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.
OR simplify the model in such a way that you can later BUILD upon it rather than having to explain it's wrong.
IMO, it, seriously, errodes the authority of teachers for me to have to tell students their previous teachers taught something wrong. Kids are not stupid. They want to know why someone wasted time teaching them something that was wrong. You can teach this in pieces. Atoms are made up of protons and neutrons at the center and surrounded by "clouds" that contain the electrons and leave it at that. Why does anyone have to add that they're orbiting the nucleus like little planets around a sun? I can add too and expand a concentric cloud model. I have to tell my students that the solar system model is just plain wrong.
Yes, I think this is more reasonable. In a (water) cloud, the water particles could be anywhere -- we understand that there isn't a clear shape like a circle.
The answer is not to make teaching degrees more difficult, but to change the education model, elementary school teachers should not have to know all subjects to teach them. Have math specialists, reading specialists, writing specialists, science specialists. That would enhance and enrich elementary school education.
I would agree. Moreover, to acknowledge the issue brought up above -- the idea that the Bohr model is not a perfect description of electron behavior either -- I think it's honest (and very do-able) for an elementary or middle school science teacher to say, "Look at all the cool ways electrons move in relation to the nucleus," and also to say, "This model is the most accurate to date, but we change our minds when we get new ideas." That's not too difficult to communicate -- and you don't even need to lean on the idea that heavily, either. I think it's sufficient to say so a few times, get the kids to understand that science is always evolving, and move on.
Like Ivory, though, I do not believe in teaching a concept which is flat-out incorrect. The Bohr model is not perfect, but it's a lot "righter," as it were, than the solar system model...and if there's a better one than the Bohr model, teach that one.
What I tell my students, when I teach the Bohr model, is that it does not represent what we believe to be the structure of an atom BUT it has aspects that are correct (number of electrons in each main energy level) that make it uesful in determining simple bonding (simple as opposed to advanced bonding concepts). It is also a stepping stone to higher models as it makes no claims regarding the shape of the orbitals (I'm careful to tell my students they are not circular) or the movement of the electrons. Keeping old models that are actually useful is one thing, keeping ones we now know are simply wrong and become stumbling blocks is another. It's time for the solar system model of the atom to go. I would bet that if we took a poll of people on the street, the vast majority would believe this model is the actual model of the atom.
Models aren't perfect and, as teachers, we need to be careful to tell our students that but we need to keep only the ones that are either stepping stones or actually useful. Electrons moving like planets around the sun is neither.
And while I'm at it, can we change the name from the Bohr model to the Bohr diagram please? We don't use this as a model anymore. We use it more as a shorthand way to write electron configurations when teaching atomic theory and early bonding. I'm, constantly, saying "This isn't REALLY a model of the atom anymore..." when I'm teaching early bonding. Since I use it as a diagram, can't I call it a diagram and just teach it as a really over simplified but useful early diagram of the structure of the atom? Kids come into my class thinking a model is a picture of the real thing and the bohr model looks so much like the solar system model that that is what kids think it is.
It's a good idea. I fully admit that I am strongest in English, but far, far less competent in science and mathematics, in that order. I would by no means be the "sage on the stage" for a large chunk of the fundamentals kids need to know.
That was the model we had in the Title One school I worked at, along with a testing specialist, the kids moved around to different classes all day, just like high school, and junior high. We improved test scores, and went from failing to exceeding AYP in two years. This was a low income school, with kids who barely spoke English--Spanish or "Ebonics" was the primary language.
We worked as a team, and did not blame parents. But, our principal was a real B#*ch. She got rid of dead wood teachers by making their lives so miserable, they went to other schools. She gave bonus pay to teachers who did National Baord Certification, she only wanted highly motivated teachers. So, I will admit she was a really good principal, effective leadership, she let teachers choose their areas of expertise to focus on, and she changed a lot of things.
I'm a 6th grade teacher in elementary, but I'm qualified to teach math through 12th grade. Most of the high school teachers I've come in contact with did know their subject pretty well. The ones that surprise me are the elementary school teachers. Many of them do not know basic math, say beyond a 7th or 8th grade level. I think they should do away completely with self-contained classrooms and make whoever is teaching the math/science portion in lower grades get some extra certifications. I don't personally know many teachers below 5th grade that care for math at all.
As far as the general education degree, I do believe it is extremely easy to get one. I have majored in both engineering and education at different times. The education degree does feel like it is basically just handed to you, like the free t-shirt you get when you sign up for a 5k run, while engineering is like finishing Marine boot camp. They do need an overhaul of the education program at most universities. Some districts do force their teachers to get Master's Degrees in a certain time frame.
Having said all that, I am proud to be a teacher, because just like any profession, there are extremely good teachers who are quite intelligent and there are idiots.
Absolutely. I know a few mildly smart to pretty smart education majors, but most of them are among the dumbest people I have ever met. And everyone wants to major in Early Childhood Education, why, because it's the easiest.
Teaching is one of the most important careers, yet the qualifications for it are shocking low. I know one girl who wants to be an English teacher, but has never picked up a single book for leisure reading and cannot write to save her life; her ACT English score was a 9 :/ . Kind of scary when you think that these people will be at the front line of your children's education and introduction to higher thinking, ain't it?
I say, pay teacher a competitive salary but at the same time require a rigorous, comprehensive education to become one and periodic training to maintain certification (this may already be a requirement, I don't know, I'm just throwing out some ideas).
Also, require teachers to go through more cultural and sensitivity awareness. Being a minority, I am appalled when I think about some of the treatment I received from my white teachers growing up. I'm not necessarily saying there were intentionally racist, but more of a complete lack of any knowledge or experience of any culture outside of middle class, white Suburbia. People like that can say something so offensive and not even realize it. Educators will be in the classroom with all creeds of life and need to be prepared to be able to connect and understand them all.
I'm a 6th grade teacher in elementary, but I'm qualified to teach math through 12th grade. Most of the high school teachers I've come in contact with did know their subject pretty well. The ones that surprise me are the elementary school teachers. Many of them do not know basic math, say beyond a 7th or 8th grade level. I think they should do away completely with self-contained classrooms and make whoever is teaching the math/science portion in lower grades get some extra certifications. I don't personally know many teachers below 5th grade that care for math at all.
As far as the general education degree, I do believe it is extremely easy to get one. I have majored in both engineering and education at different times. The education degree does feel like it is basically just handed to you, like the free t-shirt you get when you sign up for a 5k run, while engineering is like finishing Marine boot camp. They do need an overhaul of the education program at most universities. Some districts do force their teachers to get Master's Degrees in a certain time frame.
Having said all that, I am proud to be a teacher, because just like any profession, there are extremely good teachers who are quite intelligent and there are idiots.
I have also majored in both and feel the same way. My ed degree felt like so much ticket punching. I didn't even go to graduation. It didn't feel like graduation. It felt like I bought a degree...pay your tuition...show up to class...get credit... Engineering school was a different animal. I feel like I earned my engineering degree but was handed my ed degree.
I remember being really frustrated at having to take time away from classes in my English major to take my coursework for ed certification. But, means to an end, because actually doing the job is where the real training began. Still, wish I'd had all those hours to take more of the classes I loved.
I remember being really frustrated at having to take time away from classes in my English major to take my coursework for ed certification. But, means to an end, because actually doing the job is where the real training began. Still, wish I'd had all those hours to take more of the classes I loved.
I wish there had been more classes that actually taught us to teach. I feel like they assumed we knew how both during my ed studies and after I graduated. While I know a lot more now, after three years teaching, I feel like I could have been better trained before I started and during my early years.
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.
OR simplify the model in such a way that you can later BUILD upon it rather than having to explain it's wrong. 
