Discussion in 'Debate & Marathon Threads Archive' started by dave1mo, Sep 7, 2013.
Sep 7, 2013
I would like to participate in this discussion, but I feel like it would be pointless and worthless.
Sep 8, 2013
Difficult is a relative term; skill-sets for particular content areas/grades being scarce in certain areas is much less relative. People keep fixating on "hard work" and "difficulty" as if those are the sole determiners for whether a job is hard to fill.
So you contribute...a pointless and worthless post in response?
Doesn't seem like good problem-solving. I expect a sassy private message in the next hour or so.
Why do we allow these threads that just end up a p*ssing contest?
I've subbed in all grade levels and subjects. I'm plenty capable of teaching them all (except music, :lol. I was a straight-A student and I have a great memory. However, as a sub, you are extremely exhausted (physically AND mentally) after teaching K-1. The older the kids, the less fatigue. Now, I understand high school english teachers have WAY more grading to do than anyone else. I also understand high school science teachers have way more prep and set up to do because of labs. Elementary has a lot of planning because they have to plan it ALL. So, is one person's job really more difficult than someone else's? They are difficult in different ways. We ALL have difficult jobs. And most of us are grossly underpaid.
Personally, I move to have the thread closed.
What I am taking from this thread is - we all deserve a trophy. There are no superstars, there are no MVPs, and there really are no harder to fill positions based on how difficult the degree is to obtain.
hmmm. Not sure conversations that promote divisiveness should be in the faculty lounge. I much prefer lunchtime discourse on teaching practices, strategies for best reaching student needs, collaborating, touching base with colleagues who may offer some insight on my students...and yes, a lot of time at lunch, it's also ok to talk tv, books, weekend plans. But setting up an us versus them mentality? I don't have time for that.
In my opinion, there are definitely superstar teachers-- at all levels. The kindergarten superstar and the physics superstar and the PE superstar should all be paid on the same scale, because each has their own unique set of challenges. Want to pay mediocre teachers less or on a different scale? Fine by me, as long as the system accounts for student growth during the year.
Sure, the college classes the physics teacher took were likely quite a bit more challenging than those the Kinder or PE teacher took. However, the physics teacher CHOSE that career, and the challenging college classes were required because they supply the content knowledge that is required by that field. That doesn't mean that when the physics teacher goes in his classroom with his students and shuts the door, that his work is any harder than that of anyone else.
If a math or physics teacher wants to earn more money, go work as an accountant or at a lab. With the state of teacher pay across the board, everyone knows teacher's didn't choose this career to get rich. If the money is all a teacher cares about, they're likely not a superstar teacher anyway.
Woo hoo, I could be a physics major in college and teach physics just because I choose to! Oh, wait, physics was the only course in HS I just couldn't grasp and most kids in the class couldn't either, but it was a required science.
Choice in college major alone isn't the driving factor in a hard to fill position. Ability to actually complete that chosen major is a driving factor in hard science or math majors. They are notorious for weed out classes where all but the best of the group move on. So, desire only has a small part. Aptitude is important. If most people had the aptitude for physics, we would see a lot more physics majors around. Same with Chem majors. Most people choke on organic chem. That is the end point for them.
"This thread should be closed because I don't like it." Go.Read.Other.Threads.
It's really that simple. Stop proposing an intellectually fallacious false dichotomy of either wanting to help/teach children OR be paid appropriately based on how well you do it and how much demand exists for your particular set of skills.
People seem to think that just because there is disagreement on a topic that it's divisive; why should we ever discuss issues that aren't completely in lockstep with what everyone else thinks, if that's the case?
My husband has his masters in geophysics. Having seen him teach on the university level as a TA, I know he is knowledgeable but would be horrible in a high school classroom. He knows this as well and has decided to stay out of teaching from now on. There is more to teaching than the content.
I know no one that is claiming that all you need to know is content to teach, but you can't really teach content if you don't know it either. You might be able to present pre-prepared information, but there should be more to teaching than presenting information you really don't understand.
dave1mo, when did you buy this forum?
I'm trying to follow your meaning, a2z. Rockhubby REALLY knows his rocks (hence the nickname) and the physics that shape them. However, it's the conveyance of that information that was a problem. He didn't know how to engage students until I tried to coach him after a couple of labs I attended. He at least learned to move around the room and raise his voice to a more audible level. High school students would have driven him nuts.
I'm not sure how "there's more to teaching than content" plays into this; I think most people would argue that good teachers have skills that bad teachers don't have. Why should they not be compensated for those skills?
In the market, a myriad of factors play into how much one is paid, including job efficacy (largely driven by skills/personality), demand for that particular job's output, and supply of individuals with the requisite skills to complete the job to satisfaction.
Teachergroupie, when did you or giraffe buy this forum? I'm not the one complaining for a perfectly legitimate thread to be closed.
Your antagonistic nature and rudeness have undermined its legitimacy. I, for one, had to stop participating because I was so turned off by your attitude. Be less confrontational and close-minded if you want discussion.
Yep. I tend to avoid most of your posts, Dave.
I actually like reading Dave's stuff. Usually I read his thoughts and shake my head in disbelief, but I do like seeing him ruffle the feathers. Makes things more interesting.
To be clear, you may ruffle feathers by creating interesting, divergent points of view on the forums. However, if you ruffle feathers by calling names or being disrespectful, then your pertinent posts will be removed.
But why ruffle feathers?
I understand starting a thread like this if you have a true interest in the opinions of others and if the debate applies to you. Dave said he's not one of the teachers in a hard to fill area so I have to wonder at why he wanted to debate this topic. Is this happening in his area? Or was it just to create a pissing contest?
Truthfully if topics like this were debated in our staff lounge, I'd eat in my classroom. It would create a huge riff in our staff. Who needs to add indigestion to the day?
Separate names with a comma.