Eight points, then I will close my involvement on this thread:
1. I hardly think that Canada is about to emerge as a global guiding, controlling, and policing agency for the world of TEFL. But I may be wrong. Canada, especially due to the country's two major language zones, may however have a specific domestic market requiring English language tuition. Nevertheless, the country is not one of the world's major destinations for non-Canadians seeking work as TEFL teachers.
2. Canada exports quite a few TESOL teachers - indeed I have hired many. All serious Rrcruiters will always place a genuine CELTA course or a genuine Trinity validated course at the top of the list of their preferred and most trusted qualifications. True is, that Coventry House currently enjoys the position of being the only organisation in Canada that is (or wants, or can afford to be) Trinity validated. Nevertheless, the chairpeople of Cambridge ESOL, and Trinity, will certainly raise their eyebrows in the knowledge that their courses are being subjected to the scrutiny of a self-appointed 'higher' authority.
However, in the past, there have been genuine reports of real scams emanating from Canada, where course providers had been marketing 'CELTA' courses, which had absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with the University of Cambridge ESOL.
3. You may be right therefore, that Canada has decided to insist that only its own agency is competent for authenticating all TEFL certificates for employment in that country, and that all teachers are required to posses its certificate or equivalency stamp. I would suggest that it would be of more help to prospective teachers to know the facts and be able to refer to the Act of Parliament that passed that/those law(s), and the legal decision to adopt the federation as the government's official TESOL accrediting body.
Personally, if such moves are indeed true, I would go so far as to suggest that the federation exists primarily to protect and promote Canda's own domestic TESOL course industry. I may be wrong in the case of Canada, but course providers in other countries have lobbied their governments to do precisely that. Ironically, the net result was that native speakers simply stopped looking for jobs in those countries!
4. I have already mentioned that the use of the logo of the College of Teachers (of which I am a member) in a situation or a position that could even vaguely be construed, misconstrued, or otherwise misinterpreted by a reader of a brochure, or a visitor to a web site as being an endorsement, is illegal. The College of Teachers was established by royal charter.
5. IATEFL - of which I used to be a member - is mainly an organisation that provides resources, and organises projects and conferences for teachers. It is not an accrediting body, anyone can join it by paying the subscription fee. I will leave readers to reflect upon the relevance of the use of its logo on advertising material for TESOL courses.
6. On ACTDEC, which might well be a respected organisation, there are many articles, some of them quite famous, entitled "Who accredits the accreditors?" - one only needs to type that phrase in Google and see the search results. To help other readers understand the implications more fully, ACTDEC answers its own question:
Q:Who passes judgement on the legitimacy of a distance TESOL certificate or diploma?
A:Quite simply, the schools and institutions around the world that employ English language teachers.
- let us also not forget that the OP's question was about face-to-face courses, whereas ACTDEC exists solely to 'accredit' distance courses. The list of ACTDEC members is extremely short when taking into consideration the hundreds (or thousands) of distance providers that have come into existence since the Internet went truly global about ten years ago.
7. I have always made a point of asking, as part of the interview procedure, what the candidates' criteria were for choosing the course they took. The regular, oft repeated questions on this board concerning the choice of courses, reflect the fact that most course candidates naïvely take the the marketing claims of the providers on face value, and do no further research, and that the vast majority do not take the initiative to seek further advice through a web forum.
8. Finally, I do not doubt for a moment the standard of the courses provided by Coventry House. The Trinity validation is an exceptionally complex and expensive procedure - for each course - and is a guarantee of quality. The cost of a course will reflect this, and other organisations offering non-Trinity, or non-CELTA courses at similar prices would need examining very closely indeed.
I offer any information or advice 'as is' and hope that it has been of help. I am not an admin of this board, and my postings do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the board management.
____________________Thailand TESOL forum