4 ms·
I do not intend to judge the level of competence or respect of Finland's teacher's only I'm really curious how they were formed in the first place. In general
by xte 8y ago
I do not intend to judge the level of competence or respect of Finland's teacher's only I'm really curious how they were formed in the first place.
In general when something new appear (to stay, with success) we have a pioneering phase that start to "form and initially spread" the new "thing". This phase may be quick, however it have to be at least 5-8-10 years to be "spread and know enough". After we have a "consolidation and popularization phase" that normally last long, 10-15 years if it's quick, after it became spread and know enough to have enough "thought currents", it have developed a sort of "stable" philosophy etc. This is the stage we can start to form teachers, normally for tech schools and universities. Only after a decade or even a generation we can start to arrive at "initials schools" teachers.
Counting those years and see "IT age"... Well, we can say we are at start phase of teaching in schools, so it's really hard to have enough competent and "tested" teachers now...
Also about pedagogy and professionalism I remember a personal observation, limited to universities, before I have observed too little: teachers with professional background tend to know far better what they teach and normally are more capable to communicate it. Teachers coming directly from academia tend to know far less and are far less able not only to communicate but also to create interest and transmit passion.
Of course that's not a valid statistics nor I can generalize it for the entire world but... Well just as an example at first year of computer engineering degree course I have a course in chemistry, the first part was held by an teacher "definitively and proudly made in academia", it was a disaster not only for me. The second part by an actual chemistry doctor coming from the industry that start teaching to remain active instead of retire. For some results was still poor for other me included was really well. The same for economy course. The same for all subsequent courses and years. The third year in particular nearly no one digest mathematical physics (a sort of variant of rational mechanics adopted for a not-really-industrial engineering course), the second semester another teacher results completely changes. For essentially all.
Long story short: only few know how to transfer knowledge and I can call them "pedagogues" do not caring to much if they study that subject or they are naturally brought to teach. That's needed but not sufficient. Competence in the field is also needed and for non-academic discipline it's hard to have gained, metabolized and summarized enough to teach. Also passion for the matter is needed and that's again should be trained and formed in years of activities. Like a construction worker's that see if something is valid by instinct even before actually calculate it. Only people with such experience can properly teach. And while normally young schools are considered "easier" to teach is at that stage that we really form our knowledge and start to develop paradigms.
- tuukkah 8y agoI should clarify that the context of my comments was grades 1-9 where the content is fairly simple and the target level is nowhere near professional skills. I'm not saying the teaching is perfect (it's always far from that) but the results in other topics are good and I don't see why they wouldn't be good in programming as well. If you're saying it's too early, I say the earlier we get the virtuous cycle going the better (the previous generation of teachers will teach the next generation to be better).