Several readers have written the Taipei Times to say that one of the ubiquitous problems in the nation's education system is incompetent English teachers (Letters, Aug. 16, page 8).
But what makes a "good" English teacher? Can teachers with a competent level of English skills be considered good English teachers?
A list of attributes of a good teacher of English as a second language (ESL) would be very subjective. With that in mind, I would like to discuss the characteristics of a good English teacher based on my own research and experience.
There are two common misconceptions about English teaching. First, a professor with a doctorate is not necessarily a good English teacher.
Second, a native speaker of English is not automatically an effective teacher. If fluency were the most important variable in language instruction, a native-speaker -- especially one with a doctorate -- would undoubtedly be superior to those who are not native-speakers.
I have found this logic questionable. I have been taught English by native as well as non-native speakers, with doctorates in literature, linguistics or ESL, who were disappointingly ineffective and unprofessional.
On the other hand, I have been taught in a private language school by an English teacher who comes from Bangladesh, only has a bachelor's degree and speaks with a heavy foreign accent. Students from all walks of life are eager to study under him because they enjoy his fun, down-to-earth and interactive teaching style.
I've noticed that even shy students are motivated to speak up in his class. Many students obviously consider this Bangladeshi teacher a "good" English teacher.
Personally I think that obtaining a degree in ESL and having a good command of English are necessary and crucial qualifications for being a good English teacher. However, these qualifications are not enough.
For example, a professor at the University of Pennsylvania, Yuko Goto Butler, conducted research on Japanese and Korean students studying English in their native land and found that the most important traits of ESL teachers are a friendly personality, English fluency, cultural knowledge in the English-speaking world, a good command of students' native language and the ability use technological aids to teach.
Another study showed that students in Taiwan expect their English teachers to be welcoming, professional, humanistic and enthusiastic -- characteristics unrelated to nationality and English proficiency.
Douglas Brown, a distinguished ESL expert, provided a fairly comprehensive list of characteristics of good English teachers, which can be classified into four categories: technical knowledge, pedagogical skills, interpersonal skills and personal qualities. Good technical knowledge means understanding the mechanics of the language, such as phonology and grammar.
Pedagogical skills include a contextualized approach to language instruction, the ability to stimulate interaction, presentation skills and so on.
To be an effective English teacher requires interpersonal skills to engage students through enthusiasm and humor, valuing the opinions and abilities of students, and seeking opportunities to share ideas with students and colleagues.
As for personal qualities, good English teachers are flexible when classroom activities go wrong, maintain an inquisitive mind in trying new teaching methods and have goals for professional development. Language teaching is a very complicated art.
What language teachers should do is be lifelong learners and strive to meet the characteristics mentioned.
As a teacher, I have discovered that I almost always learn something every time I walk into my classroom because new issues always come up. This journey of discovery will go on for a lifetime. Therefore, the beauty of the teaching profession is that good teachers never stop learning.
Kao Shih-fan is an assistant professor at Jinwen University of Science and Technology.
China’s recent aggressive military posture around Taiwan simply reflects the truth that China is a millennium behind, as Kobe City Councilor Norihiro Uehata has commented. While democratic countries work for peace, prosperity and progress, authoritarian countries such as Russia and China only care about territorial expansion, superpower status and world dominance, while their people suffer. Two millennia ago, the ancient Chinese philosopher Mencius (孟子) would have advised Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) that “people are the most important, state is lesser, and the ruler is the least important.” In fact, the reverse order is causing the great depression in China right now,
We are used to hearing that whenever something happens, it means Taiwan is about to fall to China. Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) cannot change the color of his socks without China experts claiming it means an invasion is imminent. So, it is no surprise that what happened in Venezuela over the weekend triggered the knee-jerk reaction of saying that Taiwan is next. That is not an opinion on whether US President Donald Trump was right to remove Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro the way he did or if it is good for Venezuela and the world. There are other, more qualified
This should be the year in which the democracies, especially those in East Asia, lose their fear of the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) “one China principle” plus its nuclear “Cognitive Warfare” coercion strategies, all designed to achieve hegemony without fighting. For 2025, stoking regional and global fear was a major goal for the CCP and its People’s Liberation Army (PLA), following on Mao Zedong’s (毛澤東) Little Red Book admonition, “We must be ruthless to our enemies; we must overpower and annihilate them.” But on Dec. 17, 2025, the Trump Administration demonstrated direct defiance of CCP terror with its record US$11.1 billion arms
The immediate response in Taiwan to the extraction of Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro by the US over the weekend was to say that it was an example of violence by a major power against a smaller nation and that, as such, it gave Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) carte blanche to invade Taiwan. That assessment is vastly oversimplistic and, on more sober reflection, likely incorrect. Generally speaking, there are three basic interpretations from commentators in Taiwan. The first is that the US is no longer interested in what is happening beyond its own backyard, and no longer preoccupied with regions in other
RSS