|
Russian Federation748 Posts
And I have to add this in, because it always gets to me - nobody who isn't a doctor tells a doctor how to perform surgery, and nobody who isn't a pilot tells a pilot how to fly a plane. Why is it that so many people who have never studied or practiced education feel like they can tell teachers how to teach?
I cannot believe there are still people using that argument, which is probably the weakest fallacy ever devised.
You're trying to imply all jobs are equally difficult and all areas of knowledge equally esoteric, through a naive comparison. Sadly, this doesn't hold. What a surgeon or a pilot knows, is something nobody in other fields (that is anybody who has not studied that particular field at university or any place it is taught) could possibly know. On the other side, everything linked to education can be perfectly assimilated by anyone ; because as human beings, we spend our time reflecting upon ourselves, the way we learn, mature, evolve, live and should live. And not only do we reflect upon it, but we also find the answers, because as human beings we have a good (not complete) understanding of our own nature. Beside that, we can also count on everything we've heard from others or read (most of literature and philosophy is concerned with those very questions). Finally we've all been to school for a long time, more than necessary to judge how things work and should work there. Few people spend their whole youth in operation rooms or planes, do they ? It follows than it is all but possible to know far more about education than a "teacher" without being one himself. Especially when it comes to trifle question such as : " Is it necessary to do assignments which do not improve our knowledge or abilities in the least ? " .
|
On June 05 2012 07:39 JitnikoVi wrote:Show nested quote +On June 05 2012 04:02 TGalore wrote:On June 04 2012 23:44 red_b wrote:
btw TGalore you should consider a different job. I work as long as it takes me to finish what I am doing. Even more telling is my father, a neurologist, who just comes home when he is done doing what he has to do. If he does it faster because he is simply smarter than the next person who would theoretically do his job, then he doesnt have to work as long.
I get that being a teacher sucks and kids seem entitled, but there are some that deserve to be. You will have kids who are smarter than you, and your attitude seems vindictive rather than helpful. I love my job, and moreover, the feedback I get from my students every year tells me that I'm doing the right thing in the right place. It doesn't suck. I work 90 hour weeks sometimes, and it still doesn't suck. The ones that do not do well in my classes know exactly why they do not and own up to it when they slack off or do not put their full effort into something. That, I think, speaks volumes to their character and shows that they're much better people than the above posters who want things that they are not willing to work for. You can't compare two jobs like a neurologist and a teacher. I know that I have to do more work out of the classroom than other professions do and I'm fine with that because I think I'm very lucky to have a job focused on improving people's lives rather than just making money. By the way, you should also ask your dad if he had to study outside of his classes or internships during medical school, or if his school handed him his doctorate simply because he was smart. your last paragraph is sheer poop, being a younger brother of a med school student (and hoping to gain acceptance next year myself), i can assure you there isnt a moment to waste, when people complain about how hard it is they arent joking, there is no "going out to meet new people" and getting good grades, youll probably only get past the acquaintance level the with the people u see in your classes, when your drinking coffee as you wake up, your studying, before bedtime your studying, on the bus, you will be studying. being smart will get your foot in the hallway that the door is located in, being hardworking, dedicated, focused with a never-give-up attitude is what youll need to finish, and to succeed. its saddening as a teacher you would say something so silly and immature. and pretty much every single job focuses on improving peoples lives btw, just because your a teacher and you do it directly doesnt mean others dont do it as well now i also have some family friends that are high school teachers, and i dont know if this same deal applies to you, but supposedly you can work for 4 years at 80% salary to get the 5th year off while getting 80% salary as well. ALSO, not to mention the 2 month 'break' teachers get every year.. and the weekends (although i understand your still grading/creating new work during this time, the students also have to study and prepare... the dedicated ones anyways.. and if you teach summer school, you only get paid more... and students do summer school as well!)
I think you're misunderstanding me, Jitnovi. The person I was referring to in my reply was arguing "well my dad is a doctor and he gets to go home when his work is done, so you're wrong about not ever having to work past your hours", and the point I was making to him was that his dad probably had to work harder than that poster could have imagined to get his medical degree and maybe he doesn't understand what his dad had to do in order to be where he is now. I have two friends in medical school as well, and I know what it does to them.
And as for myself, I don't get a break on weekends. I work at a boarding school, and there are Saturday classes and Saturday afternoon sports games, so I'm often teaching and then coaching until 8:00 in the evening. Half of the Sundays I'm working too, either supervising the dorm or leading activities for kids. I got a total of 3 days off in the last 8 weeks. I'm salaried too; if I was hourly, it would work out to be less than $2 an hour. So while summers are not spent in the classroom, it's not paid vacation like it would be in other jobs, and there's no such system that would allow you to take a year off and still get paid (at least not that I know of).
Lastly, I think people vastly underestimate the time it takes to prepare a good lesson. You can come up with a crappy one that fills the time but bores your students in twenty minutes, but a good one can take as long as the class itself to come up with, or more. So, if you're teaching three different classes and grading homework for each, that's a lot more than people realize, and it's not easy to push yourself to do it after a 12 hour day.
|
On June 05 2012 08:22 Kyrillion wrote:Show nested quote +
And I have to add this in, because it always gets to me - nobody who isn't a doctor tells a doctor how to perform surgery, and nobody who isn't a pilot tells a pilot how to fly a plane. Why is it that so many people who have never studied or practiced education feel like they can tell teachers how to teach?
I cannot believe there are still people using that argument, which is probably the weakest fallacy ever devised. You're trying to imply all jobs are equally difficult and all areas of knowledge equally esoteric, through a naive comparison. Sadly, this doesn't hold. What a surgeon or a pilot knows, is something nobody in other fields (that is anybody who has not studied that particular field at university or any place it is taught) could possibly know. On the other side, everything linked to education can be perfectly assimilated by anyone ; because as human beings, we spend our time reflecting upon ourselves, the way we learn, mature, evolve, live and should live. And not only do we reflect upon it, but we also find the answers, because as human beings we have a good (not complete) understanding of our own nature. Beside that, we can also count on everything we've heard from others or read (most of literature and philosophy is concerned with those very questions). Finally we've all been to school for a long time, more than necessary to judge how things work and should work there. Few people spend their whole youth in operation rooms or planes, do they ? It follows than it is all but possible to know far more about education than a "teacher" without being one himself. Especially when it comes to trifle question such as : " Is it necessary to do assignments which do not improve our knowledge or abilities in the least ? " .
I'm sorry, but you're showing your ignorance here by stating that everything linked to education can be assimilated by anyone who hasn't gone through the proper education themselves. Using that justification, degrees and doctorates in Education shouldn't exist because we've all been in schools. Bullsh*t. I'm not implying that all jobs are equally difficult, but those that require certain levels of advanced education - teaching included in this category - have that requirement for a reason.
Do you think you know how to introduce and present mathematical concepts in the proper sequence in a math course just because you passed Geometry? Do you think you know what to look for in books when deciding how to structure an English curriculum? Could you define, or have you even heard of the terms "Understanding by Design", "Applied Learning", or "Differentiated Instruction"? How much familiarity do you have with learning differences and do you know the strategies to effectively teach different kids with different needs in the same class? Do you even know what to look for when judging whether an assignment is worthwhile or not?
No, you don't, and unless you go through the proper education, you never will. You can't "count on everything you've heard from others" - in fact, the mark of an uneducated mind is accepting what others say without making the effort towards properly evaluating it.
|
United States24569 Posts
On June 05 2012 08:38 TGalore wrote:Show nested quote +On June 05 2012 08:22 Kyrillion wrote:
And I have to add this in, because it always gets to me - nobody who isn't a doctor tells a doctor how to perform surgery, and nobody who isn't a pilot tells a pilot how to fly a plane. Why is it that so many people who have never studied or practiced education feel like they can tell teachers how to teach?
I cannot believe there are still people using that argument, which is probably the weakest fallacy ever devised. You're trying to imply all jobs are equally difficult and all areas of knowledge equally esoteric, through a naive comparison. Sadly, this doesn't hold. What a surgeon or a pilot knows, is something nobody in other fields (that is anybody who has not studied that particular field at university or any place it is taught) could possibly know. On the other side, everything linked to education can be perfectly assimilated by anyone ; because as human beings, we spend our time reflecting upon ourselves, the way we learn, mature, evolve, live and should live. And not only do we reflect upon it, but we also find the answers, because as human beings we have a good (not complete) understanding of our own nature. Beside that, we can also count on everything we've heard from others or read (most of literature and philosophy is concerned with those very questions). Finally we've all been to school for a long time, more than necessary to judge how things work and should work there. Few people spend their whole youth in operation rooms or planes, do they ? It follows than it is all but possible to know far more about education than a "teacher" without being one himself. Especially when it comes to trifle question such as : " Is it necessary to do assignments which do not improve our knowledge or abilities in the least ? " . I'm sorry, but you're showing your ignorance here by stating that everything linked to education can be assimilated by anyone who hasn't gone through the proper education themselves. Using that justification, degrees and doctorates in Education shouldn't exist because we've all been in schools. Bullsh*t. I'm not implying that all jobs are equally difficult, but those that require certain levels of advanced education - teaching included in this category - have that requirement for a reason. Do you think you know how to introduce and present mathematical concepts in the proper sequence in a math course just because you passed Geometry? Do you think you know what to look for in books when deciding how to structure an English curriculum? Could you define, or have you even heard of the terms "Understanding by Design", "Applied Learning", or "Differentiated Instruction"? How much familiarity do you have with learning differences and do you know the strategies to effectively teach different kids with different needs in the same class? Do you even know what to look for when judging whether an assignment is worthwhile or not? No, you don't, and unless you go through the proper education, you never will. You can't "count on everything you've heard from others" - in fact, the mark of an uneducated mind is accepting what others say without making the effort towards properly evaluating it.
I don't think there is any need to get so specific. The core of the problem is here:
On June 05 2012 08:22 Kyrillion wrote:
Finally we've all been to school for a long time, more than necessary to judge how things work and should work there.
This is completely wrong. You'd have no idea how wrong that statement is until you've been teaching for a few years, though. Everything else hinges on this misguided belief that being a student for years and years means you understand the teaching profession. I can say first hand it is completely different than I thought when I graduated from college (despite majoring in education).
|
On June 04 2012 23:24 TGalore wrote:Show nested quote +On June 04 2012 22:25 Figgy wrote:
I did dick all in high school. and I absolutely deserved to pass.
I literally showed up for maybe 10 classes of my Advanced Calculus math in grade 12 and still got through easily. I only showed up for test days and my exams. I passed with a 50 on the dot. (I skipped my final exam knowing I already had the 50) I'd already taken advanced Calculus prior to grade 11 and knew all the work to begin with.
I literally aced every test, nothing below 95%. I could answer any question, solve any proof, name and explain any equation in the grade 12 books. But I'm at the bottom of the passing class, why? Because school doesn't reward intelligence. AT ALL. Almost all of your grade in school is gruntwork.
No matter how much of what they are already teaching you already know, you are still forced to do hours upon hours of work OUTSIDE of school to have grades that are sufficient. Valuable time that could be learned doing other things.
The problem is not "incompletes", the problem is the bullshit called homework that especially high schools still force kids to do. If it can't be done during class, it shouldn't be done. A lot of students from poorer families also have to work through their high school years which can leave them almost no spare time to themselves, and can cause the less intelligent students to simply give up. Hence the large amount of drop-outs.
If the school policies nowadays are trying to fix that with "incompletes" so that smart students who don't want to deal with absolute BS at certain times during the year yet are still smarter than everyone by a longshot, then I'm all for it. Teachers like this need to be suspended.
As a high school teacher, this post makes me laugh. The sense of entitlement and level of conceit (and hypocrisy) here is ludicrous. School absolutely does reward intelligence - or as I would define it, mastery of material. As educators, we have to hold ourselves accountable for making sure those that pass have enough facility with the subject matter to succeed at the next level of study in that discipline. That's how you were able to pass - though in my school you would have failed, and deservedly so. Why? Well... It also, as it should, rewards effort. As educators, we are also responsible for preparing our students for lives beyond being in school and developing habits that will help you succeed in a job. Guess what? If you skip a day of work, you're probably going to get fired. You're going to have to work beyond your scheduled hours too. You're going to have to prepare for work outside of the workplace. If you don't do these things, then you're probably going to lose your job bceause you're costing your employer money. Employers keep the guy who works hard all day even if he's not the smartest and lay off the guy who's very talented but lazy. Lastly, we as educators are responsible for holding students accountable for their actions, because the adult world does that too. You chose to skip, you chose to blow off homework, you knew the consequences, and now you're complaining about what happened to you because of YOUR actions that you consciously performed? Ha. Sorry, you don't even know the meaning of a hard day's work and having no spare time to yourself. Life and work doesn't stop just because you don't want to deal with the BS - you have to, even if you don't want to. There's a lot more to life than knowledge, and you've got a lot more to learn than you think.
1) If you're an educator then you know most of the time a very large amount of educators in the United States simply give zeroes without attempting to hold students accountable. Rather than teaching them responsibility and accountability, they flat out give them a zero and just move on. That's unacceptable and you know it. There's a reason why alot of districts do not allow you to fail students on the basis of missing work anymore. It isn't just because parents complained alot either. Research has shown and proven that zeroes demotivate students and in fact cause students to perform even more poorly.
2) Because hardwork and intelligence are all wrapped up into one grade, grades in the public education system in fact do not reflect intelligence. Some school districts are already moving towards providing two grades, one based on mastery of content, and the other based on the student's work ethic and behaviors. It's a pretty good system, but alot of teachers and parents who are too hardlined completely disagree with this notion for some odd reason (even though it is a far more accurate representation of a student's abilities).
3) Your work resume is far more accurate than what your report card or GPA says. You could be an extremely intelligent person and graduate with a 2.5 GPA, or you could be average to below average in terms of intelligence but graduate with a 3.8+ due to an extremely hard work ethic. GPA/Report Cards/etc. are not very accurate representations of a student's abilities at all. This is why administrators across the United States do not allow you to fail any student based on the basis of missing work anymore. You try this at a Title I school and I guarantee you get fired on the spot.
|
On June 05 2012 08:53 superstartran wrote:
1) If you're an educator then you know most of the time a very large amount of educators in the United States simply give zeroes without attempting to hold students accountable. Rather than teaching them responsibility and accountability, they flat out give them a zero and just move on. That's unacceptable and you know it. There's a reason why alot of districts do not allow you to fail students on the basis of missing work anymore. It isn't just because parents complained alot either. Research has shown and proven that zeroes demotivate students and in fact cause students to perform even more poorly.
2) Because hardwork and intelligence are all wrapped up into one grade, grades in the public education system in fact do not reflect intelligence. Some school districts are already moving towards providing two grades, one based on mastery of content, and the other based on the student's work ethic and behaviors. It's a pretty good system, but alot of teachers and parents who are too hardlined completely disagree with this notion for some odd reason (even though it is a far more accurate representation of a student's abilities).
3) Your work resume is far more accurate than what your report card or GPA says. You could be an extremely intelligent person and graduate with a 2.5 GPA, or you could be average to below average in terms of intelligence but graduate with a 3.8+ due to an extremely hard work ethic. GPA/Report Cards/etc. are not very accurate representations of a student's abilities at all. This is why administrators across the United States do not allow you to fail any student based on the basis of missing work anymore. You try this at a Title I school and I guarantee you get fired on the spot.
1 - Do you have any sources or references for this blanket statement?
Also, the zero is the thing that is supposed to teach accountability. I'm assuming you're talking about public school here, in which case I'll say that first, public schools are woefully underfunded and understaffed - of course a kid isn't going to be motivated if the teacher doesn't have enough time to meet with them one on one and encourage them to improve from their zero because they have 200 other students. Second, a lot of school districts discourage failing because their funding is partially based on the progress of their students, and artificially inflating grades helps get them more money.
2 - This would be great in a perfect world, and my school already does this because we're smaller and a private institution, but I have to ask you, how would you judge mastery when no work has been given in? We can't look at a kid in the back of the class who has shown up for maybe the fifth time this year and never turned in any homework and somehow psychically know that he or she is an Algebra whiz. It's incumbent upon the student to demonstrate mastery to the teacher.
3 - I'm not advocating for giving out no assistance to the kids who you know have learning challenges and require extra help. Each school has its specialties. However, the guy who knows his stuff and does well on tests and papers but does no homework needs some strong feedback from his teacher in order to realize that his habits won't fly in college or in any competitive work environment.
|
On June 05 2012 09:17 TGalore wrote:Show nested quote +On June 05 2012 08:53 superstartran wrote:
1) If you're an educator then you know most of the time a very large amount of educators in the United States simply give zeroes without attempting to hold students accountable. Rather than teaching them responsibility and accountability, they flat out give them a zero and just move on. That's unacceptable and you know it. There's a reason why alot of districts do not allow you to fail students on the basis of missing work anymore. It isn't just because parents complained alot either. Research has shown and proven that zeroes demotivate students and in fact cause students to perform even more poorly.
2) Because hardwork and intelligence are all wrapped up into one grade, grades in the public education system in fact do not reflect intelligence. Some school districts are already moving towards providing two grades, one based on mastery of content, and the other based on the student's work ethic and behaviors. It's a pretty good system, but alot of teachers and parents who are too hardlined completely disagree with this notion for some odd reason (even though it is a far more accurate representation of a student's abilities).
3) Your work resume is far more accurate than what your report card or GPA says. You could be an extremely intelligent person and graduate with a 2.5 GPA, or you could be average to below average in terms of intelligence but graduate with a 3.8+ due to an extremely hard work ethic. GPA/Report Cards/etc. are not very accurate representations of a student's abilities at all. This is why administrators across the United States do not allow you to fail any student based on the basis of missing work anymore. You try this at a Title I school and I guarantee you get fired on the spot.
1 - Do you have any sources or references for this blanket statement? Also, the zero is the thing that is supposed to teach accountability. I'm assuming you're talking about public school here, in which case I'll say that first, public schools are woefully underfunded and understaffed - of course a kid isn't going to be motivated if the teacher doesn't have enough time to meet with them one on one and encourage them to improve from their zero because they have 200 other students. Second, a lot of school districts discourage failing because their funding is partially based on the progress of their students, and artificially inflating grades helps get them more money. 2 - This would be great in a perfect world, and my school already does this because we're smaller and a private institution, but I have to ask you, how would you judge mastery when no work has been given in? We can't look at a kid in the back of the class who has shown up for maybe the fifth time this year and never turned in any homework and somehow psychically know that he or she is an Algebra whiz. It's incumbent upon the student to demonstrate mastery to the teacher. 3 - I'm not advocating for giving out no assistance to the kids who you know have learning challenges and require extra help. Each school has its specialties. However, the guy who knows his stuff and does well on tests and papers but does no homework needs some strong feedback from his teacher in order to realize that his habits won't fly in college or in any competitive work environment.
Alot of research is out there, if you're an educator then you know what I'm talking about. Marzano's a pretty good basic start for some research on instruction and why giving zeroes is bad.
It's up to the teacher to do everything within their power to ensure that students are doing their work and mastering their content. You have to present every possible opportunity to the student in order to give them a chance to demonstrate that mastery. If the student isn't doing the work, then it's more than likely that the problem is with you as a teacher. Alot of old school educators have this notion that if the student isn't doing the work, then it isn't their problem. That's not the case anymore and me and you both know that. This is ESPECIALLY true in the public education system where teachers simply hand out zeroes left and right and do nothing to ensure that the student is on task and is on track, especially in secondary education.
Handing out two grades isn't hard at all; say a student passes all the in class assignments with good grades, but doesn't turn in any homework. It's pretty easy to see that the student has mastered the content, but just simply has bad work ethic. Punishing him by wrapping everything up into one grade however, is unfair. A two grade system that demonstrates both Mastery of Content and Work Ethic wouldn't be difficult at all.
Funding goes to schools that produce results, period. Artificially inflating your grades does nothing, because everyone does it anyways. The school that produces the best students gets the best funding, particularly in the public education system.
Most of the misconception that people have is that zeroes hold students accountable. It doesn't. In fact, it is extremely demotivating, especially towards low income students that don't have the luxury of attending private schools or highly prestigious schools in rich neighborhoods. In fact, one could argue that homework in fact can actually further create a rift between more well off students versus low income students based on the fact that students that come from low income families usually have to work, have to help their parents out with things such as their siblings, etc.
|
Some students deserve a 0 grade.
|
Russian Federation748 Posts
TGalore, reading your last post as well as other ones previously in the thread, you seem to love talking beside the point and try clouding the issue. I doubt this can work here.
When did I declare education and doctorate degrees were valuable ? They may be or may not, I don't have an opinion on that, but you cannot take that kind of things as granted. It is a fact however that most teachers have very poor knowledge of education. I thought this was a well-known fact to everyone, apparently it is not. Nevermind, I guess I'll have to prove it (I've been schooled in France my whole life - although not being French myself - I may not be familiar with how school works in other places) :
- The level ranges from extremely weak to weak in every single field. This is very important. Are you going to assert educating someone is better done when you teach themselves nothing ? Because most of your colleagues here think that way. And they may be right after all, I'm open to changing my mind, but I need to be explained why it is better to come to school rather than staying at home in order to reach such a goal. Let elaborate on that level. It is considered acceptable and normal that people are not able to write French correctly even near the end of high school. There were a time when everyone mastered that skill very early on, but the stress laid on it has diminished over time, and a lot of teachers are very dismayed that it turned out so (it always buggs me by the way how teachers spend their time arguing with eachother about anything (at least they do here)- even though they apparently all know the answers because they have received a formation that establishes how to teach, and that formation is trustworthy). A traditional exercise that was practiced very often in this regard in the days of yore was the dictée (dictation in English, apparently). The teachers read a text, slowly and repeating himself several times, and the pupils have to write it down. For each orthography mistakes points are deducted from one's grade. Nowadays this barely exists even more in middle school and when there are a few, the grade barely count anyway, even though a lot of pupils have very poor grades when everyone should be above 18.
How about foreign languages ? Most pupils are barely able to build a ten-word sentence in English at the end of high school, after having learnt the language 5 or 7 years, albeit English is considerably similar to French and it usually doesn't take more than one or two years to reach a near-fluent level. Any serious student learns in his first two years and then has to progress on his own because every single thing except for a few exceptions (like subjonctive) that he will hear from his teacher afterwards he already knows. Would you believe that several years after beginning English I still wasn't aware there two pronounciations of "th" ? I learnt that one day in a book. Another anecdote : teachers first introduce the language orally without writing the sentences. Because if the pupils see them written, they're going to pronounce improperly. This is certainly an opinion that exists in a lot of countries, you may have heard it, it's also absolute tosh. As someone who has studied more than 7 languages (I do not necessarily speak them fluently for want of vocabulary), I can safely say this is not only wrong, but the exact opposite of the truth. I had to discover by myself what words the sentence "Wer bist du ?" (German) was composed of and what those words mean. But clearly learning the sentence without the ability to understand it was very beneficial. As a result, the final high school exam for German as a first foreign language asks you to identify what things underlined pronouns refer to. That's right, imagine a "she" in a text and you have to give the name of the girl as an answer. After 7 years of learning a language that's very close to your own to begin with. Useless to say, most students aren't remotely able to devise a sentence in German.
But surely, you In Europe must be very proficient in Latin. Why yes, the high school Latin exam is very difficult. You have to translate one text out of an array that have been studied in class, and commentate it. You're also asked two trifle questions of Latin grammar : typically, identify a genitive absolute or the tense of a verb (in a text you already know, again). There used to be a version (translation from the Latin, I cannot find the English term) and anyone who has studied Latin or Greek knows how awfully hard those can be ; but they were suppressed. Barring a girl in my class who I reckon had a decent level, I was the only one in my class who could have been considered to have any basic knowledge of it. The pupils simply don't know declensions and conjugations at all, after six years.
I could comment abundantly on science as well, but I think I've made my point clear already. Let's just say a ton of students have 18+ or 19+ on average without any studying at home and everyone agrees the level has dropped significantly. ax²+bx+c=0 equations used to be taught three years earlier than they are now. If you want to know more Professor Demailly will speak better than I could : http://www-fourier.ujf-grenoble.fr/~demailly/manuscripts/panel_hangzhou.pdf . The final examination is notorious for being particularly easy, taking between two and three hours out of four to finish.
Why did I write all this boring and uninteresting stuff we all already know anyway ? Well, if I really am in no position to criticize school and the way "education" is done, pray explain to me what I am not able to understand, that is, how
it is possible to teach without teaching (we would use two different verbs in French, I did not intend to use twice the same).
As for your inquisitive questions, I doubt I could introduce mathematical concepts well, but neither can most primary schoolteachers. I have no idea how you teach those things, but what I was told was that a line was just an infinite straight line, a line segment is a line which ends on both the sides, a circle is a perfectly round figure and so on. I reckon I could introduce pupils to geometry just as well as I myself was introduced, indeed, although I don't really see the point of all this. Do you teach your children Euclid's Elements or something ?
I have no idea what an English curriculum is, neither "Understanding by design" and so on, but is it not a bit easy to take cover behind names of concepts I may very well know in another form ? Hardly anyone knows what hematemesis means, yet it's simply how physicians call the spitting of blood. I don't know how to teach different kids in different ways, but you're bestowing again on the teachers abilities they don't have. If they do, why do so many kids fail school ? Why are teachers notoriously unable to understand precocious children in the least ? Surely I don't need to be better than them to criticize. And yes, I would be able to rate assignments. Mind you, I've spent my fair share of time explaining things to my co-students, correcting their mistakes, guessing and explaining to them why they had done them. I am able to determine someone's level and weaknesses in physics and math fairly well.
Finally, congratulations on quoting me on something I have never said. It makes me wonder why I even bother answering. But I probably won't need to write another lengthy post now.
This is completely wrong. You'd have no idea how wrong that statement is until you've been teaching for a few years, though. Everything else hinges on this misguided belief that being a student for years and years means you understand the teaching profession. I can say first hand it is completely different than I thought when I graduated from college (despite majoring in education).
If something is completely ineffective while it could definitely be, someone is screwing up somewhere. If you want to recount your tales of education epiphany I'm all ears.
|
Did anyone read the full article?
Many Edmonton public schools, particularly junior and senior highs, have operated under no-zero practices for several years.
Under the policy, teachers must pursue students to arrange for late assignments to be completed. If the student doesn’t turn in enough work for the teacher to assess progress, the teacher should enter “unable to evaluate,” the policy says.
After several warnings from the principal, Dorval attended a hearing May 15 with officials from the school and Edmonton Public Schools, including the district superintendent.
To summarize, an organization has a policy that explicitly states how certain situations should be handled. Employee regularly & repeatedly violates this policy. Management warns employee over & over again to follow organizational policies, but the employee refuses to do so. Organization finally fires employee after repeated warnings & interventions all fail.
I don't personally endorse this no-zero policy, but it isn't the role of individual employees to go around deciding which organizational policies they'll choose to follow & which to flagrantly violate. If you think a certain work policy is stupid, there are avenues to try & get it fixed. But no organization can operate effectively if people are ignoring all warnings & flagrantly violating organizational policies.
|
Russian Federation748 Posts
I had noticed that, but it doesn't make discussing which of the individual's and organisation's point of view is the better less interesting (although in this particular case it is not).
|
On June 03 2012 02:34 LaLuSh wrote:Show nested quote +On June 03 2012 02:12 Animzor wrote:On June 03 2012 02:07 sereniity wrote:On June 03 2012 02:00 shawster wrote:On June 03 2012 01:47 sereniity wrote:
As I go to school myself I find this a very interesting subject, a question I often bring up is "Are your grades a reflection of your knowledge/skill, or your work put into the class?"
Basically, I feel that even if my english is good enough for grade A, I cannot achieve it unless I come to almost every class and do every piece of homework, even if I get very high scores on my tests. Is this right or wrong?
In my own perfect world, a grade would reflect how a good a certain student is at said subject, not how much time dedicated into it. I know a guy in my english class who is terrible at english, yet he's given grade C. The only reason for that is because he did his homework and was nice to the teacher.
Me on the other hand, had a grudge with the teacher (along with the rest of the class) and I've been having constant meetings with the principal to get ourselves a new teacher (she has a terrible attitude and constantly mocks us, has an aura of prestige as if we're crap and she's the best, yet she can't even spell the word boulder).
Anyway, back on topic, I'm getting an E this year because I basically haven't come to many of her lessons (I have about 60% attendance rate). I did however get a B on my final exams (called 'Nationella Proven' in Sweden).
Maybe this was abit off-topic, I got abit carried away :D... you're saying that intelligence should be your mark and effort should be less of it. come on now, how successful you are at a certain job is determined by your quality of work. i don't give a shit if you are extremely smart, if that average kid puts out a better product than you he's doing better than you. So just because I wont work hard in an English class with a terrible teacher means I wont work hard if I get a job? I never understood this type of reasoning, it's not rocket science that people will work harder if they're motivated, it's hard to keep yourself motivated if your English teacher is a complete asshat and the school wont do much to solve the problem. In a job you have certain things to keep you motivated, money is usually the biggest one ofcourse but depending on what job you have you might have different motivating factors. As I said, I'm getting my grade in English class, not "how hard did you work class". First of all, you're not entitled to anything. Second, in real life, you have to learn to work with the hand that you're dealt, that means having to deal with people that you don't particularly like. If you're not willing to put effort into your work because your teacher is an "asshat", then I doubt you'd be very good at anything except complaining. You need to give up that shitty entitled attitude because you're not special, you're just like every other Swedish kid that spends too much time on the Internet. Completely agree. Don't blame your teacher if you're conceited enough to think you could easily get an A by just "applying yourself". There are plenty of options available in Swedish schools for people who already know the material. It's just a matter of seeking them out. For you, I'd recommend doing a "prövning" in English. There's absolutely no point in attending those classes if you feel you already know the material and feel you could pass with an A. With a "prövning" you can get that A and not have to attend classes. They usually let you do "nationella prov" (if applicable in that subject). Give you a book to read which you'll have to do a written assignment on. Then they call you in one day to discuss the assignment orally and possibly do another exam on the course contents. You'll be done with it all in less than a month. Absolutely worth it if you already know the subject as you claim. They usually have 2 teachers responsible for "prövningar". If your teacher is one of them, request the other.
I wish my country wasn't as backwards as yours in terms of education. I got straight As throughout high school with zero effort and learned fuck all because the classes were useless to me. Only in 10th/11th grade when I stopped caring at all about my grades did I let anything slip (English to a C, not doing a major 'creative' project). I had the privilege to be dual-enrolled in college while still in high school in my senior year, but the moment I split with my family I had a full reset on my education (I'm now working to pay for college, zero financial aid for me unless I get married / find a way to impregnate myself).
It'd be so wonderful if we could just take some solid European policies and bring them to the states, mainly pertaining to education and handling of welfare.
|
I tihnk if you dont do the work or make an effort you should get the 0.
|
On June 04 2012 23:24 TGalore wrote:
School absolutely does reward intelligence - or as I would define it, mastery of material. As educators, we have to hold ourselves accountable for making sure those that pass have enough facility with the subject matter to succeed at the next level of study in that discipline. That's how you were able to pass - though in my school you would have failed, and deservedly so. Why? Well...
It also, as it should, rewards effort. As educators, we are also responsible for preparing our students for lives beyond being in school and developing habits that will help you succeed in a job. Guess what? If you skip a day of work, you're probably going to get fired. You're going to have to work beyond your scheduled hours too. You're going to have to prepare for work outside of the workplace. If you don't do these things, then you're probably going to lose your job bceause you're costing your employer money. Employers keep the guy who works hard all day even if he's not the smartest and lay off the guy who's very talented but lazy.
Lastly, we as educators are responsible for holding students accountable for their actions, because the adult world does that too. You chose to skip, you chose to blow off homework, you knew the consequences, and now you're complaining about what happened to you because of YOUR actions that you consciously performed? Ha. Sorry, you don't even know the meaning of a hard day's work and having no spare time to yourself. Life and work doesn't stop just because you don't want to deal with the BS - you have to, even if you don't want to.
There's a lot more to life than knowledge, and you've got a lot more to learn than you think.
I thought schools were for teaching, not grading how hard of a worker you are. That's the problem with some people's perception of what school is for — that it's used for something it isn't meant to be for (or that people don't agree what it's for). College (technica/applied college to be more specific) is more for preparing people for working.
Nonetheless, even with regards to work preparation, there should not be much merit in homework, depending on the field. At least 90%(conservatively speaking) of jobs don't have any homework whatsoever, so why should students be pushed into a scenario where they will be doing 1-3 (or more) hours of homework every day? The work should mostly be doable just within school hours. You don't think taking notes, taking tests, doing class assignments, paying attention, and other things is work? It's just like a job, and even harder than many jobs. Tests are to judge if the student has learned the course material (in case they need to take it again), not to grade how good or even smart of a worker they WILL BE.
Parents give kids work at home too — or at least have the option to. That's habitualizing the children for real/paid jobs more than just school homework in my opinion (aside from things like research).
You also talk about effort, and not attending work. Attending work would be like class attendance, not homework completion. I would agree attendance is important. With regards to effort, why should effort matter? Should a plumber who tries really hard to fix your problem but doesn't, and in fact causes more problems get rewarded for that behavior? in the same light, why should a kid who gets all the questions wrong get any marks (I understand that using a "show your work" method that would be difficult to do, but not impossible) compared to a person who hasn't done it at all. Effort is never the bottom-line anywhere that I know of. Although I hate the phrase, it's like Yoda says: "there is no try, there is only do".
I'm definitely not saying there shouldn't be any homework — I think certain things like research is particularly useful as a homework assignment. Mandatory out-of-class homework math questions are pointless though. Whether the student does the homework or not, they may still be prepared or not prepared to do-so on a test. It should be optional yet encouraged work. If it's mandatory, it should be 10% of the grade (like universities often have for math grade breakdown)
|
On June 05 2012 07:39 JitnikoVi wrote:Show nested quote +On June 05 2012 04:02 TGalore wrote:On June 04 2012 23:44 red_b wrote:
btw TGalore you should consider a different job. I work as long as it takes me to finish what I am doing. Even more telling is my father, a neurologist, who just comes home when he is done doing what he has to do. If he does it faster because he is simply smarter than the next person who would theoretically do his job, then he doesnt have to work as long.
I get that being a teacher sucks and kids seem entitled, but there are some that deserve to be. You will have kids who are smarter than you, and your attitude seems vindictive rather than helpful. I love my job, and moreover, the feedback I get from my students every year tells me that I'm doing the right thing in the right place. It doesn't suck. I work 90 hour weeks sometimes, and it still doesn't suck. The ones that do not do well in my classes know exactly why they do not and own up to it when they slack off or do not put their full effort into something. That, I think, speaks volumes to their character and shows that they're much better people than the above posters who want things that they are not willing to work for. You can't compare two jobs like a neurologist and a teacher. I know that I have to do more work out of the classroom than other professions do and I'm fine with that because I think I'm very lucky to have a job focused on improving people's lives rather than just making money. By the way, you should also ask your dad if he had to study outside of his classes or internships during medical school, or if his school handed him his doctorate simply because he was smart. your last paragraph is sheer poop, being a younger brother of a med school student (and hoping to gain acceptance next year myself), i can assure you there isnt a moment to waste, when people complain about how hard it is they arent joking, there is no "going out to meet new people" and getting good grades, youll probably only get past the acquaintance level the with the people u see in your classes, when your drinking coffee as you wake up, your studying, before bedtime your studying, on the bus, you will be studying. being smart will get your foot in the hallway that the door is located in, being hardworking, dedicated, focused with a never-give-up attitude is what youll need to finish, and to succeed. its saddening as a teacher you would say something so silly and immature. and pretty much every single job focuses on improving peoples lives btw, just because your a teacher and you do it directly doesnt mean others dont do it as well now i also have some family friends that are high school teachers, and i dont know if this same deal applies to you, but supposedly you can work for 4 years at 80% salary to get the 5th year off while getting 80% salary as well. ALSO, not to mention the 2 month 'break' teachers get every year.. and the weekends (although i understand your still grading/creating new work during this time, the students also have to study and prepare... the dedicated ones anyways.. and if you teach summer school, you only get paid more... and students do summer school as well!)
Why would that make his last paragraph shit? He implied exactly what you said - that you have to do a shitload outside of class. I'm guessing you read it wrong?
|
On June 05 2012 14:37 Xapti wrote:Show nested quote +On June 04 2012 23:24 TGalore wrote:
School absolutely does reward intelligence - or as I would define it, mastery of material. As educators, we have to hold ourselves accountable for making sure those that pass have enough facility with the subject matter to succeed at the next level of study in that discipline. That's how you were able to pass - though in my school you would have failed, and deservedly so. Why? Well...
It also, as it should, rewards effort. As educators, we are also responsible for preparing our students for lives beyond being in school and developing habits that will help you succeed in a job. Guess what? If you skip a day of work, you're probably going to get fired. You're going to have to work beyond your scheduled hours too. You're going to have to prepare for work outside of the workplace. If you don't do these things, then you're probably going to lose your job bceause you're costing your employer money. Employers keep the guy who works hard all day even if he's not the smartest and lay off the guy who's very talented but lazy.
Lastly, we as educators are responsible for holding students accountable for their actions, because the adult world does that too. You chose to skip, you chose to blow off homework, you knew the consequences, and now you're complaining about what happened to you because of YOUR actions that you consciously performed? Ha. Sorry, you don't even know the meaning of a hard day's work and having no spare time to yourself. Life and work doesn't stop just because you don't want to deal with the BS - you have to, even if you don't want to.
There's a lot more to life than knowledge, and you've got a lot more to learn than you think.
I thought schools were for teaching, not grading how hard of a worker you are. That's the problem with some people's perception of what school is for. College (technica/applied college to be more specific) is more for preparing people for working. Nonetheless, even with regards to work preparation, there should not be much merit in homework, depending on the field. At least 90%(conservatively speaking) of jobs don't have any homework whatsoever, so why should students be pushed into a scenario where they will be doing 1-3 (or more) hours of homework every day? The work should mostly be doable just within school hours. You don't think taking notes, taking tests, doing class assignments, paying attention, and other things is work? It's just like a job, and even harder than many jobs. Tests are to judge if the student has learned the course material (in case they need to take it again), not to grade how good or even smart of a worker they WILL BE. Parents give kids work at home too — or at least have the option to. That's habitualizing the children for real/paid jobs more than just school homework in my opinion (aside from things like research). You also talk about effort, and not attending work. Attending work would be like class attendance, not homework completion. I would agree attendance is important. With regards to effort, why should effort matter? Should a plumber who tries really hard to fix your problem but doesn't, and in fact causes more problems get rewarded for that behavior? in the same light, why should a kid who gets all the questions wrong get any marks (I understand that using a "show your work" method that would be difficult to do, but not impossible) compared to a person who hasn't done it at all. Effort is never the bottom-line anywhere that I know of. Although I hate the phrase, it's like Yoda says: "there is no try, there is only do". I'm definitely not saying there shouldn't be any homework — I think certain things like research is particularly useful as a homework assignment. Mandatory out-of-class homework math questions are pointless though. Whether the student does the homework or not, they may still be prepared or not prepared to do-so on a test. It should be optional yet encouraged work. If it's mandatory, it should be 10% of the grade (like universities often have for math grade breakdown)
Most jobs in the world value your degree because it shows your work ethic, not what you learned. Of course, there are exceptions, such as engineering, people going into premed, etc. but the vast majority of fields don't care about anything, or possibly just a very basic understanding. Good marks show good work ethic, generally speaking. Or it's the best indicator they can get.
|
On June 05 2012 14:50 FabledIntegral wrote:
Most jobs in the world value your degree because it shows your work ethic, not what you learned. Of course, there are exceptions, such as engineering, people going into premed, etc. but the vast majority of fields don't care about anything, or possibly just a very basic understanding. Good marks show good work ethic, generally speaking. Or it's the best indicator they can get. News to me. I'm not saying they don't care about the degree, but moreso that it's due to hard work, or their mark. Do you have a good source of information to confirm this?Most employers I know care about official education (for knowledge purposes) and experience, usually the experience part and even throw away official education (but obviously you can't get experience without some starter jobs which do look at official education and/or experience)
I know lots of schools that don't grade much on attendance, you think they'd be good workers since they do their homework (assuming they did), or no? What about attitude? Usually those two things attendance and attitude get put into like 5-10% of a grade (if at all, I suppose). Do you think that doesn't matter? I would assert that it's not the school's job to grade those things much, because the school is for teaching, not for grading someone for workforce competency. Most people I know who deal with employers, including college teachers and students have told me that employers don't care too much about grades, this seems to be in contradiction with what you're saying.
|
On June 05 2012 14:37 Xapti wrote:Show nested quote +On June 04 2012 23:24 TGalore wrote:
School absolutely does reward intelligence - or as I would define it, mastery of material. As educators, we have to hold ourselves accountable for making sure those that pass have enough facility with the subject matter to succeed at the next level of study in that discipline. That's how you were able to pass - though in my school you would have failed, and deservedly so. Why? Well...
It also, as it should, rewards effort. As educators, we are also responsible for preparing our students for lives beyond being in school and developing habits that will help you succeed in a job. Guess what? If you skip a day of work, you're probably going to get fired. You're going to have to work beyond your scheduled hours too. You're going to have to prepare for work outside of the workplace. If you don't do these things, then you're probably going to lose your job bceause you're costing your employer money. Employers keep the guy who works hard all day even if he's not the smartest and lay off the guy who's very talented but lazy.
Lastly, we as educators are responsible for holding students accountable for their actions, because the adult world does that too. You chose to skip, you chose to blow off homework, you knew the consequences, and now you're complaining about what happened to you because of YOUR actions that you consciously performed? Ha. Sorry, you don't even know the meaning of a hard day's work and having no spare time to yourself. Life and work doesn't stop just because you don't want to deal with the BS - you have to, even if you don't want to.
There's a lot more to life than knowledge, and you've got a lot more to learn than you think.
I thought schools were for teaching, not grading how hard of a worker you are. That's the problem with some people's perception of what school is for. College (technica/applied college to be more specific) is more for preparing people for working. Nonetheless, even with regards to work preparation, there should not be much merit in homework, depending on the field. At least 90%(conservatively speaking) of jobs don't have any homework whatsoever, so why should students be pushed into a scenario where they will be doing 1-3 (or more) hours of homework every day? The work should mostly be doable just within school hours. You don't think taking notes, taking tests, doing class assignments, paying attention, and other things is work? It's just like a job, and even harder than many jobs. Tests are to judge if the student has learned the course material (in case they need to take it again), not to grade how good or even smart of a worker they WILL BE. Parents give kids work at home too — or at least have the option to. That's habitualizing the children for real/paid jobs more than just school homework in my opinion (aside from things like research). You also talk about effort, and not attending work. Attending work would be like class attendance, not homework completion. I would agree attendance is important. With regards to effort, why should effort matter? Should a plumber who tries really hard to fix your problem but doesn't, and in fact causes more problems get rewarded for that behavior? in the same light, why should a kid who gets all the questions wrong get any marks (I understand that using a "show your work" method that would be difficult to do, but not impossible) compared to a person who hasn't done it at all. Effort is never the bottom-line anywhere that I know of. Although I hate the phrase, it's like Yoda says: "there is no try, there is only do". I'm definitely not saying there shouldn't be any homework — I think certain things like research is particularly useful as a homework assignment. Mandatory out-of-class homework math questions are pointless though. Whether the student does the homework or not, they may still be prepared or not prepared to do-so on a test. It should be optional yet encouraged work. If it's mandatory, it should be 10% of the grade (like universities often have for math grade breakdown)
How is it that all you people are relating school to work after school. School is not work. It is a place of learning designed to better students. Yes, in today's system it is not in anyway optimized, and if any of you read something that wasn't just a reply from someone else you would see that.
Schools are in a grey area. There is no right or wrong way to teach all students. Everyone is different. The way we have it now is because it was a system designed AGES ago. Tests are meant to be a judgement of what the student has learned, however, are not. They are an evaluation of how well the student is able to write a test. Not all students are good at writing tests, but give them the a test on the same knowledge in an oral/kinesthetic approach and they pass the course with flying colours.
This is of course where homework comes in. It for many can be just a review of the learning that happens within a class. It can also be a secondary approach to teacher. Orally in class and kinesthetically in class by having inclusive teaching, visually by giving homework. Maybe a student is a terrible oral and kinesthetic learner, but an amazing visual learning. The homework benefits them greater. And don't give me any bull about then they student should pursue visual learning on their own. A school is meant to fit all learners, although with our current teaching format it doesn't very well.
Go somewhere like Australia these days and they are seriously rebuilding their educational curriculum and school layouts to find what works best (such as self-directed learning like my high school was where it is much more similar to university where you receive work that must be completely by the end of the year, and the oral seminars are completely optional).
Homework and tests are not an accurate representation of a students learning, but are necessary to fulfill as many students learning styles as possible.
AsYyoda said? Guess what, not everyone can DO everything. That's just not the way humans are.
Everything I have mentioned is a normal part of the beginning of educational learning to become a teacher as well. Don't mock the system when you don't have a solution. What they do currently is what they can to satisfy as many students learning as possible without leaving others behind. Good teachers accommodate all their students when possible and I dare say work harder than anyone else on this planet. When you say a teacher isn't good, realize that its that way in every job. Not everyone is the best at what they do, if you can do better, go do it yourself.
|
On June 05 2012 15:04 CustomKal wrote:
How is it that all you people are relating school to work after school. School is not work. It is a place of learning designed to better students. I think I partly agree? I'm only addressing that another person said school was for work— never really said that myself, or at least entirely agree with it. It is work to learn at school, though, so I will disagree with the second part. Explain how going to school is not work. Because you're not getting paid to do it? Because it's something a person should want ( because it's useful;even if they don't want it)? I don't see those as valid things to discredit calling it work. School isn't particularly fun (in-class). Sure, it can be sometimes, but so can jobs. In fact, many professional jobs people have more fun, as well as learn, too. Work takes work, just because you're learning doesn't mean it's not work. All you said is that school's a place of learning — so what? that doesn't mean it takes work to learn. Some people don't like learing much, some people take more effort to learn, some people consider it to be work more than others, but that doesn't make it non-work.
On June 05 2012 15:04 CustomKal wrote:
Not all students are good at writing tests, but give them the a test on the same knowledge in an oral/kinesthetic approach and they pass the course with flying colours. Sure, I don't care. I never said tests have to be written. I wasn't even advocating only tests in schools. I was just saying there should be less emphasis on homework — ie. more class interaction, more class work, more class learning.
On June 05 2012 15:04 CustomKal wrote:
This is of course where homework comes in. It for many can be just a review of the learning that happens within a class. It can also be a secondary approach to teacher. Orally in class and kinesthetically in class by having inclusive teaching, visually by giving homework. Maybe a student is a terrible oral and kinesthetic learner, but an amazing visual learning. The homework benefits them greater. And don't give me any bull about then they student should pursue visual learning on their own. A school is meant to fit all learners, although with our current teaching format it doesn't very well. I don't know if you understand what visual learning is. That or I'm interpreting what you're saying wrong, and/or have a different definition of visual learner. You have to tell me how homework helps visual people. Homework can help any people — oral presentations can be homework, same with sculptures, same with math, same with creative writing — they all use diferent parts of the brain. One problem with homework is that it's easy to cheat via parents, siblings, and friends, and doesn't really show true dedication or effort. Plaigerism is a big thing too. I'm all-for giving students optional assignments. If they want to do an assignment a certain way and the teacher allows multiple methods, then fine — again this is a SEPARATE issue than homework.
On June 05 2012 15:04 CustomKal wrote:
AsYyoda said? Guess what, not everyone can DO everything. That's just not the way humans are. I'm not saying everyone has to do everything! Where in the world did you get that from? If a plumber can't do his job, the fact he tried doesn't matter. If an investment banker screws all his clients — it doesn't matter if he was honest and trying to do good for them, he's still a crappy investment banker. That's all I meant by that, and like I said, I don't even like the quote personally (because it's normally used in a different way, I used it in an at least slightly out of original context way).
Overall your whole post didn't really seem to address what I'm saying. I'm sorry for saying this, but that's what I'm feeling. Can you explain how what you said is relevant to what I was saying?
|
If the teacher violated the systems put in place by the school at which he is employed, then I think it's understandable that he was suspended for giving zeros. If your boss tells you to do something, you do it, if you don't, your fired. However, I am of the opinion that the system shouldn't have been implemented in the first place, but that is beside the point of the suspension.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
