Like what you've read?

On Line Opinion is the only Australian site where you get all sides of the story. We don't
charge, but we need your support. Here�s how you can help.

  • Advertise

    We have a monthly audience of 70,000 and advertising packages from $200 a month.

  • Volunteer

    We always need commissioning editors and sub-editors.

  • Contribute

    Got something to say? Submit an essay.


 The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
On Line Opinion logo ON LINE OPINION - Australia's e-journal of social and political debate

Subscribe!
Subscribe





On Line Opinion is a not-for-profit publication and relies on the generosity of its sponsors, editors and contributors. If you would like to help, contact us.
___________

Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Speaking the language

By Mercurius Goldstein - posted Monday, 23 October 2006


The NALSAS strategy was based on re-skilling local language teachers within each state education department. For example, many French and German teachers were funded to learn the basic elements of Japanese for primary or secondary classes. Although several studies during the 1990s had recommended the recruitment of foreign-background teachers to solve the need, however these recommendations were not progressed by successive government strategies, most probably due to opposition from the teachers’ unions.

During the period of 1984-1998, spanning the pre-tsunami period and the implementation of NALSAS, the number of Japanese learners in Australia increased from 19,789 to 307,760; and was estimated by a Department of Education, Science and Training report to be over 400,000 by 2002.

So, based on a class size of 20, the number of classes that required Japanese language teachers in Australia leapt from approximately 1,000 to 20,000 in less than a generation.

Advertisement

In an amusing digression, and despite recent politically-based changes to the program’s name and appearance, Asian and Japanese language studies in Australia continue to enjoy bipartisan political support. Although the NALSAS strategy was axed by the Liberal Government in 2002-3 (fig.1); it was only to be replaced in 2006 by another strategy under the rubric of the “Asia Education Foundation”, which is very similar in appearance, and with substantially the same aims (fig.2).

Spot the difference: “They all look the same to me”


Figure 1. The former (Labor) National Asian Languages and Studies in Australian Schools Strategy (1994-2002).


Figure 2. The current (Liberal) Asia Education strategy (2006 - ? )

Despite this clear political support for foreign language teaching, Australia’s education system remains among the most difficult in the world for a foreign teacher to access, saving perhaps France. The governments of nearly all other countries actively recruit from overseas.

For example, Japan has its world-famous JET program, which distributes thousands of English-language teachers, many of whom have little or no Japanese, throughout their high schools. China, Korea, Thailand, Malaysia and Indonesia all have a voracious demand for English teachers. Most Australian teachers can easily wander into a job in the UK, New Zealand, much of South America and Africa, and practically anywhere in Europe east of Switzerland.

Advertisement

Nor is this to say that foreign-speaking teachers have absolutely no means of entry to Australia’s schools. Non-citizens and non-residents can apply through the Department of Immigration for a visa to teach in Australia, and if successful, these visas are recognised by state education departments. Nevertheless, while DIMA lists a number of teaching categories as priorities for skilled migration intake, including ironically ESL teachers, foreign-language teachers are not on the priority list.

There also remains a crucial language-based obstacle in Australia that is not so prevalent in Japan; for Australia demands a high level of English proficiency for any teaching position. In most cases, an International English Language Testing System (IELTS) score of 5.5-6.0 (advanced) would be required. There exists few such language requirements for Japanese elementary or secondary schools; which can recruit teachers of elementary or indeed no Japanese language proficiency if they wish. (The standard of Japanese required to work in university of course remains very high.)

As a result, the Australian education system has relatively few foreign-background teachers in language departments, whereas in Japan, the proportion of foreigners is substantial. A 1993 survey of 582 Japanese teachers in Australia found only 62 were native speakers, and that at that time Australian schools did not recognise native-speakers’ existing teaching qualifications.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. Page 2
  4. 3
  5. All


Discuss in our Forums

See what other readers are saying about this article!

Click here to read & post comments.

19 posts so far.

Share this:
reddit this reddit thisbookmark with del.icio.us Del.icio.usdigg thisseed newsvineSeed NewsvineStumbleUpon StumbleUponsubmit to propellerkwoff it

About the Author

Mercurius Goldstein is Head Teacher at an International School and is retained as a consultant at The University of Sydney as a teacher educator for visiting English language teachers. He is a recipient of the 2007 Outstanding Graduate award from the Australian College of Educators, holding the Bachelor of Education (Hons.1st Class) from The University of Sydney. He teaches Japanese language and ESL. These views are his own.

Other articles by this Author

All articles by Mercurius Goldstein

Creative Commons LicenseThis work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.

Photo of Mercurius Goldstein
Article Tools
Comment 19 comments
Print Printable version
Subscribe Subscribe
Email Email a friend
Advertisement

About Us Search Discuss Feedback Legals Privacy