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.
So I happened to be browsing through this paper done by the Urban Institute when I came across this passage:
Quote:
The related issue is what makes for an effective or ineffective teacher. The extensive research
addressing this has found little that consistently distinguishes among teachers in their classroom
effectiveness. Most documented has been the finding that master’s degrees bear no consistent
relationship with student achievement (See Hanushek and Rivkin 2004, 2006). But other findings are
equally as interesting and important. The amount of experience in the classroom – with the exception
of the first few years – also bears no relationship to performance. On average, a teacher with five years
experience is as effective as a teacher with 25 years of experience. But, this general result about
measured characteristics of teachers goes even deeper. When studied, most evidence indicates that
conventional teacher certification, source of teacher training, or salary level are not systematically
related to the amount of learning that goes on in the classroom
I've been wondering about the bolded for a while, but never really looked into it, but where did the idea come from that a teacher is highly qualified just because he/she holds a masters and is spending his/her free time during the summer taking professional development courses for re-certification? Most first guess is to say that it comes from the belief of certain groups that try to pin educational under achievements solely on teachers that placing more prerequisites will somehow raise teacher quality. From my point of my view it seems like a waste of a time and now the new thing is charter schools and merit pay with less job security. I'm really interested in hearing from educators who have been teaching for a long time(I respect you all for your service) as well beginners and anyone else as well.
culture of disrespect, teacher, cop, social worker, counselor, makes no difference, they all get spit on by snot nosed 16 year old utterly worthless future failures. did i mention that i was not too pleased with the parenting taking place today?
does incarceration wake up the parents & break the cycle?, no way, victims of a judgemental and stereotyping society.
Last edited by Huckleberry3911948; 07-25-2012 at 07:10 PM..
In my anecdotal experience, I agree with the bold font int he passage. A master's degree does not make one a better teacher; nor does length of time teaching (after the first few years when they are still mastering their classroom management skills. What makes one a good teacher are qualities that aren't easily measured.. rapport with students, ability to explain concepts in a way that the students can understand, inspiring, interesting to listen to, etc... Alas, 'they' stick to variables that can be easily measured.
I've been wondering about the bolded for a while, but never really looked into it, but where did the idea come from that a teacher is highly qualified just because he/she holds a masters and is spending his/her free time during the summer taking professional development courses for re-certification? Most first guess is to say that it comes from the belief of certain groups that try to pin educational under achievements solely on teachers that placing more prerequisites will somehow raise teacher quality. From my point of my view it seems like a waste of a time and now the new thing is charter schools and merit pay with less job security. I'm really interested in hearing from educators who have been teaching for a long time(I respect you all for your service) as well beginners and anyone else as well.
Aside from serious issues with the review of the lit (they rely on the same authors far to often to present a comprehensive review IMO), and some extrapolation well beyond the bounds of studies, overall I think the take home message, (that regardless of education level some teachers are better than others) is correct.
And the need to make all these highly qualified critieria is just an attempt to make it LOOK like something is being done to improve education.
In my anecdotal experience, I agree with the bold font int he passage. A master's degree does not make one a better teacher; nor does length of time teaching (after the first few years when they are still mastering their classroom management skills. What makes one a good teacher are qualities that aren't easily measured.. rapport with students, ability to explain concepts in a way that the students can understand, inspiring, interesting to listen to, etc... Alas, 'they' stick to variables that can be easily measured.
Interesting. That's something else I forgot to mention that was mentioned by the author and that was no studies have been shown to identify and differentiate a bad teacher from a good one that could be measured. School "reform" seems to be an extension of NCLB in that they are trying to measure teachers using test scores. Now the latest fad is using these measurements called Value Added Measurements to measure teachers which affects their pay. Here's an example of one(doesn't seem to be loading properly):
I've been wondering about the bolded for a while, but never really looked into it, but where did the idea come from that a teacher is highly qualified just because he/she holds a masters and is spending his/her free time during the summer taking professional development courses for re-certification? Most first guess is to say that it comes from the belief of certain groups that try to pin educational under achievements solely on teachers that placing more prerequisites will somehow raise teacher quality. From my point of my view it seems like a waste of a time and now the new thing is charter schools and merit pay with less job security. I'm really interested in hearing from educators who have been teaching for a long time(I respect you all for your service) as well beginners and anyone else as well.
Politicians who want something to point fingers at that they can regulate and say they did something about?
I think teachers will tell you that masters degrees don't make a difference. It's common knowledge that beyond about the 10th year, teacher effectiveness really doesn't change. (There is a dramatic change in the first 5 years followed by a lesser change in the next 5 then it levels off). BUT, these are things that can be mandated so it looks like someone is doing something to improve education. IMO, it's smoke and mirrors. It keeps us for looking at the real problems in education and gives us someone to blame so we feel better because something is being done to "improve" education. No one wants to admit what the real problems are because they would take work to correct. It's much easier to send a teacher to a summer session on how they suck.
I found that no two students learned the same way. The students that were learning what I was teaching the first week was split off and I tried a different approach with the second group. I kept splitting the groups until I was getting through to the greatest percentage of students. I was learning each year up to and including my last 28th year.
I am not sure...I agree...teachers doing the "rote" re-certification route...are probably not the greatest teachers. I am far more impressed with teachers who expand their knowledge base beyond their own subject matter...to have a more rounded and diversified teaching style using cross cirriculum teaching. I have two Masters degrees...and felt like that expanded knowledge base increased my ability to teach more effectively. And I was a far better teacher at 20 years than at five years...I cared more about the kids...and less about the subject...which actually increased student participation....interestingly enough...
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.
