Thanks for reading this and blahblahblah….I’ll try to be laconic..

What I want to do is to find out why ‘native speaker’ sounds just like IBM, Mercedes…or whatever for employers. That is the label, which is the best ‘a priori’.

Pronunciation is the ruff, yes. However, who are those ‘native speakers’? In fact, mainly those are the people who want to have their ‘gap’ year for a decade. Travel and relax.

What are they like teachers?

Do they know grammar? Usually – no. Just a general idea. They are not taught grammar in schools. Do they speak a foreign language? Normally - Elementary French, German or Spanish. That ‘elementary’ hardly ever goes further than ‘good evening, thanks, yes/no’. How can you explain the difficulty in understanding a language if you’ve never had one?

Having a Degree sounds impressive. Nevertheless, how can a degree in Management (etc, never higher than BA) help teaching English?

So, I’d like to know why? Why Native Speaker is the passport to the best employment?
Well, I suppose most people are hired on the basis of some kind of misapprehension.

If employers were the acute, far-sighted, canny, experienced judges of character they think they are, we'd all of us be out of a job.

lol! (sorry, just had to show my support for that reply!)
Site Hint: Check out our list of pronunciation videos.
It is often true that many private teachers touting themselves as native speakers abroad don't have much more linguistic knowledge than any other fellow countryman but the alternative is not appealing either: linguistically educated foreigners who, while they can teach grammar, and the whys and wherefores of the language, have never been able to shake off a host of fossilised errors that are characteristic of foreign teachers. When I go abroad I find myself constantly trying to get English learners to 'unlearn' the bizarre turns of phrase they use 'because their teacher taught it to them'. Examples include the way nearly all Romance-language foreigners will say 'I am learning English since/for 6 years' instead of 'I have been...', or 'I want that you help me' instead of 'I want you to help me'. With a native speaker you don't get the in-depth grammatical knowledge but you are exposed to correct (usually!) natural English.

Just make sure the native speaker is qualified (e.g. TEFL or other demonstrable linguistic qualifications, I don't have TEFL but I could happily teach with 10 years of experience as a professional linguist), otherwise the only thing he or she is good for is conversation practice. There are also plenty of foreigners who are excellent English teachers but far more that will teach you dubious English. In my experience, I've found the best foreign-language teachers in university institutions whether they're native or otherwise.

In short, there is an equal abundance of poor native-speaker teachers as there are non-native, but they are poor for different reasons (explained above), and if I'm taking my chances between the two I'd go for the native speaker and make my own efforts to learn the grammar rather than risk being exposed to strange English. I guess that's why they are preferred over non-native speakers.
Yes. Just remember the advice given to field workers trying to record and analyze some previously unknown language: "Never trust a native informant." A candidate's being a native speaker with little knowledge or even intuition about linguistic phenomena should hardly make much of an impression on anyone looking for a good teacher. That said, the native speaker who wishes to develop himself into a good teacher of English has a head start, and cannot help but be more likely to be effective as a teacher of English once he acquires the extra needed skills.

Hi I taught ESL inIndonesiafor a year and a half; at what I think were two really good schools. Native speakers are usually wanted for employment as there is so much demand for English language studies in many of these countries; they supply a service for which the demand for qualified teachers exceeds the supply. Many of these schools have developed their curriculums , teaching materials and resources to such a good standard that even non-teachers are able to present the material, at an acceptable standard with the flow and pronunciation that only an English speaking teacher could. As a whole id say many of these language schools do a good job of instruction and really any deficiency could be over come with dedicated effort from students. As some students attend 2 to 4 hours of classes a week and have ridiculous expectations of how quickly they are going to master English, when in the reality for mastery attention to this language requires effort nearly everyday with a structured approach. Whining about an ESL teacher’s knowledge of grammar is nothing more than a silly waste of everyone’s time. Id suggest getting on with what ever you should be doing.
Students: Are you brave enough to let our tutors analyse your pronunciation?
A native speaker, who acquired a native-like accent in L2 in his twenties, is the best teacher to be had.

1. A native speaker is not competent enough to teach his native language. After all, we are all native speakers of some or another language. How many of us competent to teach our native language without the grammar crap.

2. A native speaker with TESOL is alright, since TESOL doesn't teach ones own awareness of the native language.

3. To understand yourself, you need to understand others first. In the same vein, if you become like a native speaker of another L2, yes, you are fit for the job. In fact, you can get voice over gigs.

What we have in the market are: (1) and (2) types.