Why Are Unqualified Science Teachers Prevalent in US High Schools?

[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.

 

[General_Sax]

^
nice post.

 

[sportsstar469]

stupid question, but can i become a science teacher if my major right now is science, or do i need to have a teaching major? my main goal is med school aqnd i believe i have the potential to do med school (wel lat least get int LOL) but i haven't felt like doing the work needed to get in, and hearing how competitive it is is not so motivating.

anyway if i kept the science degree and got turned down fro mmed schoold would i be able to teach elementary, middle school, high school, or college science? lab work and research is not an option cause I am not good at that lull.

 

[arunma]

stupid question, but can i become a science teacher if my major right now is science, or do i need to have a teaching major? my main goal is med school aqnd i believe i have the potential to do med school (wel lat least get int LOL) but i haven't felt like doing the work needed to get in, and hearing how competitive it is is not so motivating.

anyway if i kept the science degree and got turned down fro mmed schoold would i be able to teach elementary, middle school, high school, or college science? lab work and research is not an option cause I am not good at that lull.

In the United States, most states require you to have a teaching licensure. So no, a BS/BA in science isn't enough to teach high school. Heck, a PhD isn't enough to teach high school if you don't have teaching licensure. However, at my old undergrad, the teaching certificate was only an extra year of classes. If you don't mind doing an extra year of college, this might be the best way to go.

 

[sportsstar469]

In the United States, most states require you to have a teaching licensure. So no, a BS/BA in science isn't enough to teach high school. Heck, a PhD isn't enough to teach high school if you don't have teaching licensure. However, at my old undergrad, the teaching certificate was only an extra year of classes. If you don't mind doing an extra year of college, this might be the best way to go.

well id most like to teach elementary, although I am guessing i need a teaching license for that also. do most pre meds have back ups?

 

[mgb_phys]

do most pre meds have back ups?

Drug dealer?

 

[arunma]

well id most like to teach elementary, although I am guessing i need a teaching license for that also. do most pre meds have back ups?

The smart ones do, since it's very difficult to get into medical school. Usually if you've got a biology degree, you can be a lab tech (that's what one of my friends is doing while he reapplies), or you can go to grad school. But some premeds get their degrees in art history or philosophy. I guess those guys are in trouble. Seriously though, it's important to have a backup, because if you don't get in, you need to find some kind of a job. And many med school admissions committees will actually ask you (either on the application or the interview) what your plans are if you don't get in anywhere. So definitely have a backup. It's not that hard, just choose a major that's reasonably employable. Avoid arcane fields like communications and pre-medieval history (unless you don't mind going to grad school in those fields), and you should be fine.

Actually I was premed for my first three years of college, then I decided I'd rather go to grad school. Good thing I was a physics major so that I had options. Of course now I've decided that I should have gone to med school after all, and that's what I'm going to do as soon as I finish my PhD. So don't follow my example.

 

[arunma]

Drug dealer?

These days you need a doctoral degree to do that too. It's called pharmacy school.

 

[Chi Meson]

If you have an undergrad major in Chemestry or Physics, you can be pretty much guaranteed of finding a teaching job in almost any place in the country.

The first hurdle is called the "Praxis" exam, which can be waived if you show a semi-decent SAT or ACT score (I think 1200 in the old SAT was required). The second hurdle is getting the necessary education credits. Most states allow people with math and science degrees to take an accelerated certification program which can be finished in one summer. For me, it was worthwhile to take a two year Master of Art in Teaching program, since that gave me a master's degree at the end of it. Most states require that you obtain a masters degree withing five years anyway. It was nice to get that out of the way.

The next hurdle is the "Praxis 2" subject exam, which is not hard either. Once you have that, then you get a "provisional" certification which allows you to be hired.

The certification is different state to state, but most states have reciprocity where they can hire someone with an out of state certification as long as they get recertified in-state within a reasonable amount of time.

 

[lah214]

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.

I have actually had Chi as my high school physics teacher, and I would just like to say that his class was extremely interesting, taught very well, and made me want to study it further in college. Most of the people taking his class did genuinely care, and I'll have you know that it would have been very difficult to cheat in his class. This was one of the only classes in high school where I actually would get in trouble for using my phone! I got so much out of his class. (Thanks!)

 

[vaatc]

You want to know why there is a "lack of quality teachers" in the public education system? Why do you not go and spend a day in the typicall classroom and you will find out why there is a lack of quality education in the schools. To label teachers as the main culprit in this situation is laughable.

I will finish with the comment, that a majority of parents are too busy to control their kids now adays. What makes people think that low payed educators, with their hands tied behind their backs, would fair any better?

 

[Chi Meson]

I have actually had Chi as my high school physics teacher, and I would just like to say that his class was extremely interesting, taught very well, and made me want to study it further in college. Most of the people taking his class did genuinely care, and I'll have you know that it would have been very difficult to cheat in his class. This was one of the only classes in high school where I actually would get in trouble for using my phone! I got so much out of his class. (Thanks!)

:blush:

Now we can wait for those who had the "other opinion"!

 

[noblegas]

You want to know why there is a "lack of quality teachers" in the public education system? Why do you not go and spend a day in the typicall classroom and you will find out why there is a lack of quality education in the schools. To label teachers as the main culprit in this situation is laughable.

I will finish with the comment, that a majority of parents are too busy to control their kids now adays. What makes people think that low payed educators, with their hands tied behind their backs, would fair any better?

No one is blaming only the teachers, but to put the blame on the students is equally if not more ridiculous. What makes you expect that a student will give his optimal performance in a school subject when he is FORCED to learn subjects he might not want to learn? Explain to me why children are so eager to learn the subjects that they would later find undesirable and repulsive at later times when they first enter school ? Besides , we ARE paying the teachers, so there should be a high standard of teaching that teachers should abide by. Most teachers at all grade levels make around 40,000 and 50,000 dollars per year, I hardly call not call that lowly.(http://www.payscale.com/research/US/All_K-12_Teachers/Salary, http://www.employmentspot.com/employment-articles/teacher-salaries-by-state/); and that's only the national average. In some states, the teachers in california make around $60,000 per year , even though many of these sates with the highest paid teacher salaries don't have the best performing schools.

 

[SticksandStones]

They make $60,000/yr in California, which isn't saying much. Did you remember to factor in the cost of living?

 

[noblegas]

They make $60,000/yr in California, which isn't saying much. Did you remember to factor in the cost of living?

Well , the average income salary in california is $32,000 per person(http://www.city-data.com/states/California-Income.html). A teacher in california generates an income well above the average salary in california.

 

[Integral]

No one is blaming only the teachers, but to put the blame on the students is equally if not more ridiculous. What makes you expect that a student will give his optimal performance in a school subject when he is FORCED to learn subjects he might not want to learn?

Can you explain how a high school student can possibly know what they need to learn?
I thought the reason they were there is to learn. The largest problem I see (and yes I have been spending volunteer time in a hi school classroom) is a lack of discipline into many students. It takes a very strong teacher to get the attention of maybe 20% of the students in our school. That fraction makes it very difficult for the rest of the class due to disruptions.

Explain to me why children are so eager to learn the subjects that they would later find undesirable and repulsive at later times when they first enter school ? Besides , we ARE paying the teachers, so there should be a high standard of teaching that teachers should abide by. Most teachers at all grade levels make around 40,000 and 50,000 dollars per year, I hardly call not call that lowly.(http://www.payscale.com/research/US/All_K-12_Teachers/Salary, http://www.employmentspot.com/employment-articles/teacher-salaries-by-state/); and that's only the national average. In some states, the teachers in california make around $60,000 per year , even though many of these sates with the highest paid teacher salaries don't have the best performing schools.

I guess to a high school grad working at McDs 40-50K seems like a lot of money. But if you have a family not so much. Considering that teachers have one of the most important jobs in the nation why can't the be paid as much as say a plumber. Our founding fathers recognized that our government could only operate correctly if we had a well educated population. This has not changed, indeed a good education is even more important today then it was 200yrs ago. Unfortunately I do not see any easy solutions.

 

[noblegas]

Can you explain how a high school student can possibly know what they need to learn?
I thought the reason they were there is to learn. The largest problem I see (and yes I have been spending volunteer time in a hi school classroom) is a lack of discipline into many students. It takes a very strong teacher to get the attention of maybe 20% of the students in our school. That fraction makes it very difficult for the rest of the class due to disruptions.

Can you explain to me why high school teachers or anyone , essentially strangers have the right to determined what subjects students should be taught and what they should not be taught? Thats something students need to find out for themselves, not some arbitrary authority figure. Students should decide for themselves what subjects should they devote most of their time too , whether they be the conventional subjects taught in school , like algebra, US history, calculus , English literature or not so conventional subjects like devoting all 12 years to learning to play the guitar or devoting all 12 years to studying art or film directing.

It takes a very strong teacher to get the attention of maybe 20% of the students in our school. That fraction makes it very difficult for the rest of the class due to disruptions.

Thats why I am a firm opponent of the 30 students-one teacher class room model that most schools follow. Students will not learn in the same fashion so why apply one model of learning to thirty different students? The based way for students to master a subject is only if their is one teacher and one student. Richard feynman even said that the based way for students to learn physics is their to be a one-to-one ratio between student and the teacher in the preface of his famous introductory physics textbooks

I guess to a high school grad working at McDs 40-50K seems like a lot of money. But if you have a family not so much. Considering that teachers have one of the most important jobs in the nation why can't the be paid as much as say a plumber. Our founding fathers recognized that our government could only operate correctly if we had a well educated population. This has not changed, indeed a good education is even more important today then it was 200yrs ago. Unfortunately I do not see any easy solutions.

;Oh , Come on ! I know a $50,000 dollars will not buy you a 20 bedroom mansion in a gated community , but it is enough money to provide for your basic necessities needed to sustain a decent standard of living as well as extra amenities. Not to mentioned that being part of the teacher's union makes their job more secure and therefore , it is very difficult for a teacher to be fired from their job.

 

[vaatc]

Well , the average income salary in california is $32,000 per person(http://www.city-data.com/states/California-Income.html). A teacher in california generates an income well above the average salary in california.

Your numbers are a little out of date.

http://www.top50states.com/federal-cost-of-living-index.html" is more recent and has rankings for cost of living and average income per capita. California is in the top 5 most expensive States to live in and they are not in the top 5 highest for income per capita. I hope I do not need to explain what that means. They are also ranked there as having the 16th highest popultion living under the poverty line which also hinders the quality of education.

As for putting all the blame on the students, I do not do that. But the OP's question was, "Why are their so many unqualified teachers in the US school system?" Which, in my interpretation is saying that the students in the US are not getting a solid science education because the teachers are the ones to blame.

Many teachers have their hands tied behind their backs because they do not have any ability to control their class rooms. Add in the fact that society has decided that kids, as a whole, can not handle responsibility and consequences for their actions, and also think that they are all little angles that do no wrong. In then end, all that many teachers can do is to placate the students.

If what I hold as the more likely standard, as opposed to teachers just not wanting to teach or being unqualified to teach, how can one expect a majority of teachers to do more then an average job?

Grade school is not for deciding what you want to do in life. Grade shcool is supposed to give a you a good base in the widest range of academia as possible. I personally think that too many young adults go to college. I also believe it is the indivduals responsibilty to take the initiative to increase the quality of ones own education. If ones education system is lacking then it is their parents and their own responsibilities to overcome the inequities. If you are unable to do that then higher education is not for you anyway.

 

[noblegas]

This page is more recent and has rankings for cost of living and average income per capita. California is in the top 5 most expensive States to live in and they are not in the top 5 highest for income per capita. I hope I do not need to explain what that means. They are also ranked there as having the 16th highest popultion living under the poverty line which also hinders the quality of education.

California has the highest spending expenditures on education ( http://www.statemaster.com/graph/edu_ele_sec_nin_gra_stu-elementary-secondary-ninth-grade-students, http://www.statemaster.com/graph/ed...entary-secondary-finance-current-expenditures), yet they don't rank highly in proficieny in reading and math scores. (http://www.statemaster.com/graph/edu_***_of_stu_abo_bas_gra_8_mat-above-basic-grade-8-math,http://www.statemaster.com/graph/edu_***_of_stu_abo_adv_gra_8_wri-above-advanced-grade-8-writing,http://www.statemaster.com/graph/edu_***_of_stu_abo_adv_gra_8_sci-above-advanced-grade-8-science ). Throwing money at a problem will in most cases, especially when it comes to education , will not gurantee a quick fix to the problem or any a fix at all . The only way to receive a decent education if it is presented in a fashion that peaks your interest in the subject or you are extremely passionate about the subject that you spend an exobitant amount of time learning about the subject on your own time.

As for putting all the blame on the students, I do not do that. But the OP's question was, "Why are their so many unqualified teachers in the US school system?" Which, in my interpretation is saying that the students in the US are not getting a solid science education because the teachers are the ones to blame.

A bulk of the blame should go to the teachers, if they cannot present the subjects adequately to their audience, then they have failed at their job, its that simple. Demonizing the students as rowdy and unruly is a ridiculous assessment of a population.

Grade school is not for deciding what you want to do in life. Grade shcool is supposed to give a you a good base in the widest range of academia as possible. I personally think that too many young adults go to college. I also believe it is the indivduals responsibilty to take the initiative to increase the quality of ones own education. If ones education system is lacking then it is their parents and their own responsibilities to overcome the inequities. If you are unable to do that then higher education is not for you anyway.

You should devote all of your time , from cradle to grave, find out what you are passionate about , not spent 8 hours a day in a classroom full of strangers obtaining your education from a curriculum that you had no involvement in creating and that you are not absolutely interested in. Now I am not for the destruction of schools, on the contrary, I support schools that created a curriculum desired by the student body and I support the notion that students should not be forced to learn subjects that they are not interested in and that they will probably forget when they graduate. In the adult world, we are not forced to take certain jobs or shop at certain places or eat at designated restaurants, why should children be forced to attend schools? It does not make any sense to me. One might say that we send children to school so they won't become illiterate , but you really don't need a teacher to teach kinds things like learning how to read and teaching a child how to write. Many students come to school already knowing how to read.

 

[Chi Meson]

its that simple.

Nothing is ever "that simple." Anytime anyone believes anything is "that simple," it indicates that they have not learned enough of what has contributed to the problem.

You should devote all of your time , from cradle to grave, find out what you are passionate about , not spent 8 hours a day in a classroom full of strangers obtaining your education from a curriculum that you had no involvement in creating and that you are not absolutely interested in.

You go from an exaggerated ideal of perfection to an exaggerated negative assessment of the current situation. One is unrealistic, the other is inaccurate.

Now I am not for the destruction of schools, on the contrary, I support schools that created a curriculum desired by the student body and I support the notion that students should not be forced to learn subjects that they are not interested in and that they will probably forget when they graduate. In the adult world, we are not forced to take certain jobs or shop at certain places or eat at designated restaurants, why should children be forced to attend schools? It does not make any sense to me. One might say that we send children to school so they won't become illiterate , but you really don't need a teacher to teach kinds things like learning how to read and teaching a child how to write. Many students come to school already knowing how to read.

You are in favor of what is known as "unschooling" in the homeschooling community. We (my wife rather) is a homeschool teacher for our three kids who follows an unschooling plan. It works fantastically well for us. We know of several other unschooling families where the kids are not benefiting so well. They are still waiting to find out what interests them. A key component of any teacher, perhaps THE key, is passion and excitement for what is being learned.

She happens to have mater's degrees in English and Chemistry, which makes her very well knowledgeable in many areas. She is also one of the most cheerful and enthusiastic people I have ever met. Check her out: http://runhomepam.blogspot.com/

To extend this plan into all public schools is essentially impossible. You cannot manufacture a unique curriculum for each student. The best we can hope for is an increase in "magnet" schools where there are specialized focus areas that can be selected by students.

While you are partially correct that unions make it difficult to get rid of bad teachers, there is still a large enough turnover rate that IF we had a large enough selection pool of talented people who would be great teachers, then within 10 years we would have a vastly improved cast of teachers.

The truth remains through the ten years I have been teaching, when a opening occurs for a Physics Teacher, we do NOT get the finest possible candidates. THe last opening that occurred in my school, five years ago, the best candidate that applied was a former middle school teacher, with less than a minor in physics (18 semester hours allows a co-certification in Physics along with another science). This guy commutes from one hour away. Draw a "one-hour circle" around us, and you will encompass nearly a million people, and this was our best prospect (now he's not BAD, don't get me wrong).

The compensation is NOT sufficient to attract charismatic people with a degree in science, especially Physics. There are too many alternatives with better compensation plans.

 

[Integral]

So Noblegas's student designed class schedule

Period 1. Video game walk through
Period 2. Advanced Ipod.
Period 3. Hacky sack.
Period 4. Let's play another video game.
Period 5. Politically incorrect jokes.


Sounds like fun, I bet you would get good student participation and happy students.

Trouble is after a few years of this there would be no new games, So the first period might have to be changed to nap time.

The concept of letting the students have say in what is taught is ludicrous.

Unfortunately your illiterate views are all too common in this country. Meanwhile in Asia for example the students take education very seriously. Perhaps we need to add Japanese to the schedule so you can understand what your boss is saying after you get out of school.