Times Table

[cowboybob]

Having frequently and successfully applied statistical formulae to achieve preferred results (forcing the numbers to conform to my desired conclusion), I can fully agree with Mark Twain's maxim: "There are liars, damn liars and statisticians...".

My apologies to anyone offended, but, then, 79.334% (using the Student Newman Keuls test*) of the offendees are simply unable to read and comprehend .

* Other tests failed to give me the right answer.

 

[spec]

Also, teaching something needs a greater understanding than just 'doing it', you have to understand why you're doing it in order to explain it, and often you'll find improvements and changes to techniques to help specific people.

That's true for sure. Quite often when you explain something too, like on ETO. The number of times that I have leapt into an explanation and found that I only have a wooley concept of what I am trying to say.

But there are instructors who teach by rote. I have an acquaintance who was an RAF instructor teaching basic electronics. He taught Ohms law, but had no idea how to apply it.

 

[Pommie]

The PDP-8. The first computer I did assembly language programing for.

PDP11 for me, didn't know there was an earlier version.

Mike.

 

[spec]

Having frequently and successfully applied statistical formulae to achieve preferred results (forcing the numbers to conform to my desired conclusion), I can fully agree with Mark Twain's maxim: "There are liars, damn liars and statisticians..."

I love statistics, especially the ones on UK TV; flooding in a particular area is a 250 year occurrence. What possible data could be used to arrive at that figure.
Babies that are not breast feed their will catch diseases, not be intelligent and not grow properly, medical experts say. And so on.

What really worries me is that they are missing the really important statistic: One of the most toxic substances in the world is water- everyone who has drunk it dies in the end.

 

[misterT]

 

[cowboybob]

Very enlightening, misterT. Thank you.

I was amused by the "bitter warm" comment. In my neck of the woods we use "bitter" to describe the cold... .

 

[Nigel Goodwin]

But there are instructors who teach by rote. I have an acquaintance who was an RAF instructor teaching basic electronics. He taught Ohms law, but had no idea how to apply it.

Unfortunately that's very true of many school teachers - who are forced to teach subjects they know absolutely nothing about.

At secondary school this applies hugely to maths and science teachers, as there's a massive shortage of them - so they are commonly 'taught' by teachers who know little or nothing about them.

At primary school it's probably even worse, as teachers have to teach ALL subjects - and much year 6 maths now is pretty well what GCSE maths was only a few years ago, and the teachers don't have those sort of maths skills. They are also now obliged to teach a foreign language - but not to worry, they get sent on a half day course to teach them all they need to know Apparently the next 'compulsory' lesson invented by the government (still without removing any of the many previous compulsory lessons) is teaching the kids to write iPad apps

How many primary school teachers have the skills to teach app writing?.

 

[spec]

Unfortunately that's very true of many school teachers - who are forced to teach subjects they know absolutely nothing about.

At secondary school this applies hugely to maths and science teachers, as there's a massive shortage of them - so they are commonly 'taught' by teachers who know little or nothing about them.

At primary school it's probably even worse, as teachers have to teach ALL subjects - and much year 6 maths now is pretty well what GCSE maths was only a few years ago, and the teachers don't have those sort of maths skills. They are also now obliged to teach a foreign language - but not to worry, they get sent on a half day course to teach them all they need to know Apparently the next 'compulsory' lesson invented by the government (still without removing any of the many previous compulsory lessons) is teaching the kids to write iPad apps

How many primary school teachers have the skills to teach app writing?.

There is some worrying things in what you say. Surely teaching kids up to the age of 11 is not that difficult from the academic point of view The problem is that the teachers are faced with ever changing requirements and that is not to mention all the periphery activities like health and safety and all the paperwork that is involved in most jobs these days.

To my mind there should be a national curriculum of reading writing and arithmetic on the academic side and sport and interaction with people on the social side.

While I'm on my soap box I think there is a dire need for spelling reform. I'm not talking about radical changes just on the lines of speak as you spell/spell as you speak. Other languages like Spanish for example are much more logical so why can't English be. Just think of the billions of pounds and tens of thousands of man hours expended every year teaching the silly whims of a few scribes from ancient days. Webster in the US had the right idea but didn't go far enough. The other thing about arcane spelling is that it teaches kids to illogical. My experience is that in the early years there are those who can spell and not write and those who can write but not spell.

As to the art of teaching, especially young kids, that is a complete mystery to me, as are other languages.This is the area where most teachers I have come across shine.

 

[Nigel Goodwin]

There is some worrying things in what you say. Surely teaching kids up to the age of 11 is not that difficult from the academic point of view

Not back in the days we were at primary, but now they have to teach near GCSE level maths (and other subjects), plus French, and App programming.

How is a teacher, who may only have a Degree in Art History, Psychology etc. and a 12 month PCGE course expect to teach YEARS above anything they have trained for. I was good at Maths back at school, in the top set in a highly regarded Grammar school - but I wouldn't have a clue about modern GCSE maths And that's despite been in a trade and a hobby where we use maths on a frequent basis.

As to the art of teaching, especially young kids, that is a complete mystery to me, as are other languages.This is the area where most teachers I have come across shine.

I've taught Martial Arts to young kids - adults (and even teenagers) are FAR preferable

With a 4 or 5 year old you can get perhaps 10 minutes work out of them in an hours lesson.

 

[Tony Stewart]

Teachers are far better trained to be analytical of a child's performance, but may not have all the time it takes to correct behavioral and concentration issues.

I know one retired primary Gr 2 teacher who switched to Grade 1 because too many students did not know how to read after grade 1. She mastered the art of gentle intimidation by her height and got to to read with quiet symphony music and dimmer lights.

 

[zahwi]

She mastered the art of gentle intimidation by her height and got to to read with quiet symphony music and dimmer lights.

If she is good looking then dimming the lights can help the boys in the class to be able to concentrate and learn some.

 

[spec]

I was an apprentice at RAF Locking from 1962 thru 1964. Our course was mainly, advanced maths, electronic theory, radar equipments (practical) and general study (history, geography and politics). Each instructor, civvy or serving officer was expected to handle any subject within their general field. So, for example, if a new equipment was introduced into the labs the instructors were expected to be up and running within about two weeks. One instructor was given American TACAN, which at the time used very advanced techniques both in function and construction. He said he was learning sections of the equipment the night before he gave the lesson.

At least once every three months a course assessor would sit in on a lesson for a particular instructor to asses performance. As students we had a clear outline of what our learning targets were and our level of comprehension was tested at every major point in the course.

Where is all this leading- well it showed what could be achieved by good management, well designed courses, good facilities and focus on objectives. This environment had a knock on effect- it attracted dedicated and talented staff. It was a real eye-opener for me after the appalling shambles of the school I had left.

 

[spec]

Not back in the days we were at primary, but now they have to teach near GCSE level maths (and other subjects), plus French, and App programming.

How is a teacher, who may only have a Degree in Art History, Psychology etc. and a 12 month PCGE course expect to teach YEARS above anything they have trained for. I was good at Maths back at school, in the top set in a highly regarded Grammar school - but I wouldn't have a clue about modern GCSE maths And that's despite been in a trade and a hobby where we use maths on a frequent basis.

Why would you not have a clue about modern GCSE maths- I suspect quite the opposite!

I've taught Martial Arts to young kids - adults (and even teenagers) are FAR preferable

With a 4 or 5 year old you can get perhaps 10 minutes work out of them in an hours lesson.

I can't remember much maths but 10 minutes in 60 minutes is 16.67%. That is getting close to 20% (20: 80)

 

[Nigel Goodwin]

I was an apprentice at RAF Locking from 1962 thru 1964. Our course was mainly, advanced maths, electronic theory, radar equipments (practical) and general study (history, geography and politics).

What was considered 'advanced maths' back then is probably Primary School maths now

I would presume it was similar to what I did at college, maths above O Level suitable for Electronics courses - and just a small sub-set of A Level Maths.

Where is all this leading- well it showed what could be achieved by good management, well designed courses, good facilities and focus on objectives.

You left out unlimited money, time, and resources

 

[spec]

Not back in the days we were at primary, but now they have to teach near GCSE level maths (and other subjects), plus French, and App programming.

How is a teacher, who may only have a Degree in Art History, Psychology etc. and a 12 month PCGE course expect to teach YEARS above anything they have trained for.

Another strong point and I agree entirely. But the question is why were the teachers trained in art, history, psychology. This is the crux of the matter. There are armies of people taking what technical and scientific people call 'basket weaving subjects'. One of the biggies at the moment is media management, whatever that is, and the perennial favorites photography and sociology. Meantime there is a dire shortage of technical and scientific graduates. Why is this so. Two reasons, the BWS are easier by a mile. They are also great fun, and sociology has by far the best birds.

 

[spec]

What was considered 'advanced maths' back then is probably Primary School maths now

Your impression of the maths standards now and then are the absolute opposite of what I see. I really don't think you can compare advanced maths with what is taught at primary school

I would presume it was similar to what I did at college, maths above O Level suitable for Electronics courses - and just a small sub-set of A Level Maths.

When I joined up I had GCE maths in two subjects. The maths we did were close to A level. The maths for electronics was covered in the electronics classes rather than the advanced maths classes. Don't get the impression that I was a swat, quite the opposite- regrettably my interests were elsewhere at age 17 to 20 I did most of my learning when I grew up.

You left out unlimited money, time, and resources

That is true and no doubt the RAF had more of every thing, but that is a matter of degree not principal. The school I mentioned could have performed much better with a good system and management. I'm not sure what you mean by time. The teachers were not dealing with anything especially difficult, unlike the instructors at RAF Locking. They just did the same thing over and over again each term. By the way, I don't want to fall out with you now that I know you are a a Marshal Arts Instructor. (PS: I don't live at Weston Super Mare anymore)

 

[Nigel Goodwin]

Another strong point and I agree entirely. But the question is why were the teachers trained in art, history, psychology. This is the crux of the matter. There are armies of people taking what technical and scientific people call 'basket weaving subjects'.

The majority of teachers tend to have degrees in poor subjects, while teaching is a good paid job for a poor degree it's a poor paid job for a good degree - hence the lack of Maths and Science teachers (who can get much better paid jobs elsewhere, and without all the bother).

I read recently in a newspaper that the average starting pay for an Undergrad is £28,000 - for an NQT (Newly Qualified Teacher) it's £22,244 - well below the supposed 'average'. The £28,000 figure sounds rather high to me though, as a lot of graduates have useless degrees and work at McDonalds

 

[Nigel Goodwin]

That is true and no doubt the RAF had more of every thing, but that is a matter of degree not principal. The school I mentioned could have performed much better with a good system and management. I'm not sure what you mean by time. The teachers were not dealing with anything especially difficult, unlike the instructors at RAF Locking. They just did the same thing over and over again each term.

Time because there's only so much time in a day, and many Primary School teachers are commonly working 12+ hours per day already.

You've not been in a school recently if you think they do the same over and over, the government completely change everything every few months, meaning you have to start entirely from scratch again.

By the way, I don't want to fall out with you now that I know you are a a Marshal Arts Instructor. (PS: I don't live at Weston Super Mare anymore)

I don't hurt people without good reason

 

[spec]

My wife's second cousin was taking a tech course to be an electrician. He showed me some homework he was having trouble completing. Would you believe it. The subject was transistor audio amplifiers. On the paper there was a schematic of an amplifier and a list of questions about the circuit. I was amazed by what I saw- there were two major errors on the amp schematic which meant that no one could have sorted out what was going on. This was a standard course paper that had been in use for years.

When I told my wife's second cousin about the errors I could tell he didn't believe me- uncle Chuck knows more than my instructor?

This is just another example of sloppy work which seems to be endemic where there is no feedback mechanism to correct errors.

 

[spec]

The majority of teachers tend to have degrees in poor subjects, while teaching is a good paid job for a poor degree it's a poor paid job for a good degree - hence the lack of Maths and Science teachers (who can get much better paid jobs elsewhere, and without all the bother).

I read recently in a newspaper that the average starting pay for an Undergrad is £28,000 - for an NQT (Newly Qualified Teacher) it's £22,244 - well below the supposed 'average'. The £28,000 figure sounds rather high to me though, as a lot of graduates have useless degrees and work at McDonalds

Yeah I know- the whole thing is a mess. £28K sounds high for a grad engineer, but maybe in London. £20K or less would be common in this area. I used to do quite a bit of interviewing- some of the people were extraordinary, if they bothered to turn up that is. Salary statistics are just that and as we have discussed statistics can show anything.