SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
from the those-who-can,-do,-those-who-can't,-teach dept.
In the US: this article presents an analysis how a person's chosen college major corresponds to their IQ. The interesting thing is that the relationship has remained essentially stable over the past 70 years. At the top of the list are math, science and engineering. At the absolute bottom of the list: education.
These data show that US students who choose to major in education, essentially the bulk of people who become teachers, have for at least the last seven decades been selected from students at the lower end of the academic aptitude pool. A 2010 McKinsey report (pdf) by Byron Auguste, Paul Kihn, and Matt Miller noted that top performing school systems, such as those in Singapore, Finland, and South Korea, "recruit 100% of their teacher corps from the top third of the academic cohort."
The article points out that it isn't quite this simple: Top schools place high requirements on all of their students; poor schools generally attract lower quality students in all of their programs. Still, the national averages are clear: overall, the least intelligent students go on to teach. This is an odd priority.
Educational organizations, of course, have a different view. This article claims that teacher quality declined from the 1960s through the 1990s, but has since recovered, with teachers being barely below average (48th percentile) among college graduates.
On a related note, there is a strong international correlation between teacher pay and student outcomes. The (rather obvious) theory is that higher pay attracts better candidates to the teaching profession.
No conclusions - just thought this might spark an interesting discussion...
(Score: 2) by ledow on Friday July 01 2016, @05:18PM
I work in schools.
Currently, the most highly qualified person in an independent (private) school with 50+ staff... the Librarian. The only one with a doctorate.
Teaching is a horrible profession, I looked into it after graduating and wouldn't touch it with a barge pole, but I've always worked in schools, just on the "IT admin" side.
Sure, they have the holidays, etc. but - to be honest - pay scales in state schools in the UK are atrocious. I've often had to keep my salary secret.
Much of the problem is cultural - far too much unnecessary paperwork and presentation (so many teachers spend SO MANY hours on "making displays" and things like that, not to mention the faffing done on reports at the last moment instead of in advance, and the unnecessarily large amount of "marking" throughout the year that could easily be automated), a focus on the back end instead of the teaching, and so on.
These people do an important job, but I've watched far too many inadequate teachers coast for years, even decades, without actually learning anything new themselves. I've seen people teach outdated and inaccurate junk, because that's what they were taught. And I've seen teachers who have almost no subject knowledge or interest outside the exam questions.
The independent (private) sector is better - quite obviously. Because they don't tolerate coasting, or lack of knowledge or a lot of the modern fads (iPads, whiteboards, touchscreen, visualisers, etc.) to the point of detriment of basic skills, and they encourage progress and participation in all things from all staff. And obviously, staff get paid more for that than they would in a state school.
But, as an IT guy with ZERO industry certifications, just a maths degree, I wonder quite what those who are coasting expect. I mean, seriously, if I got even six months behind on technology, services, facilities, features, products, skills, etc. available to me, I'd be out of a job through obsolescence. But it seems a teacher in a state school can get out of uni and teach for 40 years without learning a damn thing new, except how to take the register on a PC rather than on paper, or whatever.
They have a horrible, hard job, with little recognition, tons of paperwork, and lots and lots of unnecessary shite. And they get rewarded for it appropriately, I think. And yet they're always on strike or complaining about it and lots of harder, more horrible, less recognising, worse jobs are around that still don't give you free reign to spend your entire summer abroad even under the guise of "working from home".
But the special teachers, the ones that really make the difference? They are few and far between because the rewards just aren't there for them. They can go work freelance in their industry, earn more, work less, and be recognised for their skills. You can't solve that problem while you consider education as anything other than something you pour money into now - and spend wisely, not on gadgets - to reap the rewards when the next generation grow up.
Currently the UK are heading in exactly the opposite direction, making university fees higher and higher (I never had to pay for my degree), and turning secondary schools into for-profit Academies run by conglomerates.
Some things you spend money on. Education. Health. Because the money you spend will be returned two-fold in terms of longer-paid taxes, higher salaries, less stupidity in the world, etc.
But education is now a profit centre, and the teachers themselves were taught in profit centres so they don't see it.
Dig out a 1960's A-Level paper and put it in front of the average teacher today, with whatever monetary / unit conversion tables are needed (e.g. pre-decimalisation money, etc.) and have it marked by the marking scheme of the 1960's. See how they do. I guarantee you that almost all teachers would fail.
And, damn, I went to school in the 90's, so it's not even an age thing.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday July 01 2016, @07:07PM
You could do the same with tests from today and give them to children who take those a levels. If you don't know the alphabet on the first day of kindergarten, you are behind. If you can't divide using two digit numbers in fourth grade, you are behind. If you don't understand feedback cycles in second, you are behind. True, rote facts have less emphasis but the concepts required are much more advanced.
Besides, you don't need to be an expert in trigonometry as an adult to teach kids the concept of our base 10 number system. If you think that is easy, I guarantee your local University has a "math for elementary educators" or similarly named class and I challenge you to take it.
(Score: 2) by kazzie on Saturday July 02 2016, @05:22AM
Currently the UK are heading in exactly the opposite direction, making university fees higher and higher (I never had to pay for my degree), and turning secondary schools into for-profit Academies run by conglomerates.
That is the case in England, but Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland have independent control over their education budgets, and still fund their schools through local councils. They aren't converting schools into "Academies", and they have lower or non-existent university fees for local applicants. Admittedly, they may be pressured into copying England's approach on tuition fees at some point, if the higher education budgets get squeezed...