3 ms·

"I don't think the author makes a convincing point as to why standardization is bad for students but somehow beneficial to teachers." I would claim the freedom

by fsloth 12y ago

"I don't think the author makes a convincing point as to why standardization is bad for students but somehow beneficial to teachers." I would claim the freedom given to teachers when practicing their profession is one of the reasons they do so well. Strict control usually cuts down the performance of the best people by oveconstraining requirements while protecting against the worst performers. More lean system keeps the best people motivated and gives them the leeway to do as they see best (practice art instead of just fulfilling regulations). Worst people can do poorly but the teachers education system is so good even the worst are not that bad (usually). This is why the strict standardization of teacher education is needed - to make sure people are good enough they can be expected to perform well. These are just anecdotal toughts based on experience (I'm a finn).

bko 12y ago
That's the basic concept of most licensing: ensure that the practitioner is good enough to meet some basic level of competence. Although that makes sense for things like a license to drive a car, I don't think it makes sense for teaching since teaching (in my opinion) is an art. It would be silly to provide licensing for people to practice art or a similarly creative endeavor. Admittedly anecdotal, but I've asked a few teacher friends if graduate school has made them better teachers and all have answered that it hasn't. Rather, they would insist that it's a more organic experience of learning through teaching over time and experimenting with the medium. Perhaps it's just that teacher education in America is fragmented and ineffective but I think it's just the nature of most art that the skill can't be acquired in an academic setting. To me the ultimate effectiveness measure is if parents choose to send their kids to that school or students sign up for that class voluntarily.
- fsloth 12y ago
  " Rather, they would insist that it's a more organic experience of learning through teaching over time and experimenting with the medium" Yeah, my anecdotal understanding of the profession acquired through similar channels would corroborate this. The sad thing is that in strict licensing situation the great teachers who lack proper licensing are locked away (e.g. when licensing requirements change). I suppose university degrees work mostly as gateways to the careers that require them - i.e. it is thought the candidates who graduate are better qualified for the job than those that did not. I have no idea if the people filtered out would actually be the ones who would perform worst on the job. "To me the ultimate effectiveness measure is if parents choose to send their kids to that school or students sign up for that class voluntarily." I don't think parent perceptions kick in as a significant metric of quality until the differences in school quality have reached pathological levels. And in the first grades kids are not really supposed to sign in to classes by themselves.

by fsloth 12y ago

bko 12y ago

That's the basic concept of most licensing: ensure that the practitioner is good enough to meet some basic level of competence. Although that makes sense for things like a license to drive a car, I don't think it makes sense for teaching since teaching (in my opinion) is an art. It would be silly to provide licensing for people to practice art or a similarly creative endeavor. Admittedly anecdotal, but I've asked a few teacher friends if graduate school has made them better teachers and all have answered that it hasn't. Rather, they would insist that it's a more organic experience of learning through teaching over time and experimenting with the medium. Perhaps it's just that teacher education in America is fragmented and ineffective but I think it's just the nature of most art that the skill can't be acquired in an academic setting. To me the ultimate effectiveness measure is if parents choose to send their kids to that school or students sign up for that class voluntarily.

fsloth 12y ago
" Rather, they would insist that it's a more organic experience of learning through teaching over time and experimenting with the medium" Yeah, my anecdotal understanding of the profession acquired through similar channels would corroborate this. The sad thing is that in strict licensing situation the great teachers who lack proper licensing are locked away (e.g. when licensing requirements change). I suppose university degrees work mostly as gateways to the careers that require them - i.e. it is thought the candidates who graduate are better qualified for the job than those that did not. I have no idea if the people filtered out would actually be the ones who would perform worst on the job. "To me the ultimate effectiveness measure is if parents choose to send their kids to that school or students sign up for that class voluntarily." I don't think parent perceptions kick in as a significant metric of quality until the differences in school quality have reached pathological levels. And in the first grades kids are not really supposed to sign in to classes by themselves.