Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
To teach in Colorado, you must major in a subject, e.g. math, and take the education courses as well. The ed courses are considered a certificate program.
To teach in Colorado, you must major in a subject, e.g. math, and take the education courses as well. The ed courses are considered a certificate program.
Every day in every way the Konservatives wonder why they have to spend any of their money teaching anything to the proles anyway. They have enough children of their own to fill the next generation’s management and owner positions and uneducated workers are always available from Hispanic America or elsewhere. Teaching the red neck's children is just a waste of time and money. Education would only lead them to think they were just a good as their leaders. Bedsides they should be working in factories maker money for their betters
So after devastating private sector workers unions these "Greedy Bastards" are trying to inflict the same destruction on public sector workers. After all why should the public workforce be paid more and have decent pensions when the private sector workers are desperate enough to work for less? Drive down the wages and put more taxes on these people as well. We cannot let them even think of prosperity. That was Eisenhower’s big mistake.
The point of the game is to concentrate and protect wealth no matter what is required to do so. Destroying working class prosperity is acceptable as if rigging the investment markets so the gamblers cannot lose. So long as the top 1% never loses anything goes.
Teachers do not need unions and we do not need teachers except for our children sayeth the plutocrats.
Every day in every way the Konservatives wonder why they have to spend any of their money teaching anything to the proles anyway. They have enough children of their own to fill the next generation’s management and owner positions and uneducated workers are always available from Hispanic America or elsewhere. Teaching the red neck's children is just a waste of time and money. Education would only lead them to think they were just a good as their leaders. Bedsides they should be working in factories maker money for their betters
So after devastating private sector workers unions these "Greedy Bastards" are trying to inflict the same destruction on public sector workers. After all why should the public workforce be paid more and have decent pensions when the private sector workers are desperate enough to work for less? Drive down the wages and put more taxes on these people as well. We cannot let them even think of prosperity. That was Eisenhower’s big mistake.
The point of the game is to concentrate and protect wealth no matter what is required to do so. Destroying working class prosperity is acceptable as if rigging the investment markets so the gamblers cannot lose. So long as the top 1% never loses anything goes.
Teachers do not need unions and we do not need teachers except for our children sayeth the plutocrats.
Too funny, typical left wing nuttery. Only they would think the fact that we spend the second most mony (by a tiny margin), and getting mediocre results means we should spend even more money. Let's make sure we don't change a thing. Gotta protect those unions over ther kids!
Merit pay rewards outstanding performers and encourages excellence. As I said repeatedly, there is no incentive for teachers to excel in the current scheme.
Tenure simply solidifies bad teachers. Tenure in primary and secondary education is completely unnecessary.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shorebaby
Who said money was the ONLY reason teachers would want to excel. But how to you reward excellence? You may be motivated to be an excellent teacher, but you may not be very good. Why should you be compensated the same as a very good teacher?
We have two things here. Tenure isn't earned automatically. You earn it after years in a position, and usually after scrutiny of other teachers and your students. Tenure isn't always guaranteed--it's a benefit of being a good teacher. If students and other faculty view you as worthy, you're awarded tenure, usually after a number of years on the job.
That is, of course, assuming you even made it that far in the first place. As someone else mentioned, teaching isn't for the lazy.
Tenure is incredibly beneficial to teachers, and really, to any worker. Having a "guaranteed job" is a positive force. We have little job security in the United States for many positions, so there is a constant distrust between employee and employer. If an employee feels like anything they do is a fire-able offense, why take any risks on the job? Do just what you're asked and nothing more.
When you have job security, especially something like teachers' and professors' tenure, you can take risks, teaching controversial subjects, and not be fearing losing your job. I.E., your employer has to have reason to eliminate you, aside from "one of our students is complaining about their math scores."
Quote:
You seem to think objective measures for teachers is a bad thing. Look at how we fair against the rest of the world on these objective measures, not well.
A student's achievement isn't necessarily a direct reflection of teacher's skill. The United States hasn't done quite well with standardized testing for numerous reasons. We should be exploring and implementing other programs.
Quote:
I would really love my job, if no one were allowed to gauge my effectiveness, paid me regardless of if I was any good, and couldn't fire me.
You're arguing a strawman. Nobody says teachers can't be measured for effectiveness. And, clearly, you seem only concerned about merit pay--which, as discussed earlier, doesn't in any way ensure that teachers would be better teachers--just that they would compete amongst one another, which doesn't translate necessarily to better academics. If you want to advocate for merit pay for educators, you need to show me a pilot program that worked.
And you can still be fired. You just need a reason to be fired. We need some job security in this country.
Quote:
FYI, look at NYC rubber rooms (which were just abolished) for how easy it is to fire teachers.
There was an episode of The Simpsons about 'em. And, those teachers had to undergo arbitration before they could be fired. That's a problem with the process. It took too long to complete, which means hiring more arbiters and shortening the process. There is nothing wrong withing in purgatory while you're given due process. There is a problem when it lasts three years.
Quote:
Originally Posted by shorebaby
I account for it by saying that what you claim is unture.
Did you read that? It is true that students in union states do better. They ranked the claim half-true because of the correlation fallacy--which we've discussed here as well. Nothing necessarily states that unions will make students better--they're there for teachers.
Relating to teaching degrees
Quote:
There are many unemployed, highly educated folks who would jump at the chance to teach.
Quote:
Originally Posted by shorebaby
That is a shame. I would be much more interested in having someone with a math degree, teach math. Perhaps this is another reason we trail the world in education.
Quote:
Originally Posted by shorebaby
It's a shame because a minor isn't the same as a major. Why would you minor in a subject you are supposed to be an expert in? I think there are many reasons we trail in education. Perhaps the fact that those teaching our children don't have the highest proficiency in the subjects they are teaching is among them.
Quote:
Originally Posted by shorebaby
That is sensible.
Having a BS in math or science doesn't necessarily qualify you for teaching. Teaching isn't just knowing the subject. It's about controlling your class and presenting a subject in a manner that children can actually grasp. While it's a great idea to have doctorates of biology teaching evolution to our students, they may not actually learning anything. Are you prepared to say a doctorates of biology is a poor teacher? Are you prepared to say that someone with an associates in a biology my be a better teacher because they've actually completed a teacher program?
Teaching is more than just knowing things. Keep that in that mind.
Last edited by gallowsCalibrator; 03-02-2012 at 09:38 AM..
Reason: As requested
Merit pay rewards outstanding performers and encourages excellence. As I said repeatedly, there is no incentive for teachers to excel in the current scheme.
Tenure simply solidifies bad teachers. Tenure in primary and secondary education is completely unnecessary.
A student's achievement isn't necessarily a direct reflection of teacher's skill. The United States hasn't done quite well with standardized testing for numerous reasons. We should be exploring and implementing other programs.
That may be true, but all teachers struggle with the same challenges. Tests are the only objective measure we have of teachers effectiveness.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Konraden
You're arguing a strawman. Nobody says teachers can't be measured for effectiveness. And, clearly, you seem only concerned about merit pay--which, as discussed earlier, doesn't in any way ensure that teachers would be better teachers--just that they would compete amongst one another, which doesn't translate necessarily to better academics. If you want to advocate for merit pay for educators, you need to show me a pilot program that worked.
I am not only concerned about merit pay, it is one component of the solution. The unions screamed bloody murder when teachers ratings were published. It really isn't something in their members best interest, but is certainly important for consumers to know. The teaching establishment is unlikely to push this. Pilot programs are fine but they n eed to be comprehensive where a number of solutions are tried.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Konraden
Relating to teaching degrees
Having a BS in math or science doesn't necessarily qualify you for teaching. Teaching isn't just knowing the subject. It's about controlling your class and presenting a subject in a manner that children can actually grasp. While it's a great idea to have doctorates of biology teaching evolution to our students, they may not actually learning anything. Are you prepared to say a doctorates of biology is a poor teacher? Are you prepared to say that someone with an associates in a biology my be a better teacher because they've actually completed a teacher program?
Teaching is more than just knowing things. Keep that in that mind.
I understand that teaching is more than just knowing things, but clearly if you don't know the subject you are teaching, all the education classes in the world will not help you. People who know more about the subject they are teaching are in a position to bring greater knowledge then someone with less education in that subject.
That may be true, but all teachers struggle with the same challenges. Tests are the only objective measure we have of teachers effectiveness.
That's false. There are other ways to measure teacher effectiveness that standardized testing, which doesn't measure teacher ability. It measures how well students can take standardized tests.
Standardized tests are part of the problem. Our teachers need to only teach what is on the tests. The tests measures student achievement. There's a logical disconnect between the two. We should be looking at other ways to measure teacher performance.
Quote:
I am not only concerned about merit pay, it is one component of the solution. The unions screamed bloody murder when teachers ratings were published. It really isn't something in their members best interest, but is certainly important for consumers to know. The teaching establishment is unlikely to push this. Pilot programs are fine but they need to be comprehensive where a number of solutions are tried.
Part of the problem you're going to see while arguing against teachers' unions is that they have no real direct involvement in student achievement. They don't set curriculum, they don't tell teachers how to do their jobs, or how they should be teaching. It's why I, and others, keep telling you to "look elsewhere." The problem isn't with teachers' unions, but systemically with the educational system. But in the mean time, if you want to continue with your union busting crusade, feel free to pony up that evidence.
Quote:
I understand that teaching is more than just knowing things, but clearly if you don't know the subject you are teaching, all the education classes in the world will not help you. People who know more about the subject they are teaching are in a position to bring greater knowledge then someone with less education in that subject.
If you have a limited knowledge teacher whose students learn that information fantastically from her, and a fantastically knowledged teacher whose students struggle to grasp the concepts from her, who would you rather have teach? I do not intend to disrespect very well educated persons, but teaching isn't just knowing your subject. You actually have to be able to impart that knowledge onto students, and if you can't do that, your knowledge, no matter how vast and great, is useless in the field of teaching.
Also, I apparently had to invent the word "knowledged"
That may be true, but all teachers struggle with the same challenges. Tests are the only objective measure we have of teachers effectiveness.
When all children have exactly the same abilities and come from exactly the same home environments, then you can say that "all teachers struggle with the same challenges." Some teachers do not struggle at all. Their students come to school well fed, well rested, and well disciplined - little sponges waiting to soak up information. Most teachers are not that lucky and spend a good portion (if not all) of their day struggling. Tests measure student performance, not teacher performance. There are teachers who teach their hearts out, day after day, and their students do not perform well due to circumstances over which the teacher has no control.
Quote:
I am not only concerned about merit pay, it is one component of the solution. The unions screamed bloody murder when teachers ratings were published. It really isn't something in their members best interest, but is certainly important for consumers to know. The teaching establishment is unlikely to push this. Pilot programs are fine but they n eed to be comprehensive where a number of solutions are tried.
There is still debate over the merit of merit pay. As I stated in a previous post, the collegial atmosphere amongst teaching staff that I enjoyed during my 37 years in the classroom is disappearing. When teachers have to compete for bonus dollars, they are reluctant to share their methods and materials with their fellow teachers, which really works to the detriment of beginning teachers. Not a lot of mentoring going on these days.
Quote:
I understand that teaching is more than just knowing things, but clearly if you don't know the subject you are teaching, all the education classes in the world will not help you. People who know more about the subject they are teaching are in a position to bring greater knowledge then someone with less education in that subject.
Not necessarily. As has been pointed out, a PhD in biology who is a lousy communicator and has no classroom management skills is not going to do a better job teaching 10th graders about biology than will a trained teacher with just a BS.
That's false. There are other ways to measure teacher effectiveness that standardized testing, which doesn't measure teacher ability. It measures how well students can take standardized tests.
Standardized tests are part of the problem. Our teachers need to only teach what is on the tests. The tests measures student achievement. There's a logical disconnect between the two. We should be looking at other ways to measure teacher performance.
Part of the problem you're going to see while arguing against teachers' unions is that they have no real direct involvement in student achievement. They don't set curriculum, they don't tell teachers how to do their jobs, or how they should be teaching. It's why I, and others, keep telling you to "look elsewhere." The problem isn't with teachers' unions, but systemically with the educational system. But in the mean time, if you want to continue with your union busting crusade, feel free to pony up that evidence.
If you have a limited knowledge teacher whose students learn that information fantastically from her, and a fantastically knowledged teacher whose students struggle to grasp the concepts from her, who would you rather have teach? I do not intend to disrespect very well educated persons, but teaching isn't just knowing your subject. You actually have to be able to impart that knowledge onto students, and if you can't do that, your knowledge, no matter how vast and great, is useless in the field of teaching.
Also, I apparently had to invent the word "knowledged"
I'm interested in improving education, if the unions want to stand in the way, they will be called out. Defense of the status quo simply won't cut it anymore. There are things things that other countries are out performing us do that we should emulate. I have outlined them in my previous posts. But you can see from the responses that I'm getting from teachers, that they are incapable of being introspective. The poor performance of our kids is everyone's fault but their's. It's the kids fault, their parents, the tests. The excuses go on and on. Meanwhile their defense of the status quo puts our kids further behind. It also contributes to the divide in this country. The wealthy escape the educational monopoly and the kids further surpass the kids who are trapped in poor schools. It is a national shame.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
