Get Schooled

By Leigh

June 27, 2008 8:25 AM | Link to this

Apparently spelling is not our strong suit either.

By Gwinnett Educator

June 27, 2008 8:35 AM | Link to this

I think it can make the teacher more well rounded (if that makes sense..just waking up here)

Looking at my own college career, I just realized that I didn’t have much focus on Math at all. Everything was centered around Reading and Language Arts. But more so Reading. I think because of that, I find myself more willing to go to a Math oriented workshop/training over anything Language Arts related.

By Jeff

June 27, 2008 8:41 AM | Link to this

For all of KSU’s faults as far as their College of Education is concerned in general, I LOVE the fact that they empasize at the 6-12 level that you are a mathematician FIRST and a teacher SECOND. (The difference between a Math Ed major and a Math major - other than the EDUC-type courses, is about 2, maybe 3, MATH classes. Specifically DiffEq - Differential Equations, basically Calc 4 - and a couple of other classes with a ‘2’ behind them, such as Discreete Mathematics 2 or similar.)

Granted, this approach needs to be taken to the K-5 level, but then again the State needs to take the specialization of teachers from the 6-12 level down to the K-5 level. As it stands right now, K-5 are generalists, and this really doesn’t benefit anyone other than reading and ENGL-type classes.

Until then, I’d say add a couple of MATH classes at the K-5 level and remove a reading/ENGL class or two to make room. This is particularly critical when you think in terms of what GPS is attempting to accomplish.

By Kat

June 27, 2008 9:00 AM | Link to this

Link to this story on AJC’s home page has a word spelled incorrectly.

By catlady

June 27, 2008 9:04 AM | Link to this

I’d say yes. In my experience, several of my fellow elementary teachers have math deficiencies. Just this year I had to take aside two bright, experienced folks whose classes I push into to correct mistakes they had made (things they did not have a correct understanding of) in 4th and 5th grade math. I also had to explain some of the reasoning to them for problems in the book. I think GE is right that we spend a great deal of time (in the elementary grades , at least) in reading-related preparation, and, also, many people have had bad experiences in math in the past that makes them more math-adverse. Women, in particular (thank God this is changing), get the message that “girls can’t do math or science.”

When I was in college we had 2 math classes (in addition to math methods class) for elementary teachers which really helped me. I had always just learned the rules (and was good in following them) but I did not understand (had never thought about or questioned) the rules. I went pretty far in math but just accepted that “this is how you get the right answer”. Sometimes students don’t take the rules at face value, so it helps to be able to explain the why. (Example: multiply two negative numbers and you get a positive number—counterintuitive)

IMHO the problem for students in my area for math is that we send them from grade to grade without mastery, even of basic facts. As we have found with other things, people CAN rise to higher standards if you force the issue. If you don’t, some people are likely to just give it a passing effort. To those who argue that mastery isn’t necessary: if a student does not master certain phonics rules, they are unlikely to be a proficient reader in the early grades. Why do we insist on certain standards to go to a harder reading book, but do not insist on certain skills to go to a harder math book?

By Sad Clayton County Parent

June 27, 2008 9:11 AM | Link to this

As far education, particularly math education, goes here, Clayton County has become a real-life “Planet of the Apes.” How sad.

By Teacher

June 27, 2008 9:16 AM | Link to this

Math is just like reading in that just because you can do it does not mean you know how to teach it. You have to know how to break down the skills for the grade level you are teaching.

More math classes are not the answer. Better training in teaching methods during college and once out is what is needed. We had a teacher last year moved from kindergarten to 4th grade with no extra training in how to deliver the math curriculum.

The way Fulton County rolled out the new GPS math curriculum was absolutely terrible. Teachers were handed the new textbooks during pre-planning, given a “workshop” by another teacher who had gone to a summer training and that was that. The curriculum and delivery model is very different from traditional methods but there was no training in how to accomplish this. Many teachers threw up their hands and did double curriculum, what was in the books and what they had traditionally taught. It was ridiculous.

By josh

June 27, 2008 9:20 AM | Link to this

No, but 1+1 might equal poor teacheRs

By Ernest

June 27, 2008 9:31 AM | Link to this

Jeff raises several good points in his post. Perhaps we should consider more ‘departmentalization’ in ES, at least beginning at 4th grade. This would allow teachers to concentrate on their strengths for the benefit of the students. It would also go a long ways towards preparing ES students for changing classes in MS.

A question for any teacher, do you value someone having great content knowledge over instructional abilities or vice versa? Correct me if I’m wrong but teachers take 3-4 years of Math in HS, usually up to Algebra 2 or higher. I could see prospective ES teachers taking math up to Geometry in college to reinforce the content but would you want them to take more classes on how to effectively teach children math concepts? I’m sure most have had teachers who ‘knew their stuff’ but could not teach worth a darn.

By EducatorX3

June 27, 2008 9:34 AM | Link to this

Liking math and/or being good at math does not mean one can teach math. I agree with catlady, many know how to do math without understanding the “why” behind the concept. Many teachers - some even at the high school level - know the rules without understanding the concepts!

Will more math classes help? It depends. We’ve probably all had classes where memorization of formulas was the key to passing - there was little teaching of the true concepts.

Most ECE - and even some Middle Grades programs - need additional math content courses. However, I disagree that we need to drop any ELA/Reading classes. Why not increase the number of courses required so that our K-5 teachers become true specialists in early childhood learning? They should know how to teach math and reading.

And, again agreeing with catlady, we need to realize that students need to master the content before being moved to the next level.

By Jeff

June 27, 2008 9:48 AM | Link to this

Ernest:

You can probably guess where I stand, but here goes:

I personally favor Subject Matter Expertise over ALL else. (Well, exception being if you are a convicted child PREDATOR - and not all convicted for sex crimes in general, or even child sex crimes in particuar, are actual PREDATORS - I don’t want you anywhere NEAR a school.)

Beyond the above exception, however, if you KNOW YOUR CONTENT, I really don’t care about anything else. If you’re a pain/cuss/drink/smoke/general ‘jerk’/whatever, I’ll tell my kid to toughen up and learn everything he can from you.

There again, I don’t subscribe to the current mania of ‘life should be easy for kids and they should never experience any negativity’. I’d rather my kid experience negativity in situations I can somewhat control, and if that means that they have to deal with a few jerks who happen to be subject matter experts along the way, they’ll be better off all around.

By Trained Teacher

June 27, 2008 10:08 AM | Link to this

I have a K-8 degree and have a major in the 4 core subjects the same as a HS Math Teacher. NO, I did not go to college in GA, and maybe that is why I have such good training. Of course, it was from the 70s too.

I am tired of seeing Alg 1 students counting on their fingers and making lines on paper for multiplication problems because they don’t know their facts. They are passed on in Middle School. The buck stops when they repeat 9th grade for the second time in Math and English. We won’t even talk about Social Studies and Science.

New 9th graders will have to take 4 Math classes to graduate. What is the MS doing to prepare their students? Will I teach 4th grade Math remediation to 9th graders? See, my Elem Degree is still useful.

By under_the_radar

June 27, 2008 10:13 AM | Link to this

I will share a dirty little secret to enlighten those of you not in the know. This (IMHO)explains why some of the math scores are so low. When a county faces a teacher shortage, they can hire someone through TAPP or provisional certification. What does this mean? It means the teacher may have a business degree, psychology degree, etc…but managed to pass the GACE. Now they have a 5 year provisional certificate…in that time they work on meeting requirements for certification. Many do not start on this right away…so you have people in the classroom with ZERO teacher training classes. Some schools have good mentoring programs to help them, but many do not. They are thrown to the proverbial wolves with new GPS curriculum that is not user friendly for experienced teachers…let alone newbies. So, no training, no experience, no support, and no idea how to manage behavior…hmmmm that does not translate into overall academic success. Very, very scary indeed.

By EducatorX3

June 27, 2008 10:18 AM | Link to this

Yes, content knowledge is important. But knowing how to read and knowing how to teach someone to read are not the same thing.

If you know how to do math, and you teach me how to do it, I can memorize what you do and still have little mathematical knowledge.

We need a balance between the content and the pedagogy. The best teachers I know are content specialist, instructional experts, and have classroom management down to a science. It takes it all to be a good teacher.

By Jeff

June 27, 2008 10:37 AM | Link to this

EX3:

I am a soldier. My job is to fire a nuclear weapon. All I have to do is enter the proper coordinates and hit the right button.

Do I need to know the particulars of how the weapon works, or do I just need to know how to enter the proper coordinates and hit the right button in order to make the bomb work?

Memorize one way first, you can go back and learn other ways later if needed.

By jc

June 27, 2008 10:40 AM | Link to this

Why is it OK to have a Black Miss USA pagent, but not a White USA pagent?

By RandolphCountyAdministrator

June 27, 2008 10:46 AM | Link to this

“I really don’t care about anything else. If you’re a pain/cuss/drink/smoke/general ‘jerk’/whatever, I’ll tell my kid to toughen up and learn everything he can from you.”

I guess thats why you are selling computers at Wal-Mart instead of teaching math.

By Just A Teacher

June 27, 2008 10:53 AM | Link to this

I find it amusing (and quite predictable) that the State Department of Education’s decision to put more emphasis on math test scores has placed the blame at the feet of educators. Well folks, I have a word problem for state officials. If the cost of gasoline goes up 25%, the cost of food goes up 15%, and teacher salaries go up 2%, how long will it be before Johnny and Mary are being taught by “poor” teachers? When you figure out the answer, please email the Governor, so he can copy your work. I don’t think he and Ms. Cox got that far in math.

By vet-teacher

June 27, 2008 11:01 AM | Link to this

undertheradar you are correct. My county, title 1, constantly has a high teacher turnover every year. Guess who gets hired? Usually relatives of people with hiring power. In my 15 years here not a single TAPP teacher is still here. The number that completed the program and moved on to greener pastures is VERY VERY small. The question that needs to be asked is why so many teachers leave the profession each year. Oh wait; we already know the answer to that.

By SallyB

June 27, 2008 11:02 AM | Link to this

In my experience with teacher prep…speaking of elementary as well as middle school, there is very, very little emphasis on subject matter, math or any other. The required courses are heavy on ED. theory, methods, materials and VERY light on subject area courses. In fact, I when I took some classes OUTSIDE the ED dept., those professors were very open about their lack of regard for the preparation / requirments for certification to teach any subject. If I stayed within the Ed dept. course requirements for certification I don’t think I would have been prepared at all.

By SallyB

June 27, 2008 11:10 AM | Link to this

It’s difficult for parents [as well as colleagues] to have high regard for teachers who do not speak standard American English correctly, and who cannot write a note to parents without it being loaded with grammatical and spelling errors. This should be a requirement for certification also.

IN fact, I think I have read that a little known part of NCLB is that all teachers who teach ESOL must be able to pass a written ENglich exam before being allowed to teach ESOL. One school superintendent in the northeast decided to enforce that and Only 2 of the ESOL teachers passed. He took it himself and did not pass either!

By Lynn43

June 27, 2008 11:12 AM | Link to this

I was required to have only 1 math course in college, but, in no way, does my subject area use math. The course I took was a “farce”. In an Honor Society forum to the faculty discussing courses that needed to be added to the general ed, I quoted that the only thing I had learned was that P implied Q, and I had lived 30 years without knowing that and guessed that I could live another 30 years without knowing that. Money Management should be a required “Math” course.

By OTP

June 27, 2008 11:18 AM | Link to this

I have an acquaintance who is an elementary math teacher in Copenhagen. She begins with her students in grade 1 and moves up with them through the end of our equivalent of grade 4 or 5. Then she loops back down. She’s a math instructor and not a generalist trying to cover everything. Every content area is taught in the manner. From her perspective the benefits are enormous. She knows the full curriculum and can teach the foundations the kids must know for course 5 years ahead. And when she’s at the other end, she knows what/how the kids have been taught and where strengths and weaknesses lie. Some kids transition in/out but the most make it through several years if not all in the same school.

We discussed possible personality conflicts, a concern parents may raise and she said longstanding ones are rare but the everyday difficulties of getting along with others works itself out and kids come away with great life skills that help them with employers and family conflicts much better than being able to “escape” each time they “don’t get their way.”

By SallyB

June 27, 2008 11:21 AM | Link to this

Educator3X RE The best teachers I know are content specialist, instructional experts, and have classroom management down to a science. It takes it all to be a good teacher. Very well said. Unfortunately, Ed. prep is heavy on the last 2,very light on the first. However, although classroom management and instructional techniques can be acquired in school, I sometimes think those are talents / gifts that are difficult to develop if you don’t at least have a little of the gift . Also, observation of really good techniques and management styles in real life school situations is much more effective that just hearing it in an Ed class.

By Ernest

June 27, 2008 11:59 AM | Link to this

Well said by EducatorX3 @ 10:18! I also believe a stong balance is needed. Jeff, even in the business world, strong SMEs don’t necesarily make good managers. A teacher is a manager in some sense of the word. They must be able to recognize the unique needs of their ‘employees’ and use the right methods to reach them. In this day and age, the ‘my way or the highway’ mentality doesn’t get one very far.

The focus of the blog was on ES teachers. I don’t think they need as much math content background as a MS or HS teacher. The more the better to help with developing different analogies for instruction.

By Penguinmom

June 27, 2008 12:10 PM | Link to this

Jeff - Kennesaw has one of the best math departments anywhere! (Or at least they did 18years ago.) :-)

Unfortunately a lot of elementary teachers are people who were great with reading/history/english but who were not so strong on science and math. They are great, caring people who truly love the kids but they are not all that comfortable with math.

That discomfort translates into less certainty when they are teaching concepts and an inability to come up with different ways to explain a concept since they don’t have a strong comfort level to start with.

This also leads to kids who don’t have a strong level of certainty in what they’ve learned.

The other thing though, beyond the teachers, is that there needs to be an increased emphasis on basic facts. As someone else said, high school kids are still struggling with their basic facts.

Future sucess in upper level math is detemine in a large part by how well you know the basic facts. You cannot keep up in the middle of a long problem if you are struggling to remember what 7X6 is. The kids lose their place and begin to think the problem is hard when the real problem is that they don’t know their basic facts.

We end up with calculator-dependent kids but then if that student moves on to be an elem teacher they can’t use their calculator in the classroom.

By Jeff

June 27, 2008 12:38 PM | Link to this

One of my first experiences watching someone in the classroom as a professional came in my Intro to Teaching class when I was assigned to a 6th grade math teacher (prophetic, huh?). This teacher WAS the very teacher I tried to become years later. (Extremely tough, not a PC-type professional, would rather kids hate him and learn from him than have their self esteem built up, etc)

Anyways, on point:

This guy’s big thing was multiplication facts. He CONSTANTLY drilled these into those kids, and on Fridays - or whenever he had a few extra minutes in class - he had competitions to see who knew their facts the best.

I could probably go up to those kids now - they were in 6th grade spring semester of 03, so they’d be rising seniors now - and they could more than likely STILL tell me those facts at the drop of a hat.

I’d bet there’s some future engineers in that particular group…

By shadow7071

June 27, 2008 12:40 PM | Link to this

I think that ES teachers should be comfortable and confident with the fundamental arithmetic/math operations - adding, subtracting, dividing, multiplication, and fractions. And, they should be confident and comfortable with teaching these skills to their students.

I believe it is a well accepted fact that in this country that we fear math. This is not new. These feelings have existed for years. It is one of the reasons that fewer and fewer people go into science and engineering. Why do we fear math? I’m not sure that there is a solid answer. But, personally, I think it begins in the early years of education and hinges on those early developmental experiences that we have with learning math. Therefore, I believe, that if a child has a teacher that is not comfortable and confident with math then the child senses this and develops their own lack of confidence with math. And as time goes the fear of math sets in and this is hard to overcome.

By thomas

June 27, 2008 12:52 PM | Link to this

The question is not if elementary teachers really need more content knowledge. The question is can the people actually teach the subject to 6-11 years olds effectively. That is what the problem is.

Most of the people have the content knowledge necessary to teach third grade math. They can add, subtract, and divide. It’s teaching third graders how to do it that’s the problem. It is the same problem that exists in reading, writing (but some people actually can’t write), science, and social studies.

The reality is that reading and math are skills based activities. It is more than just memorizing facts. Many of our teachers struggle teaching these difficult skills. Some of them are struggling just maintaining the classroom from day-to-day (classroom management with students, dealing with parents and administration, paperwork, keeping the room clean and organized, etc.).

The only people I have seen really successful in this endeavor as a whole are the ones in schools that have a majority middle and upper middle class population. The test scores speak for themselves. The reality is, AGAIN, that our schools really can’t teach anyone who is not prepped for success in school/society. The students in the schools of East and West Cobb, for example, come to school groomed for success. The teachers don’t have to be Superwomen to teach the basic GPS curriculum to the students in order to be successful.

What these people have going for them is the fact that, 1) The vast majority of the teachers have been at the school for several years and aren’t going away anytime soon (hence, no high teacher turnout and a staff composed of at least semi-veterans), and 2) teachers have students who come from backgrounds and cultures similiar to theirs. The kids have the background knowledge and the parents have worked with them to fill in any of the gaps.

Before we talk so much about whether or not math education at the college level is lacking, I think we should look at the “good” schools and examine why they are so successful at producing students who ace the standardized tests. I can guarantee you that I can take a so-called average teacher ed graduate and put her in a East Cobb school and she will shine. I can put her in a West Cobb school and she will be successful. She can go to a North Cobb school and survive. But put this girl in south Cobb with a bunch of black and Latino students and she will struggle. She will do her one, two, or three years and get the h_ll out. It happens here everyday of the week. They come in on day one with plans of only doing their “time” and getting out. Why? Because they know they are not prepared to handle is put in front of them- either culturally or pedagogically. And the fact of the matter is that 95% of these people “didn’t go to school to teach these people”. They may not admit it out loud, but it’s the truth.

Let’s face it— teaching ain’t no joke. It took many, many hours or advanced, college level training and study to realize that it takes ADDITIONAL, SPECIALIZED training, beyond the garbage taught to bachelors level teacher ed students, to really be able to teach many of our students. I will say this— the colleges of education ARE NOT preparing its students to teach in the urban and rural schools of America. These students who come out of school are prepared only to teach the best students, in the best of environments. The majority of America is not made up of East Cobbs.

By MP

June 27, 2008 12:56 PM | Link to this

I had some great math teachers in HS and college. Today, I wonder why certain courses (maybe all) from 1st grade through high school could not be done via e-learning. I know the answer may be cost, but it seems that if enough systems subscribed to computer/video/audio based courses where the subject matter is consistently good and consistently delivered we would see better results. Why do we always have to have a human teacher leading the teaching? Let’s write one script for each chapter, one video, one audio, one set of graphics, and rotate test questions.

Why not?

By mom of 3

June 27, 2008 12:58 PM | Link to this

My 3 children had the same math teacher in 5th grade and she was excellent. She held the kids to a high standard and challenged them. unfortunately many of the parents complained that little Susie had too much homework that interferred with dance, gymnastics, piano, swimming and tennis lessons. Then they complained that the teacher was too hard. My children have been involved in some extracurriculur activities but school always comes first. They were well prepared for middle school and have excelled in math even into high school.

Until parents get serious about their children’s education and quit enrolling them into activities every single night of the week, then there are always going to be problems.

By KennMom

June 27, 2008 12:58 PM | Link to this

As the parent of a 2nd grader, I have seen the teachers push “tricks” to learn math and reading, instead of repetitive use for math and phonics for reading. For some students it may help, but not everyone learns the same way and trying to remember math tricks at 6 yrs old just makes math more confusing. Also, I have noticed that not all teachers use the same methods, so when the child moves into the next grade, he may be faced with a completely new way of learning math, which may be good or bad. It seems that educators just need to get back to the basics.

By shadow7071

June 27, 2008 1:02 PM | Link to this

Thomas, I think you’ve hit the nail on the head. Well said.

By thomas

June 27, 2008 1:10 PM | Link to this

What I can’t understand is why Jeff is still gloritizing being a bully teacher. Isn’t being a bully is what got you fired as a teacher? Excuse me— I meant “encouraged you to resign and seek a new career.”

What many of these people don’t realize it that “being tough” will get you nowhere. I invite all of you to read this POWERFUL article.

http://ednews.org/articles/20389/1/The-Teacher-As-Bully/Page1.html

If Jeff had followed this advice, he might still be teaching today. And don’t tell me some garbage about politics and superintendents. The fact is that you went into the classroom and nutted up. We have teachers who do wrong in our classrooms everyday (particularly on the side of town I work in- they are allowed to do it). But the fact is, my friend, there is a double standard in teaching. Women are allowed to get away with that stuff and men (particularly, and for some strange reason, white men) are put away for lesser transgressions.

By catlady

June 27, 2008 1:10 PM | Link to this

Where do we go to get supervisors to be more willing to allow us to require mastery of facts? Our K-5 math coach seemed astounded when I told her kids should not be passed on until they have them down. But here is what you see as a result: 10 and 11 year olds at my school, who, if asked to compute 10-8 HAVE TO USE THEIR FINGERS. If asked 8+7, you see the fingers pressing against their thighs as they count. And God help you if you ask them (4th and 5th graders) what 9X7 is! Do we even have enough paper for the tally marks? You can FORGET such things as 69 divided by seven (or even 63 divided by 7) Most of the GPS requires being able to do simple computation in more complex problems, yet our system says we must “expose” these kids to more complex concepts when they are not able to take baby steps unaided. The classroom teacher is supposed to work with students in small, needs-based groups to catch them up. The only thing is, some stuff is JUST PLAIN MEMORIZATION. Over half our 4th and 5th graders failed the math CRCt. That should indicate SOMETHING.

By Jeff

June 27, 2008 1:35 PM | Link to this

thomas:

Who produced better results: The catholic nuns that wouldn’t hesitate to smack your hand with a ruler or the liberal pansies of today? (Here’s a tip: One of those two groups put a man on the moon.)

And you attack me, but then note the rampant racism and sexism against white men in schools (which is EXACTLY what happened in my case, as older black ladies came into my classroom using the EXACT methods I did, and not a WORD was said)… go figure.

By HS Teacher, Too

June 27, 2008 1:56 PM | Link to this

“I could probably go up to those kids now - they were in 6th grade spring semester of 03, so they’d be rising seniors now - and they could more than likely STILL tell me those facts at the drop of a hat.”

Jeff, I should hope so! And that ability should be true of almost all high school seniors! It’s a sad state of affairs, indeed, if we consider it an accomplishment that a high school senior would be able to recite their multiplication facts “at the drop of a hat!”

By RandolphCountyTeacher

June 27, 2008 2:45 PM | Link to this

Thomas

I had the misfortune to teach with Jeff. To this day he believes that he was screwed over. The simple fact is he could not cut it as an educator. I assume he has found his dream job. He certainly has enough time to post here doesn’t he? ;)

By mom3boys

June 27, 2008 2:49 PM | Link to this

Jeff, I will be 46 this year, and I still know my math facts…seriously. So do my kids…I still can recite the prelude to the Canterbury Tales (in middle English), as well as many other random literary works. However, we do not stress memorization in school now. I asked my students to memorize something last year and they nearly had a stroke. In my book, knowing your math facts 5,10, or 40 years later is no big accomplishment…it should be a given.

By Jeff

June 27, 2008 3:31 PM | Link to this

HST2:

I’ve forgotten what subject you teach - sorry - but I do know that my HONORS Geometry students (mostly sophomores, some freshmen) couldn’t do it.

By SarahTG

June 27, 2008 3:56 PM | Link to this

Someone early in this thread talked about a teacher who drilled multiplication facts into their students’ heads. Most of us who are a little older (I’m 49) remember when this was the norm. I was additionally blessed by a fifth grade math teacher (who had 63 students in her class!) who refused to leave fractions to go on to something else until every one of us could add, subtract, multiply and divide fractions in our sleep. It took 3 1/2 months, but the benefit was incalculable. We gained an understanding, a FEELING for the relationships of numbers, whole and fraction, that students just don’t receive today. What fifth grade teacher today is allowed to look at his/her class, say “they don’t get it yet”, and stick with a topic until they do? And because they can’t 4th/5th graders add 8 + 7 with their fingers. We need smaller schools, smaller classes, teachers who aren’t afraid of their students (or parents!), and less standardization of curriculums.

By Just Curious

June 27, 2008 3:57 PM | Link to this

Jeff

By your own admission you were in the classroom less then a year but you had honor students??? I had to teach 2 years as a minimum before I could get a gifted endorsement. Not trying to start an argument but surely you realize that not too many people are going to take you, or your advice, too seriously.

By Jeff

June 27, 2008 4:29 PM | Link to this

Curious:

The class was titled “Honors Geometry”.

It wasn’t a class that required a gifted endorsement.

And I know MENTALLY RETARDED kids that are smarter than many of the kids I had in that class….

By lovelyliz

June 27, 2008 4:56 PM | Link to this

My niece attends a private Christian school. Her 6th grade Bible/math teacher was telling the parents about her son who was taking a pre-calculus class of which she admittedly had no real understanding. She then said something I have never heard a math teacher even at the elementary/middle school level say I don’t like math

It’s cheaper to get someone who teaches another subject to teach math than it is to hire someone with a master’s degree in that subject.

As a former math teacher, I had to deal with parents who couldn’t understand why their children couldn’t use calculators in basic math class.

It doesn’t help that so math classes are teaching students to regurgitate what’s going to be on some standardized test rather than to think. Teaching the tricks to get the easy answer rather than trying to understand the concepts.

Yes, you need to think in math class.

By thomas

June 27, 2008 4:56 PM | Link to this

Truth be told:

Teachers should not be bullies. It results in lower student achievement and morale and its unprofessional.

However, there is a double standard in education. I know of people who should not be teaching. They have abused students and even put their hands on them. Some are men and some are women. But for the most part, the margin for error for men is much smaller. I will give Jeff this point— he MAY be right. There may have been other teachers, men, women, black, or white who may have acted similarly to himself and not experienced the same difficulty he did. But there is one difference he may not have told us. It is how you handle “issues” that has an impact on what “problems” you might have at school.

By Tony

June 27, 2008 5:18 PM | Link to this

This report is quite lengthy and will take me some time to review it. The National Math Panel released their report in March and it reviewed several studies attempting to link elementary teachers’ knowledge of mathematics to student achievement. There were no definitive studies and the overall analysis produced a mixed bag of results. So, based on research at hand, there is not a strong link between teachers’ math knowledge and elementary school students’ performance.

As a high school chemistry teacher, I know the importance of content knowledge in the high school levels, and math is no exception.

One of the things I noticed on the web-site where the report is located was another title about alternative certification. My reaction to what I saw was that there is an agenda being pushed. One poster today has already shared his/her concerns about TAPP teachers, and I agree that alternative certification is not what it’s cracked up to be.

My dissertation is in process and I am focusing on the teaching of elementary math in our schools. (I will focus upon professional development in schools.) There are deficiencies in our teaching, but these deficiencies seem more closely related to pedagogy rather than content. Now Jeff would have you believe that content is the most important thing, but in elementary school teaching it is not! What I see in classrooms is that teachers have difficulty with the concepts of mathematics. In the last few years we have made a huge jump from rote math facts to requiring the understanding of concepts of how the math works. At the same time we have made this curriculum shift, our state legislators and the governor have eviscerated the staff development budget by over 60%.

During the last four years, I have had an opportunity to work closely with a university to improve ES teacher training and have been amazed at some of the political pressures the universities are now required to endure. As we negotiated to increase the math requirements for ES teachers, we were met with resistance because of mandates from the Chancellor. Adding requirements could only be done by taking away requirements elsewhere. The Board of Regents saw fit to tack on core requirements in science.

One of the ironies about “teacher quality” is in how it is being defined and implemented. Many people do not yet realize the effects this federal intrusion may have on their schools. I would encourage everyone to look into how their district is planning for their own policies for teacher quality.

Finally, to answer the questions: Teacher candidates should take more math in college and more pedagogy. There is an important balance between these two that must not be overlooked. Colleges should also look more at teacher candidates’ dispositions. Some people are not cut out to be teachers.

By Just A Teacher

June 27, 2008 5:57 PM | Link to this

As for the discussion of the importance of pedagogy in elementary and middle school mathematics, I would like to share something from my own experience as an 8th grader. I attended a junior high school and I consistently scored very high on the language arts section of standardized tests, so I was placed in the most advanced classes with the same group of kids all day. In Algebra class, I was the worst student and the teacher arranged the classroom seating chart according to how we scored on the previous test. I was consistently in the back corner of the room. Once, one time only, I scored high enough on a test to move up 2 seats. Instead of praising my effort, the teacher derided those students for doing worse than me. I have never liked Math after that class even though I think I now have a higher degree than that teacher did. I am a high school fine arts teacher, and I admit my Math is shakey, at best. I’m pretty sure I had to know my multiplication tables from 1 - 12 before I got out of 5th grade, however. I can’t imagine what high school Math would have been like with a calculator. Then again, I’m an old guy who wrote his English papers on an electric typewriter with footnotes.

By Math Educator

June 27, 2008 6:34 PM | Link to this

I am a college level math educator in GA, and I teach math courses for future elementary teachers. So, obviously my comments are biased by my background. But, here are a few facts:

It appears that the UGa was identified as one of the schools that was doing well. The truth is all GA state colleges and universities are under the same rule - 5 mathematics courses. Some places actually require 6 as they have a statistics as a part of general education requirements.

Those are the facts about the mathematics requirement for future elementary teachers.

By Lee

June 27, 2008 6:47 PM | Link to this

Oh good grief. Are we really surprised that a group of academics are proposing that the solution to low elementary Math achievement is more academics for teachers?

Conveniently overlooked is the fact that back in the 50’s and 60’s, a significant percentage of elementary teachers only had a high school education. They seemed to do all right back then.

Maybe I should do a research project on the inverse correlation between teacher education and the quality of schools.

Bottom line, an elementary school teacher should have enough Math knowledge with a high school diploma to teach math concepts to elementary students.

By HS Teacher, Too

June 27, 2008 7:19 PM | Link to this

Jeff, I taught high school math. I’m not presently teaching. And I, too, had students who were not fluent in their multiplication facts. But, that doesn’t mean we should celebrate those that are. As I said earlier, it’s a sad state of affairs if that reflects the depths to which we have fallen, and I don’t think it is (quite) that bad (yet). On the other hand, I did give weekly multiplication-facts timed quizzes to my ninth graders, when I had them, so I am aware that the kids don’t all know their facts.

By HS Teacher, Too

June 27, 2008 7:27 PM | Link to this

Lee, The key word is “should.” I say that because, though I don’t disagree with you, today’s programs are so insanely watered-down that today’s graduates do not have the skills that one would expect to correlate to the classes they have taken. And I say this as a high school math teacher who has been pressured to lower standards for Algebra 1, Algebra 2, and Trigonometry to the point that the classes no longer fairly and accurately reflect their titles. And that, of course, is a travesty.

So, yes, a high school education’s level of math ought to be sufficient, but we must mean a real high school education’s level of math, and not today’s superficial fluff.

By Jeff

June 27, 2008 7:44 PM | Link to this

Math Educator:

5 courses. WOW. Secondary teachers have TWICE that - AND REGULARLY have to reteach things that the K-5 teachers SHOULD have taught.

Again: Subject Matter Expertise above ALL else.

Interesting that we don’t trust COLLEGE professors who do not demonstrate COMPLETE SME, and yet we trust our most VULNERABLE students with people that could barely get a JANITOR’s job in the Ivory Tower…..

By TheBlogger

June 27, 2008 8:14 PM | Link to this

It isn’t how many math courses that should be the issue. You can take many, many math courses in college that are rudimentary.

It is the level of math courses in college that are important.

If an elementary school teacher can make a B or better grade in Calculus I, that should be good enough.

By Math Educator

June 27, 2008 8:29 PM | Link to this

Lee,

Unfortunately, US children have never done well in math compared to their international counterparts - even back in the 60’s. There has NEVER been a “good old days,” unfortunately.

Speaking of international studies, Japanese elementary school teachers would say that the most important goal of elementary education is to nurture their children to be responsible and productive members of the society. They teach think carefully about teaching subject matters to serve that goal - children first, then subjects. Interestingly, Japanese children have been consistently outperforming the US students.

By EducatorX3

June 27, 2008 8:46 PM | Link to this

Jeff…quick question. do you believe that EVERY student you have ever taught (in your VERY short time in the classroom) would remember everything you “taught?”

Think about it…I have taught at the college level where I have had some students who didn’t know what they should have been taught in high school (even math concepts taught by people with 10 classes of math!)

When I taught high school, I had some students who didn’t know what they should have been taught in middle school.

When I taught middle school, there were some kids who didn’t know everything they should have learned in elementary school.

In elementary school, I had students who came in without knowing basic information they should have learned at home.

We can play the blame game all day long. Those elementary teachers you want to put down didn’t just take 5 math classes, they took classes in Language Arts and how to teach writing. They took classes in reading and how to teach a child to read. They took content and pedagogy in science and social studies.

I will still hold to the saying: They don’t care how much you know until they know how much you care. Teaching is far more than knowing the content.

I am NOT saying content is not important. Like SallyB said, our teacher ed programs don’t always get it done. The program I taught in is making great strides in changing that, but you have to work within the guidelines of the Board of Regents as far as required coursework.

If we truly want to teach our children to think, we must have interdisciplinary knowledge. We have to be a jack-of-all-trades, and a master of many. We must be able to explain the content, not just spew factoids to be repeated in unison by those who happen to be sitting in the classroom. There is a huge difference in knowledge and understanding.

You see, Jeff, I want that soldier who sets the coordinates and pushes the button on the nuclear weapon to also understand what to do if something goes wrong. I want that soldier to be able to think through any situation and have multiple solutions.

Catlady… Where do we go to get supervisors to be more willing to allow us to require mastery of facts? There are some of us out there. Unfortunately, as long as we allow folks to be administrators with degrees from “13 easy visits and you too can be a principal” programs, we will have folks who don’t get it!

Sorry for such a long post!

By HS Teacher, Too

June 27, 2008 9:27 PM | Link to this

EducatorX3, please don’t apologize for the long post. It’s a pleasure to read your comments!

By Tony

June 27, 2008 9:52 PM | Link to this

After looking through the report cited in this blog, I want to throw up. Let me name a few names of the high powered educators on the distinguished panel: E.D. Hirsch, Chester Finn, Roy Barnes, … Can anyone spell A G E N D A.

The basis of their report is a simple analysis of texts, syllabi, and number of courses of math content in graduation requirements for degrees from various universities. They make very broad recommendations for all elementary school programs of study based on this analysis.

The research in the area of elementary math teaching is lacking in many ways, but the fact that this report is generated without regard for existing research is ludicrous. I guess the real amazing thing is that the media is very eager to publish such alarm-raising news.

There is much more that drives the American economic engine than what happens in our schools. There is creativity, innovation, and perseverance.

By Tony

June 27, 2008 9:54 PM | Link to this

After looking through the report cited in this blog, I want to throw up. Let me name a few names of the high powered educators on the distinguished panel: E.D. Hirsch, Chester Finn, Roy Barnes, … Can anyone spell A G E N D A.

The basis of their report is a simple analysis of texts, syllabi, and number of courses of math content in graduation requirements for degrees from various universities. They make very broad recommendations for all elementary school programs of study based on this analysis.

The research in the area of elementary math teaching is lacking in many ways, but the fact that this report is generated without regard for existing research is ludicrous. I guess the real amazing thing is that the media is very eager to publish such alarm-raising news.

There is much more that drives the American economic engine than what happens in our schools. There is creativity, innovation, and perseverance.

By Tony

June 27, 2008 10:06 PM | Link to this

Amen EducatorX3!!!

Math Educator and others - are any of you aware of the international studies that give favorable results for US kids? TIMMS and PIRLS are hardly ever mentioned and PISA gets all the attention because it is of “The Sky Is Falling” ilk.

The problems we face in educating our children these days are more rooted in social concerns than in schooling concerns. Yesterday’s topic about transient students is one of the symptoms that shows up in areas where poverty is a concern. Healthcare for children in poverty is another one. Schools can not fix these two factors, yet they are demonized as underperforming when there students come from these circumstances.

ps: sorry about the double post. my network connection is going crazy.

By Math Educator

June 28, 2008 12:18 AM | Link to this

Tony,

If you meant TIMSS, then I am very familiar - it was originally the Third International Math and Science Study. It is now called the “Trend in…” As the name suggests, it was the follow up on the first and second international studies, both of which showed the US students to be in the middle at best. In fact, the TIMSS, whose results were released in the late 90s, was the source of more recent concerns for US math education. PISA simply confirmed that US students aren’t doing too well even when the emphasis became more “practical.” I am not aware of any large scale international study in mathematics that gave US students any favorable results. On the other hand, US paticipants in the Math Olympiad have done very well.

I think the TIMSS results showed that US 4th graders were doing better (relatively speaking) than their 8th graders. The results from the PISA may be suggesting that the 12th graders are doing even worse than the 8th graders.

By Simon

June 28, 2008 12:46 AM | Link to this

Jeff,

What’s your problem? I hope you are not an educator - if you are, unfortunately, you are the best example of why teachers are not considered professional. You just keep blaming others…

By Math Educator

June 28, 2008 12:51 AM | Link to this

My apology for multiple posts. If anyone is interested in viewing a video of Japanese elementary math lessons, you can see a few of them at the following:

http://hrd.apecwiki.org/index.php/ClassroomInnovationsthroughLessonStudy#LearningfromLessonsandLessonStudyVideos

By Math Educator

June 28, 2008 1:02 AM | Link to this

I guess the link didn’t show up correctly. Try here

By lovemy4kids

June 28, 2008 2:14 AM | Link to this

Math Educator:

Thanks for the link. My 5th grade home school curriculum uses the same method for teaching the area of a circle. The day we covered this lesson, I happened to serve orange slices at lunch. I had a “Eureka!” moment. As I stared at the segmented circle of orange slice, I realized that by cutting it in half, I could carefully separate the triangular sections and flatten out the curve on the two halves. I then slid the two pieces together (like shark’s teeth) and voila, I had a parallelogram. My child was fascinated! This might be a fun demonstration for your class. It also makes a delicious snack when you are through.

By OldSchool

June 28, 2008 6:42 AM | Link to this

In skimming over the previous posts, I gather that we’re talking “meat” and “method” as being important in math instruction. May I add one more observation? Although I am a 34 year veteran shop/drafting instructor, I was assigned one freshman/sophomore math class for one quarter early in my career. They were the lowest achieving students and several had been “placed” in high school. I was told only to “teach addition, subtraction, multiplication, and division with maybe a bit on percents.” Talk about being thrown to the wolves! I had no clue as to how to begin and my classroom was on the other side of the campus from the entire math department in a completely separate building.

I sought help from my fellow shop teachers (We are T&I instructors hired directly out of industry and many had no degrees at all mind you.) With them behind me, I went back to basics and taught the math students SHOULD know when they get to OUR classes. I used flash cards, drills, and even got the students to come up with their own class activities that involved measurement. I brought in precision devices like micrometers and calipers and we measured drill bits. We took surveyor’s tapes and calculated square footage and volume of buildings. We even figured materials and building costs for the sheds being built in construction class.

Maybe they didn’t go on to calculus and some still failed or even dropped out, but those who came into our T&I classes did so with a very valuable skill in their pockets…MATH FOR THE REAL WORLD.

So, in my opinion, mastery of the subject matter is crucial, focusing on delivery methods is vital, and tying it into the real world will make it stick because it makes sense.

But while we are waiting for the educrats to “discover” this, they need to back off the cure de jour and LET US TEACH!

By Lisa B.

June 28, 2008 10:05 AM | Link to this

Programs like Reading First take up huge amounts of the primary and elementary school day with a 150 minute block. Students still have lunch, recess, music, art, PE, Social Studies, Science and Math crammed into the schedule. I was extremely alarmed when a primary school administrator said that her teachers “try” to teach math for 20 minutes every day. Gosh, I “try” to do lots of things.

As far as learning multiplication facts, I mostly practiced at home with my mother. We reviewed and tested at school, but much of the memorization happened at home.

By Tony

June 28, 2008 3:21 PM | Link to this

Math Educator, if you are very familiar with these studies then you are familiar with the flaws. PISA tests students at a specific age - 15. Inherent in that is the unequal representation of students in various nations. While we still educate all students at 15 in a regular high school setting, this is not so for all the nations who participate.

A recent book of articles written by European researchers challenges the reliability, validity, statistical procedures, cultural bias, exclusion of disabled kids, interpretation and virtually everything else about PISA. Here’s a short quote from one of the chapters by British economist, S. J. Prais.

“That the U. S., the world’s top economic performing country country, was found to have schooling attainments that are only middling casts fundamental doubts on the value, and approach of these surveys [such as PISA].”

Typically, people pick and choose the “research” that fits the message. Politicians are notorious for this. The vouchers for DC kids was recently under scrutiny in congress. It turns out there is no significant difference in performance between the voucher kids and the public school kids in this two-year old experiment. Congress voted to continue the funding even though the research indicates questionable results.

Yes, TIMSS indicated 4th grade children were faring better than 8th grade, but in some nations the filtering of students into other programs has already begun.

Another not about international studies: in the sixties the US had less than stellar results in comparison with a few other countries. In the fifties, Time/Life ran a series about the mediocrity of US students. Yet, we have continued to be the dominant economic force. Japan’s economy tanked in the 90s while our remained the strongest. Considering it was the “mediocre” kids from the 50s and 60s who were the movers and shakers of the 90s how can we continue to make claims about the effect of student achievement on the economy?

By Math Educator

June 28, 2008 4:59 PM | Link to this

Tony,

I know that there have been issues raised about the methodology of these studies. I think the data collection for the TIMSS was rather very well done. These researchers were very aware of the fact that different countries have different systems. So, the researchers set up a pretty strict set of standards. Clearly they are not perfect, but the fact that the US students performance were fairly consistent with the first two international studies seems to suggest that the results weren’t only because US “educate all. The argument that because US students did poorly, the methodology must be wrong seems to be rather unscientific, doesn’t it?

I think there are probably many factors that contribute to the economic power of the United States in spite of its not-so-great K-12 education systems. In a way, the United States is an example that K-12 education may not be as important for a nation’s economic power if other factors are present.

By Tony

June 28, 2008 5:24 PM | Link to this

The argument that because US students did poorly, the methodology must be wrong seems to be rather unscientific, doesn’t it? Actually, no. It is somewhat of a non sequitur and begs further investigation, especially when there is evidence of manipulation of samples. As a person of science, I understand the need to be extremely cautious about drawing conclusions based on superficial evidence. There must be other evidence to corroborate the findings. And, yes, the TIMSS project was very meticulous about the collection of data, but they were not in complete control in the host countries.

Singapore is often held up as a fine example of a nation for its achievement in mathematics education. Yet, the ministers of education seek out answers from our educators because their students lack the creativity needed to solve complex problems. Should we, then, emulate their math education? Should we abandon methods here that foster the creative spirit?

By catlady

June 28, 2008 6:29 PM | Link to this

I am hopeful we will discuss the AJC’s revelations (thank you for finally putting the shameful secret out there) about the noncompliance with the state’s rules on passing the CRCT in order to be promoted on Monday. What a travesty; what an outrage! Will the legislature and governor step in and put an end to the sham? Will citizens hold the DOE’s feet to the fire? Can the leaders at the DOE do the math on this one? WHY DIDN’T THIS REPORT COME FROM THE DOE??!!

By catlady

June 28, 2008 6:33 PM | Link to this

Sorry about the poorly worded sentence in the last post. I hope we will talk about the AJc data analysis on Monday. Kudos to the two AJC reporters who have shown that the emperor has no clothes.

By catlady

June 28, 2008 8:36 PM | Link to this

Perhaps our intrepid reporters can also delve into who failed and WHO went on: were they all ESOL and sp ed kids that went on, regardless of failing scores?

By Math Educator

June 28, 2008 8:42 PM | Link to this

IMHO, we really need to separate a nation’s economic power from its educational effectiveness (in math and science). When a nation has the best higher education systems, when a nation attracts the brightest students and scholars from all over the world to this higher education system, and when a nation’s economic, political, and social structure is so attractive that many of those who come to the country decide to stay, the nation’s economy is positively influenced - and perhaps masks the serious shortfalls of the nation’s education system.

I am fully aware that Singapore’s Ministry of Education is looking at other countries, not just the United States, to further improve their math and science education. I think it is rather short sighted to simply try to transplant a curriculum from another country.

On the other hand, you take a country like Japan, where there is no tracking until students complete the compulsory education (Grade 9, age 15). Their students have consistently placed high internationally, and much higher than the US students. In their system, social promotion is the norm. There is no mandatory high-stake testing in through Grade 9. Their classes can have as many as 40 students. Their elementary (Grades 1-6) teachers are generalists, teaching all academic, and sometimes non-academic, subjects. They, too, often seek new ideas to deal with their problems from other countries.

But, I think we can learn from those countries, too, instead of questioning the validity of comparative studies. There are other smaller scale studies that compared US and Chinese/Korean/Japanese students, and the findins have been pretty consistent. We also know that the quality of our textbooks leaves much to be desired, and textbooks from Singapore, Japan, etc. do seem to be much better quality.

Again, the point is not to somehow find the blueprint for the solution to our problems. Rather, we should use these comparative studies to critically analyze and question our practices.

By under_the_radar

June 28, 2008 10:34 PM | Link to this

Catlady, While ESOL and sped students have IEP’s and mod plans to allow non-passing of CRCT, any student can be passed based on committee consensus at the SST meeting to determine retention or passing. This is done routinely, not just for students who fail CRCT, but often for students who are just too old and need to get on w/ school…(i.e. do you really want a 15 year old in a 6th grade class??).

By Tony

June 29, 2008 2:15 PM | Link to this

While I have serious concerns about retaining students based on one test score, in catlady’s defense I think there are some children who’ve never been retained and who are behind. These kids and their families need a wake-up call and retention may be appropriate. A wholesale decision to pass all the students who fail the CRCT without regard for their overall performance, in my opinion, is a form of educational malpractice. Decisions to retain students should not be taken lightly.

By catlady

June 29, 2008 8:03 PM | Link to this

What I was thinking of is: how many of these kids who failed the CRCT have little “excuse” to have failed it? Sp ed kids are Sp ed FOR A REASON. Kids who have been in an English speaking environment for 2 or 3 years, well, they have A REASON to have trouble with comprehension.

What I see, however, is ESOL kids who, after being born here, have been in English-speaking school for 4, 5, or 6 years. They should not be failing the CRCT, IMHO, if they are not sp ed. Or I see “Sp ed” kids whose disability may be speech, yet they fail the CRCT. IMHO, they should not be given a pass.

What REALLY worries me is the regular kids I see who fail the CRCT year after year (all grades, not just gateway) and are “placed” in the next grade. They get every EIP class, every intervention, the most experienced teachers, but still they fail the test. And, if truth be told, while they may have passing grades, it is because of all the modifications in class or because they are in a first grade reading book in 3rd grade. Year after year they are behind and behinder. Yet they are passed on, to be someone else’s “problem”.

Last year I pushed into 3 reading classes for 3rd graders. One group was a year behind; the other two were two years behind. Guess what? Even with extensive help (see above), very small classes, extra teachers pushing in, etc, they still—gasp—failed the CRCT. These kids should be retained. They will never be on grade level unless it happens.

Last year I pushed into 2 math classes. In the 4th grade class, most of the kids were 2 years behind in math. In the fifth grade class, they were 2-3 years behind. Again, they got modifications, EIP, interventions, small classes with experienced teachers, and push in help. They made progress, but they left class well behind their peers. (They were not the bottom math classes, but near the bottom.) They had all failed the CRCT math in years past, including third grade, BUT WERE NEVER RETAINED. Again, their grades, NOT BASED ON WHAT KIDS IN THEIR GRADE LEVEL SHOULD BE DOING, looked poor to fair, but largely passing. Yet they have little prayer of EVER catching up unless they are given an extra year of instruction somewhere along the line.

I was surprised to see that my school was credited with holding 4% of the failing students back in 5th grade over the last 2 years. I personally know the only (1) student who was retained, and it was because his parents insisted. The data may be generous.

Teachers at our school are NOT given much of an opportunity to say that a child should be retained. It is supposed to be a joint decision, but IME it is not. Our county says they will go on, no matter what, so they do. And precious few parents will argue and insist that their child stay back.

Decisions to retain students should not be taken lightly.

Decisions to send on unprepared students should also not be taken lightly.

By Simon

June 29, 2008 10:41 PM | Link to this

I would be in favor of retaining students IF those students received the support they really need. On the other hand, if they are going to go through the same thing one more time, I don’t see why the results should be any different. Promoting them may not be for their best interest, but retaining them won’t necessarily be for their benefit, either.

I also have a bit of problem with making this decision based solely on a test, and only in Reading and Math. Unlike HS, we are making those students repeat the entire curriculum, whether or not they need to.

By jim d

June 30, 2008 5:52 AM | Link to this

Does improving a teacher’s knowledge of math make that person a better teacher?

It certainly won’t make them worse.

Without meaning to sound condescending, many elementary-school teachers are poorly prepared by education schools to teach math, math relies heavily on cumulative knowledge, making the early years critical.

Personally I don’t believe education schools are selective enough. Most require applicants to take an admissions test, usually around their sophomore year of college. These tests, typically include reading, writing and math sections, and are far too easy, almost anyone can get in and the tests can be taken time and again till they do.

Education schools set exceedingly low expectations for mathematics knowledge that aspiring teachers must demonstrate. With such low standards set to become a certified educator, we can not in all honesty expect high standards to be met by students that are being taught by someone with such little knowledge of the subject matter they are teaching.

Bottom line? Yes requiring a higher profieceny standard for teachers would help.

But hey folks, that is JMHO.

By EducatorX3

June 30, 2008 8:15 AM | Link to this

jim d, Just a few thoughts in response to your post.

First, like an earlier poster said, If the cost of gasoline goes up 25%, the cost of food goes up 15%, and teacher salaries go up 2%, how long will it be before Johnny and Mary are being taught by “poor” teachers? It is difficult to get some of the brightest and best to consider education as a career path. I don’t want to get into the salary debate, but few who are looking at “making it big” will be inticed by the teacher pay scale.

Second, we need to consider the folks who are teaching in the schools of education. You want to talk about salary issues? I teach as an adjunct at a university. To teach full-time, with a full class load, my contract would be about half of what I make in the local school system. So, who do you get to teach those ECE majors? Professors who have (1) only taught at the university so there is theory with no real world experience; (2) retired educators who have a pension to supplement their income but MAY have been out of the school too long to be effective; and I have to inlcude these, (3)some awesome instructors who continue to do this work regardless of the pay (there are a few of these folks around!)

Also to be considered, the Board of Regents issued a mandate a few years back that all schools of education in the university system needed to DOUBLE their graduates from the schools of education. Even with major recruitment programs, changes in programs of study, and “free gift with registration” programs, there are few ways to do this without lowering standards.

My fix for the problem? Education programs should be expanded to 5 year programs.

Pre-service teachers should be in K-12 classrooms beginning the semester they are admitted to the SOE(we are seeing this more and more)

They should be with master teachers who are compensated for opening up their classrooms for instruction.(not just the teacher who is willing to have them, but the teacher who is good enough to help them!)

Student teaching should be a full year internship under the watchful eye of a master teacher. I have seen many really good first year teachers, but none who would not have been even better with a year of supervised experience.

Just some information.

By Jeff

June 30, 2008 8:37 AM | Link to this

EX3:

You and I are seeing more eye to eye in regards to your last.

Our only point of contention is that I wouldn’t have a strictly ‘supervised’ full year internship. I’d make it more of a mentor-type relationship where you may have one required meeting with your mentor per week, and your mentor would be available to advise you anytime you needed it, but otherwise you are on your own in your own classroom.

I had a semblance of this at Newton, and I can only imagine how it would have turned out with a full-on mentor type program. As it was, I managed to get by decently well under the circumstances, but had I had the relationship with that teacher that I had had with Mr. Harris back when I was first starting the college of education, I’d probably still be teaching now, and I’d probably still be in Newton. (Of course, that would mean that I would never have met T, so all in all I think I got the better end of the bargain there, even though it means I’m not currently in the classroom!)

By EducatorX3

June 30, 2008 8:49 AM | Link to this

Jeff, Sorry, you won’t get me to give up on that one. Once a week meetings cannot compare to having a safety net in the classroom. I think a co-teaching situation is the ideal internship for the first year. Let’s face it, the retention rate for teachers is pitiful. More than 50% leave in the first three years. We need to provide a safety net for the first year issues.

If we went a full five years for the program, master’s level courses could even be worked in so that the interns could be on their way to the next degree.

Of course, from the administrator’s point of view, this plan could also help weed out those who do not need to be in the classroom at all!

Have a good day.

By Jeff

June 30, 2008 9:04 AM | Link to this

EX3:

Nor will I move. But you didn’t have the Student Teaching experience I had, where your ‘co’-teacher tried to dictate every breath you took. (Interestingly enough, I actually worked with TWO teachers at that point, since my ‘official’ teacher had an AP class that Student Teachers aren’t allowed to touch with a ten foot pole. The other one was a male of a similar background with 10 years experience, and we got along quite well. Another one of those situations where had I been paired differently, I’d probably still be in the classroom.)

By HB

June 30, 2008 10:37 AM | Link to this

Maybe clustering should start earlier. Most K-5 kids have one teacher, right, while middle schoolers have 3 or 4, right? My grade 1-6 elementary school had us changing classes between teachers starting in 4th grade, and then jr high was set up more like high school with independent student schedules rather than rotating within a group of teachers. That allowed elementary school teachers to 1) divide up subjects according to their own strengths, and 2) focus on effectively teaching 2 or 3 subjects instead of juggling the entire curriculum alone.

By jim d

June 30, 2008 1:52 PM | Link to this

so X3,

lowering the standards for teaching certification to double the amount of educators avaiable, helped how?

By EducatorX3

June 30, 2008 6:18 PM | Link to this

Oh jim d…I didn’t say it helped…just said that the mandate was put in place. For some reason the folks at the BOR thought the schools of education could just find the candidates. Go figure!

By jim d

July 1, 2008 10:07 AM | Link to this

Actually x3,

Schools of education have found a lot more candidates by making it an easy path to a career for what some might consider marginal students and by offering such things as PROMISE Teacher Scholarship, The Agricultural Education Loan, Destination Teaching Program, and the HOPE Teacher Scholarship. All highly service cancelable scholarship loan programs that will assure unqualified teachers will make every attempt to stay in our schools teaching in order to repay the cost of their education. Which in my opinon is of little or no help to students.

By NothGATeacher

July 2, 2008 11:10 PM | Link to this

The letter by “Thomas” was terrific. This guy really has a grip on things in Cobb. I am a certified high school math teacher. I KNOW that the problem is NOT that elementary teachers are undereducated in math. The problem is that the proper values and habits to succeed in school are NOT taught at home in many families, especially families with social problems. To succeed in math, students have to be able to pay attention, stay on task, and do their homework. THE VALUES OF RESPECT FOR TEACHERS, RESPECT FOR LEARNING,AND WORK ETHIC have to be present. Parents also MUST help them with homework and MUST call teachers if their children struggle. Unfortunately, the socially troubled families never seem able to maintain this. The tough new Georgia curriculum and NCLB standards cannot work in the absence of parental support.

By EducatorX3

July 3, 2008 8:03 AM | Link to this

Jim D, Sorry it took me so long to read your post! Actually, even with all those programs in place, many schools of education still do not have an abundance of folks knocking on the door. These programs - at least most of them - do have a minimum gpa requirement.

But I hate to say this…I have had some pre-service education students who were brilliant - 4.0 students - but did not make good teachers. (before you say it - they were not 4.0 in elementary education, I taught secondary courses so these students had majors in their content fields and minors in education)

Are there students in the programs who don’t need to be? Of course. Just like there are folks who will be bad accountants, poor business people, and inept plumbers. It happens. We try to weed these out, but it doesn’t always work. I can tell you that I have refused to recommend students for student teaching internships and/or certification based on performance in pre-service programs.

Bottom line - the best prep programs have the pre-service teachers in the classrooms as much as possible. They need to be with master teachers (not the GAPSC definition, but with classroom teachers with a proven track record) Some of the skills of a good teacher can only be learned through experience.

By catlady

July 3, 2008 8:26 AM | Link to this

When I started college (1970) in Tennessee, aspiring teachers were in the classroom the second quarter they were in school, and every quarter afterward. It astounds me to see colleges that wait until jr year or later to put students into the real world.

By jim d

July 3, 2008 8:36 AM | Link to this

Cat,

UT??

GO VOLS!!

X3,

The point I was making is that we make it too easy for people that do not belong in a classroom teaching to be there. Then stand in amazement when children don’t learn.

By EducatorX3

July 3, 2008 9:07 AM | Link to this

Jim D, I agree with you, and while it would be helpful for the schools of education to weed out more of those, we are often left to hire the lesser of evils when trying to staff a classroom. Sad, isn’t it?

By jim d

July 3, 2008 9:37 AM | Link to this

X3,

Gee, wonder if it’s ever occurred to anyone else that maybe, just maybe, it has something to do with working conditions.