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.
One problem with your argument. Professors have a high minimum level of education required to be professors. And then they do their time as TA's and associate professors first. Full professorship is earned. Not licensed but there are requirements one must meet.
And our college system isn't superior anymore. It once was but not today.
How is this a problem with my argument? Colleges get away without having credentials because they rely on other things, there is no reason why the secondary system can not work in a similar fashion. Also, I prefer to compare secondary to the community college system, its more similar.
Our college system is superior to our high school system.
Yup. It just says you meet the minimum requirement. I have to agree that if you don't meet that minimum you shouldn't be teaching....
A credential is not associated with teaching ability, so in what sense is it the minimum requirement? You guys don't address the issues. There are multiple studies that show credentialing is not associated with teacher quality. If you'd like the links I'll give them to you.
Secondly, again I ask how are teachers in the college/university system able to teach without some sort of credential program? They have education and experience, that is all. And the system works.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ivorytickler
And no to eliminating credentials for AP. You need MORE credentials for AP. These may be the top kids but they're still kids. Some are ready for self teaching but others are not.
So do you purpose that these kids go throw a butterfly like transformation the summer after their senior year? This is the problem with what you and others are suggesting, you are pretending that there is some dramatic shift in the students between them being a high school student and a college student. I mentioned AP classes for a particular reason. The kids choose to be in their and most end up going to college, that is to say the demographic of the class will be rather similar to a freshman college course.
So, what is so different about an AP high school science class and an introductory science class at a community college? Why does one require a credential as a "minimal requirement", while the other rather successfully does not require it?
You claim simply having subject knowledge and experience teaching is not enough, yet this is precisely what college/university teachers have. Why is the system superior to the system that requires credentials?
You make a good point there, and you are right. Professors are granted tenure based on some great research or book that they have written.
This is true of only particular universities. Its certainly not true of community colleges, you get tenure by demonstrating you're an effective teacher. Little or no research occurs at community colleges and the teachers are given no time for research. At non-research based universities (e.g., the Calstate system) professors are primarily hired because their teaching abilities, not their research.
Using research universities as a model for our secondary system does not make much sense. Looking at the community college system, Calstate system, etc on the other hand does provide some valuable information.
How is this a problem with my argument? Colleges get away without having credentials because they rely on other things, there is no reason why the secondary system can not work in a similar fashion. Also, I prefer to compare secondary to the community college system, its more similar.
Our college system is superior to our high school system.
That's right????? They have higher degree requirements than secondary school. Instead of higher degree requirements, secondary school has certification. Unfortunately, neither is enough. We've all had our share of lousy professors in college and lousy school teachers. My experience is that colleges care more about publishing and doing research than teaching. Hopefully, the new certifications will help improve the quality of teacher in high schools.
Our college system is only superior to our high school system because colleges take the cream. High schools have to teach everyone. That makes a HUGE difference. It's not high school you'd compare college to. It's college in other countries.
Last edited by Ivorytickler; 05-08-2009 at 03:55 AM..
A credential is not associated with teaching ability, so in what sense is it the minimum requirement? You guys don't address the issues. There are multiple studies that show credentialing is not associated with teacher quality. If you'd like the links I'll give them to you.
Secondly, again I ask how are teachers in the college/university system able to teach without some sort of credential program? They have education and experience, that is all. And the system works.
So do you purpose that these kids go throw a butterfly like transformation the summer after their senior year? This is the problem with what you and others are suggesting, you are pretending that there is some dramatic shift in the students between them being a high school student and a college student. I mentioned AP classes for a particular reason. The kids choose to be in their and most end up going to college, that is to say the demographic of the class will be rather similar to a freshman college course.
So, what is so different about an AP high school science class and an introductory science class at a community college? Why does one require a credential as a "minimal requirement", while the other rather successfully does not require it?
You claim simply having subject knowledge and experience teaching is not enough, yet this is precisely what college/university teachers have. Why is the system superior to the system that requires credentials?
Yes, subject matter knowledge is no guarantee you can actually teach. Want proof? Go to a college campus. There will be no shortage of professors who can't teach. They're kept because they publish and do research not because they can teach.
And yes, CHILDREN go through butterfly like changes all the time. They are growing and developing. Some mature earlier than others. By the time they get to college, I'd expect them to be able to self teach. Compared to high schools, colleges have a totally different student body. They take the cream. The kids who were already demonstrating an ability to self teach. They will weed out the ones who can't self teach. They won't do well.
Sadly, quality of teaching is seldom the deciding factor in hiring a professor. From my experience (1 community college and three universities), they'll take anyone with a high enough degree who wants the job. As students, we gave the same professors bad reviews year after year and they kept their jobs. I had some really bad ones. I had some really good ones too. Perhaps we need higher credentials at the college level to weed out the bad ones.
Another reason colleges can get away without credentials is they are pay per use establishements. The theory is, if they don't teach well, people will go elsewhere. Doesn't work that way but that's the theory. Public schools are, entirely, different. They serve everyone not just the ones picked to get in. Students are younger and require more scaffolding. You don't teach AP kid less, you teach them more somore training is required. (If I'm kept on, I will spend my summer training to teach AP chemistry and AP physics next year).
Subject matter expertise is not enough. Few of us remember what it was like to be learning this for the first time. You have to get back into that mindset to teach children and you have to accomodate multiple learning styles. In college, the professor teaches what she teaches and the student either gets it or figures out how to get it. They have a vested interest in their education at the college level. They're paying for it. They care. That makes a HUGE difference. I see a huge difference in my regular to honors classes. Teaching honors classes is easy. AP will be a little harder because of pacing. You have to finish in time for the AP exams.
You seem to have a bone to pick about credentials for teachers. Is there some reason you can't meed the credentials required to teach? Honestly, it's not hard to do. IMO, it should be harder.
You make a good point there, and you are right. Professors are granted tenure based on some great research or book that they have written.
Yup. No actual teaching ability required.
You should have seen some of the professors I had in engineering school. They knew their subject but they could not teach it to someone else. Why anyone would think you only need subject matter expertise is beyond me. But colleges have their own agenda and part of the college experience is proving that you can learn in all kinds of situations. They are weeding grounds. The only take the best and they get rid of the bottom quarter or so of them which makes it easier to teach at the college level. What's hard there is publish or perish rules.
That's right????? They have higher degree requirements than secondary school. Instead of higher degree requirements, secondary school has certification. Unfortunately, neither is enough. We've all had our share of lousy professors in college and lousy school teachers. My experience is that colleges care more about publishing and doing research than teaching.
Community colleges don't really have higher degree requirements that high school. Typically they have at least masters, but you can teach with less in most systems (Usually this is more applicable to the arts, etc than say biology). I've never claimed that there are not lousy professors in college, but the system as a whole is better than our secondary system.
Also, you are talking about research universities. As I said, looking at liberal arts colleges, community colleges, non-research public universities and things of that nature is for more interesting as a point of comparison.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ivorytickler
Our college system is only superior to our high school system because colleges take the cream. High schools have to teach everyone..
Nope. Our college system ranks better globally than our high school system, so this can't be used as an excuse.
Yes, subject matter knowledge is no guarantee you can actually teach. Want proof? Go to a college campus. There will be no shortage of professors who can't teach. They're kept because they publish and do research not because they can teach.
Again, not all colleges/universities are research institutions. In fact most are not. But even research universities look at teaching quality as a critical factor, but there are other factors too.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ivorytickler
And yes, CHILDREN go through butterfly like changes all the time. They are growing and developing. Some mature earlier than others. By the time they get to college, I'd expect them to be able to self teach. Compared to high schools, colleges have a totally different student body.
Sorry, but humans never go through butterfly like changes. We slowly develop over time... There is no dramatic different between a high school senior and a college freshman. And regarding the "different student body" I already addressed that. AP science classes have a "different student body", in fact a rather similar one than that of a freshman college class, yet you think it requires a credential where as the college gets by fine without requiring them. The excuse you keep using can't be used in this case, you continue not to address the issue.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ivorytickler
Sadly, quality of teaching is seldom the deciding factor in hiring a professor. From my experience (1 community college and three universities), they'll take anyone with a high enough degree who wants the job.
Rubbish. Firstly, jobs in the college/university system are highly competitive. They don't "take anyone with a high enough degree who wants the job", that is just absurd. Community colleges don't really care about your publications, they do not fund research! They pay you to teach and they are more interested in your teaching abilities. Likewise for other non-research based institutions.
But, of course, there are some bad teachers in this system. But to say it again, it ranks better than our high school system. Its a better system.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ivorytickler
Another reason colleges can get away without credentials is they are pay per use establishements...
So are high schools, people are just not explicitly paying tuition. Its just that the students do not have choice. That is another way our secondary system would mimic our college system. Kids should be able to decide where they want to go to high school, just as they can college.
But why would this mean they can get away without credentials? The lower end colleges still lack credential requirements.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ivorytickler
You seem to have a bone to pick about credentials for teachers. Is there some reason you can't meed the credentials required to teach? Honestly, it's not hard to do. IMO, it should be harder.
I have no bone to pick, I simply think that credentialing requirements have many negative effects on the public school system while having few if any positives. They push out a lot of highly qualified teachers. For someone like yourself, they can be effective. That is your problem here, you see that it was helpful in your case therefore you think it will be helpful to anybody! The credential program in your case gave you the ability to gain experience and knowledge of education, that you were unlikely to be able to get otherwise. For you it was rather useful, for others its a complete waste of time that adds a rather large barrier to entry. One that is often not jumped, they go into the college/private school systems, other industries etc.
Why don't I get a credential? Because there is no reason to get one. Even if I decided I'd like to be a full-time teacher I'd first try to get a job at a college or private school before I'd even bother with a credential. But, I'm not interested in full-time teaching right now. I can make more money doing other things. What teaching I have done has largely been on a part-time basis because I enjoy it in limited quantities. Actually, in general I get sick of things rather easily. Having a "career" really is not my cup of tea.
Again, not all colleges/universities are research institutions. In fact most are not. But even research universities look at teaching quality as a critical factor, but there are other factors too.
Sorry, but humans never go through butterfly like changes. We slowly develop over time... There is no dramatic different between a high school senior and a college freshman. And regarding the "different student body" I already addressed that. AP science classes have a "different student body", in fact a rather similar one than that of a freshman college class, yet you think it requires a credential where as the college gets by fine without requiring them. The excuse you keep using can't be used in this case, you continue not to address the issue.
Rubbish. Firstly, jobs in the college/university system are highly competitive. They don't "take anyone with a high enough degree who wants the job", that is just absurd. Community colleges don't really care about your publications, they do not fund research! They pay you to teach and they are more interested in your teaching abilities. Likewise for other non-research based institutions.
But, of course, there are some bad teachers in this system. But to say it again, it ranks better than our high school system. Its a better system.
So are high schools, people are just not explicitly paying tuition. Its just that the students do not have choice. That is another way our secondary system would mimic our college system. Kids should be able to decide where they want to go to high school, just as they can college.
But why would this mean they can get away without credentials? The lower end colleges still lack credential requirements.
I have no bone to pick, I simply think that credentialing requirements have many negative effects on the public school system while having few if any positives. They push out a lot of highly qualified teachers. For someone like yourself, they can be effective. That is your problem here, you see that it was helpful in your case therefore you think it will be helpful to anybody! The credential program in your case gave you the ability to gain experience and knowledge of education, that you were unlikely to be able to get otherwise. For you it was rather useful, for others its a complete waste of time that adds a rather large barrier to entry. One that is often not jumped, they go into the college/private school systems, other industries etc.
Why don't I get a credential? Because there is no reason to get one. Even if I decided I'd like to be a full-time teacher I'd first try to get a job at a college or private school before I'd even bother with a credential. But, I'm not interested in full-time teaching right now. I can make more money doing other things. What teaching I have done has largely been on a part-time basis because I enjoy it in limited quantities. Actually, in general I get sick of things rather easily. Having a "career" really is not my cup of tea.
No, high schools are not pay per use. Parents are not charged if they use the schools and the children, usually, go to the school nearest to them. Colleges OTOH are pay per use. You pay tuition AND TAXES in the case of public universities and students go to the school they choose.
If you don't want credentials, why are you so put off by them? No one is saying credentials make one a good teacher. All credentials say is you have the minimum required to become one.
Have you ever taught full time? There's a huge difference between doing something as a hobby and doing it as a career.
So, do tell what the hiring requirements are for community colleges. BTW, I'll be working at one in the fall. They were willing to hire me on my resume and one lesson taught which is a lot less than was required for my day job.
Yes, subject matter knowledge is no guarantee you can actually teach. Want proof? Go to a college campus. There will be no shortage of professors who can't teach. They're kept because they publish and do research not because they can teach.
And yes, CHILDREN go through butterfly like changes all the time. They are growing and developing. Some mature earlier than others. By the time they get to college, I'd expect them to be able to self teach. Compared to high schools, colleges have a totally different student body. They take the cream. The kids who were already demonstrating an ability to self teach. They will weed out the ones who can't self teach. They won't do well.
Sadly, quality of teaching is seldom the deciding factor in hiring a professor. From my experience (1 community college and three universities), they'll take anyone with a high enough degree who wants the job. As students, we gave the same professors bad reviews year after year and they kept their jobs. I had some really bad ones. I had some really good ones too. Perhaps we need higher credentials at the college level to weed out the bad ones.
Another reason colleges can get away without credentials is they are pay per use establishements. The theory is, if they don't teach well, people will go elsewhere. Doesn't work that way but that's the theory. Public schools are, entirely, different. They serve everyone not just the ones picked to get in. Students are younger and require more scaffolding. You don't teach AP kid less, you teach them more somore training is required. (If I'm kept on, I will spend my summer training to teach AP chemistry and AP physics next year).
Subject matter expertise is not enough. Few of us remember what it was like to be learning this for the first time. You have to get back into that mindset to teach children and you have to accomodate multiple learning styles. In college, the professor teaches what she teaches and the student either gets it or figures out how to get it. They have a vested interest in their education at the college level. They're paying for it. They care. That makes a HUGE difference. I see a huge difference in my regular to honors classes. Teaching honors classes is easy. AP will be a little harder because of pacing. You have to finish in time for the AP exams.
You seem to have a bone to pick about credentials for teachers. Is there some reason you can't meed the credentials required to teach? Honestly, it's not hard to do. IMO, it should be harder.
Is being able to teach and being able to educate the same thing. If students are self directed do they need a teacher or one who educates? Perhaps the need for certification is becoming more related to management of a public school classroom and less one of how to educate. educate - Definition from the Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary
transitive verb1 a: to provide schooling for <chose to educate their children at home> b: to train by formal instruction and supervised practice especially in a skill, trade, or profession2 a: to develop mentally, morally, or aesthetically especially by instruction b: to provide with information : inform <educating themselves about changes in the industry>3: to persuade or condition to feel, believe, or act in a desired way <educate the public to support our position>intransitive verb
teach - Definition from the Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary
transitive verb1 a: to cause to know something <taught them a trade> b: to cause to know how <is teaching me to drive> c: to accustom to some action or attitude <teach students to think for themselves> d: to cause to know the disagreeable consequences of some action <I'll teach you to come home late>2: to guide the studies of3: to impart the knowledge of <teach algebra>4 a: to instruct by precept, example, or experience b: to make known and accepted <experience teaches us our limitations>5: to conduct instruction regularly in <teach school>
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.
