what do we think of requiring "higher standards" of teachers?

[ulysses]

Where, exactly, should those standards be set? Leave aside for the time being any belief you might have that teachers should be paid more for what they already do - what kind of pay do you think Kerry might offer in exchange for what kind of rise in standards?

[noahmijo]

1. Higher pay maybe?

My girlfriend is planning on being a teacher at the elementry level. The higher standards bit could point to requiring teachers to be certified (in some states I understand they don't have to be) or at least certified in their field.

In return I know according to his education platform he advocates raises and tax breaks for teachers.

[Tandalayo_Scheisskopf]

2. Fundy Red Herring.

It means they want the teachers to teach the kids the earth is flat.

[lastknowngood]

3. If you pay them like housekeepers why should they have to

be anything more. They are already more qualified than half of the shrub's cabinet.

[rucky]

4. If there are inservice requirements, who pays?

right now the teachers do & I don't think that's fair. Teachers should be reassessed periodically, but to have them pay for mandatory retraining is the same thing as a pay cut.

[brokensymmetry]

5. So what standards are wanted?

Seriously. Do we want them all to have dual PhD's, one in education and the other in a hard science? Do we want them to look like body builders? Are they to be paragons of virtue (whatever that means!)?

It's easy to say "higher standards". It's tougher to define exactly what's meant. As for getting the money to pay for it...well, I doubt anyone should hold their breath.

[dsc]

6. This is a two edged sword

Barring a vast increase in money for teachers many districts may have a huge problem finding qualified teachers. Here is where it gets sticky. The school system now has to put a sub in the room and it can't be a long term one. So every five days that sub has to be pulled anda new one put in. That would be way worse than having a technically unqualified teacher in the room.

The myth of the unqualified teacher is just that a myth. There are some teachers who aren't terribly good at teaching but it isn't due to lack of education. It is due to being burnt out or being poor at the occupation in the first place. That has nothing to do with qualifications.

[ulysses]

7. kick

[RC]

8. How about letting teachers teach.

What a concept, huh? Teachers teaching!

Teachers teaching instead of being the Guinea pigs for the latest bull shit the admin bring back from their latest conference. or having to toe the line with teaching the test so the school will have money for the next year.

[ulysses]

9. thank you.

"What a concept" indeed!

[leftyandproud]

10. bad idea

it sounds great in theory, but teachers really can't help it if they get a class full of stupid students...its unfair to the teachers to base pay or job security based on this.

[bemildred]

11. The teachers are not the problem.

Lack of funding and crappy management are.

I can teach, I have degrees in math and computer science,
and I have taught undergraduate level, and I like kids,
but I'm not willing to put up with the crap they dish out
for what they pay, and I don't have to.

The entry level requirement should be knowledge of the subject
matter, nothing else, and teachers should be graded on how the
kids do from there on out and paid accordingly. I'm willing to
put up with some testing to accomplish that.

A teacher is properly a professional, like a doctor or a lawyer,
and should be treated accordingly. If you treat teachers like
WalMart employees, that's what you're going to get.

And they can take the "let every child kiss my behind" act
and shove it.