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.
For those who are jumping all over me for my comments, I have never seen or taken a Praxis test. No, I don't need to take any more tests for certification. What I am referring to was the requirement to take a test in art history, economics, etc. that was more than just "basic skills." Perhaps, the Praxis test is easier than what I had to take. Since I was applying for certification in music, I don't see why I needed to be tested in architecture, art history, chemistry. On the flip side, there was a section on music, extremely easy for me, but drew the complaints of many test takers who never learned to read music notation or studied music history. I do believe that teachers should be well-rounded and have a knowledge of basics, including something that would deter many younger teachers-geography. But as a music teacher, it was really unnecessary for me to re-learn how to balance equations in chemistry and test questions of that nature. Why should a chemistry teacher have to take a test in music to become certified in chemistry? But they did.
Exactly. The bad part is they are missing out on a lot of really great foreign language teachers (especially as bad as the state of Texas needs Spanish teachers), because phonetics, morphology, how far the Andes stretch, and which 15th Century Spanish artist did a certain painting aren't even things that are taught in K-12 anyway. Those things are more appropriate for and congruent with graduate level classes at a university than middle school and high school. So it's easy to say, "Well, good teachers should pass their content tests the first time anyway," but it really all depends on the test.
One of the questions on the French test for my state asked about the French & Indian War, and about the Statue of Liberty. I've been teaching for a while and I have yet to discuss either of these topics in a language class.
Ok, so, then, how do you answer the question of "Why do I have to study this <insert boring school subject here in place of the word the student would use>? I'll never use it in the real world."
Ok, so, then, how do you answer the question of "Why do I have to study this <insert boring school subject here in place of the word the student would use>? I'll never use it in the real world."
I think you may be comparing apples with oranges. Different types of subjects teach you how to think and to use different aspects of your brain. I am glad that I took geometry even though I don't use it much beyond the very rudimentary stuff. It taught me to learn how to learn and how to approach learning new material. It taught me how to analyze. Its the same why young children should learn musical skills even though most will never become professional or even amateur musicians. It's a cognitive skill and self-disciplinary skill that can be applied towards the subjects that you will use. Languages, math, music all teach the brain how to recognize patterns.
Ok, so, then, how do you answer the question of "Why do I have to study this <insert boring school subject here in place of the word the student would use>? I'll never use it in the real world."
One of the math teachers in my building tells students that "yes, you'll most likely never use this math, but for now, it teaches you how to think in a different way."
Only the really dumb ones don't want to think in a different way.
Well in another move on the war on teachers, the TEA has now passed a limit to the number of tests that one can take. You are only allowed to take each certification 5 times, and you can only take the PPR 5 times as well. If you fail 5 times, then you are not allowed to be a teacher...ever.
I thought the person that told me this from Texas Teachers was full of it, so I looked it up and a law was passed in 2015 confirming it.
Here is my issue, I took the test back in 2013. Even though I took it in 2013, it STILL counts as one of my attempts meaning I have 4 more to go. I can handle stress, but considering that now my career hinges on this, I work at a stressful job, and my home life is not that great, I don't know if (or when) I will be able to take this test and feel that I will be able to successfully pass it.
I am about ready to just give up on this state..
My question is why can't one pass the test the first time or at least the second time?
I think you may be comparing apples with oranges. Different types of subjects teach you how to think and to use different aspects of your brain. I am glad that I took geometry even though I don't use it much beyond the very rudimentary stuff. It taught me to learn how to learn and how to approach learning new material. It taught me how to analyze. Its the same why young children should learn musical skills even though most will never become professional or even amateur musicians. It's a cognitive skill and self-disciplinary skill that can be applied towards the subjects that you will use. Languages, math, music all teach the brain how to recognize patterns.
I know that. But I'm referring to all the talk on here along the lines of "I don't need to know XYZ" which is the exact same thing said by students. It's somewhat hypocritical to claim that, here on CD, while in school telling students how important it is.
Quote:
Originally Posted by lepoisson
I don't know why states don't exempt content area exams for teachers with a Master's degree or higher.
Here in Missouri, I was only required to take content area exams, plus a pedagogy exam. The pedagogy exam should be required for all teachers. However, I do not agree with having teachers take an ACT/SAT style basic skills exam. I don't teach math, so why should I be required to be tested on that? Should math teachers be required to take a test on French? If anything, I think those tests are used to weed out imbeciles.
My point exactly; above, see below.
Quote:
Originally Posted by lepoisson
One of the math teachers in my building tells students that "yes, you'll most likely never use this math, but for now, it teaches you how to think in a different way."
Only the really dumb ones don't want to think in a different way.
The law may not be perfect but the intent is clear. The kids deserve teachers who can pass standardized tests.
And demonstrate a grasp on the relevant material. No offense, but I honestly would not want a teacher who cannot pass his/her professional boards to teach my kids. Five attempts is beyond generous.
If you can't pass the test, you should not be teaching.
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.
