Recruiting Professionals to become teachers

[rcon]

TFA should be an guide

I remember reading this thinking how awesome it sounded, but more reading has made me question it more.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142 ... carousel_1

A 2008 Urban Institute study found that “On average, high school students taught by TFA corps members performed significantly better on state-required end-of-course exams, especially in math and science, than peers taught by far more experienced instructors. The TFA teachers’ effect on student achievement in core classroom subjects was nearly three times the effect of teachers with three or more years of experience.” A new study from the University of North Carolina found that middle school math students taught by TFA teachers received the equivalent of an extra half-year of learning.
…
Oddly, the other obstacle is finding districts that will take the teachers. Why wouldn’t any superintendent trip over himself to hire young people with these qualifications?

The answer lies in the opposition to TFA by teachers unions and education schools. Though Ms. Kopp attributes any hard feelings to “some misunderstanding about the way Teach for America works,” it is clear what the union interests are. If TFA corps members can do a better job in two years than many longtime veterans, what do public-school systems need with job protections like tenure? And if they can do it without education school courses, why do we need those institutions?

im not sure what pillows and naps have to do with maths or whatever, but if it was me, i would be learning form the teachers on how to teach, and i think i could give my maths and science knowledge to them.

lol - the ring-in professionals learning to teach were getting the kids to bring in pillows as they thought napping would be good for learning.

[bennymacca]

lol - the ring-in professionals learning to teach were getting the kids to bring in pillows as they thought napping would be good for learning.

weird.


i think the main opposition will come from teachers who will feel threatened by people coming in from the outside.

but in essence, the question will be

which one is better

a highly motivated, skilled teacher that has been working for 15 years
a highly motivated, skilled professional, who had 5 years experience in the field and now has 10 years of teaching experience.


i would say that latter would be significantly better, and its not even close.

BUT

how long would it take to get the professionals up to speed?

my gut feeling would be at least 5 years of teaching experience before their greater knowledge will become valuable.

[Brett Kay]

lol - the ring-in professionals learning to teach were getting the kids to bring in pillows as they thought napping would be good for learning.

weird.


i think the main opposition will come from teachers who will feel threatened by people coming in from the outside.

but in essence, the question will be

which one is better

a highly motivated, skilled teacher that has been working for 15 years
a highly motivated, skilled professional, who had 5 years experience in the field and now has 10 years of teaching experience.


i would say that latter would be significantly better, and its not even close.

BUT

how long would it take to get the professionals up to speed?

my gut feeling would be at least 5 years of teaching experience before their greater knowledge will become valuable.

I think a lot of the professionals experience can be translated into the classroom.

Especially in Maths. Showing real world examples about what you need such and such for in engineering, mechanics e.t.c.

In science, reproducing experiments that lead to a certain eureka moment in history. Oil drops through electric fields.

I dont think that would be a huge opposition from teachers. Purely from the understaffed/stressed, overworked position.

[Brett Kay]

Think the big issues would be professionals that don't act professional in a teaching environment.

I definitely would put up my hand first in saying a thats what she said comment in the classroom. Or making inappropriate remarks to questions.

Not to mention i would be pulling pranks as well. Keep the kids on there toes.

[bennymacca]

Especially in Maths. Showing real world examples about what you need such and such for in engineering, mechanics e.t.c.

from my own experience, when i was studying maths at high school, we learned complex numbers. at the time, i thought they were a bit abstract, and when i asked the teachers what they were used for, their responses were pretty vague.

then i get to university, and they are literally the most important mathematical concept in the whole of electrical engineering, a lot of mechanical engineering, a lot of physics. it is basically impossible to do any sort of professional engineering or physics job without using them (either directly or indirectly as applications of the theory, even if you dont use the theory yourself)

i think sometimes the reasons get lost on teachers, especially those that are not maths teachers by trade and have the extremely tough job of having to learn it all on the fly.

Think the big issues would be professionals that don't act professional in a teaching environment.

I definitely would put up my hand first in saying a thats what she said comment in the classroom. Or making inappropriate remarks to questions.

Not to mention i would be pulling pranks as well. Keep the kids on there toes.

LOL

[rcon]

For once i think I'm with the unions - children are that most valuable asset thing we have, surely we shouldn't sell them short with the "teaching" part of teaching. Sure, your more motivated and engaged students (likely to be higher socio-economic areas) will lap it up, but they form a minority in the classroom. How will a professional engineer go when faced with 5 disruptive students in a class of 20? How does that bring down the overall standard of learning?

[bennymacca]

For once i think I'm with the unions - children are that most valuable asset thing we have, surely we shouldn't sell them short with the "teaching" part of teaching. Sure, your more motivated and engaged students (likely to be higher socio-economic areas) will lap it up, but they form a minority in the classroom. How will a professional engineer go when faced with 5 disruptive students in a class of 20? How does that bring down the overall standard of learning?

i might be wrong here, but in general, professionals wont' be brought in to teach year 8 english, but more like year 11 and 12 maths and science. so the behaviour management wont me as much of an issue i dont think

but you are right though, that is where the problem lies. but at present you can do a 1 year diploma as well as practicals. this isn't much different to an intensive program and on the job training.

the hard bit will be in the first couple of years - obviously you can't throw someone in the deep end with no experience in behaviour management.

i could see these professionals, for the first year at least, just sitting in on classes and helping out where possible.

maybe 1 professional will act as a tutor for 5 different maths classes, each getting 1 day a week of effort. or maybe they piggy back a teacher full time to learn the ropes. maybe its 2 years or more before they get a class to themselves.

things like behaviour management are small issues imho - they can be worked out with proper planning.

[gundog]

How will a professional engineer go when faced with 5 disruptive students in a class of 20? How does that bring down the overall standard of learning?

Neither Teacher or Professional can do anything about a disruptive student, because of the piss weak parents in the past took disipline out of the teachers hands and allow kids to run their agenda's with no regard for those that want to learn, I hate to say but disipline metered out by teachers, Senior Master or Head Master in the form of corporal punishment didn't hurt us mentally, we may have had a sore arse or hand for short time.

I may be wrong but I think someone who has had life experiance would make a better instructor than an textbook and theory acadamic, and perhaps it was my maths teacher that failed to show the revelence of maths in the real world, it wasn't untill I left school that I found the practical use of maths in real situations became easy. But then again log books and slide rulers confused many.

As an employer many kids leave school not prepared to enter the workforce, because their basic 3 R's are somewhat deficient, they maybe good with a calculator and a computor, and this has even disintergrated even futher with text talk.

[maccatak11]

Excellent post rcon. This was going to be my point.

Now i am still an inexperienced teacher (heading into my fourth year of teaching now) but i can tell you that the 'content' of a particular subject is secondary to the enormously high 'people' skills that are needed to be a successful teacher.

Hell, lots of teachers don't have these skills even after doing a degree in teaching. Traditional views of education have an 'expert' up the front of the classroom who will impart all of their knowledge into the empty brains of their students.

But the fact is, that even a professional that has been working in his or her field for a number of years does not know it all. Now this will sound wanky but its true, our education system is now about teaching kids how to learn. Its my belief that this point requires a completely different skill set to simply knowing a lot about maths/science/whatever.

Now, that does not mean that a professional in a certain field won't make a good teacher, some could do the job fantastically well, its just that expert knowledge does not make an expert teacher.

When i first read that article about teachers who will do a eight week course (or whatever) and become teacher i nearly did my chops. You simple cannot learn the required skills in that time that are needed for such a complex profession as teaching.

As rcon said, an intensive course in such a short period of time cannot possibly prepare someone for dealing with the 5 disruptive kids, the student at the front with Aspergers, the three students on NEP's (Negotiated Education Plan's) and the 8 kids who just can't be bothered right now, LET ALONE learning about the associated SACE and SACSA frameworks, how to write reports, how to deal with parents etc etc.

And notice i haven't even mentioned anything about the theory of actually how to teach? How do you explain something in 8 different ways so the student will finally get it? How do you motivate, challenge and inspire the students to sit through your double maths lesson when all they want to do is go and smoke bongs?

If teachers with experience and a full degree behind them find these challenges in every day, then i do feel sorry for other professionals who might join the field of teaching.

Having said all of that, the part that the article mentioned about '2 years of mentoring' before joining as a full teacher was slightly encouraging. I did an 18 month Bachelor of Education at UniSA (which was an intensive accelerated course btw - normally 2 years) after i completed a degree in Applied Science (Human Movement). The best thing about the course at UniSA (which puts it head and shoulders above the other uni's) was the amount of opportunities for practicum experiences.

At UniSA, and with our Health and PE major, we were given a small class of year 7 students to teach one lesson per week for 6 weeks after 4 WEEKS being in the degree. We had 12 weeks of official practicum within our 18 month course - one prac at the end of each semester.

Although i did an intensive graduate entry degree, i see student teachers who are doing their first prac in their third year of a four year degree; when the things you learn on prac FAR outweigh the things you learn in a lecture theatre. Having said that, some of the concepts and theories learned in the classroom are incredibly important.

With careful selection of candidates who want to switch professions in the first place, and even more careful selection of mentor teachers who could guide these people through the years of their 'mentorship' then it could probably work, but i still dont see 6-8 weeks as being long enough in a classroom.

A better system would be to study teaching almost as a trade. Three days a week in the lecture room at uni, followed by two days a week at a school performing observation and taking some lessons etc, building up to a block of up to a term of straight teaching with a mentor teacher. This could happen over two years, so the amount of time in a school is similar, but the maount of time in a lecture theatre if much higher. Lets face it, many teachers, especially of the older generation simply would not know all of the latest concepts, theories and methodologies in the latest views on education.

Having had the opportunity to be a 'mentor' to a few student teachers already in my career, although the techniques i would be able to pass on in a classroom sense would be very valuable, the in-depth theories regarding educational psychology and the like are already escaping me.

If you were to ask me what was better as a middle school maths/science teacher:
a) a fantastic teacher who can set great routines and establish excellent relationships with the students, who knows NOTHING about university science, but who's knowledge of the relevant curriculum is sound

b) an expert whose in-depth knowledge at a high end level is outstanding, and they could answer any question thrown at them, but lacked many of the above 'general' teaching skills

I would take the first person EVERY time and its not even close.

I also don't believe that teachers will be intimidated by a more 'knowledgeable' person joining them as a colleague. If the correct people are chosen for this program (both prospective teachers and mentors) then the prospective teacher will be just as keen to learn from his/her new colleagues as the current teachers will be to learn from them. To say that teachers might be intimidated from an 'expert' joining them is basically saying that teachers were below the professional status of the 'expert; in the first place, which i believe to be certainly untrue. As i have, actual experience in teaching is much much more important than experience in a particular field in my opinion.

At the end of the day, its not overall knowledge of science in general that will ensure success, but knowledge of the relevant syllabus set out in the SACSA framework (tells us what to teach at what year). If you know this, and your general teaching skills are fantastic, then this is what translates into successful outcomes for the students.

I can see some benefit perhaps at a senior school level (year 11-12) for 'experts' who wont have to deal as much with things like behaviour management or learning difficulties, as they are directly preparing students for university and careers in those particular fields. In the few (5-6) schools that i have been involved in, there have been a few very senior experienced knowledgeable maths/science teachers, but there are more needed in this area. However, its definitely middle school maths/science where there is an even greater shortage.

Personally, i teach PE, as well as junior maths and science at a high school level (maths applications up to year 11 and science to year 9) and there has been almost no times that i can think of where i have felt 'out of my depth' in terms of my knowledge of content. There are plenty of experts in my school and plenty of resources that i can access to assist in any area that i might need.

In short, i think this idea has been come about through the lens of a traditional view of education, and its debatable whether this will actually increase the standard of maths/science teaching, or whether it will simply increase the numbers of maths/science teachers. But, either option is better than the status quo at the present time in my belief.

[666HARPS666]

I might be wrong but i'm pretty sure it is called MATH. Just like a RULER is in charge of a Kingdom , & a RULE is a measurement

lol maths are two Mathews in a room