K-5 teacher overload: Too many trained, not enough jobs

Quote from travathian : You are obviously confusing probability and statistics, they have absolutely nothing to do with each other. Likewise obviously clueless about statistics as statistics are completely biased, you even said so yourself. Saying that "math" isn't partisan is down right silly. Duh, 1+1 isn't partisan, but statistics are not just math. Yes, you happen to use math in part of it, but to claim that it is non-partisan because it uses math is moronic and ignorant. This is why so few Americans "get" why they are being fooled by them all the time. Again, take a data set and 5 statisticians and they can each present different conclusions, some of which will seem directly contradict each other. Your response clearly shows a lack of training in stats, you should correct that before making a bigger fool of yourself.

fine you downright forced me to go Stat 101 on you..

http://www.education.com/study-he...ling-bias/

Quote : Sampling Bias for AP Statistics Undercoverage One type of bias results from undercoverage. This happens when some part of the population being sampled is somehow excluded. Voluntary Response Bias Voluntary response bias occurs with self-selected samples. Persons who feel most strongly about an issue are most likely to respond. Wording Bias Wording bias occurs when the wording of the question itself influences the response in a systematic way.

each of these are errors by a statistician.. and if you read a statistical report they are obviously very apparent.. There are more types of biases.. but again they follow the very same course of error (normally the error of the creator).

I will give you a real world example.. Children are measured at school for height, weight etc.. and calculated BMI. These results are then reported on. There's no bias only variables such as.. did the tester make the child remove their shoes? Did the instructions clearly state to do so? Did the kid stand on their tippy toes and go unnoticed? But given the sample size the few children that do so and slight differences become negligible. In the report it states public school children.. so we can say nothing about private schooled children.. (but you'd have to read the report to understand that). So point out the missing bias.

Quote from TRNT : Only if you always wanted to punish teachers and thought their pay were exorbitant. Rather what this should do is to increase the qualifications of teacher programs and make certifications even more difficult so only cream of the crop would become teachers. I cannot see how US can have a bright(er) future if we did not drastically improve our education.

Oh? You mean further entrench the teacher/union racket by strengthening certification requirements?

How many more decades do we have to tolerate subpar teacher production from these educational schools before you recognize that it ain't a problem of good teachers not being placed into schools but poor curriculum and instructional methods choices that are driving under-achievement in school and that child illegitimacy is also a major factor in urban student failure?

Using K-12 primary school education to rewrite history, impose social guilt on white kids, attempt to erase biological gender differences, et al is not education, it is indoctrination.

Having 4th graders learn power point to deliver their report on ancient Egypt to their classmates is not education, it's a waste of time.

It's the types of curriculum and instructional methods that are resulting in poor student achievement and why colleges are forced to run remedial instruction courses rather than focusing on core studies. It's also why we have seen the rise of so-called area studies, e.g., gender studies, Near East studies, which are nothing more than grievance machines that are, again, indoctrinating, not educating.

Vicious cycle.

Quote from jonsmith74 : Oh? You mean further entrench the teacher/union racket by strengthening certification requirements? How many more decades do we have to tolerate subpar teacher production from these educational schools before you recognize that it ain't a problem of good teachers not being placed into schools but poor curriculum and instructional methods choices that are driving under-achievement in school and that child illegitimacy is also a major factor in urban student failure? Using K-12 primary school education to rewrite history, impose social guilt on white kids, attempt to erase biological gender differences, et al is not education, it is indoctrination. Having 4th graders learn power point to deliver their report on ancient Egypt to their classmates is not education, it's a waste of time. It's the types of curriculum and instructional methods that are resulting in poor student achievement and why colleges are forced to run remedial instruction courses rather than focusing on core studies. It's also why we have seen the rise of so-called area studies, e.g., gender studies, Near East studies, which are nothing more than grievance machines that are, again, indoctrinating, not educating. Vicious cycle.

Stipulating almost everything you said to be correct, I am still puzzled why anyone would be against increasing teacher qualification and competence.

Quote from TRNT : Stipulating almost everything you said to be correct, I am still puzzled why anyone would be against increasing teacher qualification and competence.

I think a better question is how exactly do you judge their effectiveness. Oddly enough their enthusiasm and dedication to assisting additional time usually trumps most other areas. Of course their teaching style is another.. but that's so difficult to properly judge in the union's black and white world.

Also.. I've seen crappy crappy preK - 5th grade teachers. I've argued with a good number of them. Typically I've had better response and results from the younger ones. If anyone is curious about teachers lending additional help after school, in my area it's $30/hr for the child's actual teacher to do it. The money is considered a "donation" which is tax deductible???? Keep in mind my state pays for education through real estate taxes.. but somehow I doubt this money cushions the taxes of it's township.

Quote from TRNT : Stipulating almost everything you said to be correct, I am still puzzled why anyone would be against increasing teacher qualification and competence.

Oh, I'm for enhancing teacher quality and competence, but you were not talking about that in what I addressed. Instead, you were encouraging strengthening the teacher and union racket to imit entry into teaching by imposing or enhancing teacher certification requirements. These requirements do nothing to improve educational outcomes. But they do protect teachers and their unions by restricting competition.

I also want improvement over n educational outcome, but I clearly recognize that the source of the problem is teacher preparation in college (indoctrinated with bad instructional habits that are in ineffective) and bad curriculums that focus more on historical revisionism and imposing guilt than to teach a student how to read, write, and think.

Quote from jonsmith74 : Oh, I'm for enhancing teacher quality and competence, but you were not talking about that in what I addressed. Instead, you were encouraging strengthening the teacher and union racket to imit entry into teaching by imposing or enhancing teacher certification requirements. These requirements do nothing to improve educational outcomes. But they do protect teachers and their unions by restricting competition. I also want improvement over n educational outcome, but I clearly recognize that the source of the problem is teacher preparation in college (indoctrinated with bad instructional habits that are in ineffective) and bad curriculums that focus more on historical revisionism and imposing guilt than to teach a student how to read, write, and think.

If I am not wrong I did mention improving teacher education curricula. But it seems you need to disagree.

Oh well.

Quote from TRNT : If I am not wrong I did mention improving teacher education curricula. But it seems you need to disagree. Oh well.

No, what you posted didn't make any sense at all. You said we should increase the qualifications of teacher education programs. Those words make zero sense... Teacher ed programs don't have qualifications.

You also said to lake teacher certification requirements more stringent which makes no sense, either. Certifying that teachers better possesses the same misguided pedagogical approaches that have gotten where we are today. Plus it further limits entry into teaching which only benefits incumbent teachers.

You make no sense.

Quote from TRNT : Stipulating almost everything you said to be correct, I am still puzzled why anyone would be against increasing teacher qualification and competence.

this kind of goes into my "why do hairstylists need licenses?" thread but being a "good" or "effective" teacher is not necessarily measured by the number of exams or classes they take. also, how is government qualified to determine the qualities of a "good" teacher, or measure them?

Quote from Dr. J : this kind of goes into my "why do hairstylists need licenses?" thread but being a "good" or "effective" teacher is not necessarily measured by the number of exams or classes they take. also, how is government qualified to determine the qualities of a "good" teacher, or measure them?

Ok, once more:

1. Require a more rigorous teacher education program/curriculum.
2. Make the standardized exams required for teacher certification more rigorous and require a higher score.

Why is that so difficult to understand?

Where did I mention the gov to determine qualities of a "good" teacher?

Quote from jonsmith74 : No, what you posted didn't make any sense at all. You said we should increase the qualifications of teacher education programs. Those words make zero sense... Teacher ed programs don't have qualifications. You also said to lake teacher certification requirements more stringent which makes no sense, either. Certifying that teachers better possesses the same misguided pedagogical approaches that have gotten where we are today. Plus it further limits entry into teaching which only benefits incumbent teachers. You make no sense.

This is petty in my opinion.

I say nearly all people would understand what I meant. But if you insist:

increase the qualifications of teacher education programs ==> increase the quality of teacher education programs

Better?

Quote from TRNT : Ok, once more: 1. Require a more rigorous teacher education program/curriculum. 2. Make the standardized exams required for teacher certification more rigorous and require a higher score. Why is that so difficult to understand? Where did I mention the gov to determine qualities of a "good" teacher?

who does the above? who determines what is good, bad, etc? is there a correlation between certification or performance on exams to effectiveness? who administers current credential programs?

Hey, I am just posing obvious questions to determine how your proposed solutions would actually solve a problem. You seem to have no answers, or at least WHY what you're proposing will work.

Quote from Dr. J : who does the above? who determines what is good, bad, etc? is there a correlation between certification or performance on exams to effectiveness? who administers current credential programs? Hey, I am just posing obvious questions to determine how your proposed solutions would actually solve a problem. You seem to have no answers, or at least WHY what you're proposing will work.

We are not starting from scratch. We have some standards now. I say increase them.

We usually trust our universities to opine on college degrees. The requirements can be tightened. If you do not believe educators are qualified to raise their requirements then I guess we have a bigger disagreement.

Quote from LivninSC : No union is going to advocate a pay decrease and/or firing tenured teachers for ones just out of school just because of an over supply of teachers? Oh sure, they'll teach you about supply and demand but it'll never be applied to them

isn't the point of a union to protect good teachers who've done nothing wrong from being fired because the administration can hire 2-4 new teachers without any experience in place of them?

Quote from travathian : You are obviously confusing probability and statistics, they have absolutely nothing to do with each other. Likewise obviously clueless about statistics as statistics are completely biased, you even said so yourself. Saying that "math" isn't partisan is down right silly. Duh, 1+1 isn't partisan, but statistics are not just math. Yes, you happen to use math in part of it, but to claim that it is non-partisan because it uses math is moronic and ignorant. This is why so few Americans "get" why they are being fooled by them all the time. Again, take a data set and 5 statisticians and they can each present different conclusions, some of which will seem directly contradict each other. Your response clearly shows a lack of training in stats, you should correct that before making a bigger fool of yourself.

Math major says whaaaaaaa?

The same (inferential) statistics can support more than one hypothesis.

Quote from jonsmith74 : How many more decades do we have to tolerate subpar teacher production from these educational schools before you recognize that it ain't a problem of good teachers not being placed into schools but poor curriculum and instructional methods choices that are driving under-achievement in school and that child illegitimacy is also a major factor in urban student failure?

Could you please describe the difference between these things? Are you saying we have good teachers, they're just teaching students the wrong material? So you're pissed off at curriculum coordinators and the state departments of education, and not teachers?

Quote : Using K-12 primary school education to rewrite history, impose social guilt on white kids, attempt to erase biological gender differences, et al is not education, it is indoctrination.

Has it ever occurred to you that what YOU learned when you were in school might be incorrect?

Quote : Having 4th graders learn power point to deliver their report on ancient Egypt to their classmates is not education, it's a waste of time.

Why? And how about them learning about ancient Egypt? I'm just curious on what you find "good" education and why.

Quote : It's the types of curriculum and instructional methods that are resulting in poor student achievement and why colleges are forced to run remedial instruction courses rather than focusing on core studies. It's also why we have seen the rise of so-called area studies, e.g., gender studies, Near East studies, which are nothing more than grievance machines that are, again, indoctrinating, not educating.

What elementary, middle, and high schools do you know of that has classes focusing on gender studies?

Do me a favor. Go to your states department of education and look through their curriculum frameworks -- the thing the state DoE decides are the baselines that students should be taught. They're separated by grade levels, normally. Go through them and tell me which ones you think are good, which ones are bad, and what you'd replace them with.

I'm just curious.

Quote from jonsmith74 : Oh, I'm for enhancing teacher quality and competence, but you were not talking about that in what I addressed. Instead, you were encouraging strengthening the teacher and union racket to imit entry into teaching by imposing or enhancing teacher certification requirements. These requirements do nothing to improve educational outcomes. But they do protect teachers and their unions by restricting competition. I also want improvement over n educational outcome, but I clearly recognize that the source of the problem is teacher preparation in college (indoctrinated with bad instructional habits that are in ineffective) and bad curriculums that focus more on historical revisionism and imposing guilt than to teach a student how to read, write, and think.

Wait -- so teachers unions are making it tougher for teachers to join....

Meaning they're killing off their own futures?

I'm confused here.