4 ms·

Essentially this. It's not really the schools or teachers - they are generally decent. Some better than others ... but teaching is not rocket science. Basic ed

Essentially this. It's not really the schools or teachers - they are generally decent. Some better than others ... but teaching is not rocket science. Basic education is not some magical, mysterious thing. It's mostly straightforward, and a little mundane. If you have decent students, prepared to learn a bit - which mostly comes from a reasonably positive and stable home - then all you need is basic things to get them to a decent level of literacy. Surely some systems are better than others but I think it's far more about homes and communities than it is dumping 'bad teachers' and certainly not about making teaching 'competitive'.

andy_ppp 8y ago
>>> but teaching is not rocket science I actually think teaching children is a really difficult and important part of society but I think many people don't value the contribution incredible teaching can make to individual students lives. A great school and teacher obviously can change the lives of children in poverty but it's astonishingly difficult and requires immense talent to achieve. Not commenting on the quality of this study however.
- sonnyblarney 8y ago
  I didn't say it was easy, or that it wasn't hard work, or that I didn't value it. Teaching is 'hard work', it requires educated, dedicated people, and it's very important work. But it's not rocket science. Doing it is not risky - especially if you're teaching something that's been taught a million times before. Most well educated people I think could teach at least one subject, though they may not have the wherewithal or stamina to stick it out, or may not have the empathy/social skills to do it well.
  - pbhjpbhj 8y ago
    Being a schoolteacher is risky - kids kill themselves over things that happen at school, or they metaphorically throw their life away with other stupid actions. A good, engaged teacher can help to steer children through that minefield. It's not just about teaching a subject. The idea that one only needs to be good at a subject to teach it well is bunkum. It's not rocket surgery, it's potentially far more important.
  - Angostura 8y ago
    > Doing it is not risky - especially if you're teaching something that's been taught a million times before. Most well educated people I think could teach at least one subject I think this is something that many well educated people think, right up until they are placed alone in a class-room of 30 children who aren't desperately interested in what they have to say.
    - brlewis 8y ago
      You are correct. http://blog.mrbigler.com/2016/04/23/those-who-can-do-those-who-can-teach-teach/ http://blog.mrbigler.com/2016/04/23/those-who-can-do-those-w...
    - Retric 8y ago
      The five year teacher attrition rate is under 20% based on this study: (https://edsource.org/2015/half-of-new-teachers-quit-profession-in-5-years-not-true-new-study-says/83054 https://edsource.org/2015/half-of-new-teachers-quit-professi...) That's rather low and includes many who don't like teaching even if they have the skills. Which suggests most people really can do it. Granted, that's not the first time these people have been in a classroom, but collage Education degrees don't see high attrition either. Also, "97 percent of teachers who earned more than $40,000 their first year returned the next year, compared with 87 percent who earned less than $40,000."
  - dhimes 8y ago
    Most well educated people I think could teach at least one subject And in essence you have hit on the problem. Everybody thinks they can be a teacher. And for some value of $teacher they can, but it's hard to be really good. You might watch LeBron James play basketball and think "I can do that," go out on the court and take a few shots, and think you're pretty good. But you're likely not. This is why assessing teachers is soooooo important. We need reliable, verifiable ways to separate the good from the bad.
    - germinalphrase 8y ago
      And yet, assessing teachers reliably is a very difficult task. As a teacher, the moment that a reliable assessment method is introduced there will be significant push back; however, it will also be the key to broad improvements in the education system and the further professionalisation of teaching (and, by extension, teacher retention/compensation). I also believe that this starts by enabling classroom teachers to assess their students with the reliability of standardized tests but within their individualized curriculum. That's not an easily ask - but it is an exciting concept that I return to every few months.
      - dhimes 8y ago
        I agree. If we ever get there then this will be the way that top teachers finally start making the money they deserve. The caveat, of course, is that they will be in limited supply so we'll need a way to extend their influence.
        germinalphrase 8y ago
        Yes - but we will actually have a tool upon which to make effective evaluations and offer individualized learning goals for teachers. Understanding my weaknesses is the first step in strengthening them (or leaving the profession if I can't).
      - dahdum 8y ago
        I disagree a bit here, but I do have a limited understanding of the history of education. US high schools lag significantly behind international averages [1] across almost all metrics, and are used for socializing more than other other countries. It's so easy for us to blame teachers, or to wishfully think they could turn it around on their own, but the approach has to extend beyond the classroom. Non-school factors are estimated to have 4-8 times the impact as teacher quality. [2] We should work on removing vocational program stigma and drop the illusion that everyone should aspire to a 4 year degree, even if in disciplines with terrible job markets, to "succeed". I really wish there was some way of incentivizing parents to be more involved, or moving to year round all day education to mitigate their impact. [1] http://www.slate.com/articles/life/education/2014/02/high_school_in_america_a_complete_disaster.html http://www.slate.com/articles/life/education/2014/02/high_sc... [2] https://www.rand.org/education/projects/measuring-teacher-effectiveness/teachers-matter.html https://www.rand.org/education/projects/measuring-teacher-ef...
  - adamsea 8y ago
    The risk is turning away young minds.
  - Clubber 8y ago
    The difficult part is being able to inspire the kids to be interested in the subject; the subject matter is fairly boilerplate. Wanting to learn a subject is much better than being forced to learn a subject. In other words, it's much more about soft skills than hard skills. Think of a good speaker. Two people can talk about the same subject, but one leaves you with the inspiration and curiosity to learn more, the other makes you want to break for lunch. Of course, you have to get rid of the disruptive kids. US schools are so scared of getting sued, the principles just bounce them back to the classrooms. When I was growing up, they had a school for bad kids so they wouldn't disrupt the ones that were there to learn. They closed that program down. My state is in the lower half of the school system. Money also matters. You can't each in a classroom full of 30-40 kids at the high school level. Teachers can't be spending their money on school supplies the state won't budget for. Earning a college degree for a profession that doesn't pay very well isn't a great option, so fewer people do it. For something so critical to our civilization, it seems many states treat education as a cost center. Disclaimer: Both my parents were teachers as were many in the family. I am not, but if things were better, I certainly would consider it. I'm a programmer by trade.
- rayiner 8y ago
  Is there empirical evidence for this?
- dwater 8y ago
  I taught high school for almost 10 years and I agree with both of you. You don't have to be a genius, some of the best Algebra 1 teachers I worked with couldn't teach calculus because they didn't understand it. Getting the students to understand the material is generally the easy part, their brains are highly receptive. If a student wants to learn the subject, you can basically just sit there and answer their questions. Engaging and motivating them to want to do it is the part that takes a lifetime to master.
- home_boi 8y ago
  > A great school and teacher obviously can change the lives of children in poverty but it's astonishingly difficult and requires immense talent to achieve. Teaching children in poverty is a specialization. Teachers can excel at teaching children at upper middle class schools but fail miserably at an inner city school. People complain about privilege on teacher quality difference between inner city and good schools. The truth is that the "good" teachers at an upper middle class school wouldn't be much of an improvement over the "bad" teachers at inner city schools. The "good" teachers only know how to teach well-behaved, studious students! That is why integration failed. The environment at good schools are good for children with familial support and low behavioral issues. It is not good for children with behavioral issues without familial support.
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
ss2003 8y ago
There are many, many schools that are not decent. There are plenty of others that are 'decent' but have no resources to support any student who has even a minor learning deficient. In order to pull themselves up and compete on an even playing field with the rich/elite kids the majority of students need more than a 'basic education'.

andy_ppp 8y ago

>>> but teaching is not rocket science I actually think teaching children is a really difficult and important part of society but I think many people don't value the contribution incredible teaching can make to individual students lives. A great school and teacher obviously can change the lives of children in poverty but it's astonishingly difficult and requires immense talent to achieve. Not commenting on the quality of this study however.

sonnyblarney 8y ago
I didn't say it was easy, or that it wasn't hard work, or that I didn't value it. Teaching is 'hard work', it requires educated, dedicated people, and it's very important work. But it's not rocket science. Doing it is not risky - especially if you're teaching something that's been taught a million times before. Most well educated people I think could teach at least one subject, though they may not have the wherewithal or stamina to stick it out, or may not have the empathy/social skills to do it well.
- pbhjpbhj 8y ago
  Being a schoolteacher is risky - kids kill themselves over things that happen at school, or they metaphorically throw their life away with other stupid actions. A good, engaged teacher can help to steer children through that minefield. It's not just about teaching a subject. The idea that one only needs to be good at a subject to teach it well is bunkum. It's not rocket surgery, it's potentially far more important.
- Angostura 8y ago
  > Doing it is not risky - especially if you're teaching something that's been taught a million times before. Most well educated people I think could teach at least one subject I think this is something that many well educated people think, right up until they are placed alone in a class-room of 30 children who aren't desperately interested in what they have to say.
  - brlewis 8y ago
    You are correct. http://blog.mrbigler.com/2016/04/23/those-who-can-do-those-who-can-teach-teach/ http://blog.mrbigler.com/2016/04/23/those-who-can-do-those-w...
  - Retric 8y ago
    The five year teacher attrition rate is under 20% based on this study: (https://edsource.org/2015/half-of-new-teachers-quit-profession-in-5-years-not-true-new-study-says/83054 https://edsource.org/2015/half-of-new-teachers-quit-professi...) That's rather low and includes many who don't like teaching even if they have the skills. Which suggests most people really can do it. Granted, that's not the first time these people have been in a classroom, but collage Education degrees don't see high attrition either. Also, "97 percent of teachers who earned more than $40,000 their first year returned the next year, compared with 87 percent who earned less than $40,000."
- dhimes 8y ago
  Most well educated people I think could teach at least one subject And in essence you have hit on the problem. Everybody thinks they can be a teacher. And for some value of $teacher they can, but it's hard to be really good. You might watch LeBron James play basketball and think "I can do that," go out on the court and take a few shots, and think you're pretty good. But you're likely not. This is why assessing teachers is soooooo important. We need reliable, verifiable ways to separate the good from the bad.
  - germinalphrase 8y ago
    And yet, assessing teachers reliably is a very difficult task. As a teacher, the moment that a reliable assessment method is introduced there will be significant push back; however, it will also be the key to broad improvements in the education system and the further professionalisation of teaching (and, by extension, teacher retention/compensation). I also believe that this starts by enabling classroom teachers to assess their students with the reliability of standardized tests but within their individualized curriculum. That's not an easily ask - but it is an exciting concept that I return to every few months.
    - dhimes 8y ago
      I agree. If we ever get there then this will be the way that top teachers finally start making the money they deserve. The caveat, of course, is that they will be in limited supply so we'll need a way to extend their influence.
      - germinalphrase 8y ago
        Yes - but we will actually have a tool upon which to make effective evaluations and offer individualized learning goals for teachers. Understanding my weaknesses is the first step in strengthening them (or leaving the profession if I can't).
    - dahdum 8y ago
      I disagree a bit here, but I do have a limited understanding of the history of education. US high schools lag significantly behind international averages [1] across almost all metrics, and are used for socializing more than other other countries. It's so easy for us to blame teachers, or to wishfully think they could turn it around on their own, but the approach has to extend beyond the classroom. Non-school factors are estimated to have 4-8 times the impact as teacher quality. [2] We should work on removing vocational program stigma and drop the illusion that everyone should aspire to a 4 year degree, even if in disciplines with terrible job markets, to "succeed". I really wish there was some way of incentivizing parents to be more involved, or moving to year round all day education to mitigate their impact. [1] http://www.slate.com/articles/life/education/2014/02/high_school_in_america_a_complete_disaster.html http://www.slate.com/articles/life/education/2014/02/high_sc... [2] https://www.rand.org/education/projects/measuring-teacher-effectiveness/teachers-matter.html https://www.rand.org/education/projects/measuring-teacher-ef...
- adamsea 8y ago
  The risk is turning away young minds.
- Clubber 8y ago
  The difficult part is being able to inspire the kids to be interested in the subject; the subject matter is fairly boilerplate. Wanting to learn a subject is much better than being forced to learn a subject. In other words, it's much more about soft skills than hard skills. Think of a good speaker. Two people can talk about the same subject, but one leaves you with the inspiration and curiosity to learn more, the other makes you want to break for lunch. Of course, you have to get rid of the disruptive kids. US schools are so scared of getting sued, the principles just bounce them back to the classrooms. When I was growing up, they had a school for bad kids so they wouldn't disrupt the ones that were there to learn. They closed that program down. My state is in the lower half of the school system. Money also matters. You can't each in a classroom full of 30-40 kids at the high school level. Teachers can't be spending their money on school supplies the state won't budget for. Earning a college degree for a profession that doesn't pay very well isn't a great option, so fewer people do it. For something so critical to our civilization, it seems many states treat education as a cost center. Disclaimer: Both my parents were teachers as were many in the family. I am not, but if things were better, I certainly would consider it. I'm a programmer by trade.
rayiner 8y ago
Is there empirical evidence for this?
dwater 8y ago
I taught high school for almost 10 years and I agree with both of you. You don't have to be a genius, some of the best Algebra 1 teachers I worked with couldn't teach calculus because they didn't understand it. Getting the students to understand the material is generally the easy part, their brains are highly receptive. If a student wants to learn the subject, you can basically just sit there and answer their questions. Engaging and motivating them to want to do it is the part that takes a lifetime to master.
home_boi 8y ago
> A great school and teacher obviously can change the lives of children in poverty but it's astonishingly difficult and requires immense talent to achieve. Teaching children in poverty is a specialization. Teachers can excel at teaching children at upper middle class schools but fail miserably at an inner city school. People complain about privilege on teacher quality difference between inner city and good schools. The truth is that the "good" teachers at an upper middle class school wouldn't be much of an improvement over the "bad" teachers at inner city schools. The "good" teachers only know how to teach well-behaved, studious students! That is why integration failed. The environment at good schools are good for children with familial support and low behavioral issues. It is not good for children with behavioral issues without familial support.

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]

ss2003 8y ago

There are many, many schools that are not decent. There are plenty of others that are 'decent' but have no resources to support any student who has even a minor learning deficient. In order to pull themselves up and compete on an even playing field with the rich/elite kids the majority of students need more than a 'basic education'.