DannyBoy33
Member
- Joined
- Nov 20, 2013
- Messages
- 209
- Gender
- Male
- HSC
- N/A
I'd go with last reply too, kids are not the issue, parents are. Then again, parents are not the issue, system is. Bah...
This.Blame parenting. Parents are a huge part of education in a child's life and being actively involved plays a crucial component in their development. I noticed students in aussieland are way more disruptive than anywhere else. Shit try being disruptive in asia, glhf bro.
Bwahahahaha.The reason teachers get little respect is because they are failed students who are fraudulently taking taxpayers money to teach subjects they couldn't understand themselves.
Yeah, that doesnt give good enough aprox of how person is with its social skills and global IQ with eg kids, other teachers etc...I have worked with a ton of 90+ ATAR/UAI teech0rs and even state-rankers. Anyway, even if they get a lowish ATAR, doesnt mean they cant teach, similarly, just because they get a high ATAR doesnt mean they can teach.
Pretty shit idea, in my opinion. Doesn't stop a teacher from teaching properly for a few lessons and fucking being lazy for the rest.Last I heard of the HAT was external assessors come in and assess your lessons etc to determine if you are HAT. It is not a simple viewing, but it is almost like a portfolio. The teacher has to pay for the assessors to come out and if they don't 'pass' then they still foot the bill.
AFAIK in the next couple of years, all teachers will need to accredited and maintain this accreditation every 5 years through professional development. HAT are additional to this accreditation.
A HAT will be part of the executive, but only on half a teaching load, remainder of the load is to support other teachers.
I have a very superficial understanding atm, but I will be finding out more as I will endeavour to be one of these in the next few years.
At the moment there are very few HAT in the state. I can't remember the exact number, but it was around 10-15 last I heard
This is true. I think the idea is that the teachers that ceebs, well, they ceebs doing what is required for HAT. So far, of all the HAT I know, they are definitely best practice teachers.Pretty shit idea, in my opinion. Doesn't stop a teacher from teaching properly for a few lessons and fucking being lazy for the rest.
There needs to be many factors such as average student result, change in average student result (compared to past years), student ratings, years experience etc.
Teacher's will either cheat for their students or inflate their grades. That's how no child left behind was based on and it just completely fucked with the system.Pretty shit idea, in my opinion. Doesn't stop a teacher from teaching properly for a few lessons and fucking being lazy for the rest.
There needs to be many factors such as average student result, change in average student result (compared to past years), student ratings, years experience etc.
The issue isnt the new people entering though, they're universally proactive and inspired (99% anyway) - it's (some of) the older people growing weary / careless that are the problem, the ones just showing up for the paycheck etc. Increasing requirements for new teachers wont have an iota of impact on maintaining new teacher's passion, if it's gunna fade it's gunna fade and they should do the right thing and either change that or leave the profession.I think this is a great start to the much needed re-vamp of the education system in Australia. Other things that need to happen include more difficult entry pathways to education to ensure that only the best and brightest (or at least a shitload less lazy/uninspired/uninspiring people) will be able to enter the education system as teachers, and a huge syllabus change.
It p dumb to think someone with a lower entry score would be an underperformer, given that most students who go through alternative entry programs experience greater success at uni (and likely in their teaching endeavors), as a result of actually wanting it and working to get there, rather than simply cruising in from high school without really knowing what they want to do (I admit this is anecdotal). Not to mention the schooling environment isnt for everyone and really only serves to create all-rounder academics, which is not what is required of a high school teacher.Whilst the counters to this decision are likely to revolve around ridiculously uninformed "but they get 11 weeks paid holidays", "they don't do shit for society", "they are useless and do shit all in comparison to job x", "they have ridiculously low working hours" there is an unfortunately true overarching point created - there are too many low performing teachers that will be undeserving of such a pay rise. Putting beside the point that the same complainers probably do not realise the pay rise isn't some automatic thing given to every teacher or the genuinely crushing workload they are constantly under, this is still a necessary concern (which is why I suggest a more rigorous entry pathway to weed out the would-be-unperformers).
Overall though, there needs to be a greater social respect for teachers. We need an education system similar to that of Norway or South Korea, where teachers are treated with as much respect as the more prestigious occupations such as Lawyers and Doctors.
Students from high SES backgrounds will automatically net their teachers higher paychecks and the inverse is true for low SES.Too tired to read the article so the question I am about to ask may have already been answered.
How is 'high performance' going to be measured?
That's very true, shortages in maths/sci in particular I believe.From another article i read there is an abidance of primary school teachers but shortage in high school teachers?
Is the the case or is it typical journalist rubbish?
For primary, reducing intake is the only sensible measure given out drastic oversupply, high school (where the vast majority of 'shit teachers' seem to be) is another story and further restrictions on maths/sci would probs be disastrous.Surely if you greatly reduce the intake of teachers then there will be a shortage, especially considering the huge number of baby boomers who are retiring as we speak.
Maybe you should justify your opinion, otherwise it might well have been written by an eskimo who has never heard of Australia.
Yep and teaching to the test with an increased focus on particular subjects is as terrible for authenticity reasons as its for non maths/english subjects (in a primary education). It also discriminates teacher pay on little more than student SES (largely tied to the race and IQ thing sylvy is goin on about).Measuring teacher performance based on exams isn't really good either because it creates an incentive for teachers to cheat for their students.
A most people, even bogans care about education (in its actual definition), it's just that schooling is so far removed from real education it's not funny, and the idea that schooling = education creates much of the contempt for education.No that is not true. Teachers get little respect because some students:
A) do not care about education,
b) are forced into going to school
C) , think school is boring,
d) think teachers are unengaging
E) have something against them (e.g. She's such a bitch, he always picks on me)
U r one cheeky guy but h can't trick me, that's right I read the fallacies section and I see through your fancy talkIt p dumb to think someone with a lower entry score would be an underperformer, given that most students who go through alternative entry programs experience greater success at uni (and likely in their teaching endeavors), as a result of actually wanting it and working to get there, rather than simply cruising in from high school without really knowing what they want to do (I admit this is anecdotal).
lolU r one cheeky guy but h can't trick me, that's right I read the fallacies section and I see through your fancy talk
Good try but it takes an early birder to trick this worm in the morning