Why Are Unqualified Science Teachers Prevalent in US High Schools?

[noblegas]

Of all the complaints that I hear about when the topic of public school teaching is being discussed , the subtopic that always seems to come up is the lack of qualified science teachers that are teaching in public high schools, especially physics teachers. What can be done to address this pertinent problem, I mean besides firing unqualified teachers and hiring qualified teachers? Some say that the best science teachers are drawn away from teaching because of the more lucrative jobs in the job market that offer higher pay than teaching. But I would argue that some teachers who do have a BA or a higher degree in a science like physics or biochemistry should not be teaching if they are only interested in their subtopic and not interested in teaching the introductory material to their students, just like their are some college professors who have no business teaching and should devote their full time to research if that what they love to do. That being said, I suppose the best thing to do to address this problem is to hire teachers who not only specialize in the subject that they are teaching , but higher teachers who are gifted or worked very hard to present the material in a manner where the non-specialist has a full understanding of the subjects that they are teaching. What are some of your suggestions to address this problem or even do some of you even see a problem with how science is being taught generally in high schools?

 

[whs]

Of all the complaints that I hear about when the topic of public school teaching is being discussed , the subtopic that always seems to come up is the lack of qualified science teachers that are teaching in public high schools, especially physics teachers.

Who says its a problem? Sounds to me like you are just hearing people complain.

 

[Chi Meson]

By gum there is a problem.

I only have a Bachelor's in Physics, and I think that makes me a better high school teacher than if I had stuck it out for a Master's. It was hard enough getting my head down to the High School level after undergrad. If I had gone post-grad, It would have taken me even further from this level.

But even with a Bachelor's, I could have started at much higher salary almost anywhere else. I decided to teach mainly because the summer vacations were worth much more than the $30,000. It was a no brainer to me, but evidently I am considered the "odd one."

If you want better science teachers, we will have to pay them more or give them other incentives. We have a deficit of physics teachers in general; only 44% of all physics teachers have any form of degree in physics (and this includes a "minor in physics education"; this was printed in last February's Physics Today) and only about 2/3 of America's High Schools even offer Physics.

Why should teachers be considered to be a mutant breed of humanity that does their job jot for money but merely for the good feeling one gets when educating America's youth? Why should the law of supply and demand take a holiday?

Every elementary school should have a physical science specialist for each grade. Every high school should have a Physics teacher with a degree in physics. In my own school there is the "other guy" who has repetedly demonstrated that he doesn't know what he is doing. He teaches his Honors Physics class like a middle school IPS class "Let's discover the characteristics of waves on our own by playing with slinkys in the hall for 45 minutes!" (And the slinkys come back mangled and overstretched!)

Anyway, if you know what you need and you can't find any takers, then the offer isn't good enough.

 

[whs]

By gum there is a problem.

It was hard enough getting my head down to the High School level after undergrad. If I had gone post-grad, It would have taken me even further from this level.

only 44% of all physics teachers have any form of degree in physics (and this includes a "minor in physics education"; this was printed in last February's Physics Today) and only about 2/3 of America's High Schools even offer Physics.

Why should teachers be considered to be a mutant breed of humanity that does their job jot for money but merely for the good feeling one gets when educating America's youth? Why should the law of supply and demand take a holiday?

I am confused with these statements.

How was it hard getting your head down to high school level? High school level physics would hopefully come naturally after 4 years of study...

And why do high school physics teachers need a degree in physics? My high school physics teacher was excellent, and she didn't have a physics degree, or a physics minor. She even gave me extra studying materials to get me prepared for college, even though I didn't major in physics.

Who says teachers are considered mutant breeds of humanity?! You must be one very disgruntled person..

It would be nice if physics was offered in more high schools, if that number has any truth to it.

But when I went through school, hardly anyone cared about actually learning, and those that did sure didn't need a physics major to learn physics, they could do it on their own. All we needed was a teacher that could spark some sort of interest in the material, and my teachers accomplished that.

 

[D H]

I am confused with these statements.

How was it hard getting your head down to high school level? High school level physics would hopefully come naturally after 4 years of study...

The math and the physics in high school physics are markedly and painfully simplistic. Those with a bachelor's degree in physics, let alone an advanced degree, would have to dumb themselves down to a high school level to be able to teach it. That is not an easy task.

 

[whs]

The math and the physics in high school physics are markedly and painfully simplistic. Those with a bachelor's degree in physics, let alone an advanced degree, would have to dumb themselves down to a high school level to be able to teach it. That is not an easy task.

Oh really? So tell me, you get your BS in physics and you are off to teach High school. What steps would you take to dumb yourself down? Go out drinking for a few months? Hit up starbucks and tediously try to understand a lack of details? There is no such thing as 'dumbing yourself down'. Its an excuse people make that either can't teach, or don't understand these concepts.

I find it hilarious that someone who CHOSE to teach would find it difficult to teach very simple concepts that were a part of the degree itself.

My math degree doesn't hinder me in the least from teaching simple concepts. More proof that I am brilliant I suppose..

 

[Sorry!]

Oh really? So tell me, you get your BS in physics and you are off to teach High school. What steps would you take to dumb yourself down? Go out drinking for a few months? Hit up starbucks and tediously try to understand a lack of details? There is no such thing as 'dumbing yourself down'. Its an excuse people make that either can't teach, or don't understand these concepts.

I find it hilarious that someone who CHOSE to teach would find it difficult to teach very simple concepts that were a part of the degree itself.

My math degree doesn't hinder me in the least from teaching simple concepts. More proof that I am brilliant I suppose..

Well math isn't physics first off. With your degree in math how would you explain to a person with no prior experience to how to calculate the max. amount of area a certain amount of fence? Not just show them what to do but give them and understanding of everything being done.

 

[turbo]

Our next-door neighbors in our last house were a math teacher and a general elementary teacher. They made 'way more money than the average citizens of the town (Maine is a poor state with low wages), and they had summers off to vacation with their 3 kids. They had a slide-in camper for their truck when we moved into the neighborhood, and upgraded to larger camping trailers over the years. They put their kids though college, did home improvements, and bought new vehicles ever 4-5 years or so. Teachers are not impoverished up here - they are living pretty well as long as they don't live beyond their means, and they get really great health-care coverage and retirement benefits AND summers off with their kids. Pretty sweet deal. We have some pretty well-qualified teachers because of that. An old friend of mine teaches special education at the regional junior-high/HS, and she has a masters from Penn State. Pretty sharp lady.

 

[Chi Meson]

Oh really? So tell me, you get your BS in physics and you are off to teach High school. What steps would you take to dumb yourself down? Go out drinking for a few months? Hit up starbucks and tediously try to understand a lack of details? There is no such thing as 'dumbing yourself down'. Its an excuse people make that either can't teach, or don't understand these concepts.

I find it hilarious that someone who CHOSE to teach would find it difficult to teach very simple concepts that were a part of the degree itself.

My math degree doesn't hinder me in the least from teaching simple concepts. More proof that I am brilliant I suppose..

I certainly wouldn't call it "dumbing yourself down," but it is difficult to find several ways of explaining a concept to several different people when you yourself never had any difficulty with that concept.

Tell me, where do you teach?

 

[whs]

Well math isn't physics first off. With your degree in math how would you explain to a person with no prior experience to how to calculate the max. amount of area a certain amount of fence? Not just show them what to do but give them and understanding of everything being done.

Ah OK, but D H said math OR physics, hence I replied with an example in math.

I'm not sure what you are trying to ask me with your hypothetical situation. Are you trying to get me to say I will need to dumb myself down and I'll be able to perform the task? Do you want me to say it will be simple? Impossible? What happens if we get nuked mid learning session?

"Give them and understanding of everything being done" : Not sure what you mean by this.

So 'Sorry!' are you saying you wouldn't be able to teach high school physics after a BS in college without 'dumbing' yourself down? (Whatever that means..)

 

[Chi Meson]

I am confused with these statements.

How was it hard getting your head down to high school level? High school level physics would hopefully come naturally after 4 years of study...

And why do high school physics teachers need a degree in physics? My high school physics teacher was excellent, and she didn't have a physics degree, or a physics minor. She even gave me extra studying materials to get me prepared for college, even though I didn't major in physics.

Who says teachers are considered mutant breeds of humanity?! You must be one very disgruntled person..

It would be nice if physics was offered in more high schools, if that number has any truth to it.

But when I went through school, hardly anyone cared about actually learning, and those that did sure didn't need a physics major to learn physics, they could do it on their own. All we needed was a teacher that could spark some sort of interest in the material, and my teachers accomplished that.

Wow, you make a lot of assumptions! And it's clear that you are not a teacher, either.

 

[rootX]

By gum there is a problem.

I only have a Bachelor's in Physics, and I think that makes me a better high school teacher than if I had stuck it out for a Master's. It was hard enough getting my head down to the High School level after undergrad. If I had gone post-grad, It would have taken me even further from this level.

But even with a Bachelor's, I could have started at much higher salary almost anywhere else. I decided to teach mainly because the summer vacations were worth much more than the $30,000. It was a no brainer to me, but evidently I am considered the "odd one."

If you want better science teachers, we will have to pay them more or give them other incentives. We have a deficit of physics teachers in general; only 44% of all physics teachers have any form of degree in physics (and this includes a "minor in physics education"; this was printed in last February's Physics Today) and only about 2/3 of America's High Schools even offer Physics.

Why should teachers be considered to be a mutant breed of humanity that does their job jot for money but merely for the good feeling one gets when educating America's youth? Why should the law of supply and demand take a holiday?

Every elementary school should have a physical science specialist for each grade. Every high school should have a Physics teacher with a degree in physics. In my own school there is the "other guy" who has repetedly demonstrated that he doesn't know what he is doing. He teaches his Honors Physics class like a middle school IPS class "Let's discover the characteristics of waves on our own by playing with slinkys in the hall for 45 minutes!" (And the slinkys come back mangled and overstretched!)

Anyway, if you know what you need and you can't find any takers, then the offer isn't good enough.

In addition, I believe there are less liabilities and headaches relative to working in private sectors (high/good paid jobs)... I guess?

 

[whs]

I certainly wouldn't call it "dumbing yourself down," but it is difficult to find several ways of explaining a concept to several different people when you yourself never had any difficulty with that concept.

Tell me, where do you teach?

I'm sorry for your difficulty. I find when I don't have trouble with a concept, I can easily find many different ways to explain it. Whatever.

Back on topic...

Does anyone have any evidence that there are too many unqualified science teachers? Or is the subject of science just getting a back seat to something else?

My very narrow observations show well qualified teachers, some without degrees in physics, chem etc..

I think this is an interesting topic that I also hear a lot about. I'm sorry that I have upset some people here. Geez.

 

[lisab]

Oh really? So tell me, you get your BS in physics and you are off to teach High school. What steps would you take to dumb yourself down? Go out drinking for a few months? Hit up starbucks and tediously try to understand a lack of details? There is no such thing as 'dumbing yourself down'. Its an excuse people make that either can't teach, or don't understand these concepts.

I find it hilarious that someone who CHOSE to teach would find it difficult to teach very simple concepts that were a part of the degree itself.

My math degree doesn't hinder me in the least from teaching simple concepts. More proof that I am brilliant I suppose..

You're trolling. Are you just upset at the term "dumbing down"?

Fact is, there is a *wide* gulf between physics learned in high school (where the students are still learning the basics of algebra) and in college (where most of the upper division classes use multi-variable calculus, Dirac notation, etc).

 

[whs]

Wow, you make a lot of assumptions! And it's clear that you are not a teacher, either.

Huh? Where was all the assumptions? Are you calling my personal experiences in high school assumptions? Did you read your own post? I was repeating your assumptions, questioning them, followed by personal experience..

I see why you have trouble teaching..

 

[turbo]

I taught adults in industrial settings, and it was a bear of a job. Many of the people in my classes were poorly-educated and functionally illiterate. They had worked their way up through the ranks, often with only on-the-job peer-to-peer training, and their employers would hire me to develop and deliver training programs as retirements and illnesses thinned their ranks. Bear in mind that my specialty was pulp and paper, and the power boilers, chemical recovery boilers and associated systems were generally operating at 600-900 psi. Pretty dangerous stuff to trust to operators with only spotty OTJ training, so my contracts were mostly driven by the mills' insurance companies. They wanted documented, certified training. The employees often were put off by the notion that somebody from 1000 miles away could come in and teach them more about their mills and teach them how to be better at their jobs. Hard to win them over, sometimes. I had to write and teach an electrical safety program to electrical-department supervisors for DuPont after too many of their staff took early retirement in the 80's. They lost a lot of talent and experience due to that mis-cue.

I would have loved to have taught in a school program in which I had some confidence in the base of knowledge that each class had established in earlier grades. I took some education courses in college in anticipation of just that, after switching from engineering to liberal arts in mid-course. Life intervened, and I wound up working in construction, and then as a chemist in pulp and paper. I like to think that I would have been a good HS teacher and a decent motivator for kids.

 

[maverick_starstrider]

I've never understood how high school teachers complained about their pay. The average salary for a teacher is something like $45,000 for 8 months work. That seems quite reasonable considering the vast majority of teachers don't even have undergraduate degrees in the topic they're teaching (for example most physics teacher could not do any actual form of physics or engineering in industry). And of course there are people who get into teaching because they love it however it has been my experience that those are the precious few. With exception of 2 people, every person I knew who went to teacher's college went because they weren't eligible for grad school (failed too many courses) and they didn't like their odds at getting an industry job either. It was sort of the "drop-out" track for physics grads (excepting of course those precious few who always wanted to become teachers).

 

[whs]

You're trolling. Are you just upset at the term "dumbing down"?

Fact is, there is a *wide* gulf between physics learned in high school (where the students are still learning the basics of algebra) and in college (where most of the upper division classes use multi-variable calculus, Dirac notation, etc).

Did I say otherwise somewhere? Why would be upset at that term? I never brought it up in the first place? I am really sorry I upset everyone in this off topic debate. I can see I'm not welcome here.

Dare I question anyone. I am apparently a lying troll.

 

[D H]

Did I say otherwise somewhere? Why would be upset at that term? I never brought it up in the first place? I am really sorry I upset everyone in this off topic debate. I can see I'm not welcome here.

Dare I question anyone. I am apparently a lying troll.

*You* are the one who brought the thread off-topic. You are welcome here, but if you want the welcome mat to stay in place I suggest you lose the chip in your shoulder.

 

[mgb_phys]

In the UK the IoP claim that 25% of schools have no science teachers. (*)

As a result almost all state funded schools don't teach separate science, they teach general science instead. The big advantage of this is that it's easy and it counts as 2 courses.
So if you have a student in general science who gets an A (which >50% of students do since it's mostly reading comprehension) that counts the same as a student getting an A in both physics and chemistry (must less likely) as far as school performance tables and funding goes.
The more students you can put through easy courses, the more funding you get - the last thing you want is students gambling next years budget by taking hard science classes.
Would you want to be physics teacher if your job is based on how many stuents you can get through the easiest exams?

It's even worse in languages, since they stopped being compulsory almost all schools have dropped them - it's hard to guarantee an A in a foreign language
* - its worse than that sounds, the education dept 'science subjects' also include design and technology, information and communications technology, business studies, graphics, textiles and food technology.

 

[Sorry!]

Ah OK, but D H said math OR physics, hence I replied with an example in math.

I'm not sure what you are trying to ask me with your hypothetical situation. Are you trying to get me to say I will need to dumb myself down and I'll be able to perform the task? Do you want me to say it will be simple? Impossible? What happens if we get nuked mid learning session?

"Give them and understanding of everything being done" : Not sure what you mean by this.

So 'Sorry!' are you saying you wouldn't be able to teach high school physics after a BS in college without 'dumbing' yourself down? (Whatever that means..)

I never said anything about dumbing anything down but based on what I've seen of people who take math throughout university to get a degree in math they are extremely talented in the subject. I would love to see you try and teach someone with no prior understanding how to do such a problem from the basics up.
I tutor math and science (biology/physics) and sometimes it is VERY hard to try and help someone understand something that came so easily to yourself... the higher up in degree you achieve the easier the simple stuff would seem that you probably lose sight of the very basics and how important they were in your own understanding. As well, all the things that you learned at the advanced level would serve you no purpose what-so-ever in a high school classroom (unless of course you want to teach them something they might find interesting on the side which my physics teacher did quite often) This is what I think Chi was trying to get at before, nothing about 'dumbing' yourself down. As well making sure they understand everything means you can't just tell someone "ok now put that over there and type it in the calculator and then divide your answer by this" You have to explain WHY they are doing everything else they will not gain an understanding to be able to do it on their own just as confidently as you can do it.

I never had the problem in question with science teachers going through high-school. To teach senior level sciences at my school you had to have a degree in your field. So grade 12 university biology teacher had to have a degree in biology. At the lower levels while I was in them our science teachers had degrees in varying science fields but after I was in grade 12 I noticed that we had lost a lot of those teachers and the lower level sciences were being taught by the gym teachers who had credentials in teaching 'core' subjects...

My grade 11/12 physics teacher had a masters he worked for as a meteorologist or something to that effect but had to work on military bases and move around a lot. He told us how surprised he was that he had gained all that knowledge throughout university and it was pretty much useless in the real world. So he decided to settle down and teach physics instead and try to help other people to make it through university (he was really good at helping prepare for university).

 

[Chi Meson]

Huh? Where was all the assumptions? Are you calling my personal experiences in high school assumptions? Did you read your own post? I was repeating your assumptions, questioning them, followed by personal experience..

I see why you have trouble teaching..

Since you asked, here are the assumptions I was referring to:

"High school level physics would hopefully come naturally after 4 years of study...

High school physics does come naturally to me, as it did from my first class; that's why it is challenging to find a way to explain concepts to people for whom it does not come naturally to. And the four years of college physics were way above the level of high school, so when teaching the basics, there is not much use for the months I spent on quantum.

You must be one very disgruntled person..

I am actually quite not.

when I went through school, hardly anyone cared about actually learning

Even if this is a verified fact in your school, it is not the general case. I have many students who are very interested in learning.

they could do it on their own.

while some can learn on their own, most can't or haven't yet learned how to.

 

[turbo]

Some people are born teachers - can't help it. My neighbors' daughter moved back in with them after a nasty divorce and she has daughters that are 4 and 6. When we visit each other, I teach them life sciences (what birds and animals live here, which birds can survive Maine winters, how beneficial and pest insects live here and can be controlled, etc). The younger girl loves rocks, and I teach her the names of the minerals in the "interesting" rocks that she collects, and her grandfather has started taking her to mineral shows, and buying her inexpensive hand-samples. I show the girls my astro-photographs and try to explain them how big and far away some things are. When the neighbor on the far side of the neighbor with the kids shot a deer this fall, he asked me to gut out his buck (he is squeamish), and I let my neighbor with the g-kids know. By the time I got there with my knives, he was there with his daughter and grand-kids, and as I gutted and cleaned out the deer, we gave them an anatomy lesson. A 5-minute job turned into a 15-20 minute lesson, but the girls loved it, so that was fine. They know that the heart resides between the lobes of the lungs, and the function of each, what the liver does, what the intestines do, etc. When they get to HS biology class and are required to dissect specimens, they will not only have a head-start on their class-mates - they will charge right in.

 

[Chi Meson]

I've never understood how high school teachers complained about their pay. The average salary for a teacher is something like $45,000 for 8 months work. That seems quite reasonable considering the vast majority of teachers don't even have undergraduate degrees in the topic they're teaching (for example most physics teacher could not do any actual form of physics or engineering in industry). And of course there are people who get into teaching because they love it however it has been my experience that those are the precious few. With exception of 2 people, every person I knew who went to teacher's college went because they weren't eligible for grad school (failed too many courses) and they didn't like their odds at getting an industry job either. It was sort of the "drop-out" track for physics grads (excepting of course those precious few who always wanted to become teachers).

This is actually quite true, in my experience (except it's at least 9 months work, and teachers in high school are now required by NCLB to have a degree or 30 sem hours in their subject area (and that had already been the law in CT before that, and perhaps only South Carolina is still deficient), and the numbers are slightly more than "precious few," at least in these parts). Where was I...

I am quite embarrassed over my pay, currently, with so many of my friends taking cuts or outright losing their jobs in the past year. I try to make sure that my effort is worth it. In addition to teaching, I coach our school's FIRST Robotics Team. This is an extra 10 to 30 hours a week, depending the season. Not only am I not paid for it, I've spent over a grand of my own money so far for the cause.

The general notion that you mention ("the drop out track") was prevalent when I was in college. I remember us joking around during 2nd and 3rd year: "Man, if I can't get this, I'll end up teaching high school! Noooooooooooooooo!"

I must admit, that it was clear during my first year that I was not PhD material. I simply could NOT buckle down to that kind of study regimen.

Still, we have to get to a point where it is not considered a failure to have a science degree AND teach high school. And nothing speaks of "not a failure" as a good starting salary (hey, I'm being human here!).

If we need more degreed science teachers (as is the general consensus, from educational groups, from the AAPT, from school administrations) then the offer of employment should be enticing. But as it is, a successful physics teacher who has been teaching for 10 years does not get any more compensation than the worst [pick any grade] teacher who spends their time playing computer solitaire while kids fill out worksheets.

We had a chem teacher who did undergrad at MIT and got a Master's at Cal Tech. You simply do not accidentally do that! She taught AP/IB Chem, I had AP/IB Physics and together we ratcheted up the science curriculum at our school. She was selected teacher of the year for the whole district on only her fourth year at the school.

Anyway, we lost her because there was an opening in her home town, shortening her commute to five minutes, and our school made no effort to keep her. It is "not done" around here to offer teachers any other form of incentive to stay on.

So now, the AP/IB chem is being taught by a really nice guy who doesn't know the subject that well. Kids love his classes because they are so easy, and he shows a lot of episodes of CSI. But they aren't scoring very well on the AP and IB exams. The upside, is that my AP/IB class is a bit larger now, since the word going round is that "if you want to actually learn something, you got to take Mr. C's class."

Yes, that's right, I'm the teacher who is glad when he gets more students in his class. I think there was one other, but she retired.

 

[D H]

I never said anything about dumbing anything down ..

That terminology is mine. What I meant by that is that to teach high school physics, one must learn how to do so without resorting to multidimensional calculus (and calculus in general!), operator notation, Einstein sum notation, abstract geometry, Noether's theorem, ... To get a bachelor's degree in physics one has to learn Maxwell's equations three times over, and the first freshman physics form is over the heads of high school physics students.

[thread=357929]Here is a recent thread[/thread] on this forum where a high school physics teacher has done a disservice.

 

[Chi Meson]

That terminology is mine. What I meant by that is that to teach high school physics, one must learn how to do so without resorting to multidimensional calculus (and calculus in general!)

That was the hardest part.

My first year, I actually tried to teach calculus basics to my Honors class because I though it would make things so much simpler. Acceleration for example. I mean, how much easier does it get? Big mistake, that was.

Now, when I'm doing 2 dimensional vectors, or anything involving a right-hand rule, I think of matrices, and sigh.

 

[magpies]

I think these terrible teachers are in a way the best kind you can possibly hope for. If you go into school and are smart enough to notice your teacher is more or less wrong most of the time you will be way more likely to actually learn on your own. As far as I am concerned learning on your own is the only way to learn that's worth a darn. If I had good teachers in school I would have just accepted what they were teaching and would have never questioned the "how" it works until I ran into a bad one. So imo bad teachers are great for a smart kid or at least a kid that takes note of the mistakes and learns from them. However I guess it would be better for the stupid kids if the schools had good teachers so it might not be all that good of a thing after all but only because of the stupid kids.

 

[rootX]

I find it hilarious that someone who CHOSE to teach would find it difficult to teach very simple concepts that were a part of the degree itself.

Some of our TAs can teach better than the professors. The best TA we had failed couple of courses during his early undergrad years. So, we had all people going to the tutorials while very few to the lectures ...

 

[noblegas]

I think these terrible teachers are in a way the best kind you can possibly hope for. If you go into school and are smart enough to notice your teacher is more or less wrong most of the time you will be way more likely to actually learn on your own. As far as I am concerned learning on your own is the only way to learn that's worth a darn. If I had good teachers in school I would have just accepted what they were teaching and would have never questioned the "how" it works until I ran into a bad one. So imo bad teachers are great for a smart kid or at least a kid that takes note of the mistakes and learns from them. However I guess it would be better for the stupid kids if the schools had good teachers so it might not be all that good of a thing after all but only because of the stupid kids.

Definetely agree with you about learning on your own being the most effective way to understand the subject you are trying to understand. Who would know your strengths and weaknesses in terms of learning a particular subject other than yourself? It can be difficult for a teacher to unveil the potential for fully understanding the subject if a teacher has 40 students and only applying a method of teaching that might work for some but not for all.

 

[Sorry!]

Definetely agree with you about learning on your own being the most effective way to understand the subject you are trying to understand. Who would know your strengths and weaknesses in terms of learning a particular subject other than yourself? It can be difficult for a teacher to unveil the potential for fully understanding the subject if a teacher has 40 students and only applying a method of teaching that might work for some but not for all.

I don't think learning on your own is the most effective way. I actually highly disagree with this, I'm pretty sure studies have been done which show that learning as a group enhances your ability to learn.

The important thing is being self-motivated... so if a teacher says something you don't understand then ask questions... see them after class in their office, seek outside help etc. This is being self-motivated, not 'trying to learn on your own' (maybe you just used the wrong term?)

 

[206PiruBlood]

There is no such thing as 'dumbing yourself down'. Its an excuse people make that either can't teach, or don't understand these concepts.

I find it hilarious that someone who CHOSE to teach would find it difficult to teach very simple concepts that were a part of the degree itself.

My math degree doesn't hinder me in the least from teaching simple concepts. More proof that I am brilliant I suppose..

You seem to be missing the point entirely. For example, I recently started tutoring students in math and often need to explain things more intuitively or use different vocabulary than I would naturally use. Great teaching is somewhat of an art, and frankly you just sound arrogant. Also, the same approach does not work for every struggling student.

 

[noblegas]

I don't think learning on your own is the most effective way. I actually highly disagree with this, I'm pretty sure studies have been done which show that learning as a group enhances your ability to learn.

The important thing is being self-motivated... so if a teacher says something you don't understand then ask questions... see them after class in their office, seek outside help etc. This is being self-motivated, not 'trying to learn on your own' (maybe you just used the wrong term?)

It is really not that hard for a student to learn on their own nowadays given the seemingly number of innumerable learning resources at their the disposal, where their are resources that seem to convey information better than their teacher conveys it to them .In addition, if a teacher is just summarizing what is in the textbook for the class, which happens often, it is not that hard for a student to learn the subject on their own. I disagree, learning as a group is the least effective method to convey subject matter to a student. To me, the best way for a student to learn subject matter effectively is either for the student to teach the subject that they are learning themselves or higher a teacher who might address the academic needs of the student faster than a teacher who regularly teaches thirty students.

 

[Pinu7]

My 9th and 10th grade science teachers have doctorates.

My MATH teachers were idiots though. My geometry teacher, who has been teaching the subject for several years, didn't even know who Lobachevsky is.

 

[maverick_starstrider]

My 9th and 10th grade science teachers have doctorates.

My MATH teachers were idiots though. My geometry teacher, who has been teaching the subject for several years, didn't even know who Lobachevsky is.

I don't remember ever leaving the greeks in high school geometry. I'd hardly call that a damning revelation.

 

[GeorginaS]

Back in the Stone Age, my grade 10 math teacher had a doctorate in mathematics. He could not teach to save his life. You knew that he knew what he was talking about, but getting the ideas across to the students wasn't something he was capable of. No doubt he was a really bright guy. He simply could not share his knowledge with us. Anecdotal evidence to be certain, but it proved to me that, while someone may know a whole bunch of stuff about something, that doesn't necessarily mean they can teach it.

Then again, things got worse in grade 11 when they had to have a social studies teacher try to teach us calculus. Worst semester of math in my life.

But yes, it takes some doing to find ways to explain concepts that are straightforward to you to people who are having trouble grasping them. English and writing concepts come to me very, very easily. I'm a volunteer adult literacy tutor and also help just about everyone in my office when they have complex reports to write. (I try to teach writing concepts to the people I work with so I can stop editing everyone's reports.) Frequently I get stumped when trying to come up with an easy explanation or simple way to remember a concept. And English isn't anywhere near a intricate as physics.

 

[JasonRox]

Did I say otherwise somewhere? Why would be upset at that term? I never brought it up in the first place? I am really sorry I upset everyone in this off topic debate. I can see I'm not welcome here.

Dare I question anyone. I am apparently a lying troll.

Your comments scream... "I never taught a day in my life!"

Hence, I deduce that your opinion is of low value.

I've been teaching material at the high school and university level, for 4 years now. From your comments, I can tell you have no experience whatsoever. Your opinions are based on assumption, which means they hold little or no value.

Chi explained it very well but you basically denied it and trashed based on what... your low valued opinion that is based on assumption.

Sorry my friend.

 

[russ_watters]

Without bothering to go back and get quotes, Chi, two things:

1. The problem with attaching supply and demand to teacher salaries is unions. If you did that, you'd have art history teachers making minimum wage and physics teachers making $100k and unions simply would never accept that.

2. Being able to understand how a person who is below you academically thinks is a skill and an important one for a teacher. I'm not sure if it is something that can be taught or is just a personality component, but it is something that needs to be addressed in teacher training/hiring. It seems to me that it is more of an issue with science and math, but I'm not sure. The problem comes up a lot on PF - an awfully high percentage of the time, people inject unneeded complexities into a problem. But the thing that makes me think it may be a skill is that we also sometimes get simple questions that responders don't understand. I'll try to think of an example, but I think that learning peoples' common misunderstandings of concepts would help teachers deal with such questions better. I think that's a skill that I've acquired or developed on PF.

Saying that learning too much physics makes it harder to relate to physics students implies that the best teachers would be those who are learning the physics along with the students! That seems nonsensical to me, although the military uses a similar principle when training pilots: the best in a class of new pilots stay at the school to help train the next class.

 

[Critical]

Because trying to teach people who don't want to learn is a god awful job? Face it, for every good student a teach has, there are 20 infantile pillocks that a teacher has to babysit who don't care. Most kids cheat their way through classes anyway. The amount of cheating going on at schools is VASTLY under reported.

 

[Chi Meson]

I think that learning peoples' common misunderstandings of concepts would help teachers deal with such questions better.

This is exactly what I've found to be true. Getting people to let go of their firmly ingrained misconceptions is sometimes impossible. "Acceleration" is a common example of this, primarily due to the gas pedal. People feel that if they are pressing down on the accelerator, they must be accelerating.

Saying that learning too much physics makes it harder to relate to physics students implies that the best teachers would be those who are learning the physics along with the students! That seems nonsensical to me, although the military uses a similar principle when training pilots: the best in a class of new pilots stay at the school to help train the next class.

I think you are reading too deeply into a minor observation I made. So far, in my ten years of teaching, I have witnessed 5 other physics teachers come and go. Two of them had masters and they found it more aggravating than I ever did about how the students simply could not get simple concepts. One woman, with a master's degree, who taught at a local private school, lasted one year. I tutored one of her students over the summer to prepare for an AP class. He had copious notes and I could see that she had been using calculus based formulas, with unit vectors and such. Everything that I saw was just a little too complicated for first-time physics students. A little too much information here, too much derivation there.

The point is, the higher your education in any subject, the more removed you are from where the line of "common knowledge" is. It is a skill that can and must be developed. Everyone can do it, but it takes time to find out what people do not know.

Putting your mind in the same situation as your students is a learned craft. Your example of pilot training is a good one. The recent "grads" are much closer in time and experience to the new trainees, and they remember what it was like to not know important things. They can quickly recall the "aha" moments that they just experienced. They could NOT, however, teach the course outright. They can be of crucial assistance, but someone needs to have knowledge well beyond the scope of the course in order to lay out the curriculum.

 

[Chi Meson]

Because trying to teach people who don't want to learn is a god awful job? Face it, for every good student a teach has, there are 20 infantile pillocks that a teacher has to babysit who don't care. Most kids cheat their way through classes anyway. The amount of cheating going on at schools is VASTLY under reported.

A physics teacher has a better gig than most teachers. This is one of those "alternative compensations" I refer to. I have to teach all levels, including a "Foundations of Physical Science" class. Even there, the ratio of good students to "infantiles" is usually 1 to 2 or 1 to 3. Not great odds, but durable. In my Honors classes the ratio is 10 to 1 in favor of the interested students, and in the AP/IB class, I have essentially 100% dedicated students.

 

[Moonbear]

The point is, the higher your education in any subject, the more removed you are from where the line of "common knowledge" is. It is a skill that can and must be developed. Everyone can do it, but it takes time to find out what people do not know.

This is something that happens even at the university level. Someone may be a content expert in a specific area of a field, but that does not mean they know how to back up and teach the basics of the more general field to an introductory class.

It's also worth considering that there are a LOT of high schools in the country and not a lot of physics or math majors (and even not a lot of biology or chemistry majors when you take into account the large range of available jobs they are filling when they graduate). Add to that the type of personality one needs to be a teacher, plus the skills one needs in education, and it's hard to find someone well qualified to do both, especially when the pay scales are too low to motivate some who may be good at one or the other to get additional training to be better at whichever they are weakest.

 

[noblegas]

A physics teacher has a better gig than most teachers. This is one of those "alternative compensations" I refer to. I have to teach all levels, including a "Foundations of Physical Science" class. Even there, the ratio of good students to "infantiles" is usually 1 to 2 or 1 to 3. Not great odds, but durable. In my Honors classes the ratio is 10 to 1 in favor of the interested students, and in the AP/IB class, I have essentially 100% dedicated students.

You really think that your honors and AP Students are genuinely interested in learning physics and not simlply taken those classes just because they have a better chance of being accepted into a more competitive college? From my experience and I can speak only for my experience, but a lot of my classmates took heavy courses like physics and calculus only because they wanted to be accepted into their choice of college that they applied for, not because they were interested in physics or calculus. I did not see many people discussing physics outside the classroom not related to homework.

 

[lisab]

You really think that your honors and AP Students are genuinely interested in learning physics and not simlply taken those classes just because they have a better chance of being accepted into a more competitive college? From my experience and I can speak only for my experience, but a lot of my classmates took heavy courses like physics and calculus only because they wanted to be accepted into their choice of college that they applied for, not because they were interested in physics or calculus. I did not see many people discussing physics outside the classroom not related to homework.

But what's the difference? From the teacher's perspective, a dedicated student is a dedicated student, regardless of the true motivation.

 

[Chi Meson]

You really think that your honors and AP Students are genuinely interested in learning physics and not simlply taken those classes just because they have a better chance of being accepted into a more competitive college? From my experience and I can speak only for my experience, but a lot of my classmates took heavy courses like physics and calculus only because they wanted to be accepted into their choice of college that they applied for, not because they were interested in physics or calculus. I did not see many people discussing physics outside the classroom not related to homework.

My experience is very different from yours.

In fact I right now polled my AP/IB class and 11 out of 12 disagreed with you. So, sorry for your experience. I think you would have enjoyed my class a bit more.

 

[noblegas]

My experience is very different from yours.

In fact I right now polled my AP/IB class and 11 out of 12 disagreed with you. So, sorry for your experience. I think you would have enjoyed my class a bit more.

What sorts of teaching methods did you employ to pique your's students interest in the subject? Did you make physics concepts vivid beyond the description in the textbook? Did you place less emphasis on grades and more emphasis on understanding the core concepts of physics like Newtonian's laws and Maxwell's equations? My teacher confessed that she was not interested in physics and said that she was ultimately teaching it because she was required to.

 

[Chi Meson]

What sorts of teaching methods did you employ to pique your's students interest in the subject? Did you make physics concepts vivid beyond the description in the textbook?

I try

Did you place less emphasis on grades and more emphasis on understanding the core concepts of physics like Newtonian's laws and Maxwell's equations?

Definitely. Except we don't get into Maxwell's equations. I still talk about them, but it's silly to use them until you fully understand the calculus behind them. I assign the book to read, but I never simply reteach the book.

Last year, in fact, I did an experiment where I never even gave a test to the AP/IB class. The results were not conclusive, though. If anything, the scores on the AP and IB exams were a bit lower than what I expected. This year I'm trying more frequent yet shorter tests (a 15 minute question every 3rd day or so).

The only problem is that I am required to give a justifiable grade to each of these students.

My teacher confessed that she was not interested in physics and said that she was ultimately teaching it because she was required to.

Well, that's sad. And it points toward the main topic of this thread: Why can't schools attract teachers that enjoy Physics and want to make it interesting?

 

[Tsu]

Do you mean : "why is THERE an oversaturation of unqualified science teachers"??

Well... maybe they couldn't pass an English spelling test!: surprised

 

[Moonbear]

You really think that your honors and AP Students are genuinely interested in learning physics and not simlply taken those classes just because they have a better chance of being accepted into a more competitive college? From my experience and I can speak only for my experience, but a lot of my classmates took heavy courses like physics and calculus only because they wanted to be accepted into their choice of college that they applied for, not because they were interested in physics or calculus. I did not see many people discussing physics outside the classroom not related to homework.

That's unfortunate. Back when I was in school, only those who really enjoyed our first physics class would enroll in the AP course. Same with any of the other AP courses. We had enough to choose from that we could get our AP credits without having to take a subject we didn't like. Though, I also used some of them to explore other subjects I didn't know much about but sounded more interesting than the standard curriculum. (I still thought I hated physics back then, because I had the evil psycho physics teacher who was more worried about who was breaking school rules during class time rather than the fun one that taught well.)

Do you mean : "why is THERE an oversaturation of unqualified science teachers"??

Well... maybe they couldn't pass an English spelling test!: surprised

 

[sportsstar469]

Of all the complaints that I hear about when the topic of public school teaching is being discussed , the subtopic that always seems to come up is the lack of qualified science teachers that are teaching in public high schools, especially physics teachers. What can be done to address this pertinent problem, I mean besides firing unqualified teachers and hiring qualified teachers? Some say that the best science teachers are drawn away from teaching because of the more lucrative jobs in the job market that offer higher pay than teaching. But I would argue that some teachers who do have a BA or a higher degree in a science like physics or biochemistry should not be teaching if they are only interested in their subtopic and not interested in teaching the introductory material to their students, just like their are some college professors who have no business teaching and should devote their full time to research if that what they love to do. That being said, I suppose the best thing to do to address this problem is to hire teachers who not only specialize in the subject that they are teaching , but higher teachers who are gifted or worked very hard to present the material in a manner where the non-specialist has a full understanding of the subjects that they are teaching. What are some of your suggestions to address this problem or even do some of you even see a problem with how science is being taught generally in high schools?

i could be wrong, but i don't think most people enter science careers to teach. i think they only do that if they are not capable of doing what they prefer (medical, dental,pharmacy, lab work), i always asked my math teachers why they would go through all the tedious school work, for a teaching job. i can't fathom why someone would rather go through that kind of degree and get paid less than a gym teacher in most cases. i personally, would like to be a teacher for kinder gardeners, however in this economy that's not a smart idea. i am currently a science major because i want to do dental/med/pharm. ill admit i don't wan tt o work in a lab since I am horrible in those circumstances rofl. i don't want to teach science classes though, but if all else fails it would be an ok job i guess. my point is since teaching science classes is not my first choice, i probably would not have much passion for the job, and id be a bitter med school reject teacher. although at least in my case i enjoy teaching so i might not be as bad off as the other underqualified.

 

[Pythagorean]

Oh really? So tell me, you get your BS in physics and you are off to teach High school. What steps would you take to dumb yourself down? Go out drinking for a few months? Hit up starbucks and tediously try to understand a lack of details? There is no such thing as 'dumbing yourself down'. Its an excuse people make that either can't teach, or don't understand these concepts.

I find it hilarious that someone who CHOSE to teach would find it difficult to teach very simple concepts that were a part of the degree itself.

My math degree doesn't hinder me in the least from teaching simple concepts. More proof that I am brilliant I suppose..

That's ridiculous. You can't draw any conclusions about a teacher's ability based on how they had to prepare for it. Advanced physics is completely different from beginning physics. It's not necessarily the technical math itself, but the philosophical part of math.

But the point you're missing is not really subject dependent. When you teach formally, you have a lot of people in front of you. You've learned, collected, and managed a lot of assumption about your subject material over the 4+ year period of learning it. There's terms that you can't assume everybody knows, simple algebraic tricks that you haven't used in years because you've developed an intuition, and don't need them anymore.

Furthermore, all the advanced physics rules are defined in terms of calculus. I never memorized all the algebraic relationships in intro physics because I can derive them from a differential equation or integral. That would take a lot of time from the students if you derived everything whenever you needed it right in front of them, so you have to relearn (even if by derivation) all the material in the algebra frame.

That's a common theme in physics (especially electromagnetics). As you get more and more advanced, all the equations that describe your system collapse into less and less equations. Going with the electromagnetics example, you start off learning a crap load of different relationships between charge, current, time, voltage, resistance, inductance, and so many more, but then eventually you learn the four Maxwell equations, then later you learn how to condense them all into one equation.

But that one equation requires years and years condensing. You have to "extract" it back out to make sense of it for a beginner.