Get Schooled

By luvs2teach

January 3, 2008 11:39 AM | Link to this

I took the survey last year, and so I was interested in the results. No real surprises, for me anyway - most of the most-chosen answers were my answers.

Not just NCLB, but the mind-numbing, “office of redundancy office” CYA paperwork is a real down-fall to the profession, too.

One thing that I do find disturbing? All of the “okay” answers…sure, it’s better than bad, but are we okay with just being okay?

I would love to know what they plan to do with this information now.

By holdingAJCaccountable

January 3, 2008 11:54 AM | Link to this

Was it an anonymous survey? Even if it wasn’t, given the generally positive responses to things on this survey, (except NCLB) teachers should stop advocating for any change. Since they say they are generally getting what they asked for, they are getting exactly what they deserve.

By fed up

January 3, 2008 12:03 PM | Link to this

Well, it will never happen because the folks in charge at the state level are too stupid to understand why NCLB is such a ridiculous law…… However, if we actually had someone with brains and some math skills at the state level, someone would realize that the cost of implementing NCLB is more than the funds provides by Title I. Then, assuming we have someone in charge who has some logic skills (we don’t now), we would politely opt out of NCLB and take the money we SAVE to better fund impoverished schools and to provide kids with more than just bubble test skills.

Of course that will never happen… We are in Georgia after all.

By V for Vendetta

January 3, 2008 12:04 PM | Link to this

Great points L2L! I think you pretty much hit the nail on the head.

One thing I’d like to throw in is an answer to the question: “What makes teachers leave the classroom?”

Look, all of us in the teaching field complain (a lot) about discipline, parents, NCLB, and all the rest. One thing that has always bothered me, and something that I think could impact education state-wide, is teachers’ ability to earn advanced degrees. Why the state doesn’t partially, or fully subsidize teachers’ who want to earn advanced degrees is beyond me. To me, that would be a great thing to spend some of the lottery money on — even if it meant raising the requirements of the HOPE scholarship (which SHOULD be raised, in my opinion).

On most days I can deal with the discipline. On most days I can work with the parents. But on NO day can I gladly accept the cost of the advanced degree I am currently working on. It is a serious financial burden.

Considering I rarely, if ever, complain about the money I earn, I don’t think it’s unreasonable to dream about a world where the state could possible help one of its most important employees become better at one of society’s most important jobs. Makes sense to me, which is why it will never happen.

By fed up

January 3, 2008 12:15 PM | Link to this

V, that’s the problem with teachers. They do not live in the real world and they just don’t understand how it operates. Try asking your employer to pay for your advanced degree in the private sector. Nine out of ten would laugh you out of their office.

Why in the world should I (as a taxpayer)pay for your advanced degree? You didn’t pay for my advanced degree. I had to go into debt to pay for it myself.

Also, believe it or not, there are lots of state employees that are just as “important” as you are. Is the state going to pick up the tab for their advanced degrees too?

Finally, too many teachers are earning “advanced degrees” from online “degree mills.” I doubt that these “degrees” are improving my child’s classroom experience one bit.

By jim d

January 3, 2008 12:17 PM | Link to this

V,

You might as well ask for “summers off” :-)

I suspect that might happen long before the State of Georgia opts to educate eductors.

By luvs2teach

January 3, 2008 12:17 PM | Link to this

Holdng…yes it was anonymous, but again, are we okay with just being “okay?”

I don’t think so - it’s like a ‘C’ - sure my son is passing, but I would rather he get As or Bs. We should all be at “one of the best” IMO.

V - thanks - I agree on the advanced degree (and if you look at the survey, professional development, advanced learning, and opportunites for both were areas where there were fewer favorable responses). To mollify those that complain about advanced degrees, then the HOPE could be tied to the degree being both relevant and rigorous.

I know about the HOPE teacher post-graduate loans, but I haven’t read good things about them - anyone out there know more?

By Janine

January 3, 2008 12:19 PM | Link to this

Fed up is so right:..borrowing the old lament…”If [they] only had a brain!!!!! Opt out of NCLB.The money required to implement NCLB is actually MORE than the funds the states receive for it.

By Janine

January 3, 2008 12:22 PM | Link to this

Oh…and the mindless NCLB is exactly why I and 7 other teachers at my school left teaching in June of 2006.

By Jeff

January 3, 2008 12:26 PM | Link to this

V:

I’ll support you in your advanced degrees, with a caveat:

If the advanced degrees are in the ‘education’ field, your pay should DECREASE.

IF, however, you are actually getting an advanced degree in the subject matter you teach - for instance, if luvs got some kind of Masters in Chem/Physics/Bio or some similar - THEN I would give you more money. You’re more valuable then.

ANY ‘education’ degree - including the BS level - isn’t worth the paper it is printed on.

By jim d

January 3, 2008 12:26 PM | Link to this

fed and janine,

Can you point me to resources that would substantiate that claim?

I would be highly intrested in reading and comparing those figures.

thanks.

By jim d

January 3, 2008 12:33 PM | Link to this

fed up,

I’m not an educator, yet I will attempt to answer your question about why we (taxpayers) should pick up the bill for educating educators.

I look at it as an investment in the future. That would be the future of not only my child but of yours as well. And isn’t that what we are striving for?

By jim d

January 3, 2008 12:38 PM | Link to this

Excellent point Jeff,

I’d be hesitant to pay for an advanced degree in basket weaving for a math teacher. :-)

By jim d

January 3, 2008 12:43 PM | Link to this

Jeff,

Another twist might to be use a contract similar to what the Military offers on a 2:1 ratio (Education:years of obligation.) This could potentially keep highly qualified teachers in the class room for a few more years.

By Jeff

January 3, 2008 12:53 PM | Link to this

jim:

See? I CAN come through with a thoughtful comment every once in a while!

Additional note to my last: Personally, I don’t care how esoteric the advanced degree is, as I know doctorate level theses can get pretty out there. But if you are teaching math, I don’t want your thesis to be on how to TEACH math, I want your thesis to be on a novel approach to the Reimmann Hypothesis.

I’m gonna assume someone is good at the TEACHING side of teaching until they prove to me otherwise. I’m MUCH more concerned about the subject matter expertise of the teacher in question. After all, if you don’t know a rational number from a real number, what business do you have teaching my kid __ + 1/2 = 1.375?

Or, if you don’t know about the SECOND American Revolution, how can you accurately teach my kid about America’s emergence as a superpower??

By holdingAJCaccountable

January 3, 2008 12:55 PM | Link to this

luvs2teach,

Given that it was anonymous the percent of OK responses is even more troubling. I think it’s evidence that jimD is right; even when teachers are given anonymous surveys, where their voices can be heard, they simply act out of fear and won’t tell the truth about things. Thus they get exactly what they deserve; and then complain about it later. LOL (But really if you think about it, sad.)

By fed up

January 3, 2008 1:06 PM | Link to this

If my kid’s teacher gets an advanced degree from some degree mill.. I doubt it will do much for my kid or any kid. A teacher is either talented or not… a teacher either knows the subject matter or doesn’t… an advanced degree in education doesn’t help that.

We have a principal at one of my kids’ schools that has at least three advanced degrees. He can’t put together a coherent written sentence though. We all get a good laugh out of the letters he sends home though.

If a teacher does get an advanced degree they get an AUTOMATIC pay raise… that is compensation enough. Most folks in the private sector do not get automatic raises if they get advanced degrees… they have to prove themselves and get promoted or go out and get another job to get more money.

Teachers get the raise without having to prove anything… not even that the degree program is of reasonable quality. Not even that they are the least bit competent. That seems like a pretty good deal to me.

So…. some guy in EPD may want an advanced degree in environmental science. That would arguably be an investment in the future of others too. Should I pick up the tab for that?

Anyone getting an advanced degree in anything arguably is an investment in someone else’s future. Having more people who are more knowledgeable about more things helps us all. So should I pick up the tab for all of them?

By luvs2teach

January 3, 2008 1:08 PM | Link to this

Fed up - I beg to differ on “not living in the real world” - I know of a lot - A LOT - of private sector employers that offer tuition reimbursement programs - they understand that a better educated employee is a more valuable one. Some are full-scale, others on a sliding scale (an ‘A’ pays more than a ‘B’ and so on).

Jeff - I agree - especially if I were to go to the HS level and want to teach AP classes, a “real” science degree would certainly do me more good than another education class.

jim d - from what I understand about the HOPE teacher loan is that it is service-cancelable loan - every year of the loan is then cancelled by a year of service - again, though, which subjects/degrees are eligible change from year to year.

By luvs2teach

January 3, 2008 1:14 PM | Link to this

holding…good point - then again, with only 21,000 out 100,000+ (not sure on that one), and some systems clearly responding more than others, how does that skew things? What about those too apathetic to answer?

I’m not sure that this was that well advertised, either - the only reason I saw it (if it wasn’t from a GetSchooled link) was becuase I had an add-on to my certificate last year, and I was on the site.

I still think that they’re trying to put a rosy spin on it - reminds me of the time my neighbor’s cat ate tinsel off the tree…the poops had some sparkle, but they were still poop!

By flipper

January 3, 2008 1:19 PM | Link to this

The answer to all of this is merit pay based on growth model testing. If that advanced degree really did improve a teacher’s ability to teach, it will show up in her performance.

Better performance equals better pay.

I’d even be open to a reimbursement model where a teacher is reimbursed for her expenses in getting an advanced degree if her performance improves as a result.

Teachers would never stand for that though.

By HB

January 3, 2008 1:21 PM | Link to this

I’m gonna assume someone is good at the TEACHING side of teaching until they prove to me otherwise.

Wow. Really? Am I the only one who had a college professor or two that while being quite accomplished in their subject matter were completely inept at explaining simpler concepts to freshman and sophomores taking calculus?

Of course a math teacher should know the difference between rational and real numbers before teaching students, but I seriously doubt one has to complete a math major to acquire such knowledge. Does a graduate-level conceptual math course really make a teacher that much better equipped to teach 7th grade pre-algebra? Seems to me that a teacher should be required to complete a certain number of both subject matter courses and education courses, without necessarily being required to major in one over the other. Teachers need to know content AND how to teach it!

By jim d

January 3, 2008 1:38 PM | Link to this

No offense Luv,

I just think if we are paying for a teachers education we should be able to expect a return on our money. I think something along the lines of what the military offers is really fare. Are you familar with the ROTC scholarship program and/or the programs available for servicemen / women to continue their education all the way through advanced degrees in exchange for years of commitment to the service branch they are enlisted in?

Something along these lines would enable taxpayers to recieve a great benefit by keeping highly trained professionals in the classroom for more years in exchange for their education and still enable teachers to earn a pretty darned good salary based upon those degree’s.

I certainly wouldn’t want a teacher who has had an education paid for in Georgia (with georgia tax dollars) moving off to NC unless NC were to buy out their contract with the state of georgia. But to me the bottom line is creating an opportunity to get highly trained personel into the class room and then retaining them. This in itself would benefit all concerns.

By OldSchool

January 3, 2008 1:57 PM | Link to this

About HOPE for teachers: Because I teach in what is now considered a critical area (CTAE) I qualified for HOPE to get my MEd in Adult & Career Education (it was either that or Ed. Leadership…such are the choices!) Applying was a nightmare and the resulting “award” set in motion the most ridiculous chain of events I’ve ever had to deal with! Within a few weeks of the first monies arriving at the university, I began receiving payment due notices (and classes had no even started!) To double my pleasure, I received 2 identical notices each month. I finally borrowed the money to pay HOPE back which cut down on the number of notices but did not solve the problem. A year later I got yet another notice of payment overdue! It took several phone calls and being passed around the HOPEless offices to finally get it all straightened out. I can only imagine how my life would have been impacted if I had been “awarded” more than that one thousand dollars.

I managed to find another way to pay for my advanced degree. I would NEVER go that HOPEless route again!

As far as the surveys being anonymous, I too filled one out. The link was sent to me at my school email address. I don’t doubt for a single minute that it is possible to track the responses of those who, like me, clicked on that link and filled out the surveys. Some of the questions were also worded in such a manner as to encourage a more positive response.

holdingAJCaccountable: “If a teacher does get an advanced degree they get an AUTOMATIC pay raise… that is compensation enough. Most folks in the private sector do not get automatic raises if they get advanced degrees… they have to prove themselves and get promoted or go out and get another job to get more money. ” You are correct in that we do get paid at the next level due to that advanced degree. I have daughters working in the corporate world who are evaluated by their supervisors once or twice a year. A favorable evaluation earns them a pay increase. I get evaluated 3 times a year (and for several years it was 6 times), have NEVER gotten a less than excellent evaluation, and have also NEVER gotten a pay increase for ANY of those evaluations. I was also teaching the year the Georgia legislature passed a 10% pay increase for teachers but never bothered to fund it. It was right after that our school board started putting Xs instead of numbers on our contracts in the salary amount space.

But I STILL love teaching. I STILL love working with my students. And I am STILL looking forward to a great ‘08.

By teach1

January 3, 2008 2:06 PM | Link to this

I did want to agree with loves2teach. All those “okay” answers are alarming! Think of it this way. Teachers were given 5 choices (A,B,C, D, F) for most answers and the best they could answer was okay. That relates to a grade of a “C” for each ok.

If my child brought home a report card wth all C’s we would be talking about what needs to be done to improve this grade instead of thinking every thing seems to be “okay”. It seems to me what you put in is what you get out.

I can’t believe state level admistrators or Bridget Gutierrez would look at this survey and think everything seems to be “generally fine” with teachers! Look at that survey again and put the grading scale on it and see if teachers are giving “high marks” to any catagory or if things are just “ok” with much room for improvement!

By luvs2teach

January 3, 2008 2:18 PM | Link to this

jimd - no offense taken at all (actually not sure why you’d think that???)…

I was just saying that it would not be an unheard of tradeoff and so I think it’s an option that is a good one if it were offered. I have heard, not just of ROTC, but also medical loans that are service cancellable for doctors who practice in a high needs area. I have taken advantage of a grant that required me to stay in my system for 2 years after or pay the grant back.

I think it’s a nice compromise.

I think we can all agree that our pay scale is a little wacked - we don’t get raises based on our performance, but we do get raises based on furthering our education. We can’t base raises solely on our students’ performances, because there are too many factors we can’t control - that would never go over. Flipper - how are you going to judge if the teacher is better-performing? Is s/he using her advanced degree to mentor new teachers? Is s/he using it to implement new programs within the school? Or are we going to look at the CRCT?

Any suggestions?

One final thought - NCLB. This whole way of rating schools based on the CRCT scores is such garbage - not only is it bad math and statistics (as we’ve discussed before), it doesn’t reflect the quality of the teachers - only the quality of the population.

Do you really think that if you took teachers from Walton and placed them in the worst performing Clayton County school that that school would be on par with Walton by the following year? I don’t.

By V for Vendetta

January 3, 2008 2:29 PM | Link to this

Jeff, great point. (My degree IS in my field, and I totally agree with that statement.) It makes perfect sense; the education degrees are usually crap anyway (depending on where they’re from).

L2T, I know a little about the post-grad HOPE loans. I’ve used it before. Here’s the bottom line: The loans are somewhat helpful. They generally pay for about a third of the cost. The catch is the paperwork. It is done by reimbursement, and trying to get your check from HOPE is like trying to get a mouse away from a snake — lots of hissing and venom! It’s so frustrating I’ve even considered forgetting the whole thing. Usually by the time the check comes, I’ve already paid a few grand out of pocket for multiple semesters. The money is decent, but it is dispensed at their leisure and at seemingly random intervals. The process is maddening beyond belief.

Fed Up, I understand your point and your reasoning. I also understand what you said about “diploma mills,” but Jeff made a good point about the degree being DIRECTLY TIED into the subject you teach. As JimD said, it’s an investment in the future of education and society in general.

Also, I seem to have quite a few friends who have had their businesses and organizations help pay for advanced degrees. I thought it was almost rather common. Perhaps I was wrong, but that was the impression I got.

By jim d

January 3, 2008 2:30 PM | Link to this

You know teach1,

I’d say teachers responding to the survey may have left themselves behind. They may have missed an opportunity to improve their situation by answering more in line with what we see them saying here on these blogs. But they didn’t

The point is they had an opportunity to be heard and what was their response? “OK”! As an employer I sure as hell wouldn’t go out of my way to fix something that wasn’t broken. If my employee’s are content—I’m happy as hell and wouldn’t change a thing.

I’d say y’all missed the boat on this one.

By Jeff

January 3, 2008 2:41 PM | Link to this

HB:

Reagarding Subject Matter Expertise being the single most important factor in determining a good teacher:

Give me a teacher that knows how to interact with kids but isn’t a subject matter expert, and I’ll give you a bunch of lost kids. The second the students raise a question that the teacher can’t answer, you’ve got a whole HOST of issues running the gamut from subject matter - the kid now doesn’t know the answer to the question they posed - to discipline - particularly at the MS/HS level, once a kid thinks they know more than you, you’re DONE - to parents - I for one would be ON that teacher like white on rice - to administration - “This parent is complaining that you don’t know what the heck you’re talking about”. In other words, a WORLD of hurt.

HOWEVER: A teacher that knows his/ her content at an extremely high level - both abstract ideas and concrete facts - can then experiment with the best way to deliver the knowledge. But virtually anytime a student has a question, the teacher will know the answer.

By teach1

January 3, 2008 2:45 PM | Link to this

Here are some of the “generally fine” grades give by teachers in response to the survey:

Under the question about time for non instructional duties: 76.1% gave a grade of C or lower!

Time to teach what MUST be taught 60.02% gave a grade of C or lower.

For adequacy of prep/planning time a combines grade of 70.05% of teachers gave a grade of C or lower.

Finally time for REQUIRED paperwork 79.07% of teachers gave a grade of C or lower.

I think that maybe the Non instructional duties may be - just maybe be interferring with the time needed for teaching? What do you think! What do you want your child’s teacher doing?

By catlady

January 3, 2008 2:48 PM | Link to this

Luvs, lots of that sparkly poop around here!

By Lyncoln

January 3, 2008 2:53 PM | Link to this

I don’t have much opinion on the NCLB and other issues, but I do have one comment. A few people mentioned the large number of ‘OK’ responses within the survey.

There is a known issue of ‘neutral bias’ which occurs regularly in surveys that ask for ‘agree — neutral — disagree’ type responses. Survey responders select answers closer to the middle or neutral because they don’t have strong feelings or just don’t care about the question. That could be one of the reasons for the large number of ‘ok’ reponses from the teachers. Maybe the questions weren’t directed towards issues that the teachers cared about so they just answered ‘ok’ to move on.

We can hope that the neutral bias has been taken into account when reading the results of the teacher survey, but something like a ‘no opinion’ choice would help remove some of the neutral bias from a survey like this one.

By teach1

January 3, 2008 2:54 PM | Link to this

I think you are right jim d. I could have drawn a much harder line. I wish now and will in the future make answers that will draw red flags.

I guess something to think about though is this. If you are ok with your employees doing “C” work because everything is OKAY. Think about how much more successful your company could be if you could get your employees doing their “A” game!

By jim d

January 3, 2008 3:09 PM | Link to this

Teach1,

But just take a look at it from my perspective. I’m getting their “A” game and they are content without making demands.

Hmm, sounds like a no brainer to me. Or maybe I’m already treating them too well? No matter, I’m still making a living doing what I love, 42 years into the business with most employee’s having about 20 years with me. (not too shabby)

By jim d

January 3, 2008 3:21 PM | Link to this

teach1,

let me point out one minor difference. My crews work not only so they make a living, but so that the company is sucessful as well. If the compnay fails to make money they fully understand they will be looking for a new job. (not a bad incentive, in my opinon)

By teach1

January 3, 2008 3:29 PM | Link to this

jim d

No doubt you treat your employees well and are sucessful with your company. I would even bet if you gave your employees the same type of survey your company would get high ratings.

So would you say the education field is being run as well as your company and is having as much success as you are?

By teach1

January 3, 2008 3:45 PM | Link to this

So what would you suggest happen in the education field? Fire your “OK” workers and start over with a new crew or see what you could do to make them work harder and increase their production?

And how many non-production type activities are you expecting out of your employees? Do they have to decorate and clean your office? Or do you give them time to come in and get their things together and make plans for the day so they can undertake your assignments?

By luvs2teach

January 3, 2008 3:54 PM | Link to this

catlady - that was a true story and one of the funniest things I’ve ever seen! LOL (good thing it didn’t make her sick, though) - it’s a great metaphor for educratic statistics, I think!

Teach 1 - I like your negative spin on the numbers - it’s exactly my point! These numbers aren’t that great - they’re just spun well.

Lyncoln - excellent point about the neutral bias - I wonder what the results would’ve been if there hadn’t been a “middle ground” answer.

jim d - I think the survey actually reflects what I have said to you in the past when you ask if we’re all that unhappy why we don’t do more - we’re not THAT unhappy.

Problem is, we’re not all that happy, either.

Those of us who are that unhappy change schools or change professions all together - that was reflected in the answers, too. I would like to see a parent version of the survey done - curious what those results would be. I remember reading somewhere that a study was done which showed most people thought public education was terrible, but their schools were good. Perception, I guess.

By L.King

January 3, 2008 3:56 PM | Link to this

I agree with Jim on the fact of degrees for educators. If the state would pay for advance degrees for teachers then there should be requirements for teachers to stay in state.

Jeff, I am torn between your issue on advance degrees and teaching. It is extremely important for a teacher to know their subject area to ensure that students get a quality education. I have seen many (about 8) intelligent teachers, who used to be college professors that bombed in the classroom. They knew their materials but they could not relate to the students, so classroom disruptions occurred. I saw this one teacher that came from Emory (she stated that she wanted to teach high school math) just quit the first semester of school and did not come back. We knew she was a math whiz but she had a lot of conflict with her students and they did not care about how intelligent she was.

Thinking about my education, I remember taking more classes in the College of Arts and Sciences than the College of Education. In some aspects I wished I had more education classes or more classroom time before my first year teaching. But that is from a secondary education major concentrating on social studies with a history minor.

I believe advance degrees can help the classroom experience. While I was working on my degree, I did research and collected data on my students. I used that data to attempt to help my school and my classroom improve on the EOCT.

By jim d

January 3, 2008 3:56 PM | Link to this

teach1

I really hate to go here,(b/c it tends to PO a few of our regulars) but since you opened the door. Here goes

Without a doubt NO

But then regradless of what anyone would have us believe—public education in its current form here in Ga. isn’t a business.

States like Michigan with their Choice Schools(google it) are transforming education into a business enterprise, reportedly with a good deal of success. Teachers are happy, students are learning and parents are extremely pleased with the results or at least with the ability to be involved in the choice. I spent several weeks up there this past summer traveling the state, and with my passion for education grilled family, friends and even a few teachers about how it was working. I suspect Georgia will enter the 21st century about the time the 22nd arrives. How sad!

By jim d

January 3, 2008 4:13 PM | Link to this

Teach1,

So many questions and so little time (and limited typing skills)

So what would you suggest happen in the education field?

Choice would be an excellent start

Fire your “OK” workers and start over with a new crew or see what you could do to make them work harder and increase their production?

Rid it of the dead wood, Then provide training to improve production. Once production is brought to an acceptable level provide incentives to assure continued growth. (invest in your best asset—your employees)

And how many non-production type activities are you expecting out of your employees?

Funny thing most respond by doing the non productive tasks freely (although not for free)

Do they have to decorate and clean your office?

They have

Or do you give them time to come in and get their things together and make plans for the day so they can undertake your assignments?

They are given their assignments daily in many instances and allowed to fulfil them in a manner they have been trained. (in other words I trust them) I know this is a difficult concept for many teachers to grasp in our current environment, but one that still works!

By jim d

January 3, 2008 4:34 PM | Link to this

L2T,

LMAO—y’all need to get off the fence!

By EducatorX3

January 3, 2008 7:03 PM | Link to this

I just have to weigh in on the issue of content knowledge and teaching knowledge.

I agree all teachers need to know their content, but one can know a lot of content and have no idea how to teach. I have seen many examples of this in classrooms in K-12 schools and in higher education.

I could have a degree in English Literature, but that doesn’t mean I know how to teach a child to read. There are some education courses that are necessary - and in my opinion - many things that should be learned in a supervised internship situation.

I would love to see content undergraduate degrees with master’s in the art of teaching (MAT) and a full year internship for all teachers with 6-12 certification. (yes, I know there are issues there…just stating my opinion)

Most Elementary teachers need additional content but they have to have the “how-to” courses to teach the little ones the things they need.

All teachers need to know how create good assessments and analyze data for the purpose of improving instruction. Teachers need to know theories of classroom management - but that can only really be learned by being the classroom. And teachers need to have a good class on education law, policy, and professionalism. These are all present in GOOD schools of education.

As for diploma mills…ugh! Until the state makes some decisions about the “13 easy visits and you too can be a principal” programs, we will always have issues!

By catlady

January 3, 2008 9:20 PM | Link to this

Luvs, lucky there were no ill effects. I have heard horror stories of cat’s guts being cut by tinsel, or intestional obstruction and infection resulting. No tinsel in our house for decades for that reason.

Now for something completely different: Here is something to ponder about the “anonymous” survey (and teacher distrust). Somehow the administrators knew who had not filled theirs out yet! Which tells me they are not too anonymous. Which verifies teacher reluctance to speak strongly to the problems. So please don’t be too quick to jump on teachers’ “good” ratings (I, too, think they are quite LOW) as a sign of apathy or whatever. Teachers, having been burned before by “voluntary” things of this nature, are pretty cautious about setting in motion (by expressing their true opinions) their assignment to extra duties, poor class groupings, etc. In addition, some of the demographic questions made it quite easy to match some of the faculty with their responses. Think about that!

On the subject of dipoma mills, a high percentage of the administrators in our county (as well as our teachers) have their degrees from these “schools”.

What sort of “curricular expertise” would you suggest primary/elementary teachers hold? We have to know about AND be good at teaching about 8 different subjects a day. You don’t teach social studies the same way you teach math, for example.

By Blueja

January 3, 2008 9:41 PM | Link to this

Many teachers chose not to take part in the survey for fear of reprisals. Yes, the survey claimed to be anonomous. Many teachers had doubts about that. Another important point about the survey is that it was not independent. Those in charge of tallying the results had a vested interest in the outcome. I would hardly regard it as credible research!

By EducatorX3

January 3, 2008 9:43 PM | Link to this

Catlady, You are so right about all the things an elementary teacher needs. I wish I had the magic formula for mixing the content and the pedagogy in the teacher education programs.

While there are many elementary teachers who have vast knowledge and experience in content, many have had very few courses in content beyond their core requirements in college. Again, like you said, you have to have the “how to” for every content area, but I have watched some teachers - both pre-service and in-service - struggle with content concepts that I would expect them to know. Please note that I said “some.” So, maybe it is just an individual need and not a need of the EC-Education programs.

Then again, I don’t think additional content knowledge ever hurts.

Another aside…I think all high school teachers ought to spend a day in a good elementary school classroom to be reminded of what really happens there! (before I get blasted - I also think elementary folks should spend a day in high school!…and everyone should spend a day in middle school!) It distresses me to hear teachers put down those who teach in the different levels without really knowing what it is that they do.

By Jeff

January 4, 2008 6:01 AM | Link to this

EX3:

My ideal (and this is only SLIGHTLY modified from what I have been saying for a couple of years now:

For a teacher, the undergrad degree needs to be thus:

1 class in Child development, appropriate to the age you intend to teach.

1 class in EXC issues.

1 class in basic pedagogy.

The three of these could take 12 hours from the normal ‘free’ electives most undergrad degrees offer.

The remaining 115 hours or so would be content. For elementary teachers, I would have them declare freshman year give them a general knowledge test. They would then be forced to choose between their two WEAKEST areas for their content majors.

Once this process is finished, rather than granting a license on the spot, I would put EVERYONE into a one year long internship supervised only by the administration of the school they are in and some form of mentor teacher. To qualify as a mentor teacher, a teacher would either have to have the ‘master teacher’ designation or National Board certification. In the abscence of these two, I would include any teacher with between 5 and 10 years experience.

Why do I go so low here? At 5 yrs the teacher has just gotten everything together enough to be an effective mentor without overloading them, but at the same time remembers their first year with relative ease and can point out routine pitfalls that a more ‘senior’ teacher might forget about.

Only after this entire process is complete would we release the student-teacher onto the world as a teacher.

By EducatorX3

January 4, 2008 7:55 AM | Link to this

Jeff, We aren’t too far apart here.

I would disagree with child development. I believe it is very important to understand what comes before and after your chosen age group. I also think it is very helpful to have at least a basic understanding of adult learners. However, I do believe that a GOOD psychology of learning or cognitive development course can give the overview necessary with a specific course for the child development content.

My personal belief that good instruction is based on good assessment would require instruction in assessment - how to write it, how to analyze it, how to use it for improving instruction - is necessary for anyone who plans to teach.

I don’t believe that classroom and behavior management can be taught as an isolated skill. While the novice teacher needs the theories and strategies, it makes much more sense for this instruction to be combined with an internship. You don’t know what works until you are in the classroom. And there is no “one size fits all” regardless of what some folks may think.

And the way our schools operate these days, I am not sure there shouldn’t at least be a seminar in educational paperwork and jargon. Make sure the new teachers know the language of all these programs that are floating around and how to work within the confines to implement good teaching.

Have a great day.

By Jeff

January 4, 2008 9:06 AM | Link to this

EX3:

You don’t know what works until you are in the classroom.

COMPLETELY agree on that one. From a ‘teaching’ standpoint, I learned more in 2 hours on my own at Newton than I had in a year and a half of EDUC classes at KSU.

Heck, even in PROGRAMMING you become 10x better within your first week on the job! (And you can ask virtually anyone at KSU’s CSIS Dept that was there when I was - I was among the best they had!)

About child development: When I said that, I had in mind my Adolescent Development class from KSU. The way that class worked was that we learned the BASICS of all phases of life development and then went in depth on the adolescence period.

Taking from KSU’s 2007-2008 catalog, this is what a Math Ed program would look like:

Gen-Ed math, you MUST take either College Trig or Precalc as well as Calc 1. No other Gen-ed requirements other than (obviously) you must complete all Gen-ed requirements.

Lower division major: Calc 2, Calc 3, Programming 1, Chem or Phys 1 and 2

Upper division: Linear Algebra, Differential Equations, Discrete Modeling 1, Probability and Statistics, Modern Algebra, Real Analysis, Senior Experience

EDUC courses (no free electives for those that want to become teachers): Child Development, Exceptional Children, Learning Motivation and Classroom Management.

Once these requirements are fulfilled, student officially graduates college. EDUC program at college at some point within the student’s last semester helps place them in a school for a 1 yr paid internship.

At the end of this internship, if the intern still wants to teach, s/he is granted his/ her license and works on their own to find a new job.

By Mark

January 4, 2008 9:30 AM | Link to this

Wow. We seem to have gotten off the NCLB discussion here.

Jeff… The worst teacher I ever had in school was a man who had earned his doctorate in physics. He had no clue as to how to teach a class. Our classroom was a zoo for that year. We slept, shot spitballs and played practical jokes on him all year. (Hey, we were kids!)

Also, I can guarantee you that my education degree from Emory was not earned easily. I’ll stack my college work up against anyone’s….from anywhere. Granted, there are some colleges that accept unqualified students into teacher preparation programs. Higher pay equals better candidates applying to become teachers….it’s that simple.

It would not make sense for an elementary teacher to major in a content area other than “education.” Those programs not only teach you HOW to educate kids, they also include a hefty amount of content. The elementary methods in math course I took at Emory was one of the most difficult classes I took there. It was substantially more challenging than biology, calculus, or any of the other core courses I was required to take.

Now for NCLB. Teachers and administrators feel great frustration with NCLB because it assumes all students are able to achieve at grade level. Furthermore, it punishes schools, teachers and administrators when students fail to live up to that standard. Each April, we give the CRCT to students with “intellectual disabilities” (retarded, in the old days), students who cannot speak or hold pencils, and students with various emotional and learning disabilities. (Not to mention the large percentage of the population with IQ’s under 90.) NCLB has decided that these students are merely “behind” and can get caught up with proper instruction. Unfortunately, educators are being asked to perform some miracle cure with these students that medical science has been unable to do in over a hundred years. Schools are given until 2013 to have them all at grade level! Along that line of thinking, many changes have taken place with certification, methodology, funding, record keeping, etc. in order to seek this miracle cure. THAT is what has educators frustrated!

By WFC

January 4, 2008 9:41 AM | Link to this

I’m retired after 31 years as a history teacher and administrator in both public and private schools here in Georgia. Here’s my perspective:

• My undergraduate degree was in pure history, no education courses. I never met a single teacher who understood history as well as I do. Of course, I learned that subject matter competence simply isn’t all that important in high schools.

• I went to graduate school for a Masters in teaching (at my own expense) and took all the undergrad education courses as well as the Master’s level work. Some was worthwile, some not. I also took as many graduate level history seminars as I could work in. I was “dirt poor during the two years it took to do this (lots of 19-cents a box macaroni.) Lots of great profs at the State University of West Georgia somewhat made up for this.

• Getting a job in 1976 and thereafter came as a great shock to me. Every single job (5 in all) until the last one depended on my ability to coach sports (basketball, baseball and football. Luckily for me, I was a jock and could do this. I guess you can figure out where our priorities are. Nobody really cared that I was a Woodrow Wilson Fellow in history. A lot of students I taught got lucky that I took my history teaching as seriously as I took my coaching.

By Jeff

January 4, 2008 9:53 AM | Link to this

Mark:

I can understand what you’re saying about the PhD level guy - we had one at one of the HS’s I went to. The guy eventually went on to teach at KSU, where he was much more successful. (He now works under two of the best-in-their-field professors I have ever known.)

HOWEVER, I still maitain that we don’t need more discipline-trained-teachers, we need more teacher-trained-disciplinists, which is what my model promotes.

Heck, one of the biggest laments of post-ES level Math teachers is that most ES level math teachers always hated math, and that comes through in their instruction. It is why we get 6th graders that barely know what a fraction is, much less how to manipulate one.

BUT, you get a teacher-trained-Mathematician in a 1st grade classroom, all of a sudden you’ve got 6 year olds as fascinated with prime numbers as they are with the latest Spongebob cartoon. Much the same as happens with a (FAR more common) teacher-trained-Reader (one that loves to read) in a first grade classroom. All of a sudden, you’ve got kids wanting to spend more time with Dr. Seuss than with even Bugs Bunny.

Oh, and don’t give me the crap about ‘Math for educators’ classes. I had to take a couple myself. Remove the educational bias and make it a straight math class, and it is no harder than Calc 1 - particularly on the ES level.

By luvs2teach

January 4, 2008 11:40 AM | Link to this

Educatorx3 and Jeff - the class that actually had the most impact on my teaching was a Master’s level Cognitive Psychology class that I took as part of my teaching add-on. I got more out of that class than any of the education classes - and it made me think about how I was trying to convey my science information in a way that the brain would get it.

The classes on lesson plan writing were a total waste, IMHO - I was already teaching and writing lesson plans per my schools format (Learning Focused - ugh) and so never used anything I did in that class. When we had to do group units, those were even more of a time waster, because I may or may not be working with people teaching 8th grade science - I wrote a 7th grade math unit - never use that either.

I learned more actually teaching - I think a “best of both worlds” of alternate ed prep and traditional prep would be more effective.

Ohter states do as Jeff suggested - after graduation you have a temporary certificate and can apply for a full certificate after you have some experience.

We could definitely look at how docotors model the training of their profession - interns and master teachers and so on.

Mark - I have a friend who completed the MAT at Emory - it was very rigorous.

AS far as elementary ed goes - you couldn’t pay me enough to work with that age group or do what they do. An effective elementary teacher is worth his or her weight in gold, and I was extremely fortunate that my kids had several through their elementary years - the very best teacher I know is an elementary teacher. When I talk about teacher training, I am relating it to my experience preparing for MS/HS - I totally defer to others as far as what’s best for elementary prep.

By Mark

January 4, 2008 11:47 AM | Link to this

Jeff….You can only say that about the math for educators class because you didn’t have Dr. Skypek for a professor! She wrote the book (literally!) on teaching elementary math. You cannot imagine how complex it was.

So, with your model, are you proposing that students should begin changing classes in kindergarten? Or, do you believe elementary teachers should have a major in seven different fields….one for each of the subjects they teach? They are already required to take a test to prove content knowledge competency in every subject.

About your history guy who went on to success at KSU….Teaching in college is a completely different animal than teaching in elementary, middle or high school.

By V for Vendetta

January 4, 2008 12:14 PM | Link to this

L2T,

Let me throw out an age-old complaint here (one that I don’t always agree with, but here it holds water).

You mention doctors as a model for teacher training, and that’s fine. I agree with that line of thinking. But if teachers were to be trained as rigorously as doctors, wouldn’t it make sense for them to be compensated as well as doctors? I have always felt that doctors deserve their money because of the training they go through and the service they provide.

If teachers were trained in a similar manner — one that resulted in a Phd — and provide a similarly valuable service, it makes sense to compensate them accordingly.

Again, I have NO argument with the way most teachers are currently compensated, I’m just trying to apply a little logic to the (theoretical) educational processes we’ve been discussing here.

By Jeff

January 4, 2008 12:20 PM | Link to this

Mark:

I already noted that ES level teachers should have to take a general-type test among all 4 disciplines early in their collegiate career. They would then have to major in ONE of their two WEAKEST areas. (A required minor in the other area probably wouldn’t hurt.)

If - as you say - they already have to take such a general competency test, I say move it up a couple of years, then proceed with the major selection.

And the guy I knew wasn’t a history teacher. He was a math teacher, and from what I knew of him a true mathematician - hence his success at the collegiate level. (BTW: This guy was also one of my coaches on the Academic Team.)

By Tony

January 4, 2008 12:33 PM | Link to this

The results of the survey by the PSC come as no surprise to me. I hear from teachers regularly about the things that bring frustration and many of the things are rooted in the ridiculousness of NCLB and our state’s reaction to that law. “Accountability” is a word that has been abused as a result of the legislation and the political baggage continues to demean teachers and the fine work they do.

As I have followed the discussion in this thread, I can’t help but put my two cents worth in on teacher prep programs. There is both an art and science to teaching. It is valuable for the teacher to know and understand learning theories that can be applied in the classroom. It is equally important for teachers to have thorough understanding of the content of the courses they teach. This is especially important in high school and to some extent in middle schools.

Mathematics, as has already been discussed, is an area of great concern to me as a school principal. Having teachers who understand mathematical concepts well enough to teach children is vital. Elementary certification programs have begun to pay more attention to this need and it is showing in recent graduates. To make up the difference, I prioritize considerable staff development funds to promote better math instruction in our school.

Back in the day when I taught Chemistry and Physics, my BS degree in Chemistry was of utmost importance. We must have content experts teaching courses like those for our students to get the most benefit. However, I must add that I was a much better teacher because I had some of the education courses that helped me understand how kids learn. The content knowledge alone is not enough to prepare a person to run a classroom where students actually learn what they are supposed to learn.

Finally, my biggest concern in education right now is related to parents’ support. We have many places where families have a very high value on getting an education. Unfortunately, the dropout rate in Georgia is a reflection on our parents more than it is on the schools. When families do not establish strong commitments to education with their children, the school’s job is increased exponentially. It is nearly impossible for us to instill a strong value of learning when it is undermined by poor values at home.

By Jeff

January 4, 2008 12:35 PM | Link to this

Mark:

regarding kindergarteners changing classes:

I wouldn’t use the MS/ HS approach (students move), but I haven’t seen anything that says an approach sometimes used in my ES years (particularly in 5th grade) wouldn’t work:

Teachers move. Kids are in the same room all day, as currently. Difference being, instead of 4 generalists teaching kindergarten, there would be a Math specialist, a Language specialist, a SS specialist, and a Science specialist who would each alternate periods of the day in the room.

As with current practice, I would put people at that level that could genuinely teach that level. The difference between what I would do and what is currently done is that I would make sure those people are trained in a content area first.

I’ve NEVER said that a person can teach HS as well as ES (though my wife was a good ES teacher and is a GREAT HS teacher). All I’ve said is that there needs to be more subject matter expertise at the ES level.

We would still have to strive to match personalities to grade level, but why SHOULDN’T ALL levels of teachers - from Pre-school through PhD programs - be expected to have the same level of content knowledge?

By Mark

January 4, 2008 12:37 PM | Link to this

Jeff..

Could it be that you don’t know about the PRAXIS or the GACE? Teachers have to pass one or the other in order to get certification. The current one is the GACE. It tests your content knowledge in the subjects you teach. It also tests your theoretical/child development knowledge for the age group you teach.

As far as your comment regarding an education degree not being worth the paper it is printed upon… My brother was pre-med with me at Emory. He took Education 101 as a way to bolster his GPA (or so he thought). He ended up making a C in the course. His only other C was in Organic Chemistry. An education degree is not so easily obtained as you think.

By Jeff

January 4, 2008 12:46 PM | Link to this

Mark:

I took PRAXIS II to get my own certification.

Yes, that’s right. I am a certified teacher.

My degree is Computer Science, and I got to within Student Teaching of adding a Math Ed degree onto that.

I then had a year in the classroom before getting fed up and going into what I am best at - programming.

Trust me, I know of what I speak when I trash EDUC degrees.

By luvs2teach

January 4, 2008 12:56 PM | Link to this

V - excellent question regarding compensation - and if someone’s training ultimately results in their having a PhD (relevant and rigorous, folks, not a “doc from a cereal box”), then, yes, better compensation should be expected.

I based what I said on an excellent article I read a couple years ago (ENC Focus, I think) that had mapped out a preparation program that included interns, apprentice teachers, and master teachers. I read it while I was doing my alternate prep program, and it made a lot of sense to me.

Part of my alt prep was a year long internship - basically, just doing my regular job at school, with support, visits and evaluations from the college. The second part of the year was a seminar with classes in ESOL, SPED, and legal issues that you might encounter. We also had an online chat where we discussed issues that came up in our classes. The seminar was a blend of alt and traditional - the traditional were doing their student teaching. Based solely on my experience in that class, it seemed like the traditional folks were having a much more difficult time.

I am now mentoring someone in the TAPP program, and she is doing very well - but I find that I am evaluating my teaching and practice as I help and evaluate her - it’s making me better, too.

So between the two experiences, I really see a benefit to changing the structure of teacher ed(and pay scale could be changed, too - for those of you talking pay-for-performance - I think successfully mentoring another is a benefit of an advanced degree that can and should be a factor in PFP).

I would like to see teaching as a 5 year program (in a lot of places it is), with traditional student teaching at the end of the 4th year, and a full-year, supported internship as the 5th. The basic program would be harder to get into (3.0 GPA, perhaps) and heavy in content - possibly even to the point of being a dual major (science and middle ed, math and secondary ed, arly child development and elementary ed).

A newly graduated teacher would be an aprentice, and assigned a master teacher as a mentor at the new school - and schools would have professional mentorship pregrams in place, not something slapped together. Schools systems would have to have buy-in and close ties with teacher prep programs in order to make this happen effectively.

The teacher could then be an apprentice for two years (they say three years is what it takes to become effective) and then after a period of maybe another 3 - 5 years, could apply to become a master teacher. This could be through a Master’s or Specialist program, National Board Certification, an endorsement or add-on like gifted or ESOL,or the Georgia Master teacher program. Pay could then be commiserate with both experience, level, and extra duties as a master teacher.

What do you think?

By Mark

January 4, 2008 1:02 PM | Link to this

Jeff…

I am truly sorry that your degree in education was not worth the paper it was printed on but please don’t assume all colleges prepare their teachers in a similar manner. I wonder if your degree had been in education, rather than computer science, if you would have had a less frustrating year of teaching…

As an elementary school principal, I do agree with some of what you say. Our 4th and 5th grade students change classes so they can benefit from teachers with particular content expertise.

By Jeff

January 4, 2008 1:11 PM | Link to this

Mark:

The only class that a Math Ed major has on their transcripts that I don’t is Student Teaching.

Other than that, I took - and passed - every single class a single-major Math Ed major at KSU would take.

A question:

If it is so important for 4th and 5th grade to sit under a content master, how much more important then should it be to sit under a content master when one is even MORE impressionable??

By V for Vendetta

January 4, 2008 1:19 PM | Link to this

L2T, maybe we’ve hit upon the answer. If your education results in a PhD, then your compensation should skyrocket. It would also help to curb the problem Jeff has been talking about because to get one, you’d have to have rigorous academic training.

We’ve solved the problem! Which is precisely the reason it will all never happen. :-)

By Jeff

January 4, 2008 1:29 PM | Link to this

V:

We’ve solved the problem! Which is precisely the reason it will all never happen. :-)

LOLROTFLMAO!!!!!

Unfortunately, probably all too true! :(

By luvs2teach

January 4, 2008 1:48 PM | Link to this

Yeah…I thought my answer had way too much common sense…and it would mean people might actually have to -gasp - work together. Too many people whose little area of the world would get rocked, too.

Ah, well, a girl can dream…

By jim d

January 4, 2008 1:53 PM | Link to this

L2T & V,

y’all crack me up.

My logic works just a bit differentlt though.

Teachin ain’t brain surgery ya know. LOL

By luvs2teach

January 4, 2008 2:01 PM | Link to this

jim d - teachers may not do brain surgery - but we do brain training!

…and would you want a surgeon, brain or otherwise, without a well-trained brain?

Besides, like a good surgeon, we do best with a lot of patience!

By teach1

January 4, 2008 11:05 PM | Link to this

Interesting idea that teachers would move in an ES instead of children. I would love to teach one subject for an entire day. My prep time would go down because I would only have to concentrate in that one area and vary it for the students as needed.

But who would take care of ESOL classes and EIP and Speech classes for those that need it and what part of their curriculum would they miss so they could take these classes? Then you still have Art, PE, Music, Character Education and Health.

New topic: “BUT, you get a teacher-trained-Mathematician in a 1st grade classroom, all of a sudden you’ve got 6 year olds as fascinated with prime numbers as they are with the latest Spongebob cartoon.” LOL! I will not believe that any teacher-trained mathematician will get first graders as fascinated with prime numbers as much as Sponge Bob. I guess I would like to meet this miracle worker because I have much to learn. Covering the state curriculum is exhausting enough for my students and me. We did just cover 3-D shapes by describing vertices and faces. Students sure thought it was fun to go home and ask mom what they call the point where two sides meet. When mom said “corner” the students could all tell mom “that is so Kindergarten, everyone knows it’s a vertex.

By Old School

January 5, 2008 9:14 AM | Link to this

teach1: I’m a HS Engineering Drawing instructor and that might lead one to believe I get to teach one subject in each of my 4 block classes…at least that’s what our guidance folks think. Well, imagine every class composed of grades 9 through 12, regular and special needs students, students who chose the class and those who were put in the class, students with no ED experience and seniors in their 8th semester of the class. I try very hard to teach (every day in every class) beginning traditional drafting, beginning AutoCAD, beginning residential design, beginning solid modeling, and more advanced levels of all the above (except the traditional…only 1 semester of that) Fewer and fewer of my assigned students even care about learning something and an even smaller number are prepared with the most basic of skills: measuring, working with fractions, reading & understanding what they read. Far too many just don’t care and will tell me so because my class is “just an elective.”

I am a classically educated teacher who chose industry instead of going straight to the classroom (or in my case as an Industrial Arts major, shop). I know the pedagogy and am very proficient in my field having worked as a technical drafter and a cartographer, freelancing in residential design, designing and building my own home and consulting on other construction projects.

I would love to be allowed to use the old QCCs, which actually were a pretty good outline for teaching drafting, and just continue to prepare my students for entry level jobs or post-secondary training.

I really don’t understand why elementary students can’t have a group of teachers who teach one subject each. By getting back to basics at the most basic levels of education and letting those who are best at teaching those basics TEACH, in a few years we just might see improvement at the upper levels as well.

Do any of us want a house built on a weak foundation?

By JustMe

January 6, 2008 8:04 PM | Link to this

I’ve noticed something reading these posts…..

Most of those criticizing teachers and such are people that have never been inside of a classroom, except as a young student. And, these same ones are the ones saying that teachers don’t know about the ‘real world?’ I propose that they don’t know about the world inside of a classroom!

I worked in the corporate world for a dozen years, with two Fortune 500 companys. I left that and retired (yes retired) - meaning that I have enough money to never work again if that is what I chose to do. However, I decided to give back to the community and teach. This has really opened by eyes as far as understanding the teaching profession.

Those of you that think you know what it is to be a teacher are so very wrong. I don’t think that I have ever met anyone in my life that knows what it is to be a teacher unless they have stood in front of a classroom as a teacher.

Why do you think that the survey shows that the top thing teachers hate is NCLB? Because teachers care about the students and we see the negative impact this is having on our students. If teachers were ‘selfish’ then don’t you think that we would complain about salary, or short lunches, or something like that?

I would hazard to guess that those posting here would reply to such a survey with selfish interests (and just say you want more money).

Before you can really gripe about any teacher, YOU spend a week in front of a classroom and see how YOU do!