The Unbiased Truth About Nova

[bakaKanadajin]

I don't agree completely. Think of the ideal situation, where a business actually DOES take the time and spend the money to hire someone with credentials and/or experience. Since the company is run by Japanese, and many Japanese managers know squat about teaching, it is only fair to assume that your professional teachers know enough to plan curricula. They are your expert consultants in the fielf of teaching. You leave them out of the loop, and you might just as well hire monkeys.

You're right, the J-staff do rely on teachers to augment and improve the current curriculum and materials, and they're an integral part of the entire enterprise. But I'm referring to the managerial issues moreso. Sales tactics, quarterly objectives, training initiatives, etc. Specifically I had something in mind from the article:

"Furthermore, most schools ..often rely on their 3 -days to 1-week training programs to transform graduates of other fields into suitable language teachers. To improve the work environment at my present school, the management needs to raise its expectations of the foreign staff; the teaching staff needs to be encouraged to be actively involved in suggesting ways to improve the teaching and student services of the school"

I could be misinterpreting it but this teacher seems to think his/her input is of value to the company. Using your native language abilities and sharp thinking to flesh out that which exists and make a 45 - 50 minute lesson out of raw material is one thing, but with so many teachers and differeing points of view, I think any teacher that assumes their 'expertise' is needed to improve the business' structure and go beyond the text books is missing the point. Japanese people know Japanese customers, teaching is all teachers can do. When the schedules were thin or sales were down, I'd hear from other teachers 'Oh they should do this, ah they oughtta do that'. But alot of those ideas were pretty hair-brained and lacked Japanese perspective, or business perspsctive, yet that disgruntlement remained and professionalism suffered. Teachers should know their role and seek to improve their teaching and just their teaching.

At any rate I don't think we're in disagreement, teaching quality should be high, period. My point was just that beyond teaching I don't think they need to be in the loop, I don't think it'd contribute to professionalism. If anything it would just cause more bickering and posturing.

To your second point, at NOVA there was in fact a chain of command, e.g. going from teacher to co-ordinator to AT to BT to AAM, AM and beyond. There was room for advancement and attempting to advance was encouraged with lots of talk of 'making a difference' and 'having more control over how the school is run' etc.

relationship is one that has a gaijin with strong Japanese skills and plenty of experience here to understand the business culture. THEN, you have someone with the savvy to hold his J boss at bay while he deals with the problems that the gaijin teachers have, and vice versa.

As far as Nova goes (I have no other experience), in the upper ranks you do in fact find individuals who started out as teachers, worked their way up the ladder, have decent Japanese capabilities (usually gained from a genuine interest in the culture, long-term exposure over time, etc. which is mirrored therein by their continuing commitment to the company) and as a result have a far better understanding of Japanese business practices and interact closely with Japanese staff. Usually an Area Manager is someone who fits this profile. A good Area Manager can have a large impact on several schools, tens of schools, and bring Block standards up quite high. But, even then, that connection is a difficult one because at some point even the best get tired and move on, usually because their experience and Japanese skills allow them to get a better job right there in Japan.

And that kind of begged the next point, which was that incentives are key in ANY business to keep people around. If the salary was good those people who moved on to better jobs within Japan wouldn't move on so quickly, (I'm just guessing), and/or teachers would be more inclined to give it that extra 5-10% of genkiness. In the classrooms, sometimes that's the difference in morale that'll get you those extra sales, or at least staunch the complaining and staunch the early ship jumpers.

I have one individual in mind, a Japanese lifer from America (married a Japanese wife, has children, had taught for several years at the same school, in possession of JLPT2 bordering on JLPT1). Here's someone who'd be a prime candidate for upper management, keeping gaijin/nihonjin relations at a large Eikaiwa amicable. But, obviously the incentive for him to go beyond teaching was never there because he never did, he turned promotions down at every corner, and eventually he quit, got his JLPT 1 and got a better job.

So a small bonus for completing your contract would really help prevent people from going home early. A further bonus for re-signing another contract (exists at NOVA) also helps. Incentives for promotion, well at NOVA you get a mere 10,000yen extra a month for becoming AT, and usually have to change your schedule so that you're off Sundays. Well guess what, working Sundays pays a 10,000yen monthly premium or something like that, effectively cancelling your raise. Plus you get to do more work.

[Glenski]

You're right, the J-staff do rely on teachers to augment and improve the current curriculum and materials, and they're an integral part of the entire enterprise. But I'm referring to the managerial issues moreso. Sales tactics, quarterly objectives, training initiatives, etc.

On this point, I agree about 95%. I still think a professional teacher can provide input to training of teachers (and initiatives), and make valuable suggestions for some marketing ploys, mostly centered around curriculum ideas. You're right that we agree about most everything, though.

Specifically I had something in mind from the article:
"Furthermore, most schools ..often rely on their 3 -days to 1-week training programs to transform graduates of other fields into suitable language teachers.

Take this statement with a grain of salt. "Suitable" usually means that a newbie has seen what the school expects of him and knows what the teaching format is supposed to be. Nothing more.

"...To improve the work environment at my present school, the management needs to raise its expectations of the foreign staff; the teaching staff needs to be encouraged to be actively involved in suggesting ways to improve the teaching and student services of the school

"
I could be misinterpreting it but this teacher seems to think his/her input is of value to the company.

As I wrote above, I agree with the author on this point. I hope you can see that now.

If not, let me give you 2 examples:
1) At my eikaiwa, a Japanese teacher of English suggested that they create a debate course, mostly for higher level people (his old HS teaching cronies, but anyone who had the skill could join). I co-taught it for 2 years. It was a raging success and is still in progress 6 years later.
2) At the same eikaiwa, the staff recognized my background in science, and they asked me to create a new course based on that. I did, Science Topics, for high level professionals in the science field. I taught it solo for the last 2 years I was there. It was a success, too.

Another item in this affair could be how teachers interview prospective students and provide input as to what level the students are, so they know which classes to take. At my school, all I could do was interview them and make suggestions. If the students had the cash, the stupid staff let them sign up for any class they wanted, and teachers often had to suffer. I'd certainly want input on this managerial matter!

Japanese people know Japanese customers, teaching is all teachers can do.

I think I have shown the inaccuracy of this statement.

When the schedules were thin or sales were down, I'd hear from other teachers 'Oh they should do this, ah they oughtta do that'. But alot of those ideas were pretty hair-brained and lacked Japanese perspective, or business perspsctive, yet that disgruntlement remained and professionalism suffered. Teachers should know their role and seek to improve their teaching and just their teaching.

My old eikaiwa had some pretty "hair-brained ideas" about advertising and certainly didn't understand what was needed. They were very lucky in having deep pockets from a parent organization to keep them afloat. On top of that, the building they were in suffered flooding problems when pipes burst, so they got money to fix up the place and stay in business longer. If that hadn't happened, they were going to go out of business in a year.

To your second point, at NOVA there was in fact a chain of command,

I know that, but NOVA is the largest eikaiwa chain around. My point was that few eikaiwa have such structure.

And that kind of begged the next point, which was that incentives are key in ANY business to keep people around. If the salary was good those people who moved on to better jobs within Japan wouldn't move on so quickly, (I'm just guessing),

Oh, it's a good guess, and I tend to agree with it, but there's more than just bonuses. Incentives also include a friendly receptive staff with which to work, no micro-management (often from foreign managers), reasonable paperwork, sufficient office equipment (we had a 5-year old Mac that didn't work, and that was it for computers for a staff of 3 teachers), and contracts that don't skirt the law or restrict employees needlessly.