Thread: The ideal teacher: "not over 30"...

Originally Posted by Bubba

You'd reject someone because they have a younger girlfriend ? Why ? Seems a bit odd.

As you can see threads need a little bit of controversy(or me) to get them going.

Some people respond like foul mouthed immature children, but on the odd occasion someone responds in a common sense fashion. I think your question is worthy of a response.

Firstly, lets go back to the actual thread, despite being in my late 50's, I applauded the approach from the school to ask for a Batchelor's and someone not over 30. It's called a sifting process, but the sift is in the mind of the applicant, so if you say, I can't apply for that job, it's not the company that have done the sifting, It would have been the applicant. Sifts are done to spend less time interviewing applicants that are unlikely to fit their needs. You may accept a gem or two will slip through your fingers, but you can't afford to invest too much time. It doesn't stop a real gem getting through the barriers and that would be win win in my eyes.

That brings to the sift, any criteria should have essentials and desirables, most essentials would include minimum age, qualifications and language skills. Then we have they grey area, two like for like jobs but two different employers, the essential lists will be different, of course the shouldn't break the law with unfair discrimination.
Now remember I said, I could never gather a pool of teachers here because of my 'essentials' box. It would include something probably deemed to be unlawful discrimination but either way it couldn't entice any applicants.

Ok, my essential box, and why. The mentality of a man who comes here to get a younger wife is not the mentality of someone I would want teaching for me. As I've said 95% of the teachers I've met became teachers as an add on and I don't want afterthought teachers. I don't think Thailand is capable of attracting quality individuals who would come over with their wife and family and put passion into delivering quality teaching to Thais. That's the teacher I want and I know I wouldn't get. And I sure as hell couldn't go go a process of interviewing those 95% that I've encountered and thought were not good enough to do the job.

I make no apology of putting the Thai students first, they are, after all, the ones paying the money.

---Update---

Originally Posted by fred flintstone

so what it is that makes someone who chases after older women a better teacher ?

And where did I say that?

Are you sure you're Fred, or is this Bambam at the keyboard again?

Originally Posted by Mr Mister

I don't want afterthought teachers.

Not logical I'm afraid........These "afterthought Ajarns"....You're saying that they are all useless and incapable of becoming decent teachers?...

Originally Posted by William money

You're saying that they are all useless and incapable of becoming decent teachers?

You can't say it's not logical, indeed that statement is not logical. You can say it's incorrect in your opinion and indeed you may be right. Because I am saying that, in the main, people who choose to teach as a secondary goal will find it very difficult to be dedicated teachers. As well as that, I'd have concerns about what their primary goal in Thailand was/is.

But the bottom line is, the 5% are needles in haystacks and to be welcomed with a 100% haystack in your in tray for for sifting is not for me. How would I solve it? Only needles may apply.

---Update---

Originally Posted by fred flintstone

you take your job and yourself way too seriously.

Although I do take myself very seriously, I'm not sure there is too much evidence of it here.

As for the job, I make no excuses for taking my job seriously, but take issue with the word 'too' But again, you have just demonstrated why I could never consider you for an interview, let alone a job.

Do I need to put my wifes age and nationality on my CV? Or would you be asking all about my wife at the interview?

Originally Posted by Mr Mister

You can't say it's not logical, indeed that statement is not logical.

Fact……My point within our argument is valid…..yours…..a fallacy….both relate to reasoning….which in turn relates to logic….correct?

Generally speaking if they say they want someone of a certain age then that's what they want. It's not some kind of silly game where quality teachers will apply anyway as you described Mr. If I apply for a job that specifies something that disqualifies me then I would get binned and labelled by them as a time-waster and probably someone too stupid to follow simple instructions.

This idea of yours that it is the potential applicants that do the sifting is interesting and I do think it has some basis of truth, but to the extent to which you are putting it that is nonsense quite frankly. You are not only expressing your opinions here as facts, you are also showing yourself incapable of objectivity in such a thing as claiming the employers are not the ones doing the sifting. You're lost in your own subjective perspective, that you yourself would employ someone who turned out ideal for the job even though they completely disregarded the information on the job advert (remember: further back you claimed you would employ someone who was older than the specified age and indeed you lauded their determination).

Then there are other issues, like the fact that whilst you again have a reasonable point about a lot of teachers in Thailand, that they may have younger wives, you miss crucial factors like how - even if teaching was an excuse to stay - that person might well be an excellent teacher. Your prejudice combined with lack of judgement and inability to remove your own opinions from your analyses just goes to show how much of a good thing it is you are not a part of the recruitment process.

There's no point in you coming back to repeat how you've said all along that this is why you wouldn't or couldn't do the job. The real sad thing here is your lack of some very basic skills when it comes to intellect and emotion.

Originally Posted by fred flintstone

you take your job and yourself way too seriously.

I doubt it... you take mr.mr. way too seriously... you're not alone though

Originally Posted by Fleabag

If I apply for a job that specifies something that disqualifies me then I would get binned and labelled by them as a time-waster and probably someone too stupid to follow simple instructions.

That is totally incorrect, if you, in any creative way possible, manage to put a foot in the door, most employer would listen to you.

Originally Posted by Fleabag

This idea of yours that it is the potential applicants that do the sifting is interesting and I do think it has some basis of truth, but to the extent to which you are putting it that is nonsense quite frankly. You are not only expressing your opinions here as facts, you are also showing yourself incapable of objectivity in such a thing as claiming the employers are not the ones doing the sifting.

Your missing the point and suspecting a fairly large intellect gap between us, not sure that spoon feeding will help you. If there is a criteria, applicants look at it and decide if they can move to step two. If they have their own sifting process that says, I will ignore age restriction and still apply, they have effectively sifted themselves, if they decide against applying, they again have sifted themselves.

Originally Posted by Fleabag

You're lost in your own subjective perspective, that you yourself would employ someone who turned out ideal for the job even though they completely disregarded the information on the job advert (remember: further back you claimed you would employ someone who was older than the specified age and indeed you lauded their determination).

I don't understand your point. Is there one?

Originally Posted by Fleabag

Your prejudice combined with lack of judgement and inability to remove your own opinions from your analyses just goes to show how much of a good thing it is you are not a part of the recruitment process.

Which is a key point I made myself, based on my criteria, I would never make recruiting teachers cost effective, although I would improve the standards.

Originally Posted by Fleabag

ven if teaching was an excuse to stay - that person might well be an excellent teacher.

We come back needles and haystack and indeed cost effectiveness. Finding them is simply not worth it.

Originally Posted by Fleabag

The real sad thing here is your lack of some very basic skills when it comes to intellect and emotion.

Zero substance in that comment, I've replied to everyone in an honest and articulate way. Given the gap between my values and most other people here, there will always be friction. Sadly most have no idea how to respect and accept my views, despite not agreeing with them.

Originally Posted by tomcat

...actually, it's that you took the time on a perfectly good Saturday afternoon to reply at length to an obvious troll...there's beer to be drunk and folks to fondle...

Still never been sure what a troll is, but I know what a freak is, and I know they are far worse and far more dangerous when they are let loose on vulnerable people. If only the laws to get into this country were stronger, it would be a safer place.