An expert in Teaching English to Speakers of Other Languages (TESOL), English as a Second Language (ESL), and working as an Assistant Language Teacher (ALT) in Japan
I came to Japan before JET, etc., programs were introduced. Sounds like it would have helped smooth some of the rough bumps.
I found my job the old-fashioned way: went to my university library and looked at a Monday edition of the Japan Times and applied to an interesting position. I suppose things could be found digitally nowdays.
The JET Programme used to have an age limit, but it has since been removed and is now open to any applicant from participating countries. A small fraction of JET Programme participants are in their 40 and over.
A YouTuber I follow is Chani in Japan. She decided to work in Japan after raising a family, over 50 years old, teaching English for an NPO (a non profit organization). In one of her videos, she honestly breaks down her low salary and living expenses in a rural area of Japan. Go check her out!
The very label “TESOL” positions learners as non-native, foreign, or different, defining them in relation to an imagined “norm” of the native speaker.
I know I’m being really critical here, but the whole idea of “native” versus “non-native” speakers is misleading. There are so many kinds of English that the category of a single “native speaker” doesn’t actually exist. But when we label someone a “non-native speaker,” it automatically sets them apart as outsiders. It often even connects to assumptions about skin colour and background. That label keeps people from being fully recognized as legitimate users and experts of English. That’s why, when I say “native speaker,” I always put it in quotation marks.
In the AMA, yes, I used the acronym TESOL, as that's a widely used term for the practice of teaching the English language.
I wish Teaching English as an Additional Language (TEAL) would catch on. It recognizes the reality that many English language learners are already users of multiple languages, acquired at home, school, and in multilingual societies.
Did we mention "native speakers" in the AMA? I try to avoid the term because it is so problematic. Two profs who taught me in undergraduate studies, one a linguist and the other an English composition instructor, acquired English as adults. They inspired me to teach. As did my multilingual family members.
I don’t recall a mention of the native/non-native speaker distinction but I agree it’s important to critically examine the names and labels we use in our field. Such labels can unintentionally reify students. Even acronyms like TESOL deserve scrutiny. Language itself often involves unequal power relations and is inherently political, so the terminology we use carries weight. Having taught English in Japan and spent the past 40 years teaching students, I’ve seen firsthand how these labels and power dynamics shape perceptions and practice.
From the JET Programme: Ugh!
Applicants to the JET Program in the U.S. must:
Be a U.S. citizen
Complete a Bachelor’s degree by June 27th, 2025
Have native-level English speaking proficiency
Not have lived in Japan for a total of six years or longer in a 10-year period prior to the departure year
This is a clear example of how programs institutionalize the native / non-native speaker dichotomy. The requirement implicitly ties language authority and legitimacy to a native standard, reinforcing unequal power relations in teaching and hiring. It shows that—even in globally recognized programs like JET—these categories carry real consequences for applicants and for how English language teaching is imagined.
Rampton (1997), The idealised native speaker, reified ethnicities, and classroom realities — an oldie but a goodie. Still essential reading for understanding how native/non-native categories shape classroom life.
First, thank you for reading the summary and listening to the podcast. Second, thank you for sharing your opinion.
You bring up a good point. According to ChatGPT-sensei, a native speaker is someone who acquired a language naturally from early childhood, making it their primary language of communication. Unlike a second or foreign language learned later in life, a native language is absorbed instinctively, giving the speaker an intuitive sense of grammar, vocabulary, idioms, and cultural nuances, even if they can’t always explain the rules. Being a native speaker is often tied to cultural identity and emotional connection. It usually results in the highest level of fluency and natural pronunciation. However, it doesn't guarantee flawless mastery. Native speakers can still have gaps in their knowledge, be influenced by their dialect, or experience reduced fluency if they stop using the language regularly.
Based on my experience learning Japanese, I have always found it beneficial to learn from a Japanese national born and raised in Japan. By attempting to mimic their speech patterns, I improved my Japanese language proficiency, which to this day continues to have room for improvement.
Thus, as long as they are utilized effectively, the use of "native" English speakers by the JET Programme seems likely to benefit public school children who have access to these instructors.
I appreciate your response, though I’d be cautious about leaning on ChatGPT for definitions—it’s a useful tool, but hardly an authoritative source on complex questions like “what is a native speaker.”
That said, you raise a good point about the fluency and intuition that come with growing up in a language. But here’s the real question: would you honestly prefer to learn Japanese from a random “native speaker” working at 7-Eleven, or from a trained professional teacher who understands how to guide language learners? Being born and raised in a country doesn’t automatically make someone a good teacher—it just means they grew up speaking the language. Effective teaching requires training, methodology, and awareness of how learners acquire a second language.
That’s why treating “nativeness” as the main qualification is problematic. The JET Programme can certainly benefit students, but only if instructors are valued for their teaching skills and given proper support—otherwise, we risk confusing accent with actual education.
ALTs only need a bachelor's degree to qualify, but many experienced and trained teachers serve. Is there a "native speaker" requirement?
Note that Daniel Roy Pearce in Plurilingual Education in a Monolingualised Nation: Exploring New Frontiers in Language Teaching in Japan addresses the issue of multilingual ALTs.
ALTTO's founder Nate Reed, has a book coming out soon, a deep look into ALT issues some which you raised.
Incidentally, during my JET year, a fracophone Canadian served as our region's CIR.
I came to Japan before JET, etc., programs were introduced. Sounds like it would have helped smooth some of the rough bumps.
I found my job the old-fashioned way: went to my university library and looked at a Monday edition of the Japan Times and applied to an interesting position. I suppose things could be found digitally nowdays.
I remember those ads in the Japan Times, too!
So interesting!! In my younger years….. wish I would’ve done something like this!!!
Thanks for watching!
The JET Programme used to have an age limit, but it has since been removed and is now open to any applicant from participating countries. A small fraction of JET Programme participants are in their 40 and over.
A YouTuber I follow is Chani in Japan. She decided to work in Japan after raising a family, over 50 years old, teaching English for an NPO (a non profit organization). In one of her videos, she honestly breaks down her low salary and living expenses in a rural area of Japan. Go check her out!
The very label “TESOL” positions learners as non-native, foreign, or different, defining them in relation to an imagined “norm” of the native speaker.
I know I’m being really critical here, but the whole idea of “native” versus “non-native” speakers is misleading. There are so many kinds of English that the category of a single “native speaker” doesn’t actually exist. But when we label someone a “non-native speaker,” it automatically sets them apart as outsiders. It often even connects to assumptions about skin colour and background. That label keeps people from being fully recognized as legitimate users and experts of English. That’s why, when I say “native speaker,” I always put it in quotation marks.
In the AMA, yes, I used the acronym TESOL, as that's a widely used term for the practice of teaching the English language.
I wish Teaching English as an Additional Language (TEAL) would catch on. It recognizes the reality that many English language learners are already users of multiple languages, acquired at home, school, and in multilingual societies.
Did we mention "native speakers" in the AMA? I try to avoid the term because it is so problematic. Two profs who taught me in undergraduate studies, one a linguist and the other an English composition instructor, acquired English as adults. They inspired me to teach. As did my multilingual family members.
I don’t recall a mention of the native/non-native speaker distinction but I agree it’s important to critically examine the names and labels we use in our field. Such labels can unintentionally reify students. Even acronyms like TESOL deserve scrutiny. Language itself often involves unequal power relations and is inherently political, so the terminology we use carries weight. Having taught English in Japan and spent the past 40 years teaching students, I’ve seen firsthand how these labels and power dynamics shape perceptions and practice.
From the JET Programme: Ugh!
Applicants to the JET Program in the U.S. must:
Be a U.S. citizen
Complete a Bachelor’s degree by June 27th, 2025
Have native-level English speaking proficiency
Not have lived in Japan for a total of six years or longer in a 10-year period prior to the departure year
This is a clear example of how programs institutionalize the native / non-native speaker dichotomy. The requirement implicitly ties language authority and legitimacy to a native standard, reinforcing unequal power relations in teaching and hiring. It shows that—even in globally recognized programs like JET—these categories carry real consequences for applicants and for how English language teaching is imagined.
Rampton (1997), The idealised native speaker, reified ethnicities, and classroom realities — an oldie but a goodie. Still essential reading for understanding how native/non-native categories shape classroom life.
First, thank you for reading the summary and listening to the podcast. Second, thank you for sharing your opinion.
You bring up a good point. According to ChatGPT-sensei, a native speaker is someone who acquired a language naturally from early childhood, making it their primary language of communication. Unlike a second or foreign language learned later in life, a native language is absorbed instinctively, giving the speaker an intuitive sense of grammar, vocabulary, idioms, and cultural nuances, even if they can’t always explain the rules. Being a native speaker is often tied to cultural identity and emotional connection. It usually results in the highest level of fluency and natural pronunciation. However, it doesn't guarantee flawless mastery. Native speakers can still have gaps in their knowledge, be influenced by their dialect, or experience reduced fluency if they stop using the language regularly.
Based on my experience learning Japanese, I have always found it beneficial to learn from a Japanese national born and raised in Japan. By attempting to mimic their speech patterns, I improved my Japanese language proficiency, which to this day continues to have room for improvement.
Thus, as long as they are utilized effectively, the use of "native" English speakers by the JET Programme seems likely to benefit public school children who have access to these instructors.
I appreciate your response, though I’d be cautious about leaning on ChatGPT for definitions—it’s a useful tool, but hardly an authoritative source on complex questions like “what is a native speaker.”
That said, you raise a good point about the fluency and intuition that come with growing up in a language. But here’s the real question: would you honestly prefer to learn Japanese from a random “native speaker” working at 7-Eleven, or from a trained professional teacher who understands how to guide language learners? Being born and raised in a country doesn’t automatically make someone a good teacher—it just means they grew up speaking the language. Effective teaching requires training, methodology, and awareness of how learners acquire a second language.
That’s why treating “nativeness” as the main qualification is problematic. The JET Programme can certainly benefit students, but only if instructors are valued for their teaching skills and given proper support—otherwise, we risk confusing accent with actual education.
About qualifications for the JET Programme...
ALTs only need a bachelor's degree to qualify, but many experienced and trained teachers serve. Is there a "native speaker" requirement?
Note that Daniel Roy Pearce in Plurilingual Education in a Monolingualised Nation: Exploring New Frontiers in Language Teaching in Japan addresses the issue of multilingual ALTs.
ALTTO's founder Nate Reed, has a book coming out soon, a deep look into ALT issues some which you raised.
Incidentally, during my JET year, a fracophone Canadian served as our region's CIR.
My preference would be to learn from a trained teacher.
Keen to listen to this and check Chiba Explorers out too - I might move there in a few months.
Thanks for checking out Chiba Explorers. Note that I haven't written a lot of long-form content. My attitude is quality over quantity.
However, I'm active in Notes which I update a few times a month.