Funny political pictures

[piercehawkeye45]

I agree that is a problem but I would think that is a reaction to larger issues?

One reason teachers will never be highly paid or respected in our societies is that we value economic output over investment. We want the "best" financial bankers, doctors, and engineers, not teachers. Teachers don't immediately produce anything. However, I don't feel this the main reason. I feel people push all their frustrations of our educational systems on teachers (justified or not) since they are easiest to blame. A better functioning educational system would lead to more respected teachers.

This also brings up the question of whether our educational system is bad because our best potential teachers don't become teachers? While better teachers could do a much better job at teaching, even under the current constraining conditions, I think culture is a bigger problem. In a better culture, I believe our current teachers could become much more efficient.

[tw]

Originally Posted by piercehawkeye45

One reason teachers will never be highly paid or respected in our societies is that we value economic output over investment.

So what chanaged? The same thing that changed even in the Bell Labs. For example, why do we have communication satellites (ie Telstar), transistors, fiber optics, lasers, digital communication, mobile phones, the C programming language and its many variants, talking machines, fundamental knowledge of the entire universe, and Unix (now called Linux)? In every case, nobody in the Labs was concerned with results. Therefore the results were massive.

Why did he create the Unix operating system? Because he wanted to play computer chess. Anyone with a business school mentality would have said no. Anyone who understands innovation knows why business school concepts stifle innovation and productivity.

Largest reason for quitting teachers is no satisfaction. Not due to class sized or other popular speculation Part is directly traceable to management who only permits what they regard as results. What is the trophy for this? George Jr's "More Children Left Behind" laws. Laws that, for example, have caused many schools to cut back on science. A perfect example of what any business school graduate would think was good. And yes, George Jr was a business school graduate.

Currently, only something like 25% of all teachers in middle school math and science have math and science training. That's correct. Most teachers were first learning that math or science from the text book. Even worse, the 25% that do have math and science training come from the lowest rated schools.

No problem. That cuts costs. On spread sheets, things such as knowledge, background, and purpose cannot be measured. And again, the "No child left behind laws" have simply forced schools to spend more money on reading and math. But then science only confuses us with realities such as global warming and quantum physics. We don't need to waste money on things that cannot be measured and that are confusing.

Some states do rate highly on the world scale including MN and MA.

We all saw the destruction of the Bell Labs when work was limited to things that could only have obvious results. Not in fundamental research. Not in learning things that management types could not understand. And definitely, we do not want researchers wasting time developing computer chess.

Who promoted Carly Fiorina? The same management that destroyed innovation in the Labs. Those same types now run or attack our education systems that once worked so much better.

Respect has something to do with it. After all, respect and the resulting job satisfaction is not found on spread sheets. Especially when it takes ten years to measure results. How curious. Management in industries that measure results annually also destroyed those companies. So we will fix the system by measuring education by the same spread sheet mentality? Respect is not important. It cannot be measured. So it is not important.

To add to BigV's point - something liek 40% of American kids now life in homes defined as poverty. Trickle down economics worked real good - to enrich those who do not innovate and do not have kids.

[glatt]

Originally Posted by tw

Currently, only something like 25% of all teachers in middle school math and science have math and science training. That's correct. Most teachers were first learning that math or science from the text book. Even worse, the 25% that do have math and science training come from the lowest rated schools.

What does "training" mean?

If my kid is in middle school and is being taught algebra, I want the teacher to understand algebra really well. I don't care much if the teacher has a detailed understanding of calculus. The teacher doesn't need a doctorate in mathematics to teach algebra. In fact, if a teacher has an advanced degree in mathematics, I'd be worried that they would have their head in the clouds and would have a hard time getting down on the same level as the kids to really get them excited about algebra.

If you're saying that middle school math teachers don't even know algebra, then I would share your horror of the situation, but if a middle school teacher doesn't know calculus, then I don't really care.

[tw]

Originally Posted by glatt

If my kid is in middle school and is being taught algebra, I want the teacher to understand algebra really well.

If a teacher has no training in basic calculus or linear algebra, then he has no concept of why anything in algebra is important. Cannot stress what is significant. And probably has so little algebra experience as to not solve many of those algebra problems without the answer book. I could not think of a teacher most likely to make math boring, rote, and unnecessary. That is potentially about 75% of middle school math teachers.

The same teacher who hated math as a kid will inspire his student to excel in math? Hardly. I know almost no kids today taking math or science in college.

But again, curious are better science and math results from students in MA and MN.

[xoxoxoBruce]

Speaking of MA...

Being an underclassman will be a bit cooler this year at Sandwich High School, where all freshmen and sophomores will be issued iPads
~snip~
The school district has purchased 450 iPad 3s at $550 apiece for all the freshmen and sophomores and several staff members, Sandwich Superintendent Richard Canfield said.
~snip~
"This is the technology generation," Canfield said. "And their world of work will be driven so much by technology. So we saw this an opportunity."

Nationally, schools are swooping in to buy iPads because of the technological exposure it gives students, but also because buying a single textbook costs close to $100, Canfield said

A hundred dollars? I hope that's for the whole class.

more

[Happy Monkey]

Originally Posted by xoxoxoBruce

A hundred dollars? I hope that's for the whole class.

I had one of my flickr photos used in a textbook, and asked for a copy of the book as payment. I got paid well!


I graduated college almost 15 years ago. Back then I had one or two textbooks that broke the $100 mark. That's probably more common now.

Though I wouldn't think that middle/high school texts would be that expensive, even now.

[piercehawkeye45]

Originally Posted by tw

So what chanaged? The same thing that changed even in the Bell Labs. For example, why do we have communication satellites (ie Telstar), transistors, fiber optics, lasers, digital communication, mobile phones, the C programming language and its many variants, talking machines, fundamental knowledge of the entire universe, and Unix (now called Linux)? In every case, nobody in the Labs was concerned with results. Therefore the results were massive.

You are hitting a different point than what I was getting at but I agree.

American schools need to dump the idea that standardized tests mean anything. We should still take them, to see what schools are failing at teaching basic skills, but realize that good test scores don't have any applicability to the working world.

The US economy is moving away from menial tasks so therefore it is even more important to produce confident, innovative students. Teaching to standardized tests does the opposite. That is why many companies don't want to hire the 4.0 Chinese student (to be stereotypical). They are insanely good at problems they have been taught to solve but tend to choke up on problems that don't have a right or wrong answer.

Originally Posted by DanaC

That may be a factor in their success. Also a factor is, I think, the level of respect and cultural capital held by teachers in those countries. Teachers in our two cultures are not respected. They are paid very low when the level of education and qualification are taken into account. They appear in popular culture on a demonised and scapegoated manner and are the butt of derisive humour and mistrust.

We don't actually value schooling in its own right and teaching at anything below degree level is denigrated as crowd control or babysitting.

Did I miss your point?