论文部分内容阅读
【Abstract】With globalization， English is becoming the international language of business and society. A number of English learners have increased rapidly over the last decades， as a result many English teachers from all over the world started their careers. There is a significant debate on which is the better group of educators： native English-speaking teachers （NESTs） or non-native English-speaking teachers （NNESTs）. This controversy paper aims to explore which type of teacher is the better choice for students and administrators， NESTs or NNESTs， especially in non-English-speaking countries. There are two different aspects discussed， which are English as a second （ESL） students’ attitude and School administrators’ perspective.
【Key words】NNEST； NEST； ESL learner； School administer
【作者簡介】郑司珂（1995-），女，汉族，河南遂平人，英国诺丁汉大学教育学院，学生，文学硕士，英语教育专业，研究方向：任务型教学法的理论与实践。
1. Background
With the development of world economy， English as a tool for global communication is becoming gradually important and popular. Although the number of native speakers of English （335 million） is not very large compared with that of Mandarin （1197 million） and Spanish （406 million）， most people use ESL or learn English as a foreign language （EFL） （ESL 2013）. According to Crystal （2012）， the international status of English greatly enhanced to improve than other languages in society. English is the official language of many international organizations including the European Union and the United Nations as well as British Commonwealth countries. Hence， English is becoming a useful and even necessary language to know， many people prefer to study it as a second language all over the world.
English as an international language and global language started to be widely learnt and taught from the 19th century. There has been consistent growth in the number of English language learners. As a result， more tutors will be needed to teach English. A report published by the British Council estimates that more than 100 million students in 100 different countries learn English since 20th century and around 2 billion people will be learning English during the next decade （British Council 2017）. For instance， international English language testing system （IELTS） has been recognized by 135 countries around the world by 2014. Every year more than 2 million students take the IELTS test （IELTS 2017）. Thus， many countries require to employ English teachers and there is an argument about the native English-speaking teachers （NESTs） or non-native English-speaking teachers （NNESTs） are better to teach English to foreign students. Since the 1990s there has been a growing form of literature that has studied topics related to NESTs and NNESTs （Le 2013）. It was judged that nearly three quarters of the ESL or EFL teachers worldwide are NNESTs， but there are many cases of discrimination against NNESTs （Lai 2011）. In the early 1990s， Medgyes （1992） discusses non-native English speakers as ESL and EFL teachers， argued that both native and non-native speakers of English could be successful ESL/EFL teachers. For decades， non-native speakers have encountered challenged from the language standard from native-speaker. The negative attitudes toward NNESTs are possibly based on the belief that NESTs are born in the English-speaking countries， who know how to teach English well （Jong 2005）. On the other hand， NNESTs have been reported to have some advantages over native-speakers， Iván （1997） illustrated that NNESTs can effectively provide students with more information about English learning. Because NNESTs have got the details about how did the English language works during their own learning procedure （Iván 1997）. Students may easier integrate into the English language environment with NESTs in English class.
However， an increasing number of NESTs are being hired to teach in numerous schools in many countries. In 1998， the government’s native English-speaking teacher （NEST） scheme in Hong Kong provided each public-sector school with a NEST， who was commonly recruited from overseas （John 2016）. Lai （2011） analyses that a NEST is a better language model than NNEST， an integrated model can help students learn fluent spoken English with authentic pronunciation. Moreover， NESTs know more about the culture of English speaking countries. In contrast， Lai （2011） points out that weakness of NESTs are their cultural barrier with students and it is difficult to build up a close relationship with students （Lai 2011）.
2.Discussion
2.1 ESL students’ attitude
The populations of ESL students have increased rapidly during last decades. There has been considerable argument internationally about students should learn English from NESTs or NNESTs. Thus， they will compare these two groups of teachers when they intend to learn English from teachers. Similarly， Moussu and Llurda （2008） confirm that the research of ESL students’ attitudes about NESTs and NNESTs is very important， since those teachers cannot estimate students’ understanding at all times. The issue whether NEST or NNEST is beneficial for students is one of the most highly debated today in education field. Students’ attitude seems likely to be an essential element of English language teaching. Therefore， I will analyse this aspect from two main standpoints， which are the quality of teachers and students’ feedback after classes. It could be debated that the students who select NNESTs may believe that NNESTs are better than NESTs. It may argue that NNESTs may offer a good learner example to their students， as a result they can teach well. Moussu （2010） asserts that NNEST is efficient and effective in teaching language strategies， because they can heartily understand students’ needs and expectations. Obviously， they know ESL students’ learning needs since they had the similar experience to learn English as a foreign language. According to Mahboob （2004） students felt that NNESTs have the better“teaching methodologies”， he collected the statements from 37 ESL student essays. One of these students claimed that NNESTs know how they feel in learning process， and the student felt that they also know the way to teaching effectively. As well as， students may learn more language information from NNESTs， they could receive sufficient answers in the class. The results based on the questionnaire responses by students， it showed that NNESTs were commended for their experience， degree of learning and the empathy with ESL students （Kelch and Santana-Williamson 2002）.
Furthermore， the professional skills of English teachers are more essential than language skills， it could be argued that the teaching skill of NNESTs are better than NESTs. For instance， Moussu （2010） suggests that the majority of ESL students taught by NNESTs， they explained that NNESTs have the ability to inspire students and the professional knowledge of the course. This conclude based on a total of 1447 students （47.6% males， 52.4% females） answered the questionnaire during the whole semester. In addition to the promotion of“innovative teaching methods”， students attitude toward to the NNESTs were positively， since NESTs just pleased to use that way to teach students， whereas NNESTs might observed to discovery other better teaching methods （Díaz 2015）. Due to NNESTs prefer to spend more time on interpret curriculum standards， research textbooks， analyze students’ situation and make the teaching design more suitable.
Moreover， NNESTs may teach grammar to students better than NESTs， because NNESTs learnt grammar completely when they were the learners. Mahboob （2004） indicates that NESTs may not know how to teach grammar， because they lack the experience as ESL leaners. Some students will request teacher interpret the grammar points or structures in their first language， since its easy for students understanding the knowledge （Hayes 2009）. In this situation， NESTs were weakness to teach English grammar. Thus， NNESTs’ knowledge of grammar is their strong subject， also they can explain the grammar in students’ first language. In contrast， there still many studies researched that ESL students’ attitudes toward NESTs were expected to be more positively， for they native language proficiency. Moussu and Llurda （2008） point out that NESTs had confidence in speaking English and they could pronounce English better than NNESTs. Hence， learning English from NESTs enables students to speak more accurately for they can correct students’ pronunciation errors. Native speakers use their mother tongue every day in their daily life， therefore it is easy to explain some slang words and new vocabulary NESTs to ESL students for NESTs （Mahboob 2004）.
Similarly， an argument by opponents of NNESTs in term of student’s perspectives as usual， they assume that NNESTs is difficult to have the standard English pronunciation as NESTs， they may make mistakes in the class NNESTs so they cannot teach well. Walkinshaw and Oanh （2014） state that NESTs as models of accurate language expression and correct language use. However， most of these opinions are based on assumption and not confirmed by formal analysis of the directing data. Moreover， NESTs from different countries with different accents and pronunciation， so it is difficult to define which is the standard model. Also， there is a strength that they have identified emergent theme in the data to a coding framework （Walkinshaw and Oanh 2014）.
Another flaw is discovered in the methods of data collection. Walkinshaw and Oanh （2014） in their study selected two English learning groups with total 100 students. The research objective may not enough to reach an acceptable result and gender was not balanced in the two sample groups. As students’ gender is the one of the variable that influenced students’ answers in the questionnaire （Lucie 2006）. In addition， the self-report questionnaire in this study was not careful of classification and not detailed enough， slightly vague. For example， only five questions were limited in this research， allowed students to give their opinions rather than other details. The mistake of researchers is that only mentioned about the advantages and disadvantages of NESTs and NNESTs， these questions should be developed more specifically. For instance， Chun （2014） clearly investigates that which type of teacher is better at teaching pronunciation？ Or give many statements to students and allow them to make a choice for agree or disagree. “The five options were given with each question： Strongly Disagree； Disagree； Neutral； Agree； Strongly Agree”. Furthermore， Walkinshaw and Oanh （2014） point out that NNESTs were preferable for students with the ability to speak different languages. However， NESTs teaching in Asia also need to learn other languages for daily life. ESL students should have the experience using English as a language in communication with foreigners， so they can be aware of its existence and nature （Jin 2005）. NESTs can offer the chance make interaction with language learners in English. A few sources writers applied as the evidence to support their position is not reliable. The study of Walkinshaw and Oanh （2014） conclude that NNESTs were constitutionally cannot do better than NESTs in Asia. There are some weaknesses in this conclusion. As a result， the writes only research from Vietnam and Japan， the data was not completely convincing. Even if this work does not fail totally for authors compared NESTs with NNESTs and obtained many advantages and disadvantages to these two group teachers.
To sum up， it is difficult to assess whether NESTs or NNESTs are beneficial for students in learning English as a second language. On the one hand， a variety of elements of teacher quality， for instance， learning experience， methodologies of teaching， language skills etc. will influence the motivation of students. On the other hand， although NNESTs may not better at pronunciation， the study which support NESTs exist many flaws and limited. Thus， in my opinion， in order to enhance the English skill of students in schools， NNESTs could have a positive impact on it.
2.2 School administrators’ perspective
English has been a compulsory subject in many Asian countries， such as China， Japan， Korean etc. （Walkinshaw and Oanh 2014）. As a result， many English teachers will be employed in school. Whether the employment of English language teachers from different countries with different distinct teaching styles have a great effect on the development of the school or not cannot be concluded till now. Hence， school administrators frequently make comparisons between NESTs and NNESTs when hiring a new employee. It could be argued that these school managers who support NNESTs will believe in their strength of lower investment as well as high-quality teaching.
For NNESTs， it is argued that the investment cost to employ these teachers is lower than NESTs. Several studies of salaries of different English teachers were researched. From one of these studies， Yeh （2002） claims that NNESTs undertook more duties than NESTs in kindergartens and language schools， but the“Salary Rates”of NNESTs were generally lower than NESTs. Similarly， Amalia （2016） clearly observes that NNESTs obtain the lower salaries， even though they had attained high level qualifications and strong English language skills. Retain non-native speakers for the teachers are economical， even they have the same quantities of work with NESTs. For example， in China NNESTs were paid salaries ranging from RMB 813 to 2，342 （US$ 101 to 284） per month， which is much lower than that for the NESTs， from RMB 2，917 to 5，029 （US$ 365 to 629） （He and Miller 2011）. In general， the financial budget of school administrators is limited， particularly in the state schools， so they could prefer hire NNESTs. Several administrators noted that hiring NNESTs often a“money-driven”move （Moussu and Llurda 2008）. Furthermore， it is also identified that NNESTs should to being taken seriously at work under the pressure and prejudice， so they would pay more time and money on their teaching career than NESTs. Doan （2016） reports that discriminating against the NNESTs is still common in many countries. Indeed， the status of native speakers of English is impressive， and many schools with English language courses will advertise that they only hire NESTs. The graduation students from the discipline of Teaching English to Speakers of Other Languages （TESOL） need encounter such occupation advertisements that obviously discriminate against themselves （Moussu 2010）. The position of NNESTs is always supposed lower than these NESTs （Clark and Paran 2007）. When the language school advertises for English teachers， the school administrators may design more requirements for NNESTs. Hence， NNESTs demand more patience and hard work than NESTs. For instance， Selvi （2014） correctly concludes that NNESTs are more willing to work hard and teach students learning approaches more effectively. The study from Kelchv and Santana-Williamson （2002） explain that non-native English speakers have the strong desire to be a teacher. On the other hand， as the increasing number of English teachers appeared， they need suffer a lot of pressure from the recruitment decisions and competition rules. Selvi （2014） observes that 80% of English language teachers all over the world are expected to be NNESTs. Thus， they must take much more work to improved their status and to make them be hired. As a result， these school administrators who need employ English teachers are more likely to choose NNESTs， because they can work hard and effectively with qualification.
However， there also many studies to support schools employ NESTs in terms of the easily attitude towards teaching and earning more money. According to Barratt and Kontra （2000） a great deal of NESTs find employment in foreign countries. There is a bias that native English speakers are often treated as the native perfect English teachers and the model for students. Therefore， schools prefer to employ NESTs and the tag“native speaker”is frequently written as a prerequisite in recruitment posters （Ma 2012）. NESTs may face a little stress during their education career， as the wages for them is much than NNESTs. However， for example， Jeon and Lee （2006） find that NESTs have to pay for the accommodation charges in Japan， and the health insurance for themselves （around 40，000 yen/month）. For instance， Selvi （2014） clearly states that NESTs do not need worry about the degree of academic and make mistake when speaking English. Similarly， Mas’ （2012） study shows NESTs have better ability at regulating the atmosphere in classes and activate students interest， such as they can teach English by narrative stories or telling a joke in class. On the other hand， Jeon and Lee （2006） find that those schools which employ NESTs charge more fees from students. The school managers will gain financially. Furthermore， school administrators should pay more attention to the teachers rather than the financial situation. Rao and Yuan （2016） claim that administrators should keep it in mind that“teachers are made rather than born”when they employ English teachers for school. Non-native English speakers devote a lot of money in order to be trained as ESL/EFL teachers in the United State （Moussu 2010）.
Finally， it is not easy to determine whether NNESTs or NESTs are positive for school in the perspective of school administrators. On the one hand， NNESTs are offered a lower salary， it is beneficial for hiring non-native English speakers. On the other hand， although NEST is authority in language， NNEST has the motivation for teaching. as a teacher in terms of financial investments and teaching qualifications.
3. Conclusion
This paper has investigated which is better group of teachers： NESTs or NNESTs has become a controversial issue in the field of education. Educators， administrators and students are concerned about this argument. I have analyzed this topic from two aspects which are students’ attitude and school administrators’ perspective.
Returning to the question posed at the beginning of this paper， it is now possible to state that students could learn English from both two types of teachers， since NESTs and NNESTs have different strengths and weaknesses. The most obvious finding to emerge is that NESTs are not always the better choice. In general， therefore， it seems that NESTs and NNESTs have merits of different aspects. However， the current study has only examined the perspectives from students and administrators. If the debate is to be moved forward， a better understanding of ESL and EFL teachers’ perspectives needs to be developed. The findings of this study have a number of important implications for future practice. An implication of these findings is that school can employ a balance number of NESTs and NNESTs， allow the students to have a chance learn English from teachers with different backgrounds， nationalities and teaching skills.
References：
[1]Amalia，S.D.NNESTs vs NESTs：Why Domestic English Teachers Should Not Worry about Their Foreign Counterparts.In Proceeding of International Conference on Teacher Training and Education[OL].Available from：http：//www.jurnal.fkip.uns.ac.id/index.php/ictte/article/view/7669，2016，22 July 2017.
[2]Barratt，L.and Kontra，E.H.Native-English-Speaking Teachers in Cultures Other than Their Own[J].TESOL Journal，2000，9（3）：19-23.
[3]Braine，G.A History of Research on Non-Native Speaker English Teachers[J].Non-Native Language Teachers.Perceptions，Challenges and Contributions to the Profession，2003：13-23.
【Key words】NNEST； NEST； ESL learner； School administer
【作者簡介】郑司珂（1995-），女，汉族，河南遂平人，英国诺丁汉大学教育学院，学生，文学硕士，英语教育专业，研究方向：任务型教学法的理论与实践。
1. Background
With the development of world economy， English as a tool for global communication is becoming gradually important and popular. Although the number of native speakers of English （335 million） is not very large compared with that of Mandarin （1197 million） and Spanish （406 million）， most people use ESL or learn English as a foreign language （EFL） （ESL 2013）. According to Crystal （2012）， the international status of English greatly enhanced to improve than other languages in society. English is the official language of many international organizations including the European Union and the United Nations as well as British Commonwealth countries. Hence， English is becoming a useful and even necessary language to know， many people prefer to study it as a second language all over the world.
English as an international language and global language started to be widely learnt and taught from the 19th century. There has been consistent growth in the number of English language learners. As a result， more tutors will be needed to teach English. A report published by the British Council estimates that more than 100 million students in 100 different countries learn English since 20th century and around 2 billion people will be learning English during the next decade （British Council 2017）. For instance， international English language testing system （IELTS） has been recognized by 135 countries around the world by 2014. Every year more than 2 million students take the IELTS test （IELTS 2017）. Thus， many countries require to employ English teachers and there is an argument about the native English-speaking teachers （NESTs） or non-native English-speaking teachers （NNESTs） are better to teach English to foreign students. Since the 1990s there has been a growing form of literature that has studied topics related to NESTs and NNESTs （Le 2013）. It was judged that nearly three quarters of the ESL or EFL teachers worldwide are NNESTs， but there are many cases of discrimination against NNESTs （Lai 2011）. In the early 1990s， Medgyes （1992） discusses non-native English speakers as ESL and EFL teachers， argued that both native and non-native speakers of English could be successful ESL/EFL teachers. For decades， non-native speakers have encountered challenged from the language standard from native-speaker. The negative attitudes toward NNESTs are possibly based on the belief that NESTs are born in the English-speaking countries， who know how to teach English well （Jong 2005）. On the other hand， NNESTs have been reported to have some advantages over native-speakers， Iván （1997） illustrated that NNESTs can effectively provide students with more information about English learning. Because NNESTs have got the details about how did the English language works during their own learning procedure （Iván 1997）. Students may easier integrate into the English language environment with NESTs in English class.
However， an increasing number of NESTs are being hired to teach in numerous schools in many countries. In 1998， the government’s native English-speaking teacher （NEST） scheme in Hong Kong provided each public-sector school with a NEST， who was commonly recruited from overseas （John 2016）. Lai （2011） analyses that a NEST is a better language model than NNEST， an integrated model can help students learn fluent spoken English with authentic pronunciation. Moreover， NESTs know more about the culture of English speaking countries. In contrast， Lai （2011） points out that weakness of NESTs are their cultural barrier with students and it is difficult to build up a close relationship with students （Lai 2011）.
2.Discussion
2.1 ESL students’ attitude
The populations of ESL students have increased rapidly during last decades. There has been considerable argument internationally about students should learn English from NESTs or NNESTs. Thus， they will compare these two groups of teachers when they intend to learn English from teachers. Similarly， Moussu and Llurda （2008） confirm that the research of ESL students’ attitudes about NESTs and NNESTs is very important， since those teachers cannot estimate students’ understanding at all times. The issue whether NEST or NNEST is beneficial for students is one of the most highly debated today in education field. Students’ attitude seems likely to be an essential element of English language teaching. Therefore， I will analyse this aspect from two main standpoints， which are the quality of teachers and students’ feedback after classes. It could be debated that the students who select NNESTs may believe that NNESTs are better than NESTs. It may argue that NNESTs may offer a good learner example to their students， as a result they can teach well. Moussu （2010） asserts that NNEST is efficient and effective in teaching language strategies， because they can heartily understand students’ needs and expectations. Obviously， they know ESL students’ learning needs since they had the similar experience to learn English as a foreign language. According to Mahboob （2004） students felt that NNESTs have the better“teaching methodologies”， he collected the statements from 37 ESL student essays. One of these students claimed that NNESTs know how they feel in learning process， and the student felt that they also know the way to teaching effectively. As well as， students may learn more language information from NNESTs， they could receive sufficient answers in the class. The results based on the questionnaire responses by students， it showed that NNESTs were commended for their experience， degree of learning and the empathy with ESL students （Kelch and Santana-Williamson 2002）.
Furthermore， the professional skills of English teachers are more essential than language skills， it could be argued that the teaching skill of NNESTs are better than NESTs. For instance， Moussu （2010） suggests that the majority of ESL students taught by NNESTs， they explained that NNESTs have the ability to inspire students and the professional knowledge of the course. This conclude based on a total of 1447 students （47.6% males， 52.4% females） answered the questionnaire during the whole semester. In addition to the promotion of“innovative teaching methods”， students attitude toward to the NNESTs were positively， since NESTs just pleased to use that way to teach students， whereas NNESTs might observed to discovery other better teaching methods （Díaz 2015）. Due to NNESTs prefer to spend more time on interpret curriculum standards， research textbooks， analyze students’ situation and make the teaching design more suitable.
Moreover， NNESTs may teach grammar to students better than NESTs， because NNESTs learnt grammar completely when they were the learners. Mahboob （2004） indicates that NESTs may not know how to teach grammar， because they lack the experience as ESL leaners. Some students will request teacher interpret the grammar points or structures in their first language， since its easy for students understanding the knowledge （Hayes 2009）. In this situation， NESTs were weakness to teach English grammar. Thus， NNESTs’ knowledge of grammar is their strong subject， also they can explain the grammar in students’ first language. In contrast， there still many studies researched that ESL students’ attitudes toward NESTs were expected to be more positively， for they native language proficiency. Moussu and Llurda （2008） point out that NESTs had confidence in speaking English and they could pronounce English better than NNESTs. Hence， learning English from NESTs enables students to speak more accurately for they can correct students’ pronunciation errors. Native speakers use their mother tongue every day in their daily life， therefore it is easy to explain some slang words and new vocabulary NESTs to ESL students for NESTs （Mahboob 2004）.
Similarly， an argument by opponents of NNESTs in term of student’s perspectives as usual， they assume that NNESTs is difficult to have the standard English pronunciation as NESTs， they may make mistakes in the class NNESTs so they cannot teach well. Walkinshaw and Oanh （2014） state that NESTs as models of accurate language expression and correct language use. However， most of these opinions are based on assumption and not confirmed by formal analysis of the directing data. Moreover， NESTs from different countries with different accents and pronunciation， so it is difficult to define which is the standard model. Also， there is a strength that they have identified emergent theme in the data to a coding framework （Walkinshaw and Oanh 2014）.
Another flaw is discovered in the methods of data collection. Walkinshaw and Oanh （2014） in their study selected two English learning groups with total 100 students. The research objective may not enough to reach an acceptable result and gender was not balanced in the two sample groups. As students’ gender is the one of the variable that influenced students’ answers in the questionnaire （Lucie 2006）. In addition， the self-report questionnaire in this study was not careful of classification and not detailed enough， slightly vague. For example， only five questions were limited in this research， allowed students to give their opinions rather than other details. The mistake of researchers is that only mentioned about the advantages and disadvantages of NESTs and NNESTs， these questions should be developed more specifically. For instance， Chun （2014） clearly investigates that which type of teacher is better at teaching pronunciation？ Or give many statements to students and allow them to make a choice for agree or disagree. “The five options were given with each question： Strongly Disagree； Disagree； Neutral； Agree； Strongly Agree”. Furthermore， Walkinshaw and Oanh （2014） point out that NNESTs were preferable for students with the ability to speak different languages. However， NESTs teaching in Asia also need to learn other languages for daily life. ESL students should have the experience using English as a language in communication with foreigners， so they can be aware of its existence and nature （Jin 2005）. NESTs can offer the chance make interaction with language learners in English. A few sources writers applied as the evidence to support their position is not reliable. The study of Walkinshaw and Oanh （2014） conclude that NNESTs were constitutionally cannot do better than NESTs in Asia. There are some weaknesses in this conclusion. As a result， the writes only research from Vietnam and Japan， the data was not completely convincing. Even if this work does not fail totally for authors compared NESTs with NNESTs and obtained many advantages and disadvantages to these two group teachers.
To sum up， it is difficult to assess whether NESTs or NNESTs are beneficial for students in learning English as a second language. On the one hand， a variety of elements of teacher quality， for instance， learning experience， methodologies of teaching， language skills etc. will influence the motivation of students. On the other hand， although NNESTs may not better at pronunciation， the study which support NESTs exist many flaws and limited. Thus， in my opinion， in order to enhance the English skill of students in schools， NNESTs could have a positive impact on it.
2.2 School administrators’ perspective
English has been a compulsory subject in many Asian countries， such as China， Japan， Korean etc. （Walkinshaw and Oanh 2014）. As a result， many English teachers will be employed in school. Whether the employment of English language teachers from different countries with different distinct teaching styles have a great effect on the development of the school or not cannot be concluded till now. Hence， school administrators frequently make comparisons between NESTs and NNESTs when hiring a new employee. It could be argued that these school managers who support NNESTs will believe in their strength of lower investment as well as high-quality teaching.
For NNESTs， it is argued that the investment cost to employ these teachers is lower than NESTs. Several studies of salaries of different English teachers were researched. From one of these studies， Yeh （2002） claims that NNESTs undertook more duties than NESTs in kindergartens and language schools， but the“Salary Rates”of NNESTs were generally lower than NESTs. Similarly， Amalia （2016） clearly observes that NNESTs obtain the lower salaries， even though they had attained high level qualifications and strong English language skills. Retain non-native speakers for the teachers are economical， even they have the same quantities of work with NESTs. For example， in China NNESTs were paid salaries ranging from RMB 813 to 2，342 （US$ 101 to 284） per month， which is much lower than that for the NESTs， from RMB 2，917 to 5，029 （US$ 365 to 629） （He and Miller 2011）. In general， the financial budget of school administrators is limited， particularly in the state schools， so they could prefer hire NNESTs. Several administrators noted that hiring NNESTs often a“money-driven”move （Moussu and Llurda 2008）. Furthermore， it is also identified that NNESTs should to being taken seriously at work under the pressure and prejudice， so they would pay more time and money on their teaching career than NESTs. Doan （2016） reports that discriminating against the NNESTs is still common in many countries. Indeed， the status of native speakers of English is impressive， and many schools with English language courses will advertise that they only hire NESTs. The graduation students from the discipline of Teaching English to Speakers of Other Languages （TESOL） need encounter such occupation advertisements that obviously discriminate against themselves （Moussu 2010）. The position of NNESTs is always supposed lower than these NESTs （Clark and Paran 2007）. When the language school advertises for English teachers， the school administrators may design more requirements for NNESTs. Hence， NNESTs demand more patience and hard work than NESTs. For instance， Selvi （2014） correctly concludes that NNESTs are more willing to work hard and teach students learning approaches more effectively. The study from Kelchv and Santana-Williamson （2002） explain that non-native English speakers have the strong desire to be a teacher. On the other hand， as the increasing number of English teachers appeared， they need suffer a lot of pressure from the recruitment decisions and competition rules. Selvi （2014） observes that 80% of English language teachers all over the world are expected to be NNESTs. Thus， they must take much more work to improved their status and to make them be hired. As a result， these school administrators who need employ English teachers are more likely to choose NNESTs， because they can work hard and effectively with qualification.
However， there also many studies to support schools employ NESTs in terms of the easily attitude towards teaching and earning more money. According to Barratt and Kontra （2000） a great deal of NESTs find employment in foreign countries. There is a bias that native English speakers are often treated as the native perfect English teachers and the model for students. Therefore， schools prefer to employ NESTs and the tag“native speaker”is frequently written as a prerequisite in recruitment posters （Ma 2012）. NESTs may face a little stress during their education career， as the wages for them is much than NNESTs. However， for example， Jeon and Lee （2006） find that NESTs have to pay for the accommodation charges in Japan， and the health insurance for themselves （around 40，000 yen/month）. For instance， Selvi （2014） clearly states that NESTs do not need worry about the degree of academic and make mistake when speaking English. Similarly， Mas’ （2012） study shows NESTs have better ability at regulating the atmosphere in classes and activate students interest， such as they can teach English by narrative stories or telling a joke in class. On the other hand， Jeon and Lee （2006） find that those schools which employ NESTs charge more fees from students. The school managers will gain financially. Furthermore， school administrators should pay more attention to the teachers rather than the financial situation. Rao and Yuan （2016） claim that administrators should keep it in mind that“teachers are made rather than born”when they employ English teachers for school. Non-native English speakers devote a lot of money in order to be trained as ESL/EFL teachers in the United State （Moussu 2010）.
Finally， it is not easy to determine whether NNESTs or NESTs are positive for school in the perspective of school administrators. On the one hand， NNESTs are offered a lower salary， it is beneficial for hiring non-native English speakers. On the other hand， although NEST is authority in language， NNEST has the motivation for teaching. as a teacher in terms of financial investments and teaching qualifications.
3. Conclusion
This paper has investigated which is better group of teachers： NESTs or NNESTs has become a controversial issue in the field of education. Educators， administrators and students are concerned about this argument. I have analyzed this topic from two aspects which are students’ attitude and school administrators’ perspective.
Returning to the question posed at the beginning of this paper， it is now possible to state that students could learn English from both two types of teachers， since NESTs and NNESTs have different strengths and weaknesses. The most obvious finding to emerge is that NESTs are not always the better choice. In general， therefore， it seems that NESTs and NNESTs have merits of different aspects. However， the current study has only examined the perspectives from students and administrators. If the debate is to be moved forward， a better understanding of ESL and EFL teachers’ perspectives needs to be developed. The findings of this study have a number of important implications for future practice. An implication of these findings is that school can employ a balance number of NESTs and NNESTs， allow the students to have a chance learn English from teachers with different backgrounds， nationalities and teaching skills.
References：
[1]Amalia，S.D.NNESTs vs NESTs：Why Domestic English Teachers Should Not Worry about Their Foreign Counterparts.In Proceeding of International Conference on Teacher Training and Education[OL].Available from：http：//www.jurnal.fkip.uns.ac.id/index.php/ictte/article/view/7669，2016，22 July 2017.
[2]Barratt，L.and Kontra，E.H.Native-English-Speaking Teachers in Cultures Other than Their Own[J].TESOL Journal，2000，9（3）：19-23.
[3]Braine，G.A History of Research on Non-Native Speaker English Teachers[J].Non-Native Language Teachers.Perceptions，Challenges and Contributions to the Profession，2003：13-23.