s/o: adequate course of study for education majors

[TechWife]

I was reading this thread on grade inflation in university education departments. From what i can recall my college classmates studying, it seems to me that the subject matter that elementary education majors study is not really all that demanding. Looking at some of the other posts in that thread, many thought that the bar was too low in the education classes that they were exposed to (papers that would have received a C in another dept. were graded with A in the education department, for example).

 

So, here's my question: What education or education related subjects and/or topics do you think an aspiring teacher should study at the undergraduate level in order to prepare for a career in teaching young students (K-50)?

 

I have some ideas, but I'd like to see the conversation get started first, if you don't mind.

[Renee in NC]

For elementary teachers, I would like to see much less in the way of education courses and much more in the way of actual content courses. I just looked up the coursework at the college I went to and the requirements are:

 

English Comp (2)

English Lit (2)

Foreign Lang (through Int. I)

American Govt

Western Civ (2)

Sociology

College Algebra/Trig

Psychology

Lab Sciences (2)

 

Then a whole slew of education courses. I wish they would require a greater breadth of courses (economics, statistics, geography, more science, US History, etc.), specialization in at least one area, and fewer education courses.

 

ETA: In the other thread, someone pointed out that secondary certification is different in that the person is required to major in their subject, which should be plenty.

[Karen in CO]

I don't think they should take education classes until they get to graduate school. I'd love to see elementary math taught by math majors and elementary science taught by science majors then everything else taught by people who majored in classical studies.

 

btw - my brother teaches high school math and my sil has a phD in secondary education. We've had a few family discussions on this topic.

:)

[Crimson Wife]

For an elementary teacher, I'd like to see:

 

-the Singapore math teacher training

-Barton or Wilson training for teaching reading

-a rigorous English grammar course

-a high-quality English composition course

-something akin to Conceptual Physics and Conceptual Chemistry, plus the basic biology core.

-a good U.S. history survey class and a good world history survey class

-a class on teaching gifted students. Most credentials require a course on teaching special ed students but few ed schools even offer any electives on GATE.

[myfunnybunch]

I don't think they should take education classes until they get to graduate school. I'd love to see elementary math taught by math majors and elementary science taught by science majors then everything else taught by people who majored in classical studies.

 

This, almost exactly, is what I would change. I'd like to see teachers with a good solid basic foundation in the subjects they plan to teach--what to teach--before they start taking courses on how to teach. And I have been saying for years that even at the elementary level, math and science should be taught by people with math or science degrees. (Go figure.)

 

Cat

[jenL]

Aside from learning extensively about the subjects needing to be taught, teachers need to also learn how to implement these subjects. Methodology classes need to be meatier, allowing students in the ed program to encounter real-life situations that would affect the implementation of the subject matter (ie. inclusion & differentiated instruction) rather than just learn the theory behind these two facets of life in the classroom and the making up of "fun" lesson plans.

 

Teachers also need to have a hardcore class on behavioral management. Not just fluff, but realistic strategies and ways to implement those strategies. I think classes in abnormal behavior and child development are a must as well as covering law in education. Ed majors also need to be IN the classroom far before the final internship to really see how things work. This includes meeting with guidance counselors, special ed staff, and administration as part of class requirements.

 

When I was teaching, I was appalled at some of the newer teachers being hired who did not have to take anything but fluffy methodology courses. Everything was just a theory here, a theory there vs. actually getting into the classroom beforehand and facing the every day challenges that a teacher faced. One of my co-workers earned her Masters in Teaching English at a different school than I did, but her knowledge of literature was atrocious! She had never heard of or read some of the well-known classics nor did she know how to do literature analysis, but she was "qualified" to teach grades 6-12. She said she had also never been taught how to manage behavior in the classroom! No wonder teachers quit within the first 3 years of earning their certification.

 

It does not surprise me in the least as to the state of the education system now with all the awful ed programs that exist. Reason #967 as to why I have stepped out of the classroom and become a homeschooling mom.

 

I'll step down from my soapbox now.

Edited August 25, 2011 by jenL

[FO4UR]

Teachers should be experts in their field 1st, teachers 2nd.

 

K-3 teachers should be experts in reading instruction and early math, and be trained to spot & remediate LD's. 4th and up, kids should see a scientist for science, an historian for history, a mathematician for math, etc....

 

All teachers should be well-versed in child development. Beyond that, I agree that the rest of the Ed classes are fodder/fluff/not relevant to anything in the real world. Most of those things would be better done concurrently with student teaching.

 

The day I found Charlotte Mason, I knew I was robbed. I had never heard her name in my years in the Ed dept in college...not even in Phil of Ed class.:001_huh: The scope of those classes were so narrow...so anemic...

[unsinkable]

Intro to Laminating

Advanced Lamination

[Skadi]

My best friend is one semester away from graduating as an elementary education major. The stories he's told me are truly frightening. No one is more aware of how incompetent most teachers are than he is because of this experience -- but he is still going to send his kids to public school. I don't get it.

 

Anyway, we can't demand better teachers until we pay them a better wage. Just as important as the new requirements, I would (being Queen of the World and all) rearrange the school budget so that teacher's salaries increased to about $100,000 per year and the amount spent on infrastructure, new books every year, laptops, etc. was severely cut. I'd also give a huge boost to gifted programs, which are being severely underfunded at present, so that the levels of instruction would be narrowed and more defined (LD, regular, gifted).

 

Early Education teachers would focus on child development, early reading instruction, etc. I would be okay with Early Education (K-3) only having a bachelor's degree.

 

Everyone else would have at least a Master's Degree. Their undergraduate would be their focus (English, history, biology, etc.) and their Master's would be in Education. Their Master's would be equal parts theory and apprenticeship.

 

I'd also try to break away from the dated model of K-12 that insists children learn best when in a sterile environment. Classes would be held outside as often as possible. There would be 20 minute recesses (all the way through high school) at least three times a day. There would be a lot more free reading time (schools are moving more and more toward this trend, thankfully). I guess I should stop now, because the laundry list of things I would change is quite long. :P

[Sandy in Indy]

Elementary teachers should be divided into two levels...1-3 and 4-6. Instruction in the early grades is much different than in the upper elementary.

 

I'm the product of one of "those" ele ed programs. I learned classroom management; I learned lots of theory; theoretically I learned how to teach reading and math. The first thing my supervising teacher said when I walked in for student-teaching was, "Forget everything they've taught you. I'll really teach you about teaching." Sadly, she was right. I learned more in those few weeks than in the other 3 years.

[Mama Geek]

This, almost exactly, is what I would change. I'd like to see teachers with a good solid basic foundation in the subjects they plan to teach--what to teach--before they start taking courses on how to teach. And I have been saying for years that even at the elementary level, math and science should be taught by people with math or science degrees. (Go figure.)

 

Cat

 

Why would you need to know Calculus, Differential Equations, Linear Algebra, Partial Differential Equations and a whole bunch of stuff that engineering and physics majors don't need to know to teach how to add, subtract, do decimals, fractions, and Algebra?

[DawnM]

This was how it worked in CA.

 

I got my undergrad in something completely unrelated to Education and then actually did 3 grad programs, although the teaching credential didn't result in an MA, the other two did (TESOL and School Counseling).

 

Dawn

 

I don't think they should take education classes until they get to graduate school. I'd love to see elementary math taught by math majors and elementary science taught by science majors then everything else taught by people who majored in classical studies.

 

btw - my brother teaches high school math and my sil has a phD in secondary education. We've had a few family discussions on this topic.

:)

[DawnM]

I can't comment too much on Elem. Education because I never did Elem. Education. In CA an Elem. Ed. student first got an undergrad degree in Liberal Arts and then got a credential in grad school.

 

Since I was Secondary Ed. I had to have a degree or the equivelent (certain number of courses in the field) in undergrad and then the credential program in grad school.

 

I have never had math above Geometry. I will admit it. I was told I didn't need it so I didn't take it!

 

Dawn

[Dana]

Why would you need to know Calculus, Differential Equations, Linear Algebra, Partial Differential Equations and a whole bunch of stuff that engineering and physics majors don't need to know to teach how to add, subtract, do decimals, fractions, and Algebra?

 

I'd argue that because then you know where the basic math will be useful if students continue on with math. At a math meet, I heard someone from the state dept of education say she'd observed a teacher who told her students not to worry about the distributive property "because you can just use order of operations". I was appalled and asked what the observer had done. She said she asked about 3(x+2) (something with a variable) and the teacher said, "Oh, I hadn't thought of that!"

 

Someone who took calculus and beyond wouldn't (shouldn't) have said that the distributive property isn't important.

 

Linear algebra is one of the clear places where you see that not everything is commutative (let's hear it for matrix multiplication).

 

If you don't have teachers who really know their subject, in some cases they do active harm to students by teaching them things that aren't true. In others, you simply put up more roadblocks to the success of students who would be able to go further if they had a solid foundation at the start.

 

I taught at one cc for a time where an instructor taught math without even a math degree. I wasn't impressed with the caliber of students exiting his course. I want instructors who know where their subject will lead.

[twoforjoy]

I've seen it argued here over and over that people don't need to be degreed experts in a subject in order to teach it.

 

I tend to agree. I really don't think that an elementary-school teacher needs to have advanced knowledge in math or language or anything like that; I just think they need to know the basics well, and then know how to teach them to a diverse group of learners.

 

I think the larger issue, as I mentioned on the other thread, is how to encourage better students to go into teaching. I really don't think the problem is that ed courses aren't rigorous enough or that elementary school teachers don't have enough training, but that really good students are actively discouraged from going into K-12 education (I wasn't the only person I know who had numerous professors in my major talk me out of pursuing a teaching cert. and instead going into a doctoral program--which is absolutely horrible advice given both the academic job market and the needs of K-12 schools) and that they are particularly discouraged from going into elementary ed. Elementary ed, at this point, is seen as almost a vocational career path, rather than an academic one. Good students are often discouraged from going that route.

 

So I think we need to figure out how to encourage really academically talented students to pursue a career in K-12 ed, and particularly in elementary ed and secondary math/science (you'll sometimes get really good English and history students going into secondary ed, because the pay is comparable to what they might make otherwise, but you'll rarely see really great math and science students pursing a teaching career). I think that would make a much larger impact on schools than changing curriculum.

 

And, something needs to be done about the financial disincentives. Most people aren't able or willing to go tens of thousands of dollars into debt to get a master's degree in ed and their certification, especially when teaching isn't a high-paying field, especially at first. I think there should be more subsidies for master's and certification programs, especially for students who've shown academic aptitude.

 

But, given the current climate, I'm not sure why anybody would go into teaching. My public school teacher friends are dealing with pay cuts, being made into the bad guys by politicians, interference from administrators, absurd demands and complaints from parents, and uncertainty nearly ever year about whether they'll even have a job the following school year. If people can make a living some other way, I don't think they can be blamed for doing so.

Edited August 26, 2011 by twoforjoy

[obsidian]

Intro to Laminating

Advanced Lamination

 

:lol:

[FO4UR]

Intro to Laminating

Advanced Lamination

 

:lol:

 

:iagree:

[Mama Geek]

I'd argue that because then you know where the basic math will be useful if students continue on with math. At a math meet, I heard someone from the state dept of education say she'd observed a teacher who told her students not to worry about the distributive property "because you can just use order of operations". I was appalled and asked what the observer had done. She said she asked about 3(x+2) (something with a variable) and the teacher said, "Oh, I hadn't thought of that!"

 

Someone who took calculus and beyond wouldn't (shouldn't) have said that the distributive property isn't important.

 

Linear algebra is one of the clear places where you see that not everything is commutative (let's hear it for matrix multiplication).

 

If you don't have teachers who really know their subject, in some cases they do active harm to students by teaching them things that aren't true. In others, you simply put up more roadblocks to the success of students who would be able to go further if they had a solid foundation at the start.

 

I taught at one cc for a time where an instructor taught math without even a math degree. I wasn't impressed with the caliber of students exiting his course. I want instructors who know where their subject will lead.

 

Someone who understands 8th grade algebra wouldn't have said that the distributive property wasn't important. It sounds like you want application taught not just theory. A math major is not required for this either. Most parents can teach their kids math up to Algebra without too much difficulty whether or not they have a degree in math or anything else.

 

One other thing to realize is that alot of people with science and math backgrounds have their heads wired differently and don't necessarily make for good K-12 teachers in a classroom.

[Deb in NZ]

My first 2 years I was a History / English double major, before switching my major to Elementary Education. In hind sight I feel that this gave me a good Liberal Arts background & a chance to take courses in my area of passion that challanged me. I did take one general ed course each semester, but that was a joke for the most part when compared to the depth & challenge of my other courses. The two science & math courses (elem. ed.) that I took, I could have passed with honors in middle school. The sad thing was a number of the class failed those courses :confused:

 

Ideally I'd like to see the first year focused on making sure that students are working at the university level (i.e. English 101, Psych 101, Speech, etc.) + one general education course each semester that had student in classrooms regularly. This early classroom contact would help to prevent ed. majors from finding out that they hated the reality of classroom teaching after doing a 2nd semester senior year student teaching internship.

 

Year 2 I'd like to see students take a couple ed courses each semester with the remaining courses chosen from their area of passion. Again regular classroom contact is essential.

 

Year 3 I'd like to see a semester long part-time internship included (~ 6 credit hours), along with other required courses.

 

Year 4 would include the semester long full-time internship + senior seminar, along with any remaining requirements.

 

I do think that all ed. majors should be required to take at least one special education course as I was thrown in the deep end my first year of teaching when mainstreaming became law for the first time. I had no spec. ed. experience & I always had at least one spec. ed. child in my class.

 

Also, any non-education courses ( i.e. English, Maths, Science, etc.) should be the same courses that other majors take. There should not be watered down maths / science / composition / etc. courses for education majors.

 

JMHO,

Edited August 26, 2011 by Deb in NZ

[FaithManor]

DD once taught a year of chemistry at our local public school by "proxy".

 

Since no child left behind was inacted, schools must fill secondary education classes with teachers who majored or minored within the education department in the specific content area they are slated to teach. Makes sense, right? Well, this is how it worked.

 

The teacher who had been teaching chemistry and was fairly successful or at least not incompetent, was no longer allowed to teach it. He had not been a science major...he actually taught history, but science was a second love of his and when no one else wanted to teach chemistry because the kids complained so much about the math and the math teachers were over loaded, he volunteered. He taught chem for nearly at decade at the school. So, they promoted a middle school science teacher to high school since she had a secondary education "science" certification.

 

Here was the disaster. She had graduated from the education department of a major, well-respected, university in Michigan in which it was entirely possible to graduate in teacher ed in science without taking A SINGLE MATH BASED SCIENCE COURSE IN COLLEGE! I am not kidding. She took introductory biology, introductory geology, introductory botany, physical science for education majors, and a bunch of science education classes that were more about "thinking creatively about science" than about actual science. She was more than happy to take the promotion and the salary increase to teach high school sciences, however, she had also failed her test of basic skills 3 times before finally passing with a 74% which means, SHE CANNOT DO MATH!!!! She was unable to teach the material. She spent each class period just writing assignments on the board and then sitting down with a newspaper or magazine to read for the rest of the period.

 

DD's best friend was in the class and she really needed high school chem, she did not want to retake introductory chem in college, and had a 4.0 she was desperate to maintain. DD was already doing advanced chemistry and doing fine. So, she came each evening to our place after school, dd taught her the material and gave her ideas how to explain the content to the class, and then friend went back to school, stood in front of the class, and TAUGHT THE MATERIAL! The principal knew the whole time and did.not.care. As long as the school was meeting the NCLB regulations on paper, that was good enough for him. Hang the actual education!

 

I have perused the college catalogs of MSU, U of M, Saginaw Valley State University, Western Michigan, Ferris State, and Grand Valley. Grand Valley is the only one that has any real content in the education department and it's still very light by my standards.

 

So, I would like to see them abolish the tradition of having specific sciences, maths, etc. exclusively for education majors. Education majors need to take their maths and sciences along with everyone else and meet the same standards. Therefore, a secondary education science major has to meet the same requirements for graduation, taking the same classes, as a science major. Let them pick their specialty - biology, chemistry, physics, forensics - whatever. Having to meet that level of rigor will make them better teachers.

 

I'm sick of dumbed down content for education majors. History classes in which no history is taught while everyone just "reviews" children's history books is not acceptable. History education majors need to have World History with their dry Spielvogel text and blue-book exams just like everyone else. High school science education majors need to take college chem and physics with everyone else, do their labs, DO THEIR MATH, and let the chips fall where they may. I'm not impressed with colleges that allow high school math teachers to graduate with their most advanced math class only being calc 1 and they can get a 70% and that's okay. Why aren't they taking calc 2 and 3, abstract algebra, number theory, etc.? They will be far better math teachers if they function above the level they are attempting to teach. Barely passing calc 1, does not a good pre-calc high school teacher of 150 students make.

 

That's my rant. It ought to be just as tough to major in ed as it is to major in that subject material outside of the education department.

 

Faith

[DawnM]

:iagree:

 

However, the financial intensive for people who are good in math and science is just simply not there. It isn't just about paying for the education, it is about the salary. Someone good in science can make a whole lot more money (and not have to deal with teen attitudes) in a lab or in the medical world. A math minded person can make a whole lot more outside of teaching in a high school.

 

Dawn

 

I've seen it argued here over and over that people don't need to be degreed experts in a subject in order to teach it.

 

I tend to agree. I really don't think that an elementary-school teacher needs to have advanced knowledge in math or language or anything like that; I just think they need to know the basics well, and then know how to teach them to a diverse group of learners.

 

I think the larger issue, as I mentioned on the other thread, is how to encourage better students to go into teaching. I really don't think the problem is that ed courses aren't rigorous enough or that elementary school teachers don't have enough training, but that really good students are actively discouraged from going into K-12 education (I wasn't the only person I know who had numerous professors in my major talk me out of pursuing a teaching cert. and instead going into a doctoral program--which is absolutely horrible advice given both the academic job market and the needs of K-12 schools) and that they are particularly discouraged from going into elementary ed. Elementary ed, at this point, is seen as almost a vocational career path, rather than an academic one. Good students are often discouraged from going that route.

 

So I think we need to figure out how to encourage really academically talented students to pursue a career in K-12 ed, and particularly in elementary ed and secondary math/science (you'll sometimes get really good English and history students going into secondary ed, because the pay is comparable to what they might make otherwise, but you'll rarely see really great math and science students pursing a teaching career). I think that would make a much larger impact on schools than changing curriculum.

 

And, something needs to be done about the financial disincentives. Most people aren't able or willing to go tens of thousands of dollars into debt to get a master's degree in ed and their certification, especially when teaching isn't a high-paying field, especially at first. I think there should be more subsidies for master's and certification programs, especially for students who've shown academic aptitude.

 

But, given the current climate, I'm not sure why anybody would go into teaching. My public school teacher friends are dealing with pay cuts, being made into the bad guys by politicians, interference from administrators, absurd demands and complaints from parents, and uncertainty nearly ever year about whether they'll even have a job the following school year. If people can make a living some other way, I don't think they can be blamed for doing so.

[TechWife]

Why would you need to know Calculus, Differential Equations, Linear Algebra, Partial Differential Equations and a whole bunch of stuff that engineering and physics majors don't need to know to teach how to add, subtract, do decimals, fractions, and Algebra?

Knowing and Teaching Elementary Mathematics is a good book on this subject.

[Rosie_0801]

I've seen it argued here over and over that people don't need to be degreed experts in a subject in order to teach it.

 

I think there is a huge difference between a classroom and a homeschool. Most of us are able to work ahead of our kids, work alongside or say "just a minute, I'll go look that up." We have time and are allowed to deviate from the lesson plan.

 

Without that wiggle room, I think a school teacher really does need to be an expert.

 

Rosie

[EKS]

I tend to agree. I really don't think that an elementary-school teacher needs to have advanced knowledge in math or language or anything like that; I just think they need to know the basics well, and then know how to teach them to a diverse group of learners.

 

 

I think that an elementary school teacher needs to have a deep understanding of the topics taught at that level as well as several levels above--meaning that a first grade teacher should be proficient at algebra I and geometry and should have a very solid understanding of high school level science--all branches. They should be able to write proficiently at a college level.

 

Frankly, this shouldn't be asking too much of a college educated person.

[EKS]

One other thing to realize is that alot of people with science and math backgrounds have their heads wired differently and don't necessarily make for good K-12 teachers in a classroom.

 

Asking that someone be proficient with high school level math and science is not too much. Prospective elementary teachers should be required to take two semesters of math--one that focuses on elementary math, and another that focuses on algebra and geometry. They should also have to take a year of science--one half semester each of earth/space science, biology, chemistry, and physics. And they should be required to pass exams that test their understanding of this information to get their certification.

 

Again, this is not asking too much of a person in college or graduate school. You don't need to be wired differently to understand this stuff. You just need a good attitude and a willingness to do the work.

[8circles]

Intro to Laminating

Advanced Lamination

 

Vertical Stapling 101

[myfunnybunch]

Intro to Laminating

Advanced Lamination

 

:tongue_smilie:

 

Seriously, I had to take a class on "Classroom Media" (I think), in which we learned to operate a film projector, a ditto machine, design a bulletin board, run a laminator.

 

Cat

[myfunnybunch]

Why would you need to know Calculus, Differential Equations, Linear Algebra, Partial Differential Equations and a whole bunch of stuff that engineering and physics majors don't need to know to teach how to add, subtract, do decimals, fractions, and Algebra?

 

Being able to really understand mathematics helps one teach addition, subtration, decimals, fractions, and particularly algebra. Too many elementary teachers teaching math understand the How but not the Why behind it, which means that students aren't even given a chance to understand mathematics as more than a series of steps to follow. This isn't a new idea. Math taught by math majors instead of by general classroom teachers is the norm in many countries. I have heard of this in Asian countries because that's where our exchange students are from. so while I am not sure if this is typical elsewhere, it is common for students in China, Japan and Korea to stay in one classroom while their math and science teachers come to them to teach just that subject even in early grades.

 

I am sure there are many math and science majors who are "wired differently" (just as many people in many different majors and professions) but there are many who aren't and would make excellent teachers. Not only that, but if a true elementary math or science degree was an option, many education majors would pursue those options instead of a general ed degree. What I'd really like to see is an undergrad degree in math or science or classics with a year of education about teaching and a year of student teaching in one's specialty. Or at least the option of adding a math or science specialty to one's ed degree.

 

I second the recommendation for Knowing and Teaching Elementary Mathematics. Here's another great read on teaching mathematics that's tangentially related because (imo) the way mathematics is taught in US classrooms is in part caused by teachers who do not understand or appreciate mathematics as an art: A Mathematician's Lament An excerpt:

"But if your math teacher gives you the impression, either expressly or by default, that mathematics is about formulas and definitions and memorizing algorithms, who will set you straight?

 

The cultural problem is a self-perpetuating monster: students learn about math from their teachers, and teachers learn about it from their teachers, so this lack of understanding and appreciation for mathematics in our culture replicates itself indefinitely. Worse, the perpetuation of this “pseudo-mathematics,†this emphasis on the accurate yet mindless manipulation of symbols, creates its own culture and its own set of values. Those who have become adept at it derive a great deal of self-esteem from their success. The last thing they want to hear is that math is really about raw creativity and aesthetic sensitivity. Many a graduate student has come to grief when they discover, after a decade of being told they were “good at math,†that in fact they have no real mathematical talent and are just very good at following directions."

 

This is my concern, in public schools particularly. Kids are being run through math procedures by teachers who don't really have in-depth knowledge of math. (Not all teachers, and I wholly believe that most teachers in schools love teaching and enjoy their classes. And it's hit-or-miss, because not all are well-versed in mathematics.) Many students lose interest because just following step-by-step procedures is boring. I didn't know how much I loved math until I started teaching it to my children. It's a puzzle! Wow, who knew? As a homeschooler, I am able to supplement a good basic math curriculum with lots of play and exploration, but many folks with ed degrees simply don't have the knowledge (or the time or the energy or the interest) to pursue the same kind of teaching with large groups of kids.

 

Cat

[KungFuPanda]

. . . and mechanics should all be automotive engineers, and nurses should all get a medical doctorate, and homeschoolers should all have teaching degrees . . .

 

REALLY? Are you sure?

 

It would be great if you could staff a first grade classroom with someone who majored in EVERY subject, had a gift for teaching, enjoyed small children, and didn't CARE that they could use those skills elsewhere to make triple their income. It's not going to happen.

 

Also, I've had the privilege of spending a great deal of time with some very gifted mathematicians. My children are named for two of them. I cannot picture these people explaining anything to a roomful of 6-year-olds. Some of them aren't the best at arithmetic either!

 

I DID major in Elm. Ed and was certified to teach K-8. I finished the program in 3 years because I loaded up and went through the summers to get the most out of my G.I. Bill/Army College Fund. Some classes were good and some were doofy. The most valuable part of all was the time we spent in the classroom. It's experience AND competence that makes great teachers.

 

The program was not hard compared to the military schools I went through. It was rather constant and you had to stay on top of a gazillion piddly

assignments to keep up. Still, the most challenging, true college-level courses contained all the stuff you'd never use in an elementary classroom.

 

I'm all for designing programs that produce more competent teachers, but there has to be a little more financial incentive and prestige attached for it to really work. Right now it's a thankless, low-paying job full of constant criticism from folks who have never taught a class in their lives. I LOVE teaching children, but I don't know if I could ever go back to the classroom.

[TechWife]

I didn't know how much I loved math until I started teaching it to my children. It's a puzzle! Wow, who knew? As a homeschooler, I am able to supplement a good basic math curriculum with lots of play and exploration

 

I could have written this! I had no idea how much fun math is until I started re-learning the algebra that I had forgotten in order to teach my son. It is so much fun, that I am getting ready to start on The Art of Problem Solving books for my own enrichment and enjoyment.

[TechWife]

. . . and mechanics should all be automotive engineers, and nurses should all get a medical doctorate, and homeschoolers should all have teaching degrees . . .

 

The best mechanics are able to diagnose problems because they understand the underlying physics of the automobile. An engineering degree? Probably not, but a thorough education in engine design will help a mechanic become a better mechanic. Notice, however, that I have differentiated between degree and education. Nurses are able to earn doctorates that have concentrations in either clinical practice or research.

 

As a parent, I am the one who determines the level of education that people must have in order to educate my child. I do think that a degree and/or a professional license is a demonstration of a minimum competence. In my case, it's a combination of my B.B.A. and my husbands M.S.. One of the reasons we pulled out of a Christian school is that they had teachers who were neither trained as educators nor trained in their subject areas.

 

Just as everyone chooses their own mechanics, doctors and teachers (enrolling in public school is a choice for many in the American culture), we can choose the level of education that we desire these professionals to have.

 

It would be great if you could staff a first grade classroom with someone who majored in EVERY subject, had a gift for teaching, enjoyed small children, and didn't CARE that they could use those skills elsewhere to make triple their income. It's not going to happen.

No one is suggesting that someone major in every subject.

The reason that we bring these ideas up is because that they are standard in other countries around the world. Not every country groups children together with one teacher for the day. Just as we have specialized teachers for art & music, they have specialized teachers for math, science and a host of other subjects. Their math teachers have foremost, studied math, not education.

 

Many people have advocated higher pay for teachers so that income isn't as much of a determining factor when choosing a career at private company over a career in the public school system. I believe, however, until the average person takes up the cause of reforming the financial management of the school systems and basing it on educational priorities, that it isn't going to happen.

 

Also, I've had the privilege of spending a great deal of time with some very gifted mathematicians. My children are named for two of them. I cannot picture these people explaining anything to a roomful of 6-year-olds. Some of them aren't the best at arithmetic either!

No one is proposing that everyone is a good teacher. I, too, have spent time with gifted mathematicians. Some are excited about math & have willingly engaged my son & shared their knowledge with him (teaching. Others, also excited about math, have no interest in teaching & are using their expertise in a variety of settings.

 

Still, the most challenging, true college-level courses contained all the stuff you'd never use in an elementary classroom.

 

I would propose that as you rose to the challenge of these courses, you were able to learn quite a lot about the process of learning and mastering material from your experience doing the same. That is something that can definitely be applied in an elementary classroom.

 

I'm all for designing programs that produce more competent teachers, but there has to be a little more financial incentive and prestige attached for it to really work. Right now it's a thankless, low-paying job full of constant criticism from folks who have never taught a class in their lives.

 

I totally understand this!