photo credit: www.pixgood.com |
There's a perennial argument in ESL teaching about native versus non-native teachers. There are so many issues and thousands of argument about this it took me almost 10 years to finally write my own piece. Also, because of the various points related to this topic, this will be a 3-part series.
The most common argument of Native speakers is that they know English more intimately than the non-natives. They've heard it since they're in the womb. That's how intimate they know the language. This argument is truly valid. Even if I want to learn Japanese, I'll look for a Nihonggo teacher who's actually Japanese. If an Indian teacher shows up in my Japanese class, I'd doubt him at first.
On the other hand, non-Native speakers argue that since they've learned English they know how to break it down and how to teach it to ESL learners. This argument is also valid. I'm a non-native speaker and the way I teach is the way I learned English. If native speakers have an intimate knowledge of the language, non-natives have personally experienced learning the language.
Both arguments have merits but there's a disconnect in perspective. Native speakers look at English holistically. English is not just a language but a representation of a culture and of a race. Non-native speakers view English as a skill. It's a tool and a means.
Interestingly, native speakers' most common arguments against non-natives are skills-related. On the other hand, non-natives' most common arguments are more on the race.
Here are the most common arguments I've read against non-native teachers. As a non-native teacher, I will not provide rebuttals cause I might just sound bias. Instead, I'll try to explain the situation of a non-native English speaker- both as a teacher and as a learner.