English as a ‘De Jure’ or ‘De Facto’?

Below, the first image shows a job posting from The Princeton Review Korea (TPRK).

Take a look at the list of countries where TPRK believes speak English as a native language.


The list contains US, Canada, Australia, UK, New Zealand, Ireland, and South Africa.

Now, the next question is, the concept of ‘De Jure’ and ‘De Facto.’

Let me provide brief explanation of the two terms based on what Wikipidia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De_jure) says.

De jure (/d ˈʊər/, /d/;[1][2] Classical Latin: de iure [deː ˈjuːrɛ]) is an expression that means “of right, by right, according to law” (literally “from law”),[3] as contrasted with de facto, which means “in fact, in reality” (literally “from fact”). The terms de jure and de facto are used instead of “in law” and “in practice”, respectively, when one is describing political or legal situations.

Now, let’s remind ourselves of the list NES countries provided by TPRK’s definition and take a look at the status of English in these countries on the link below:

English as a ‘de jure’ vs. ‘de facto’

Based on wikipedia, Only Ireland and Canada (except Quebec) truly qualify as they hold the status of English as a ‘de jure’ (official) language while it is also their primary language.

In terms of UK, USA (yes, majority of the country subdivisions do hold English as their ‘de jure’ but not all–e.g. Connecticut–yet, no one hardly questions about such division or status), New Zealand, and Australia, the status of English is ‘de facto’ (in practice), but NOT a ‘de jure’ (official) despite it being their primary language.

Regarding South Africa, English is their ‘de jure’ language, but only a small number of NESs use it as their primary language.

On another note, the Philippines use English as their ‘de jure’ but as Teri (Conversation with NNEST 1 – Teri) says, which I agree to be an issue, in the context of South Korea, hardly any stakeholders think or believe or know that the Philippines use English just as much as Ireland and Canada do.

Clearly, a simple glance at a list of countries is not only insufficient but also inaccurate to define who should be considered as a NEST and as a NNEST.

As for the ELT employment procedure, ELT educators should be reviewed based on their teaching qualifications and capabilities, not by an unjustifiable logic coming from geographical mix with history and politics outcome.





Same level of learners, but…

different visa types of instructors needed…

hmmm….why should it be….?

Take a look at 2 job postings below. The first posting seeks for Korean Nationals or F4 visa holder instructors, while the second posting requests F2, F5, or F6 visa holders of EBP instructors. Here, in parenthesis, it indicates that F2,F5, or F6 must be ‘Native Speakers’ which will lead to another layer of questions. Who would fall into the category of Native Speakers of English for this job posting? Will Teri (See my voice-recorded interview with Teri) be one, for instance? Or, will she be rejected just because she was not born speaking English literally as her first language?

Plus, what could be so dramatically effective from the learners’ perspective by selecting one or another visa holders of instructors?

Clearly, both postings have similar level of learners’ English proficiency. The first posting indicates learners’ level ranging from ‘Basic to Intermediate’ while the second posting simply says ‘Pre-Intermediate’ level of learners.

My quench for the legitimate answer goes on…


Beyond Edutainer

Check this out!

This is one of the part-time business english teaching positions and the client apparently wants an ‘attractive and young’ female instructor (See ‘Note’ section in Korean).

I guess EBP practitioners gotta go beyond being an Edutainer~ yay

As Korea is notoriously known for being a plastic surgery kingdom, it’s now the time to go for polishing oneself to be MORE attractive and MORE young-looking, it seems….?

What do you all say about this? I am curious to hear!


Conversation with NNEST 1 – Teri

So, gladly I found the first NNEST, Teri, whom I met at the KOTESOL National Concerence few weeks ago. I am so glad that she was kindly willing to participate in this short interview/conversation!

One thing to note, Teri’s visa status is F6, which should give her, if anything, the most favoritism among all potential F series of visa holders of ELT educators in Korea, in reality. But, she doesn’t get to have that. Simply because she is a DIFFERENT KIND OF F6 in many Korean ELT employers’ eyes.

After all, one must be met with specific categories in order to be able to avoid such discrimination in Korean ELT Employment.

More to think it out and no such solution yet…


Teacher Training Position (and discrimination),

So, recently, I was applying for a Teacher Training position for TESOL program at a institute/agency in Gangnam, Seoul.

And, here is what the conversations between they and I were via email.

Take a look!

FYI, after my last email to them, I never heard back from them.


This slideshow requires JavaScript.