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.
If you think some teachers aren't all that great, do you think the criteria for hiring and retaining them should be tougher?
Would there be better candidates for teacher positions if they all had to take more classes to graduate, like other professionals, if they had to do a residency requirement like doctors and if they had to pass an exam on the level of a lawyer's bar exam, before a state would employ them? I would think making it harder to become a teacher would not only produce better quality teachers but it would raise their pay. The job would then become more attractive to more qualified people meaning the employing school district would have a better pick of the litter. Perhaps school districts would compete for the best ones offering them perks to sign on with their school district.
I think the education mess is much more complicated then finding teachers that do well on tests. Are the best teachers always the best test takers? My husband is a very intelligent engineer but somehow that doesn't translate to being a good teacher, at least according to my children.
If you think some teachers aren't all that great, do you think the criteria for hiring and retaining them should be tougher?
Would there be better candidates for teacher positions if they all had to take more classes to graduate, like other professionals, if they had to do a residency requirement like doctors and if they had to pass an exam on the level of a lawyer's bar exam, before a state would employ them? I would think making it harder to become a teacher would not only produce better quality teachers but it would raise their pay. The job would then become more attractive to more qualified people meaning the employing school district would have a better pick of the litter. Perhaps school districts would compete for the best ones offering them perks to sign on with their school district.
Odd...
You seem to be convinced that the primary shortcoming in America's education system is teachers.
You seem to be convinced that the primary shortcoming in America's education system is teachers.
And it's working isn't it..kids do bad in school, it's the teacher's fault, not the curriculum or mandated NCLB rules that tie their hands.
I would say there are some bad teachers..both first year that really shouldn't be in the schools and veterans that just don't care anymore.
In Texas teachers are on 1 year contracts and I just don't understand how they keep getting renewed.
But to lay blame solely on teachers without lookiing at other aspects is wrong. You can have the best teacher in the classroom but their hands are tied. I know of a few math teachers that left K-12. They got their masters to teach at the college level where they CAN teach the subject and those that don't understand fail. There is no NCLB in college.
About 30% of ANY population (not just Americans) will be well below average. No amount of schooling will ever make them smart. Some people encounter these individuals and assume they're dumb because the school system couldn't make them smart.
Newsflash: the school system won't make them tall and good-looking, either.
Eduction simply doesn't work for everyone. Everyone doesn't have the same capacity for learning. We should grow up and admit this reality.
My husband is a very intelligent engineer but somehow that doesn't translate to being a good teacher, at least according to my children.
Couldn't help but smile! This was my Father to a T -- as an architect, he could do math all day long, but ask him to help me with an algebra problem, and oh!, but it ended with me in tears, the announcement that my teacher was too stupid to be teaching algebra, and ended with his asking me was I stupid? By the time I graduated from HS, I was convinced I was, indeed, at least too stupid to do math. Many years later, I could actually teach Algebra 1 to students assigned to me in the In-School Suspension Program.
Now, back to the topic. . .
Looking back on my own career, I would have to say making the standards to become a teacher any more rigorous won't fix the problem with the 'dead wood' in education. As a teacher, I could have told you, as well as any number of my colleagues, who, in the school needed to go. I'll bet if they were honest, the bad teachers could tell you they are bad teachers. The problem seems to be that either administrators don't have the backbone to get rid of the poor-performing teachers and staff, or they are not supported when they set out to 'clean house,' so to speak. That, and it takes almost nothing short of an act of Congress to get the documentation together to validate firing a teacher -- unless he or she has done something outright outrageous.
Back in the day, as the kids like to say, most poor-performing teachers were moved from school to school, until they retired, or were so beaten-down until they quit. The performance instruments used to evaluate teachers need more tangible measurements, and rather than letting teachers 'slide' to some extent, they need to be held truly accountable.
If you think some teachers aren't all that great, do you think the criteria for hiring and retaining them should be tougher?
Would there be better candidates for teacher positions if they all had to take more classes to graduate, like other professionals, if they had to do a residency requirement like doctors and if they had to pass an exam on the level of a lawyer's bar exam, before a state would employ them? I would think making it harder to become a teacher would not only produce better quality teachers but it would raise their pay. The job would then become more attractive to more qualified people meaning the employing school district would have a better pick of the litter. Perhaps school districts would compete for the best ones offering them perks to sign on with their school district.
The flaw in your argument is that the pay won't go up. Teacher pay is dependent on taxes. Without increased pay, you'll drag down the quality of teachers because those who are capable of getting decent jobs in industry will rather than do residencies or take more classes. I'm not sure how much harder you can make it, really. I had to have over 40 hours in one subject area, over 30 in another and a masters degree in education to get my teaching certificate. Granted I could have gotten it with a bachelors degree but I took the same classes they do. (Literally the same class. They just gave me a term paper and called it a grad class.)
I think 70 hours in my major/minor plus a degree in education along with passing the state exams is enough.
Couldn't help but smile! This was my Father to a T -- as an architect, he could do math all day long, but ask him to help me with an algebra problem, and oh!, but it ended with me in tears, the announcement that my teacher was too stupid to be teaching algebra, and ended with his asking me was I stupid? By the time I graduated from HS, I was convinced I was, indeed, at least too stupid to do math. Many years later, I could actually teach Algebra 1 to students assigned to me in the In-School Suspension Program.
Now, back to the topic. . .
Looking back on my own career, I would have to say making the standards to become a teacher any more rigorous won't fix the problem with the 'dead wood' in education. As a teacher, I could have told you, as well as any number of my colleagues, who, in the school needed to go. I'll bet if they were honest, the bad teachers could tell you they are bad teachers. The problem seems to be that either administrators don't have the backbone to get rid of the poor-performing teachers and staff, or they are not supported when they set out to 'clean house,' so to speak. That, and it takes almost nothing short of an act of Congress to get the documentation together to validate firing a teacher -- unless he or she has done something outright outrageous.
Back in the day, as the kids like to say, most poor-performing teachers were moved from school to school, until they retired, or were so beaten-down until they quit. The performance instruments used to evaluate teachers need more tangible measurements, and rather than letting teachers 'slide' to some extent, they need to be held truly accountable.
Acountability is an issue because there are too many variables. Can you really hold me accountable for a student not learning physics when they were placed in my class without having trig and barely passing algebra? Many teachers are at the mercy of what was taught before we ever met the kids we teach.
There is so much nepotism in public education. If you know somebody it is so easy to get a job. I find it insulting that any Tom, Dick or Harry can decide they want to be a teacher and go alternate route. If they have an "in" in the district they can get a position before people that actually have an education degree. I work in a building where this is a huge issue. A bunch of the chosen ones do nothing all day but sit at their desks or play on their computers. They are doing a huge disservice to the kids, but because they are friends, relatives or whatever, they are excused.
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.
