Were teachers from abroad able to provide quality education?

11:30 / 08.07.2024 5.94k

It is known that English is the most widely taught subject in schools as a foreign language. Currently, 9,924 secondary schools teach English (6 million 98 thousand 862 students), 901 German (2 million 661 students), and 581 French (133 thousand 475 students) as foreign language subjects.

As you know, since 2023, more than 500 foreign teachers have been attracted to educational institutions to teach English, German, and French as "language speakers." From this year, it is planned to bring another 1,500 "language speakers."

They were scheduled to teach high school students on the basis of textbooks and programs of Cambridge University Press in the United Kingdom, Didier in France, and KLETT in the Federal Republic of Germany.

The involvement of "native speakers" in the educational process is defined in the state strategy of Uzbekistan until 2030, according to which it is planned to attract 500 foreign specialists who are "native speakers" to educational organizations every year.

So, were the "language owners" able to provide quality education to children?

Of course, no specific statistics have been published or we have not heard about the extent to which the involvement of "language owners" in educational institutions has had a positive impact on the quality of education.

However, according to some teachers in the schools where "language owners" were involved, the positive impact of this practice on the quality of education was not noticeable. Most of the teachers expressed the opinion that the children did not understand their "language" well, and in some cases, they were forced to attach an assistant teacher to them.

Of course, the above is just a simple idea. However, it is not cheap for us to attract "language owners" to schools. Therefore, we need to know with precise measurements how useful this practice is to us.

How much salary and benefits were promised to "language owners"?

It was difficult to find information from open sources about how much salaries are paid to teachers recruited from abroad. The website ish.uzedu.uz, owned by the Ministry of Preschool and School Education, also does not provide information about monthly salaries and benefits.

However, one of the articles published by uzdiplomat.uz writes that a foreign teacher will be paid $4,200. Also, in one of the advertisements posted on teachaway.com, foreign teachers of Presidential schools were offered a monthly salary of $4210.

So, it is clear that the "language owners" involved in ordinary schools were also offered a salary of at least the above salary. Because it is clear that "language owners" coming from abroad will not receive the $1,000 salary that Uzbek teachers have been lacking for several years.

We can also see that many sources provide a number of benefits to foreign teachers. For example, one of the announcements of the Ministry of Preschool and School Education on the employment of foreign English teachers promises them, in addition to the salary, a round-trip air ticket, housing, a visa, and medical insurance.

We visited some schools where "speakers" were involved and asked Uzbek colleagues about foreign teachers.

"Language owners" are free from bureaucracy, only teach lessons, do not participate in events like Uzbek teachers, do not subscribe to magazines and newspapers, are not obliged to fulfill absurd tasks from above, no one can order work. He doesn't bother to say "repair." No one understands them, and they don't understand anyone.

The most interesting thing is that the children do not understand their language. Because children do not understand a foreign language well, we must admit this. The "language owner" is not interested in whether the child understands the lesson and how well he mastered it. If only he could learn his lesson.

The most painful thing is that we, Uzbek teachers, clean up the classrooms where they teach. As I said above, he only comes and teaches in a ready-made room," said one of the teachers who work at the school where "language owners" are involved.

Is it scientifically justified that "language owners" have a better lesson?

This topic was analyzed by education expert Komil Jalilov based on some studies conducted in foreign countries:

"In one study conducted in Turkey, the author came to the conclusion that teachers who are "language owners" have a positive effect on the attitude and motivation of students to learn a language.

At the same time, due to the fact that "language owners" mainly work in private schools, the researcher compared private schools where "language owners" work and public schools where there are no such teachers, and concluded that although the motivation of public school students is higher, they achieve less success than students of private schools. This shows that other factors (such as differences in school conditions) also play an important role in the student's success.

Another British researcher, analyzing various factors affecting language learning, concludes that "the purpose of teaching a foreign language is not to imitate the language owner," non-linguistic teachers have their own strengths (for example, the ability to take into account the influence of the native language on the language being studied). An American researcher concludes in his article that the myth of the superiority of the "language owner" should be abandoned.

In any case, if instead of a populist approach to allocating limited resources, we analyze the purpose of education (do we need students who know only English? and other subjects?), the primary factors affecting the quality of education (there are no toilets, libraries, if we bring a foreign English teacher to two-shift schools for such a fee, how much will the quality of education increase?) and a scientifically based approach would be more effective in the medium and long term," says Komil Jalilov.

How much do Uzbek teachers receive?

According to the Statistics Agency under the President of the Republic of Uzbekistan, in 2024, Uzbek teachers occupied the lowest positions in terms of monthly salaries, their average salary was 3,434,000 soums.

According to 2023 data, the number of teachers with a monthly salary of more than 6 million soums was 25,697. At the same time, the number of teachers receiving salaries from 6 million to 10 million soums will be 23 thousand, and those receiving salaries above 10 million soums - 1 thousand. Additional allowances were paid to about 2 thousand teachers from the minister's fund. (2023).

The above indicators make up 5% of the total number of teachers. That is, the remaining 95 percent of teachers may be receiving the minimum salary provided by the Statistics Agency.

The monthly salary of teachers by category is determined as follows:

Teachers with secondary special education - 2 million 756 thousand 194 soums;

Teacher with higher education - 2 million 948 thousand 543 soums;

Teachers of the second category - 3 million 301 thousand 055 soums;

First category teacher - 3 million 678 thousand 381 soums;

Higher category teacher - 4 million 064 thousand 865 soums.

If a higher-class foreign language teacher receives a 40% bonus from the director's fund and a 50% bonus for having an international certificate, he can receive a salary of about 8.5 million soums. Uzbek teachers do not have additional benefits.

Naturally, this does not increase attractiveness. If we could give at least half of the high salaries and benefits we promise to "language owners" to attract potential teachers who want to work in educational institutions, we would be able to improve the quality of education even without "language owners."

It is a little incomprehensible to invite foreign teachers to work and give them salaries and benefits that are not given to our own teachers.

In fact, there are many talented teachers in our country. They just don't want to come to school and work at the salary and conditions we are giving them now. If those opportunities were given to Uzbek teachers, they could give a better result than "language owners."

In conclusion, we emphasize what we have said above: Clear statistical and analytical data on the extent to which the involvement of "language owners" in schools had a positive impact on the quality of education must be published.