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.
PDP11 for me, didn't know there was an earlier version.The PDP-8. The first computer I did assembly language programing for.
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..."
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 knowApparently 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
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.
If she is good looking then dimming the lights can help the boys in the class to be able to concentrate and learn some.She mastered the art of gentle intimidation by her height and got to to read with quiet symphony music and dimmer lights.
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 mathsAnd that's despite been in a trade and a hobby where we use maths on a frequent basis.
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 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).
Where is all this leading- well it showed what could be achieved by good management, well designed courses, good facilities and focus on objectives.
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.
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.
You left out unlimited money, time, and resources
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'.
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)
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
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?