Text VI, for questions from 34 through 38.

1 Popular tradition would have you believe that

children are effortless second language learners and far

superior to adults in their eventual success. On both counts,

4 some qualifications are in order.

First, children’s widespread success in acquiring

second languages belies a tremendous subconscious effort

7 devoted to the task. Children exercise a good deal of both

cognitive and effective effort in order to internalize both native

and second languages. The difference between children and

10 adults lies primarily in the contrast between the child’s

spontaneous, peripheral attention to language forms and the

adult’s overt, focal awareness of and attention to those forms.

13 Second, adults are not necessarily less successful in

their efforts. Studies have shown that adults, in fact, can be

superior in a number of aspects of acquisition. They can learn

16 and retain a larger vocabulary. They can utilize various

deductive and abstract processes to shortcut the learning of

grammatical and other linguistic concepts. And, in classroom

19 learning, their superior intellect usually helps them to learn

faster than a child. So, while children’s fluency and

naturalness are often the envy of adults struggling with

22 second language, the context of classroom instruction may

introduce some difficulties to children learning a second

language.

25 Third, the popular claim fails to differentiate very

young children (say, four- to six-year-olds) from

pre-pubescent children (twelve to thirteen) and the whole

28 range of ages in between. There are actually many instances

of six- to twelve-year-old children manifesting significant

difficulty in acquiring a second language for a multitude of

31 reasons. Ranking high on that list of reasons are a number of

complex personal, social, cultural, and political factors at play

in elementary school education.

34 Teaching ESL to school-age children, therefore, is

not merely a matter of setting them loose on a plethora of

authentic language tasks in the classroom. To successfully

37 teach children a second language requires specific skills and

intuitions that differ from those appropriate for adult teaching.

H. Douglas Brown. Teaching by Principles.

Longman, 2001, p. 87 (adapted).

Text VI, for questions from 34 through 38.

1 Popular tradition would have you believe that

children are effortless second language learners and far

superior to adults in their eventual success. On both counts,

4 some qualifications are in order.

First, children’s widespread success in acquiring

second languages belies a tremendous subconscious effort

7 devoted to the task. Children exercise a good deal of both

cognitive and effective effort in order to internalize both native

and second languages. The difference between children and

10 adults lies primarily in the contrast between the child’s

spontaneous, peripheral attention to language forms and the

adult’s overt, focal awareness of and attention to those forms.

13 Second, adults are not necessarily less successful in

their efforts. Studies have shown that adults, in fact, can be

superior in a number of aspects of acquisition. They can learn

16 and retain a larger vocabulary. They can utilize various

deductive and abstract processes to shortcut the learning of

grammatical and other linguistic concepts. And, in classroom

19 learning, their superior intellect usually helps them to learn

faster than a child. So, while children’s fluency and

naturalness are often the envy of adults struggling with

22 second language, the context of classroom instruction may

introduce some difficulties to children learning a second

language.

25 Third, the popular claim fails to differentiate very

young children (say, four- to six-year-olds) from

pre-pubescent children (twelve to thirteen) and the whole

28 range of ages in between. There are actually many instances

of six- to twelve-year-old children manifesting significant

difficulty in acquiring a second language for a multitude of

31 reasons. Ranking high on that list of reasons are a number of

complex personal, social, cultural, and political factors at play

in elementary school education.

34 Teaching ESL to school-age children, therefore, is

not merely a matter of setting them loose on a plethora of

authentic language tasks in the classroom. To successfully

37 teach children a second language requires specific skills and

intuitions that differ from those appropriate for adult teaching.

H. Douglas Brown. Teaching by Principles.

Longman, 2001, p. 87 (adapted).

Text V, for questions from 29 through 33.

1 In recent literature, the concept of the ideal teacher

has gained some notoriety, especially in relation to the native

English-speaking teacher (NEST) / non-native

4 English-speaking teacher (non-NEST) dichotomy. It appears

that the glory once attached to the NEST has faded, and an

increasing number of English language teaching experts

7 assert that the ideal teacher is no longer a category reserved

for NESTs. It is becoming a generally accepted view that

outstanding teachers cannot be squeezed into any

10 pigeonhole: all outstanding teachers are ideal in their own

ways, and as such are different from each other. The concept

of ideal teacher resists clear-cut definitions, because there

13 are too many variables to consider.

In order to get a better grasp of the ideal teacher,

however, let us suppose that all the variables are kept

16 constant momentarily, except for the language proficiency

component. In relation to non-NESTs, the question arises:

Does somebody with a better command of English stand a

19 better chance of becoming an ideal teacher? In other words:

Is a more proficient speaker a more efficient teacher as well?

All other things being equal, the answer is yes: the ideal

22 non-NEST is someone who has achieved near-native

proficiency in English. The importance of this attribute is

seldom questioned in the literature. Britten (1985) claims that

25 have an excellent command of English is a major selection

criterion and a good predictor of a non-NEST’s professional

success. Lange (1990) rates language proficiency as the

28 most essential characteristic of a good language teacher, and

Murdoch (1994) calls it the bedrock of the non-NEST’s

professional confidence. Liu’s (1999) study conducted among

31 non-native TESOL students at a university in the United

States confirms that English-language proficiency is generally

recognized as a make-or-break requirement in English as

Second Language environments as well. Therefore, it must

be a valid claim that the most important professional duty that

non-NESTs have to perform is to make linguistic

37 improvements in their English.

Péter Medgye. When the Teacher Is a Non-native Speaker. In: Celce-

Murcia (ed.) Teaching English as a Second or Foreign

Language. Heinle&Heinle, 2001, p. 440 (adapted).

Text V, for questions from 29 through 33.

1 In recent literature, the concept of the ideal teacher

has gained some notoriety, especially in relation to the native

English-speaking teacher (NEST) / non-native

4 English-speaking teacher (non-NEST) dichotomy. It appears

that the glory once attached to the NEST has faded, and an

increasing number of English language teaching experts

7 assert that the ideal teacher is no longer a category reserved

for NESTs. It is becoming a generally accepted view that

outstanding teachers cannot be squeezed into any

10 pigeonhole: all outstanding teachers are ideal in their own

ways, and as such are different from each other. The concept

of ideal teacher resists clear-cut definitions, because there

13 are too many variables to consider.

In order to get a better grasp of the ideal teacher,

however, let us suppose that all the variables are kept

16 constant momentarily, except for the language proficiency

component. In relation to non-NESTs, the question arises:

Does somebody with a better command of English stand a

19 better chance of becoming an ideal teacher? In other words:

Is a more proficient speaker a more efficient teacher as well?

All other things being equal, the answer is yes: the ideal

22 non-NEST is someone who has achieved near-native

proficiency in English. The importance of this attribute is

seldom questioned in the literature. Britten (1985) claims that

25 have an excellent command of English is a major selection

criterion and a good predictor of a non-NEST’s professional

success. Lange (1990) rates language proficiency as the

28 most essential characteristic of a good language teacher, and

Murdoch (1994) calls it the bedrock of the non-NEST’s

professional confidence. Liu’s (1999) study conducted among

31 non-native TESOL students at a university in the United

States confirms that English-language proficiency is generally

recognized as a make-or-break requirement in English as

Second Language environments as well. Therefore, it must

be a valid claim that the most important professional duty that

non-NESTs have to perform is to make linguistic

37 improvements in their English.

Péter Medgye. When the Teacher Is a Non-native Speaker. In: Celce-

Murcia (ed.) Teaching English as a Second or Foreign

Language. Heinle&Heinle, 2001, p. 440 (adapted).

Text V, for questions from 29 through 33.

1 In recent literature, the concept of the ideal teacher

has gained some notoriety, especially in relation to the native

English-speaking teacher (NEST) / non-native

4 English-speaking teacher (non-NEST) dichotomy. It appears

that the glory once attached to the NEST has faded, and an

increasing number of English language teaching experts

7 assert that the ideal teacher is no longer a category reserved

for NESTs. It is becoming a generally accepted view that

outstanding teachers cannot be squeezed into any

10 pigeonhole: all outstanding teachers are ideal in their own

ways, and as such are different from each other. The concept

of ideal teacher resists clear-cut definitions, because there

13 are too many variables to consider.

In order to get a better grasp of the ideal teacher,

however, let us suppose that all the variables are kept

16 constant momentarily, except for the language proficiency

component. In relation to non-NESTs, the question arises:

Does somebody with a better command of English stand a

19 better chance of becoming an ideal teacher? In other words:

Is a more proficient speaker a more efficient teacher as well?

All other things being equal, the answer is yes: the ideal

22 non-NEST is someone who has achieved near-native

proficiency in English. The importance of this attribute is

seldom questioned in the literature. Britten (1985) claims that

25 have an excellent command of English is a major selection

criterion and a good predictor of a non-NEST’s professional

success. Lange (1990) rates language proficiency as the

28 most essential characteristic of a good language teacher, and

Murdoch (1994) calls it the bedrock of the non-NEST’s

professional confidence. Liu’s (1999) study conducted among

31 non-native TESOL students at a university in the United

States confirms that English-language proficiency is generally

recognized as a make-or-break requirement in English as

Second Language environments as well. Therefore, it must

be a valid claim that the most important professional duty that

non-NESTs have to perform is to make linguistic

37 improvements in their English.

Péter Medgye. When the Teacher Is a Non-native Speaker. In: Celce-

Murcia (ed.) Teaching English as a Second or Foreign

Language. Heinle&Heinle, 2001, p. 440 (adapted).

Text V, for questions from 29 through 33.

1 In recent literature, the concept of the ideal teacher

has gained some notoriety, especially in relation to the native

English-speaking teacher (NEST) / non-native

4 English-speaking teacher (non-NEST) dichotomy. It appears

that the glory once attached to the NEST has faded, and an

increasing number of English language teaching experts

7 assert that the ideal teacher is no longer a category reserved

for NESTs. It is becoming a generally accepted view that

outstanding teachers cannot be squeezed into any

10 pigeonhole: all outstanding teachers are ideal in their own

ways, and as such are different from each other. The concept

of ideal teacher resists clear-cut definitions, because there

13 are too many variables to consider.

In order to get a better grasp of the ideal teacher,

however, let us suppose that all the variables are kept

16 constant momentarily, except for the language proficiency

component. In relation to non-NESTs, the question arises:

Does somebody with a better command of English stand a

19 better chance of becoming an ideal teacher? In other words:

Is a more proficient speaker a more efficient teacher as well?

All other things being equal, the answer is yes: the ideal

22 non-NEST is someone who has achieved near-native

proficiency in English. The importance of this attribute is

seldom questioned in the literature. Britten (1985) claims that

25 have an excellent command of English is a major selection

criterion and a good predictor of a non-NEST’s professional

success. Lange (1990) rates language proficiency as the

28 most essential characteristic of a good language teacher, and

Murdoch (1994) calls it the bedrock of the non-NEST’s

professional confidence. Liu’s (1999) study conducted among

31 non-native TESOL students at a university in the United

States confirms that English-language proficiency is generally

recognized as a make-or-break requirement in English as

Second Language environments as well. Therefore, it must

be a valid claim that the most important professional duty that

non-NESTs have to perform is to make linguistic

37 improvements in their English.

Péter Medgye. When the Teacher Is a Non-native Speaker. In: Celce-

Murcia (ed.) Teaching English as a Second or Foreign

Language. Heinle&Heinle, 2001, p. 440 (adapted).

Text V, for questions from 29 through 33.

1 In recent literature, the concept of the ideal teacher

has gained some notoriety, especially in relation to the native

English-speaking teacher (NEST) / non-native

4 English-speaking teacher (non-NEST) dichotomy. It appears

that the glory once attached to the NEST has faded, and an

increasing number of English language teaching experts

7 assert that the ideal teacher is no longer a category reserved

for NESTs. It is becoming a generally accepted view that

outstanding teachers cannot be squeezed into any

10 pigeonhole: all outstanding teachers are ideal in their own

ways, and as such are different from each other. The concept

of ideal teacher resists clear-cut definitions, because there

13 are too many variables to consider.

In order to get a better grasp of the ideal teacher,

however, let us suppose that all the variables are kept

16 constant momentarily, except for the language proficiency

component. In relation to non-NESTs, the question arises:

Does somebody with a better command of English stand a

19 better chance of becoming an ideal teacher? In other words:

Is a more proficient speaker a more efficient teacher as well?

All other things being equal, the answer is yes: the ideal

22 non-NEST is someone who has achieved near-native

proficiency in English. The importance of this attribute is

seldom questioned in the literature. Britten (1985) claims that

25 have an excellent command of English is a major selection

criterion and a good predictor of a non-NEST’s professional

success. Lange (1990) rates language proficiency as the

28 most essential characteristic of a good language teacher, and

Murdoch (1994) calls it the bedrock of the non-NEST’s

professional confidence. Liu’s (1999) study conducted among

31 non-native TESOL students at a university in the United

States confirms that English-language proficiency is generally

recognized as a make-or-break requirement in English as

Second Language environments as well. Therefore, it must

be a valid claim that the most important professional duty that

non-NESTs have to perform is to make linguistic

37 improvements in their English.

Péter Medgye. When the Teacher Is a Non-native Speaker. In: Celce-

Murcia (ed.) Teaching English as a Second or Foreign

Language. Heinle&Heinle, 2001, p. 440 (adapted).