🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <ctbd3h$1j8c@odds.stat.purdue.edu>,
 hrubin@odds.stat.purdue.edu (Herman Rubin) wrote:

> In article <jay-0EC958.09290427012005@news.stanford.edu>,
> Jay Kadis  <jay@ccrma.stanford.edu> wrote:
> >In article <ctb6i3$1stu@odds.stat.purdue.edu>,
> > hrubin@odds.stat.purdue.edu (Herman Rubin) wrote:
> 
> [snip]
> 
> 
> >> Even this is not enough, as few teachers understand the
> >> basics of their subjects, but proceed by rote.  
>  -- 
> 
> >OK, got some statistics on this?
> 
> How would one get statistics on this?  Let the subject matter
> scholars question the teachers on their knowledge of the basics,
> and you will find few in mathematics or science who would 
> challenge this statement.  But there is no way that you would
> get the establishment to agree to this test.  
>

That is pure speculation on your part.  There are examinations that all teachers 
must pass to become certified.  It isn't the case that anyone can walk in off 
the street and start teaching mathematics.  Perhaps teachers are not at the same 
level as cutting-edge researchers in the field, but that does not mean they are 
incapable of understanding the material they teach.  I have found that teaching 
is the best route to full understanding of the subject matter at hand.
 
> I have taught a few prospective teachers, and my late wife 
> taught many of them.  Often coming home after a day of
> teaching these, she complained of illness from that.  Not
> all of them were bad in the advanced classes, but the one
> time she taught prospective elementary teachers in a required
> class, it was miserable.
>

Until teachers are respected and paid at a level commensurate with their value 
to society you will not get the best of the best to pursue such a career.  
Districts with limited funds are forced to accept teachers with limited 
abilities.  But that does not reflect the entire educational system.

> The best piece of clear evidence we have is the "new math"
> debacle of more than 40 years ago.  The teachers could not
> handle the texts which had been tested on tens of thousands
> of children.  There was a massive program to teach the teachers
> of this and of high school mathematics, which ended in failure.
> The university where I was in 1959 had a summer school for 
> high school teachers who were supposedly the good ones; I
> did not myself teach in that.   One of those who did stated
> that at best 10% could learn the basic undergraduate abstract
> mathematics courses, which should be needed to teach even
> middle school mathematics.  Unfortunately, in the years since
> then, those courses have declined under the pressure of 
> giving degrees to weak students.

When I see gross generalizations like you made, it causes me to suspect they are 
made without the requisite background knowledge.  My wife is a  public 
high-school math teacher and is pursuing a graduate degree in her field.  In her 
department, there are two teachers with Doctorates and several more with 
Master's degrees.  Do you think they are incapable of understanding mathematics?

The problem in math and science education is directly linked to the economic 
level of the community.  Communities with high average incomes demand good 
schools and get them.  Communities lacking the resources get far less.  This is 
the crux of the problem and must be addressed if we want excellence throughout 
the educational system.  We cannot afford to let this division of society become 
entrenched and further the separation of the haves from the have-nots.  It is 
not solely the fault of teachers when education fails to meet our expectations.

-Jay
-- 
x-------  Jay Kadis  ------- x---- Jay's Attic Studio ------x
x  Lecturer, Audio Engineer  x        Dexter Records        x
x CCRMA, Stanford University x   http://www.offbeats.com/   x
x----------   http://ccrma.stanford.edu/~jay/   ------------x