Teaching and Learning the Basics

[Annie]

That's interesting. One of my former colleagues was a science and PE teacher. At university she was required to study her two disciplines (and a heap of electives) and also study the human development (learning and teaching theories etc) subjects before she was granted her degree and her teaching qualification. At primary and secondary school here you can't teach unless you have those qualifications. A university will probably offer you a Lecturer B or C academic position if you have a Master's but in reality if you're not on the way to your PhD or have a PhD (and a postdoctoral work record for a research position) then you're out of the running unless you have particuarly valued skills.

My kid's high school is loaded with lawyers, with no teaching experience, but plenty of history, speech, and accounting. Currently the highest paid teacher's in Chicago area for high school. (Avg salary, $83k. Also an avg ACT of 24+)

 

[Diuretic]

My kid's high school is loaded with lawyers, with no teaching experience, but plenty of history, speech, and accounting. Currently the highest paid teacher's in Chicago area for high school. (Avg salary, $83k. Also an avg ACT of 24+)

I think I'd be a bit worried about having non-teachers teaching kids.

 

[Annie]

I think I'd be a bit worried about having non-teachers teaching kids.

Actually at least at the secondary level, pretty much a non-issue. I have 3 degrees; sociology, political science, and history. I am credentialed, I have 3 education courses, one of which was 'concurrent' with student teaching, meaning we never met. Trust me, what I learned in those courses was zip compared to 3 days in the classroom.

On the other hand, at the lower grades; behavior management, some of the theory courses, things like differentiation, multiple intelligences, may well come into play.

At higher level, any teacher that really 'knows' their subject, can explain it, and is enthusiastic is welcome.

 

[Diuretic]

Actually at least at the secondary level, pretty much a non-issue. I have 3 degrees; sociology, political science, and history. I am credentialed, I have 3 education courses, one of which was 'concurrent' with student teaching, meaning we never met. Trust me, what I learned in those courses was zip compared to 3 days in the classroom.

On the other hand, at the lower grades; behavior management, some of the theory courses, things like differentiation, multiple intelligences, may well come into play.

At higher level, any teacher that really 'knows' their subject, can explain it, and is enthusiastic is welcome.

I agree. It's probably self-evident that in the earlier years, say 5 yrs of age to about 10 yrs of age the development of the child is more important than the content of the material they're supposed to learn. So it seems to me that a primary school teacher is going to need to know a lot about early childhood development and not much about, say, calculus. But as you point out, the older the child the more critical it is that the teacher has a very high level of subject matter expertise.

But that - and I'm not suggesting this is your argument - doesn't remove the need for a teacher to have a good understanding of (for example) learning theories and (again just an example) behaviour management (and an elective in tae kwon do ). But then I suppose it depends on the dominant philosophy of learning in the institution. I'm more comfortable with constructivism than I am with a more behaviourist approach to learning, although it's again self-evident that there's a place for each, it's just that when it comes to cognitive processing I favour a constructivist approach.

 

[Annie]

I agree. It's probably self-evident that in the earlier years, say 5 yrs of age to about 10 yrs of age the development of the child is more important than the content of the material they're supposed to learn. So it seems to me that a primary school teacher is going to need to know a lot about early childhood development and not much about, say, calculus. But as you point out, the older the child the more critical it is that the teacher has a very high level of subject matter expertise.

But that - and I'm not suggesting this is your argument - doesn't remove the need for a teacher to have a good understanding of (for example) learning theories and (again just an example) behaviour management (and an elective in tae kwon do ). But then I suppose it depends on the dominant philosophy of learning in the institution. I'm more comfortable with constructivism than I am with a more behaviourist approach to learning, although it's again self-evident that there's a place for each, it's just that when it comes to cognitive processing I favour a constructivist approach.

Ok, let's leave the little ones behind, concentrating on those over 11 years old. A good teacher really knows there stuff and is excited about it. Meaning when I teach the Explorers, I stand in awe of them, for better or worse. I pass this onto my students. While a secondary teacher, I happen to be in 6-8th grades, so the kids are younger. Some have learning disabilities, duh, I don't have a lot of classes in that regarding 'education', but have a bit of common sense. Sooo, I do provide opportunities for those that are not such great test takers to prove knowledge of material through other modes.

I also provide for different testing methods when an IEP calls for it. Today for example, I told two of my 8th graders to take the essay test tomorrow and do it 'open book.' They came to me this afternoon and asked if they could leave their texts in the hallway and 'slip out' with the test. No problem. I didn't need credentials for that. Anyone with a heart would get it.

 

[Diuretic]

Yes, enthusiasm is absolutely essential. If the teacher isn't in love with the subject then the student will pick up on it immediately. As I said, the older the student the more important the actual material. But how are students to learn? That was my point. But I have to say there's no mystery to it, the methods are well known and can be learned well enough.

In terms of assessment, that's the big bugbear I think. You chose to protect your student's self-esteem and that's something they'll remember as a life lesson. But when it comes to their summative assessment will you still be able to allow them to use open-text?

As a matter of interest here at our oldest university in the law faculty students take their examination for the LLB (Bachelor of Laws, an undergraduate degree here) open-text. The idea is that lawyers don't have to memorise huge reams of law but they do have to know how to research the materials and apply their knowledge to a given set of circumstances. It seems to me that's a fair enough approach, given it reflects the reality of legal practice.

 

[Annie]

Yes, enthusiasm is absolutely essential. If the teacher isn't in love with the subject then the student will pick up on it immediately. As I said, the older the student the more important the actual material. But how are students to learn? That was my point. But I have to say there's no mystery to it, the methods are well known and can be learned well enough.

In terms of assessment, that's the big bugbear I think. You chose to protect your student's self-esteem and that's something they'll remember as a life lesson. But when it comes to their summative assessment will you still be able to allow them to use open-text?

As a matter of interest here at our oldest university in the law faculty students take their examination for the LLB (Bachelor of Laws, an undergraduate degree here) open-text. The idea is that lawyers don't have to memorise huge reams of law but they do have to know how to research the materials and apply their knowledge to a given set of circumstances. It seems to me that's a fair enough approach, given it reflects the reality of legal practice.

Bottom line, I've yet to hear zip on 'getting something in their head' from education courses, though I've heard alot of getting it to them through connections from the fools outside of education. Guess what, I sit here with nearly 40+ hour of post grad ub ed curriculum, type 75 for those counting degrees, to tell you education discipline sucks. I'd much rather trust those with practical experience to teach my kids.

 

[jasendorf]

no, why should they be paid for learning life skills?
The proper thing is to take away tenure from teachers if they cant produce above average students.
As for the parents, a license to have children should be mandatory.

At least you're evenhanded about it...

 

[jasendorf]

I figured RSG would run away from this topic once I took away his push-button, strawman arguments from him...

Once again... I can't argue against nebulous, cause-I-said-it-happened cases. You want to provide specific cases... I'll be more than happy to comment on them. But, my guess is that the system righted itself over time, the process worked as it is designed, and now you're hiding behind "well, I heard about this thing kinda happening somewhere, sometime!"

If you have maybe a link or something to these "several examples" I can comment on those. I can only base whether I agree or disagree about something or some action on facts, of which you've provided... well, zero. In fact, I have less than facts, I have your above quote which amounts to nothing more than "some school, some where, doing some ***EVIL TOLERANCE THING!!!***" Maye you're able to make ethical decisions about such things with so little information; personally, I need more.

 

[Annie]

Yes, enthusiasm is absolutely essential. If the teacher isn't in love with the subject then the student will pick up on it immediately. As I said, the older the student the more important the actual material. But how are students to learn? That was my point. But I have to say there's no mystery to it, the methods are well known and can be learned well enough.

In terms of assessment, that's the big bugbear I think. You chose to protect your student's self-esteem and that's something they'll remember as a life lesson. But when it comes to their summative assessment will you still be able to allow them to use open-text?

As a matter of interest here at our oldest university in the law faculty students take their examination for the LLB (Bachelor of Laws, an undergraduate degree here) open-text. The idea is that lawyers don't have to memorise huge reams of law but they do have to know how to research the materials and apply their knowledge to a given set of circumstances. It seems to me that's a fair enough approach, given it reflects the reality of legal practice.

Reading this a bit more carefully, note that I said 'assessments with IEP', that means already identified learning disabilities. In this case, open book is within the scope, so yes. Mind you, their records reflect 'accomodations made for learning disabilities, meaning they are not 'at grade level' in performance.

 

[Annie]

At least you're evenhanded about it...

Give me an 'average student' with a reasonable homelife, they will be above average.

Today was my first 'drama club' meeting. Out of 56 middle schoolers, 20 signed up. I'm running it in trimesters, $90 for the first 2; $120 for the last, as that will have the performance, thus much more than 1hour per week. After and hour and 15 minutes, they didn't want to leave. I really have a very limited background for theater, but I do like the kids. They know it. They also know I'll do nothing to make them look bad.

 

[Diuretic]

Reading this a bit more carefully, note that I said 'assessments with IEP', that means already identified learning disabilities. In this case, open book is within the scope, so yes. Mind you, their records reflect 'accomodations made for learning disabilities, meaning they are not 'at grade level' in performance.

I don't have a problem with it, I know of one secondary school student who had a particular learning difficulty related to his primary school years when his parents (father was an officer in the air force here) had to keep moving every two years from state to state and overseas. He was given an accommodation from the school for extra reading time in formative and summative assessments.