Why Do Teachers Quit?
theatlantic.com
theatlantic.com
Even students enrolled in more demanding programs like AP and IB are expected to pass the standardized end-of-grade tests. Now that's two (sometimes three, for students enrolled in both) standardized tests students need to be prepared for.
The people who've dedicated their lives to teaching no longer get to decide what's best for students. Only politicians get to do it now.
To put it in software development terms, imagine a customer giving you requirements that specify not only the desired product, but exactly which programming languages, design patterns, and frameworks you have to use. Now imagine realizing that the tools mandated by the requirements aren't quite a good fit for the solution, and you have 9 months to ship or you fail. How quickly would you drop that client?
The No Child Left Behind Act has led us to a school system where the government -- rather than the students -- is the client of the teachers. More like All Children Left Behind.
Aren't the mandated exams extremely easy? Isn't the barrier to pass so low that they don't really matter that much anyway?
Why would this be that big of an issue?
I'd also assume that having some sort of standard by which to judge public education is difficult, but I can sense the need for some sort of standard. I went to public school, and while personal anecdotes aren't that valuable - the quality of teacher varied wildly from great teachers who made memorable impacts to teachers so damaging I still remember how horrible they were years later.
If standardized testing is the issue then what's a better way to work towards improving it? Better teachers? Being able to fire bad ones? It's a complex problem.
For participating and not intentionally hosing the test, as we threatened to do, we had a pizza party (just about the only reward a school can give you) and moved forward with the syllabus.
My problems with NCLB exams are wide and varied but the actual test (1-2 days) is the least of it. It's the results that administrators use to pass judgement that I have the most concern.
Grading is endless. Lesson planning is also non stop. I would always look at my plans and wonder -- is this good enough? Can I make this better? How can I engage the students?
What pushed me over the top was a brand-new principal who tried way too many initiatives all at once. At that point I knew I had to get out -- and do something else.
And now I'm in web development, making way more money that I did as a teacher, and actually enjoying my work!
Oh, and that first-year principal? He was fired a year later.
Now, I believe that the education system of the majority of the world is fundamentally broken - and I am cheering on the likes of coursera, khan academy and the like to get to fixing it.
But in the mean time...can we take the first of these...grading. At the risk of trying to find a technical solution to everything this sounds like it should have a nice technological solution to it...
I can see some of the issues in English and the like where answers may not be 0 or 1 but if google can instantly translate English to Swahili...someone should be able to find a way to grade English assignments of high school student efficiently.
Or is this a money issue? The technology exists or could exist but there is no funding, so instead we are wasting hundreds/thousands of teacher hours a week while they repeat the same manual chore over and over again?
I would be interested in hearing some teachers comment on this.
Reminds me of this: http://www.ted.com/talks/geoffrey_canada_our_failing_schools...
Disclaimer: my own high school had a phenomenal English department. Do many teachers simply plop a score at the top?
This is the problem, they can't. They can do the 80% to make it understandable but the last 20% is always the hard bit.
It'll happen one day, but it might be up there with the singularity for when it's viable. Fully understanding a paper to grade might equal AI intelligence on par with humans.
Not to say perhaps a quick hack, like a 80% grader that the teachers quickly look over to check and correct might be a game changer.
See the comment by aaron695 who made a very good point about feedback.
I wonder though if there is some easy fruit at the bottom of the tree i.e. elementary school - where I gather grading is probably a lower burden and easier to formalise - although I am probably again greatly understating the problem.
It's no wonder enthusiasm dies out so quickly.
I tell my high school age kid never ever be a teacher, unless God himself comes down and puts his finger on his heart. America hates teachers.
She taught full time for 3 years, and burnt herself out with 70 hour weeks of planning, marking, parental communication, and miscellaneous bureaucracy.
Now she's working as an on-call substitute, working 8:30-3 whichever days she wants, and (get this) making more money than she was teaching full time.
Although I definitely see the advantages of the stability of knowing who your classes are, sick and long service leave and paid holidays over the freedom from preparation, marking and report writing and other paperwork. I think being a substitute teacher you miss out on a lot of the benefits of the actual teaching too, like building a relationship with your students, and being able to teach long-term concepts instead of a period at a time.
One of my co-workers makes most of her living from substitute teaching (she teaches a part time load) though and seems to be fine with it, so different strokes I guess.
She does occasionally get longer-term assignments for teachers who are away for a couple weeks at a time, so there's a bit of relationship-building and long-term-teaching here and there. She also likes that she has a less authoritative role and can relate to the students on a friendlier level.
Seeing how hard it is made me appreciate a few excellent teachers I had through school more.
* Dealing with kids has hard. Really, really hard. Computers sit down and shut up when you tell them to; kids don't.
* Rules. Rules rules rules. It's easier to list what you're allowed to do than list what you're not allowed to do.
* I was a 25 year-old male teaching high school. Lots of teenage girls flirting with me => lots of risk for sexual harassment lawsuits. It's not enough to just write them up or ignore them. You have to document everything. If even once it might be implied that you're encouraging it, game over.
* For a vast majority of my kids over the course of 2 years teaching at two different schools, their parents simply did not care. One phone call ended with "I can't control my kid." With all due respect, ma'am, if you can't control your kid, why do you think I can?
Money wasn't really on the list. $41K/year in Alabama (Masters) is more than enough for a single 25 year-old bachelor. Although I will admit the way they pay teachers is fucked. It's based on years of work and degree level. The crazy part is that 1 degree level = 5-ish years of work. I started off making $41k salary, but that's just because I started teaching with a Master's degree. To get to $41k salary with a Bachelor's, you'd have to work 5+ years in the field. Are you telling me that a rookie kid out of college with a Master's is worth more than an experienced teacher with 5 years under her belt? C'mon.
I loved teaching. It's one of the most rewarding things I've ever done. But I just couldn't do it any more after the second year. It's not teaching that sucks -- it's everything else. It's the paperwork. It's the threat of sexual harassment. It's the pressure from administration. It's the parents who don't care. It's the kids who don't want to be there.
Frankly, I'd rather code for a living and tutor on the side.
The main ways they're usually negotiated are: 1. high starting salary, but more steps to the top or 2. low starting salary, with less steps.
This, in the end, was what did me in with teaching (aside from the bureaucratic and nepotistic BS). That in 2006 the biggest factors in exposing kids to computers was by having them play Dr. Seuss games and typing all day. I'm not saying kids should be programming by age six, but the there needed to be something better. NJ's curriculum standards are still pretty terrible and could be a lot better (http://www.state.nj.us/education/cccs/standards/8/), but they're far better than what they were six years ago.
It's an interesting double whammy because in many countries there's mandatory school attendance until a certain age. So basically you "force" kids to attend school and then don't even try to create the best learning environment possible.
From my very limited samplesize of being an exchange student in the US back in high school I have also noticed that the situation in the US is actually worse. There's quite a different level of respect for teachers. In Germany being a HS teacher is a fairly respectable job socially (they also get lifelong tenure which may or may not be a good thing, I'm leaning the concept is flawed because I'd rather be able to fire people).
Because it is not enough to pay even basic living expenses in many cities (like São Paulo) some teachers here fill all their waking time with classroom time, and hope they will figure the homework somehow (thus they end having two or three jobs, working 60 hours at classroom or even more)
Public Universities here are the best stuff you can have without being a 0.1% richest (when you can pay actual Ivy League on US like Facebook founder Eduardo or when you can pay Ivy League-like stuff here, like Fundação Getúlio Vargas), to get in one you must pass a test that is a competition, Computer Engineering for example usually has 45 candidates for every spot.
The public university course to teach children (I forgot the name) is the only course that has more spots than people wanting to get in (last time I checked there was 0.3 candidates for every spot), usually they cannot even fill the classroom, because beside not having enough candidates in first place, many fail the test completely (ie: although the test is a competition and you usually do not have to bother with mininum score, most universities do not let you in if you go abysmally bad on the test, like having a zero in any subject or having a average below 30%...)
Government entities in my experience are the most wasteful and ineffective organizations that I have ever seen. Couple that with the teachers unions and who is actually surprised that the education system gets worse every year?
No government agency would survive if it were a private company. The quality and quantity of work that it produces and for the huge sums of money that it costs/wastes - would cause it to go belly up in a matter of months.
There has got to be a better way.