It doesn’t take much to raise a ruckus at the ESL café, but one surprising – to me anyway - recipient of a good amount of wrath is the CELTA – not because it is “only” a four week course (ie not sufficient in the opinion of some) but rather in contrast to other TEFL certificates.
I have a CELTA; I think it’s good (do see my “objectivity disclaimer”), and I don’t necessarily think other TEFL certificates are not as good. To be honest, I don’t really think about it all that much, but I suspect CELTA critics may feel that the CELTA is a “snob” of a certificate, and disparages their certificates. I don’t believe I see this, but I won’t say that means it doesn’t ever happen.
I think the reality is that applicants are sometimes turned down, and trainees do sometimes fail – to me this is not a sign of snobbery, it’s what responsible educational institutions do. There are standards and trainers are in a position to ensure those standards are met. It gives credibility not only to the program as a whole but also to holders of the certificate.
Are the standards some kind of sham? If so, it sure is an elaborate one; I don’t think CELTA standards are a sham any more than university or other educational standards are. I’m no expert on the process, but during my course a (Cambridge?) assessor visited for a couple of days and observed trainees teaching, assigning them his own marks which he presumably checked against those of the trainers, to ensure they were similar. As I understand it this is what external assessment involves - .it’s certainly not proof that “abuse” never happens, but it’s an extra bit of insurance against it. And while it may not be easy to rival association with Cambridge, there are other courses which are externally assessed – so it’s not as if this is an exclusive right; the CELTA is just very well-known.
So…leave the CELTA in peace, please!
{ 3 comments }
I did a Trinity cert about 7 years ago. At the time, I had been teaching for one year in the UAE, and didn’t really know anything about the certificate courses. My colleagues and friends were typically British or Irish, and most of them had done some sort of teaching qualification in addition to TESOL cert. I recall the sticker shock of checking out these courses. I was determined to go to Spain and do the course, and began looking for ‘cheaper’ alternatives to the $1100 USD I would have to spend on CELTA or Trinity certificates. The best advice I ever got was from an English friend, who knew I was heading towards Spain to work. Trinity and Cambridge were (and I believe still are) the only certificate courses for TESOL accredited by the British Council. She advised me that companies in Spain and the rest of Europe would ask specifically for those certs, at times offering to accept an ‘equivalent’. I ended up doing the Trinity course in Barcelona. I felt the standards were extremely high, and the fact that the academy delivering the session was accountable to another body made me feel that it was well-regulated. My friend was right: that course increased my employment offers significantly compared to some peers who had one 1 week in Mexico or Thailand. After doing the course, I noticed lots of Trinity/Cambridge ‘equivalents’ popping up. At that time, eslcafe’s section on teaching training was on fire w/ discussion about the new “TEFL International” course that begain Thailand (and later in other countries). I know people who’ve done the course and said all was well, but I have to admit I was sceptical about the validity of those courses not recognised by the BC. I think it goes back to the fact the teaching ESOL really began as an industry w/ the Brits. The Cambridge and Trinity certs have become the standard by which other successful cert courses have been based.
Thanks for your comment - I appreciate the additional perspective you provide.
I agree with you about the value of the course provider being accountable to another body. I guess I don’t really know the BC’s criteria for recognizing these two certificates in contrast to others…and I suppose that could have something to do with people’s “irritation” with the celta. I wonder if it is only the fact that they are externally assessed - or if it really is connected somehow to association with Cambridge?
Anyhow…that $1100 price tag doesn’t look so bad now - I think most courses (”celta/trinity or equivalent”)are now nearly double that!
I think CELTA really determined what the BC thought should be the standard. The place where I did my TESOL (and had recommded a friend to) later lost its right to deliver the course under the Trinity name, mainly because they were no longer meeting the group’s standards. In an industry with many people winging it, I think the consistency is still appreciated by many employers overseas.
Would you believe that the $1100 also included my accommodation for the month in Sitges, a seaside town south of Barcelona? I had my own room in the old quarter of Sitges in a home that was over 400 years old. Not many places offered the accommodation included, but it certainly spurred me to consider this particular language centre above others.
Comments on this entry are closed.