I genuinely don't know if I am being prejudiced

[itchyandscratchy]

I work in a secondary school, teaching but also responsible for co-ordinating/supporting trainee teachers.

I get lots of applications from people who want to get experience in schools before deciding if they want to do a PGCE. The Govt fund a scheme placing graduates in schools 2 weeks. They pay the student about £600 and give some money to the school too (not as much as this though), so my line manager is keen to take students on like this to raise a bit of cash.

Increasingly I am getting applications from post-grad overseas students, who are sometimes even masters students in their field and so are very clever... but their communications skills in English are often poor. I have turned a few applications down recently on the strength of very badly worded emails with poor spelling and grammar. I also refused one based on a meeting where the student's accent was so broad I couldn't understand him and his manner was inappropriate (talking over me, ignoring other visitors in a meeting, etc.) But, as I said before, they are often very clever students and have obviously attained a high level in their studies.

My line manager doesn't think poor English is necessarily a bad thing but I think it is, very much so, as the teaching of pupils is the priority and they need to be communicated with clearly. I can't help thinking some of these students are looking to stay in education as long as they can and the natural progression is to get a job in an educational establishment. I also know I would be very dismissive of UK trainees applying with poor English as well. But am I being very unfair? I work with a number of teachers from overseas but their English (spoken and written) is fantastic. Should I be giving students the chance to improve their English as they support/work in school or should they be of a certain standard before their applications are even considered?

I'm not looking for a fight; I am genuinely pondering this as something that looks as if it might be more of a feature in my job over in the near future.

Anyone wanting to be a teacher with bad spelling and grammar is on a hiding to nothing IMO. Doesn't matter where they are from.

You need good communication skills to be a good teacher. If you would turn down a British born applicant who couldnt communicate appropriately i.e. on the same grounds as the non British born applicant, you are not being predjudice IMO.

If you turned down the applicant on the basis that they had a foriegn name and you were assuming that they would not be able to communicate - that would be predjudice.

You need to use the same rules for all candidates. If you do (with reasonable adjustments for disability) I cannot see how this would be a problem.

If these people are going to be teaching students, then they need to be able to communicate adequately in English. As Chegirl says, so long as you are treating each applicant the same, and deciding whether to interview on an equal basis, then I don't think it's prejudice. Many people from other countries speak excellent English - so long as you are not judging without any basis, then you're being fair.

I would be appalled if my child's teacher of any subject didn't have almost perfect written and spoken english.

I think as others have said - as long as you would dismiss applications from UK citizens with the same application then you are not being prejudiced.

I think it probably depends on the subject, but mostly I think they need to have very good English. Obviously, their English will improve quickly with experience in the UK.

I don't think thick accents are problem in themselves. We all have to learn to communicate with people from all over the world, so it's not unreasonable for schools to reflect this demographic.

The long-term answer is to have sufficient home-grown students, and not rely on importing the workforce from abroad.

I am a bit shocked that the government will pay £600 for prospective students to do some taster days and work shadowing. Students should do this for free - it is an investment in their own futures. It really doesn't cost schools anything other than a few sheets of photocopying.

Prejudice is treating people differently because of things like their ethnicity, sexual orientation, gender, etc. NOt giving someone a job that they don't have the skills for is not prejudice.

I've been a science and TEFL teacher - and a postgrad (and recognise many overseas postgrads from your description). For most jobs (and theoretically, most UK postgrad courses although I have not seen this upheld consistently) there is a minimum EFL/ESL qualification required (it's been a while and I forget what the typical required grades for, say first certificate etc are) but perhpas you could find out what the appropriate requirement would be and ask that applicants meet it.

It seems that in many other countries, school teaching is a much more common profession after a masters/PhD that it would be here. It has relative security, and a much higher status that it does here.

I think your attitude is right - needing a candidate who can speak and write English clearly and effectively is a minimum requirement.

Sounds fair to me. There have been some great PGCE students in my dcs' school so I think the idea is a good one. However, if you feel that some of them lack enthusiasm for teaching (which talking over people would suggest) or could not communicate effectively with the children, then it seems to me that they would not be a positive presence in the class room and therefore you are quite right to reject them.

No i don't think it is prejudice. i would be absolutely livid if i sent my kids to school only for them to be exposed to poor english and bad grammar. english is my second language and just as i expect no one to make allowances for that, you should expect the same.

Same with accents in what is essentially a communication role- if it's so hard to understand you can't, chances are the children won't either.

Should I be giving [post-grad overseas] students the chance to improve their English as they support/work in school or should they be of a certain standard before their applications are even considered?

Depends who you value more - your own students or some transitory intern. Does that answer it?

I don't think that your stance is racist. If someone was going to teach, say, Physics would you chose the one with GCSE or the one with a Phd? Similarly, will you chose someone who cannot communicate adequately or someone who is fluent (and you have said that you know that these exist because you already employ some).

If it makes you feel better I work in a University and we frequently turn down our overseas graduates for jobs(even temp positions) because of their poor English.

I think your attitude is correct too. My ds had a teacher last year whose english was impossible to understand because their accent was so strong in the end the head ended up in the classroom interpreting to calm down the parents and poor kids! Think they were a pretty poor teacher so the way they pronounced words was to cover it all up.

I think what matters is that you're fair when it comes to deciding who will be given a place and who won't. If you were on the interview panel for appointing a mainscale teacher then being able to communicate an idea/concept to the pupils may well be one of the skills you would look for when observing them in a demonstration lesson. If an applicant didn't achieve this then you're unlikely to offer him/her a job at your school.

Do you have a set of criteria that you use to judge the applicants? Assuming that you do and that this includes reference to having an excellent standard of English then I think it's perfectly reasonable to turn someone down on the grounds that their spoken/written English is not good enough.

if i was looking for someone to fill this position - their manner, the way in which they talk and how their social skills perform would all be a factor.

i think you should ask yourself.

if this person had a v. broad scottish accent - would your feelings change?

Set some objective criteria to determine who gets a place e.g language proficiency.

Alternatively have the worst of the applicants teach your line managers children

I agree with the responses here. In my last job at our local hospital I typed opnotes - short pieces of dictation by the surgeon immediately after carrying out surgery. There were surgeons from all over world, and I had to adjust to so many different accents. Generally though it wasn't too much of a problem because a lot of the terminology was recognisable.

Most of the overseas doctors were comprehensible and most of the home-grown ones were as well. Actually, the ones who irritated me the most were some of the homegrown male juniors, who just mumbled. If the ability to speak clearly resulted in problems for me, goodness only knows how patients and relatives coped.

But, it's very different for youngsters. They might be able to cope with accents that they're familiar with from their environment or watching television, but they shouldn't have to just "cope". As an example of what I'm talking about, there was one overseas surgeon who spoke clearly but used a word that didn't make any sense. In a medical context, what is a "perry ferry"? I puzzled for ages until I realised it was a mispronunciation of "periphery". For some people who have English as a second language, the pattern of emphasis in the mother tongue sometimes gets overlaid onto the English word, which is what happened in this case. If I hadn't figured it out, I could have just left a gap in the transcription, but that isn't acceptable for a student.

If you aim for a particular standard in written and spoken English, that serves as a benchmark for all applicants - including homegrown applicants who just couldn't be bothered.

If they are coming into a foreign languages department, I suppose it's less of an issue, although even there they will need to explain grammatical points in English. A strong accent would be less of an issue but poor grammatical skills in English is unacceptable - wherever they are from! Reports have to be written in coherent English! Worksheets have to be produced.

Thanks for your thoughtful responses. (and lol at getting the worst applicants to teach my line manager's kids!)

If students are coming into a MFL dept it's sometimes even more important to be ultra-proficient with their communication skills as they will have to teach a min of 2 other languages as well as be clear in their written and spoken English. To be honest though, our MFL teachers and trainees all have fabulous English and it's a great, thriving dept with colleagues from all over Europe.

I'm finding it's the sciences that most of the overseas students are specialising in - and that's where there is a huge shortage in UK schools. Interesting point about the SCottish accent - we had a trainee with a very very broad N.Irish accent recently and the kids really struggled for the first few weeks but then he started not sounding so broad and they got to know him and found it easier. Accents aren't the worst problem I think; it's knowledge of the correct use of English and, ultimately, clear communication. But I do think students should be at a particular standard before they apply to schools; it should be part of their preparation.