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.
By quality, I mean they are knowledgeable about the subject they teach, speak correctly, can spell and form a sentence, and are ethical.
I'm assuming you have the opportunity to observe and assess your childrens' teachers from the homework they assign and papers/reports they mark, your meetings/contacts with them and what your children tell you about what happens in the classroom.
I think they are better in some ways and not in others. Overall, they seem to get jaded faster these days - probably because they are more restricted with the curriculum and such (due to high stakes testing). It seems like these days more of them get caught doing illegal things (affairs with students, etc.). I notice that more and more states are upping their requirements for content knowledge for their original certification area, so most are probably better in that respect.
Ethics are probably better, or no different, than 40 years ago. The reason you hear more about student affairs today is the saturation of news outlets. Trust me when I tell you that there were as many, if not more, teacher/student relationships then as now (I can recall 5 or 6 from just my graduating class (1972) and the next one. From a school with less than 200 kids in a class).
Then, as now, there are teachers who are experts, or nearly so, in their fields and others who couldn't find their butt with both hands if you gave them directions. Most of the ones I had who were subject shaky quit and went to law school, became administrators, or quit and worked for their in-laws in business.
Hard to say but I know we covered more material when I was in school. Today, with the focus on the test, we cover less but try to get kids profficient in what we teach. Back when I was a kid, you either got it or you flunked. No one coddled you to passing.
My high school catered to the working class and only a handful went to college immediately. Of those that did most went to state schools. My kids high school, while mostly working class, is more upscale and usually has a couple of kids each year accepted into Ivy League, or close to it, universities as well as many going to other colleges all over the country. There are much more opportunities for them than there was for me, but in some ways I think things in my day were easier. It wasn't as competitive and there wern't as many different social groups, everyone HAD to somewhat get along because we were all stuck with each other and had the same backgrounds.
I'm curious if more or less teachers are teaching in their subject matter of expertise. For example, are there a lot of history teachers teaching math and a lot of English teachers teaching science because of a glut of English/history teachers and not as many math/science teachers compared to decades ago? Or, for example, are there a lot of Algebra teachers who have to teach Geometry and Earth Science teachers who have to teach Physics?
I'm curious if more or less teachers are teaching in their subject matter of expertise. For example, are there a lot of history teachers teaching math and a lot of English teachers teaching science because of a glut of English/history teachers and not as many math/science teachers compared to decades ago? Or, for example, are there a lot of Algebra teachers who have to teach Geometry and Earth Science teachers who have to teach Physics?
Here I would say less. I've posted before that, here in Michigan, what is valued is jack of all trades certification over subject matter expertise. Schools value being able to use a teacher anywhere over having one who really knows their subject. I can't say as I blame them. They have scheduling nightmares to deal with but you will not up the quality of education until you put teachers in the classroom who know their material.
Back when I was in school, the chemistry teacher taught chemistry and probably had a chemistry degree. Today they want people who have broad certification who are legal to teach several subjects.
Here we have the DI certification which is a general science certification that allows the holder to teach any science class. They're not considered subject matter experts but they're legal to teach anything, including science courses they may not ever have taken a course in themselves. I have a friend who has this cert who was hired to teach chemistry who took a total of one chemistry class in college. Schools prefer her over my 80+ credits in chemisty because I'm seen as limited in what I can teach.
Anyway, I think our teachers are more generalists today than subject matter experts. It's as if schools think a teacher is a teacher is a teacher as long as they're legal to teach their subject.
My graduating high school class had the strictest graduation requirements of any class in the history of the school. Now, that's not to say the quality was good...just more quantity. I thought my high school seemed dumbed down but from what I've heard, it was even worse in the 80s and 90s.
By quality, I mean they are knowledgeable about the subject they teach, speak correctly, can spell and form a sentence, and are ethical.
I'm assuming you have the opportunity to observe and assess your childrens' teachers from the homework they assign and papers/reports they mark, your meetings/contacts with them and what your children tell you about what happens in the classroom.
No.
Not even close.
With all due respect to my colleagues and the many fine professionals who stand as exceptions to the statement I am about to make in full below, I am dismayed beyond belief at the quality of the teachers I've observed. Here is a brief sampling of actual statements I have personally witnessed teachers making:
1. (While weeping) "I just wouldn't feel comfortable getting up in front of students to teach grammar." (Stated by a high school English teacher).
2. "I don't believe in essays." (Stated by a high school English teacher.)
4. "American Dream: Reality or Allusion?" (On a handout. No, the context of the handout made clear this was not a clever pun.)
I could go on, of course.
I am convinced that many of the teachers emerging from colleges of education have very little actual content knowledge, primarily because they've largely been taught at the high school level by others with little content knowledge and then majored in education in college -- one of the lightest, least academically demanding of the disciplines.
This is beyond unfortunate. Again, just to be utterly clear, I do not speak of all teachers. To do so would be absurdly reductive. I speak only of my experience personally, one confirmed many times by data and secondhand knowledge. I think it wastes our money and our children's time -- and worst of all, our children's minds.
Others may, of course, feel free to disagree.
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.
