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: 3, Interesting) by weeds on Friday July 01 2016, @05:36PM
Although that may be an obvious theory (not a scientific theory, but more like a bar room theory) to some. when considering this theory, consider that more highly paid teachers most likely work in districts where the family incomes are higher.
Clearly, if the pay is higher for a job, you will attract more people. You can imagine that of those people, some will be better than what you might have gotten if you didn't offer this higher pay and will be better performers. But, that's not all of it. I don't think the correlation between higher pay and higher performance works only this way, "I pay you more, so you do a better job." I think it works the other way, "You do a better job, so I will pay you more." With a lack of metrics to determine who you should pay more, there is no incentive to do a better job. Since the only metric is longevity, the motivation is solely to stay as long as you can.
With the advent of the intewebs and the great Google, you could do the research yourself, here is one to get you started:
http://cepa.stanford.edu/content/widening-academic-achievement-gap-between-rich-and-poor-new-evidence-and-possible [stanford.edu]
(ad hominem deflector and anecdotal evidence) insufficient to draw any conclusions...
Am I a teacher, no. I am an aerospace engineer. I have spent some time tutoring high school math students. I have the metrics to show that there was an improvement. I can also tell you that the school would not put me on "the list" of tutors because I didn't have a teaching certificate. As I recall, when I pointed out that those who did have certificates were failing to teach these students, they were not pleased.
Get money out of politics! [mayday.us]
(Score: 2, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Friday July 01 2016, @06:06PM
> consider that more highly paid teachers most likely work in districts where the family incomes are higher.
Not all countries fund schools from local property taxes. Heck, not even all US states do it that way.
(Score: 1, Offtopic) by weeds on Friday July 01 2016, @07:25PM
Good observation, thanks! If you hadn't posted as AC, I'm sure you'd get modded up.
Get money out of politics! [mayday.us]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday July 01 2016, @10:49PM
Overcrowding the classroom is probably the #1 problem. Tutoring small groups is much easier and more effective. That said, requiring a teaching credential for tutors is the kind of stupid that makes people look down on education as a profession, even though its probably some politician's or parent group's fault.