Teachers who don’t go through ed school end up teaching poor kids with funny names, said Reg Weaver, head of the National Education Association, at a speech in Tulsa. From the Tulsa World:
(Weaver) called on higher standards for teacher certification, noting, “There’s a group out there that thinks all you need to be a teacher is a bachelor’s degree, a background check and to pass a computerized test, but you know they’re not going to send them to teach where the wealthy folks are.
“They’re going to send them to teach where Ray-Ray, Little Willie, Little Man, Too-sweet, and Chiquita are in the classroom.”
Offensive and unprofessional, says Dave Saba of ABCTE (American Board for Certification of Teacher Excellence), which was Weaver’s intended target.
Gosh, and here I just ended up teaching in a prep school with lots of kids named Walter. Oh, the humanity.
I believe that exactly zero of the high school teachers that I had were certified education majors. They all had degrees in their areas of teaching, and many had Masters degrees–again, in their disciplines, not education.
If all that was needed was passing a hard test, then it’d be quite the opposite–the suburbs would be getting the non-ed school teachers.
I’m just … flabbergasted that Weaver can keep his job after saying that. I’m sure if he was a reality-show bounty hunter, or a syndicated sportscaster, he’d be updating his resume right now.
The lecturers in my College of Education classes instructed us that real-world experience is the best teacher and that lectures and classes are obsolete. They managed not to smile or drop a reference to Kurt Godel.
Has anyone ever conducted a statistical, empirical comparison of: A, students whose teachers had College of Education degrees and B, students of teachers who had degrees in their subject area and who then received on-the-job training as teachers’ aids, department gofers, and in-house substitutes?
Rather than pay for 30 useless college credits in Education, prospective teachers could get paid and learn their job-related skills on-the-job. Additionally, schools could assess prospective teachers in a real-world test of their skills.
College of Education credits add nothing to teacher competence. They serve only to protect the illusion of expertise on which the State-monopoly education industry depends.
This is a better idea.
Holland, “How to build a Better Teacher”
Policy Review, April, 2001`
http://www.policyreview.org/APR01/holland.html
http://www.hoover.org/publications/policyreview/3477932.html
“College of Education credits add nothing to teacher competence. They serve only to protect the illusion of expertise on which the State-monopoly education industry depends.”
Such required courses also guarantee education faculty jobs, which is probably what the game really is about.
Bill
Yeah – the truth hurts
Hi!, Allen, thanks for the corrected link.
Leonard, on a per employee basis, post-secondary education is the larger fraud. Want to study Russian history or the novels of George Elliot? Read a book or ten. You don’t need to kiss some professor’s
toes. At least attendance at college is voluntary, so students (if not taxpayers) volunteer to get defrauded.
In terms of total cost (including the opportunity cost to students of the time they spend in school) US K-12 school is the larger fraud.
I wonder if mechanical aptitude, like language fluency, depends on early exposure.
Last night’s episode of Modern Marvels, “Cotton” mentioned Richard Arkwright, so I looked him up.
Not bad for a kid with no school at all. Do you suppose Ellen had a degree in Education, Mr. Weaver?
Speaking of weavers…
James Hargreaves …”had no formal education and could neither read nor write. Although no likeness of him is known to exist, he was described as a tall, well-built man with black hair, with an interest in mechanics despite his lack of letters.”
Anyone got anything on the education of the unsung hero, Thomas Highs?
Then there’s this contribution to the industrial revolution:…