LGP Education thread

[Pavel Bure]

Nepotism!!!!!

[count2infinity]

Nepotism!!!!!

are you watching boy meets world right now or is that just me?

[Pavel Bure]

Nepotism!!!!!

are you watching boy meets world right now or is that just me?

Just you, it was in reference to the guy getting hired that was the nephew of board members.

[MWB]

I'm thinking about going back to school to get a certificate/master's in secondary education, any suggestions as to what the best subject to get certified in? I know that it's already tough enough to get a teaching job and I don't want to make a mistake and get certified in a field that I won't get a job in. And if any of you have gone this route, how long does it usually take to complete a master's program?

I agree with c2i that something in the maths or sciences would be the way to go. Schools aren't going to stop funding either of those. However, it wouldn't be a bad idea to check job postings in your area to get an idea of what they are currently looking for. I don't have my masters, so I'm not sure how long the process is. Also, really make sure you're going into it with your eyes wide open.

[Rylan]

I couldn't see teaching science or math being enjoyable. Math especially. Though chemistry was my favorite class and I would make all my students read Napoleon's Buttons. But, I think those subjects could burn teachers out really really ridiculously quickly.

[MWB]

Those are my two favorite subjects to teach. Obviously, teaching 5th grade math and science is a completely different animal than secondary though. The kids are still really into science because of all the experiments and we get to do a wide variety.

[Rylan]

I can understand that. I am not knocking the subjects, just couldn't see doing it myself. It seemed like those teachers by the end of the year needed batteries recharged far more than those of the other subjects. Sample size was not big enough though for me to accurately project that.

[count2infinity]

Those are my two favorite subjects to teach. Obviously, teaching 5th grade math and science is a completely different animal than secondary though. The kids are still really into science because of all the experiments and we get to do a wide variety.

Believe me, they're still into the experiments at the high school level too, the problem is they just do the experiments, see the pretty colors and say, "hmmm...that's cool" and don't care to really know what's going on.

[King Sid the Great 87]

From a couple years ago, but still a relevant read:

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/01/opini ... html?_r=1&

Salary aspect:

In real terms, teachers’ salaries have declined for 30 years. The average starting salary is $39,000; the average ending salary — after 25 years in the profession — is $67,000. This prices teachers out of home ownership in 32 metropolitan areas, and makes raising a family on one salary near impossible. So how do teachers cope? Sixty-two percent work outside the classroom to make ends meet.

Possible solution:

The consulting firm McKinsey recently examined how we might attract and retain a talented teaching force. The study compared the treatment of teachers here and in the three countries that perform best on standardized tests: Finland, Singapore and South Korea.

Turns out these countries have an entirely different approach to the profession. First, the governments in these countries recruit top graduates to the profession. (We don’t.) In Finland and Singapore they pay for training. (We don’t.) In terms of purchasing power, South Korea pays teachers on average 250 percent of what we do.

The implication here is that in the United States the people that end up becoming teachers are not the same people that are identified has having the highest aptitude and potential to become a superior teacher.

If this is true and the course was ever reversed to recruit for teaching in a different manner, there would be a lot of current teachers upset about the increased competition crowding them out of jobs.

[shmenguin]

If this is true and the course was ever reversed to recruit for teaching in a different manner, there would be a lot of current teachers upset about the increased competition crowding them out of jobs.

that's already a very real thing, by the way

[the riddler]

I'm thinking about going back to school to get a certificate/master's in secondary education, any suggestions as to what the best subject to get certified in? I know that it's already tough enough to get a teaching job and I don't want to make a mistake and get certified in a field that I won't get a job in. And if any of you have gone this route, how long does it usually take to complete a master's program?

Math and science are usually the two in demand. To put it in perspective, the year that I got hired as a chemistry teacher, I was one of 6 that applied for the job (and one of only 2 that was actually certified. They hired a social studies teacher that year as well, there were over 100 people that applied and the person that got hired was the nephew of 2 or 3 board members which is likely the reason he was hired.

Thanks for the insight, I was interested in social studies but I have heard about the troubles people have with finding a job teaching it, which worries me.

[shmenguin]

If this is true and the course was ever reversed to recruit for teaching in a different manner, there would be a lot of current teachers upset about the increased competition crowding them out of jobs.

that's already a very real thing, by the way

well...a real thing in that competition for new jobs is very heavy. though "current teachers" aren't too worried about it since their jobs are typically quite protected.

[the riddler]

I'm thinking about going back to school to get a certificate/master's in secondary education, any suggestions as to what the best subject to get certified in? I know that it's already tough enough to get a teaching job and I don't want to make a mistake and get certified in a field that I won't get a job in. And if any of you have gone this route, how long does it usually take to complete a master's program?

I agree with c2i that something in the maths or sciences would be the way to go. Schools aren't going to stop funding either of those. However, it wouldn't be a bad idea to check job postings in your area to get an idea of what they are currently looking for. I don't have my masters, so I'm not sure how long the process is. Also, really make sure you're going into it with your eyes wide open.

I'm going to do an emergency sub program to see first if this is something I want to do. And also it will allow me to sub at any level which hopefully gives me an idea of the area I want to get into. But yea, I'm hearing from most people now that Math or Science are the best way to go.

[count2infinity]

Math or Science are the best way to go.

[MWB]

I'm thinking about going back to school to get a certificate/master's in secondary education, any suggestions as to what the best subject to get certified in? I know that it's already tough enough to get a teaching job and I don't want to make a mistake and get certified in a field that I won't get a job in. And if any of you have gone this route, how long does it usually take to complete a master's program?

I agree with c2i that something in the maths or sciences would be the way to go. Schools aren't going to stop funding either of those. However, it wouldn't be a bad idea to check job postings in your area to get an idea of what they are currently looking for. I don't have my masters, so I'm not sure how long the process is. Also, really make sure you're going into it with your eyes wide open.

I'm going to do an emergency sub program to see first if this is something I want to do. And also it will allow me to sub at any level which hopefully gives me an idea of the area I want to get into. But yea, I'm hearing from most people now that Math or Science are the best way to go.

That's a great idea, especially if you can get a long-term sub job. That would give you a good idea of what you'll face in terms of kids, parents, administration, and paperwork.

[MWB]

The implication here is that in the United States the people that end up becoming teachers are not the same people that are identified has having the highest aptitude and potential to become a superior teacher.

If this is true and the course was ever reversed to recruit for teaching in a different manner, there would be a lot of current teachers upset about the increased competition crowding them out of jobs.

There is not process in place that identifies who would have the highest aptitude for teaching, so your first point doesn't really make sense.

I can only speak for myself and the teachers I know, but I would welcome this process. I'm confident that I'm a good teacher, and if the increase in competition meant a better overall teaching profession, I'm all for it. But that also is not a short term solution, and leaders need to stop thinking about short term. This would be a long-term, attitude changing solution. The attitudes of all parties, including teachers, would need to change.

[King Sid the Great 87]

The implication here is that in the United States the people that end up becoming teachers are not the same people that are identified has having the highest aptitude and potential to become a superior teacher.

If this is true and the course was ever reversed to recruit for teaching in a different manner, there would be a lot of current teachers upset about the increased competition crowding them out of jobs.

There is not process in place that identifies who would have the highest aptitude for teaching, so your first point doesn't really make sense.

Ok, I tried to be soft about it. I'll rephrase. The comment was implying that in the the United States, teaching is not a profession that the smartest students (judged by grades, which while not always accurate is a great proxy) gravitate to. That's probably a true statement. I would guess that if a study was done on where the top 10% of graduating high school classes end up, very few would be in education.

I know that grades in school are not directly correlated to performance at work, but it is as good a metric as one can use to make such a prediction.

[count2infinity]

King Sid,

You've pointed out all the problems you see with the education system and seem to very often take shots at teachers and how it's their fault that the education system is in its current state. What would you suggest to do to fix it? How do you attract top level brains to come to education? How do you fix problems in inner cities to make education more appealing and make it a matter of importance? How do you fix nepotism in many school districts?

[MWB]

The implication here is that in the United States the people that end up becoming teachers are not the same people that are identified has having the highest aptitude and potential to become a superior teacher.

If this is true and the course was ever reversed to recruit for teaching in a different manner, there would be a lot of current teachers upset about the increased competition crowding them out of jobs.

There is not process in place that identifies who would have the highest aptitude for teaching, so your first point doesn't really make sense.

Ok, I tried to be soft about it. I'll rephrase. The comment was implying that in the the United States, teaching is not a profession that the smartest students (judged by grades, which while not always accurate is a great proxy) gravitate to. That's probably a true statement. I would guess that if a study was done on where the top 10% of graduating high school classes end up, very few would be in education.

I know that grades in school are not directly correlated to performance at work, but it is as good a metric as one can use to make such a prediction.

My guess is that it would be wide spread. You get teachers who range from the mediocre to the smartest in their classes. A certain type of person wants to get into teaching, and it isn't someone motivated by money. That is not a negative towards anyone who is motivated by money or who doesn't care to get into teaching. If teaching was a higher paying job, more of the smart ones who don't consider education would gravitate there.

[Rylan]

The implication here is that in the United States the people that end up becoming teachers are not the same people that are identified has having the highest aptitude and potential to become a superior teacher.

If this is true and the course was ever reversed to recruit for teaching in a different manner, there would be a lot of current teachers upset about the increased competition crowding them out of jobs.

There is not process in place that identifies who would have the highest aptitude for teaching, so your first point doesn't really make sense.

Ok, I tried to be soft about it. I'll rephrase. The comment was implying that in the the United States, teaching is not a profession that the smartest students (judged by grades, which while not always accurate is a great proxy) gravitate to. That's probably a true statement. I would guess that if a study was done on where the top 10% of graduating high school classes end up, very few would be in education.

I know that grades in school are not directly correlated to performance at work, but it is as good a metric as one can use to make such a prediction.

My guess is that it would be wide spread. You get teachers who range from the mediocre to the smartest in their classes. A certain type of person wants to get into teaching, and it isn't someone motivated by money. That is not a negative towards anyone who is motivated by money or who doesn't care to get into teaching. If teaching was a higher paying job, more of the smart ones who don't consider education would gravitate there.

Bingo. There is little incentive to get into teaching outside of a person's initial desire to get into teaching.

[pittsoccer33]

I know we spend more money per child on education than any other country. And if we aren't actually #1 anymore it is very close. So where is that money going? Why are salaries so low?

Growing up I wanted to teach - either music or history. I think part of that stems from the fact that as I child I wasn't exposed to very many professions. But part of it is that I personally love learning. I love reading. And I love relating the things I know. Many people have told me I'd make a great teacher - I do a thing on bring your brat to work day for the kids each year that seems to get a good response. If I hit the lottery I'd move to DC and become a tour guide at the Smithsonian.

1) No control over the curriculum. If I was teaching American history I would want to cover what I think is important and construct the entire thing as a narrative story. I think it would be more engaging to students but no administrator would ever ok it.

2) Increasingly little support from parents. I wouldn't want any communication from parents unless they were asking me what more THEY could do. When I get my hair cut I trust the stylist. When my car needs new brakes I trust the mechanic. Why do these self absorbed jackwagons think teachers deserve any less?

3) I am morally opposed to public sector unions. When a factory worker strikes, they are attacking the business owner and trying to force his hand. When government unions strike they are attacking their neighbors. Your neighbor isn't getting a raise this year because the economy sucks. If he isn't making more money he isn't paying as much in taxes. How can you demand a raise just because it is in a salary schedule when the pie isn't growing to pay it? Not joining the union would be a surefire way to derail your career.

4) The salary. Unless things have really changed you are given raises based on years of experience and not solely on merit. If you are the highest rated teacher by students, parents, and administrator observations you should make the most money.

Why do we need so many school districts in Allegheny county? Why do we actually need school districts at all? Have the state collect the taxes at the state level and run the schools from there. Give counties some leeway in administration to localize things. Why are the citizens of PA paying thousands of superintendents?

[count2infinity]

I know we spend more money per child on education than any other country. And if we aren't actually #1 anymore it is very close. So where is that money going? Why are salaries so low?

The money doesn't go to teachers. I'd be willing to be we spend way more money per child than any other country in the world on standardized testing them.

[shmenguin]

If you are the highest rated teacher by students, parents, and administrator observations you should make the most money.

students and parents should have no influence on how much money a teacher makes.

[MWB]

1) No control over the curriculum. If I was teaching American history I would want to cover what I think is important and construct the entire thing as a narrative story. I think it would be more engaging to students but no administrator would ever ok it.

You are right, you'd have very little control over curriculum. However, in a lot of places you would have control over how you teach it. one of the misconceptions about Common Core is that teachers don't have autonomy over how they teach. Any good principal will let you take the material and do what you want with it. Often, that is a necessity because many schools aren't getting any materials to cover the new curriculum.

2) Increasingly little support from parents. I wouldn't want any communication from parents unless they were asking me what more THEY could do. When I get my hair cut I trust the stylist. When my car needs new brakes I trust the mechanic. Why do these self absorbed jackwagons think teachers deserve any less?

This is such an important point, and I appreciate you making it. So many people think that they can teach and it is so easy. Any teacher worth his/her salt works hard to learn about how to best reach all students, and continually updates that knowledge. Teachers are specialists.

3) I am morally opposed to public sector unions. When a factory worker strikes, they are attacking the business owner and trying to force his hand. When government unions strike they are attacking their neighbors. Your neighbor isn't getting a raise this year because the economy sucks. If he isn't making more money he isn't paying as much in taxes. How can you demand a raise just because it is in a salary schedule when the pie isn't growing to pay it? Not joining the union would be a surefire way to derail your career.

I agree with a lot of what you say. However, when districts are choosing to spend money on testing materials, testing tutors, vouchers, and TFA, I have a problem with not getting an increase in my pay.

4) The salary. Unless things have really changed you are given raises based on years of experience and not solely on merit. If you are the highest rated teacher by students, parents, and administrator observations you should make the most money.

Things are moving towards merit pay. Unfortunately, it has been shown repeatedly that merit pay is not effective. Teaching is a very collaborative profession, and a profession that is very hard to evaluate because there are so many variable. I agree, proper evaluations would be the best, but teachers will be evaluated on test scores instead.

[pittsoccer33]

I know we spend more money per child on education than any other country. And if we aren't actually #1 anymore it is very close. So where is that money going? Why are salaries so low?

The money doesn't go to teachers. I'd be willing to be we spend way more money per child than any other country in the world on standardized testing them.

Well, why are we doing that? Every teacher says they're awful. The NEA is the largest union in the country by a longshot which would make them one of the largest lobbying forces, both in terms of boots on the ground membership and monetary spending ability.