover TEFL/TESOL). If you are a native speaker, several employers would accept a teaching qualifcation without a relevant BA in English Literature or Linguistics. Yet, the jobs you can aim for would be limited to language centres mainly. To explore your full potential (teaching subjects that are part of accredited programmes for example), you might need to study English (literature or linguistics) first then go for a teaching qualification. You can also study for an MA in TESOL to make your background even more relevant.
Well , they are additional qualifications.No one can stand on fixed ground without studying English literature first .then,they are additional qualifications.Also , If you look deeply , you will find that native English speakers are distinguished in both.If you were going to evaluate teachers with the literature background and those who don't have , you will find a difference.
They complement the qualifications someone already has.I doubt if they can stand on their own as independent qualifications to secure a job.
TEFL/TESOL is additional training course,but not "real" teaching qualifications. Besides that the real qualified teacher must have at least 4-5 years of high education to be real proficient in teaching English language.
Yes, they are exactly what they stand for. Teaching of a foreign or Second Language. To be able to teach these students you need different teaching strategies and methodologies. A degree in English alone will not give you the necessary understanding of teaching a foreign language.
