School improvement plan 1, The Teacher's union in Rhode Island 0

[CitizenKain]

Exactly. When you have people on welfare collecting food stamps rocking cell phones, using the laundromat instead of hand washing/drying, and giving their kids money to keep up with the latest styles, you have a problem no amount of government money can fix.

If you're on welfare, you should get exactly half the amount to rent a studio. Share the apartment with someone else. Food should be basics; rice and beans. If your kids aren't in hand me downs donated by the salvation army, your welfare should be rescinded.

Got anymore life lessons? We could always use more from a spoiled college student living off his parents. Lets hear it.

 

[HumblePie]

where is that at??? not in IL!!!

Damn you beat me to it. This is going on my experience both times I found myself without work in my profession for a few months. I looked into getting into a teaching job to tide myself over, but luckily found a job first.

First off, the only schools I know of that require a Masters degree to teach is Colleges. And that is only for regular classes. With a Bachelors I can teach prep classes or remedial classes for Colleges.

For High School, I only need a Bachelors to teach and possibly a certificate. Many high schools, especially those that need teachers because they are problem schools with many problem kids, will let just about anyone work there so long as they have working experience in the field they wish to teach and don't have a felony record. That's not the norm though at least.

Normally, most teachers have Minor Teaching degree with a Major in their field they are looking to teach. Some fields there are an over abundance of people wanting to teach so sometimes the schools look for people a bit more qualified.

Typically most people that teach are female. Just as matter of demographic fact. Most females want to teach English, Art, Music, and other right side brain dominated fields. Courses such as Computers, Science, and Math most females aren't capable of teaching or willing to. Not in anyway am I saying there aren't female teachers, and good ones, in those fields, I'm just pointing out the demographics. Most teachers are females, and most female teachers do not teach left brained fields. Those that do are usually very good as my experience as has been.

Anyways, I was going off a bit of a tangent, but the point is that if one wanted to teach Math in my High Schools, it requires nothing more than a Bachelors in Math. That's it. You get hired on, work for a year and have someone occasionally audit your teaching. Part of your pay goes to "training" and the auditing. After a year if you haven't screwed up, they basically give you a teaching certificate good just about anywhere.

 

[silverpig]

Before I call the Teacher's union horrible names, I would like to point out that most high school teachers are required to have a Master's degree.

No they don't. Here they require a bachelor's of education. Most teachers do a bachelor's in some other discipline, and then do a 1 year B.Ed quickly as a professional program.

Here, a master's degree gets you an extra $8k/yr or so, and is required if you want to be a principal.

 

[Zargon]

Damn you beat me to it. This is going on my experience both times I found myself without work in my profession for a few months. I looked into getting into a teaching job to tide myself over, but luckily found a job first.

First off, the only schools I know of that require a Masters degree to teach is Colleges. And that is only for regular classes. With a Bachelors I can teach prep classes or remedial classes for Colleges.

For High School, I only need a Bachelors to teach and possibly a certificate. Many high schools, especially those that need teachers because they are problem schools with many problem kids, will let just about anyone work there so long as they have working experience in the field they wish to teach and don't have a felony record. That's not the norm though at least.

Normally, most teachers have Minor Teaching degree with a Major in their field they are looking to teach. Some fields there are an over abundance of people wanting to teach so sometimes the schools look for people a bit more qualified.

Typically most people that teach are female. Just as matter of demographic fact. Most females want to teach English, Art, Music, and other right side brain dominated fields. Courses such as Computers, Science, and Math most females aren't capable of teaching or willing to. Not in anyway am I saying there aren't female teachers, and good ones, in those fields, I'm just pointing out the demographics. Most teachers are females, and most female teachers do not teach left brained fields. Those that do are usually very good as my experience as has been.

Anyways, I was going off a bit of a tangent, but the point is that if one wanted to teach Math in my High Schools, it requires nothing more than a Bachelors in Math. That's it. You get hired on, work for a year and have someone occasionally audit your teaching. Part of your pay goes to "training" and the auditing. After a year if you haven't screwed up, they basically give you a teaching certificate good just about anywhere.

I believe in IL you have to have a cert to be a full time teacher. I would have to ask my wife to be sure. Shes special ed k-12 cert and she cant even teach regular classes

 

[PrinceofWands]

No they don't. Here they require a bachelor's of education. Most teachers do a bachelor's in some other discipline, and then do a 1 year B.Ed quickly as a professional program.

Here, a master's degree gets you an extra $8k/yr or so, and is required if you want to be a principal.

That's old school, and no longer true in most states. In most you are now REQUIRED to have a Masters within 5 years of obtaining your license. That doesn't even mention the course requirements for the license and certification in field, nor the NCLB requirement for highly qualified teachers that requires a Bachelor's or better in EVERY subject they teach. For me to be a high school teacher in WA requires more credits than to be an engineer...only 12 less than becoming a lawyer.

 

[PrinceofWands]

Being poor isn't the problem, the parents are. When I was 5 I lived in a one bedroom mobile home in a very rural area with my two brothers and sister. We all lived in that tiny trailer . We were one of those families that nobody got new clothes. I wore what my brothers had outgrown. If I got new shoes they were from the family dollar store. I lived that way for a long time and yet I still did good in school because my mom and dad spent time with me teaching me things. They were there for me when I came home and they kept me on the right track.

Parents now have the attitude that the schools will raise their kids . Many treat kids like a pet. They give them a place to sleep, feed them and say hi to them during the day and they think that is being a parent. Then when the kids fail the parents scream at the school.

Being poor isn't the cause, but it's a very strong correlative. While there are plenty of examples of poor people raising incredible academics, that's the exception and not the rule.

There are soooo many reasons too: broken homes, substance abuse, poor nutrition, dangerous/unhealthy environment, lack of medical care, lack of positive role models, need to work for subsistence, perpetuation of poor habits or beliefs, etc.

Any or all of those can be overcome, but it takes an attitude that far too few people possess today in America. It takes standing up against the entire cultural/societal stigma against intelligence and academics. It takes a lot more than most people broken down by the system have to give.

 

[HumblePie]

That's old school, and no longer true in most states. In most you are now REQUIRED to have a Masters within 5 years of obtaining your license. That doesn't even mention the course requirements for the license and certification in field, nor the NCLB requirement for highly qualified teachers that requires a Bachelor's or better in EVERY subject they teach. For me to be a high school teacher in WA requires more credits than to be an engineer...only 12 less than becoming a lawyer.

Not that way in Texas or Colorado I can tell you that. Both times I looked into being a teacher. It is much easier to be a teacher of highschool than lower levels in either state which require teaching degrees. Meaning my Bachelors in Computer Science will allow me to teach high school computer classes, but I am not allowed to handle a bunch of 3rd graders without a teaching degree. Although the 3rd grade teacher doesn't need anything else but the teaching degree to teach them.

*EDIT*
Here is a link to the requirements for Texas as I stated.

http://www.sbec.state.tx.us/SBECOnline/certinfo/becometeacher.asp?width=1280&height=1024#basicreq

Nothing there about a masters at all. Pretty much the same for Colorado....

http://www.teacher-world.com/statespages/Colorado.html

Actually, I am googling just random state teaching requirements and most of them don't require a master's degree at all for K-12 teaching.

 

[PrinceofWands]

Not that way in Texas or Colorado I can tell you that. Both times I looked into being a teacher. It is much easier to be a teacher of highschool than lower levels in either state which require teaching degrees. Meaning my Bachelors in Computer Science will allow me to teach high school computer classes, but I am not allowed to handle a bunch of 3rd graders without a teaching degree. Although the 3rd grade teacher doesn't need anything else but the teaching degree to teach them.

Except through special certification to fill a need that's very rare from what I've found, at least in the last 3 years or so when I was looking. While Elementary teachers only require a BA, high school requirements are often much more strict. Remember also that the highly qualified requirements are national, and therefore affect every state. While not every teacher will become highly qualified, the requirement to meet a certain percentage for funding effectively forces the majority to do so.

Let me clarify something in case I misled: you don't need a 'masters' to start teaching, but you must complete a program which is the equivalent of a masters within five years of first becoming licensed to teach. In the past it was common to obtain the professional level certificate without obtaining a masters, but that's very rare now. The same model is used in many states. It's also possible to get extensions, or the requirements waived, in certain emergency situations or in a critical shortage area.

 

[HumblePie]

Except through special certification to fill a need that's very rare from what I've found, at least in the last 3 years or so when I was looking. While Elementary teachers only require a BA, high school requirements are often much more strict. Remember also that the highly qualified requirements are national, and therefore affect every state. While not every teacher will become highly qualified, the requirement to meet a certain percentage for funding effectively forces the majority to do so.

Again, not seen that in the states I've been to. I'm trying to look at the Washington State Education Board website and it is terrible. For so many workers with Master Degrees they certainly do not know how to make a website.

Not saying you are wrong for the state of Washington, but the requirements for the states I've seen and those I know personally are very different from what you have said.

 

[HumblePie]

Looks like for Washington you need to complete a couple of tests, fulfill the requirements for NBPTS certification, and have a Bachelors in the field you are looking to teach for high school.

http://www.k12.wa.us/certification/Teacher/teachertesting.aspx

The only strange thing with viewing the website is trying to figure out the Highly Qualified Teacher requirement thing. I'm guessing this is what you are referring to? The website, along with the requirements, seem a bit more convoluted than other states.

 

[theeedude]

If you want people who are good in math and science to teach instead of going into private sector, you are going to have to pay up one way or another. And the higher standards you set, the more you'll have to pay up.

 

[Brainonska511]

using the laundromat instead of hand washing/drying

This alone shows you have no clue.

 

[PrinceofWands]

Looks like for Washington you need to complete a couple of tests, fulfill the requirements for NBPTS certification, and have a Bachelors in the field you are looking to teach for high school.

http://www.k12.wa.us/certification/Teacher/teachertesting.aspx

The only strange thing with viewing the website is trying to figure out the Highly Qualified Teacher requirement thing. I'm guessing this is what you are referring to? The website, along with the requirements, seem a bit more convoluted than other states.

Ok, let's try to clear it all up. The information you linked is correct, but you're not looking at the requirements for those things.

There are multiple paths to certification in most states. Professionals can often start teaching while obtaining their certificates, shortage areas grant exemptions temporarily, etc.

In WA there are two major levels of certification: Residency and Professional.

For the Residency certificate you must have a Bachelors or higher, and complete the teaching certificate program, which is roughly 60-70 quarter credits, or 45ish semester credits. If the person obtains their degree IN education then those credits are included, but the total number of credits for the degree is slightly higher than usual since there are state general ed requirements on top of the certification program requirements. Furthermore they will find themselves lacking the endorsement requirements if they're going to teach secondary level. That's why most teachers either get a bachelors in education and a masters in their subject area, or vice versa.

Your residency certificate hangs in limbo until you complete more than 2 years teaching, at which point it gains a 5 year expiration date. Within that period you must obtain the professional certificate or get a special extension or exemption.

To obtain the professional certificate you must complete yet another program, this time it's about 15 quarter (10 semester) credits plus a professional portfolio and a bunch of other hoops to jump through. A masters in ed or masters in teaching program generally includes these requirements (however, as of 2011 the rules are changing to be even more strict, but less geared towards formal degree programs).

Now let's talk endorsements. In order to teach at the secondary level you have to have an endorsement on your license in your field. To receive one, you have to complete a set amount of specific classes, about 60-70 quarter (45 semester) credits. If you have a degree in your field you'll obtain most of them along that route, but there's usually at least a few additions. If you obtained your degree in education, rather than your field, then the entire body of classes will have to be taken to get your endorsement. You must have this endorsement for EVERY subject you want to teach. Want to teach History and English? You need 90 semester credits just for your endorsement then.

Then there's things like highly qualified - a NCLB requirement that a certain percentage of teachers at a school have at least a bachelors in every field they wish to teach, as well as demonstrate competency in that field through a test program. This is a national requirement, and 95% of all teachers meet the requirement.

National board certification is a resume padder that's quickly becoming almost a requirement. About 40% of teachers are national board certified, and that carries with it about 6-12 semester credits.

In every five year period a teacher must log an additional 12-15 credits of ongoing education as well. Those additional credits are included in most Masters programs, and so get the teacher out of it for the first five years.

As for the tests, they're not hard. The WEST-B is about a sixth to eighth grade general academic knowledge test. The WEST-E (PRAXIS) is basically a comprehensive final covering your subject area (ie a test about everything you learned in 4 years at college studying a subject). It's a bit intense in spots, but nothing worse than the LSAT if you bothered to learn your material.

So, yes, there's no specific requirement for a Masters degree. However, for secondary education you must have a 4 year degree in every subject you'll teach, a teaching certificate program alone or as part of a degree (about 2 years), some extra credits in every subject you teach, and within five years you'll be needing an additional year to year and a half. If you really want to get all that as isolated credits, go ahead. But 99% of the teachers get a Bachelors, and a Masters.

For Primary education you get it easier. You don't have to worry about the WEST-E, the endorsement requirements, etc. It's still very common to end up with a Masters since after 10-15 years you've already been required to complete enough credits to earn one anyway.

From what I've seen it's safe to say that roughly 50-60% of teachers have their Masters at any given time. You can spend an evening googling and find out this is supported by available data.

 

[DrPizza]

New York: Master's within 3 years, else your certificate expires & you're done teaching.

 

[charrison]

New York: Master's within 3 years, else your certificate expires & you're done teaching.

Of course you dont need a masters to teach most subjects nor does a masters make you are better teacher.

 

[PrinceofWands]

Of course you dont need a masters to teach most subjects nor does a masters make you are better teacher.

Education ALWAYS makes you a better person. Always. Not better than some other neutral standard, but better than you personally were without it. Moreover, the more education you have in any field the better you will be qualified to teach it.

There are a couple reasons I say this. If you have a natural talent for something you may not be able to teach it to others because you never had to learn it yourself. Being in classes for it gives you the opportunity to see how it's done. Personal experience ALWAYS has biases. So does classroom teaching, but they're not always the same biases, and a good teacher will be sure to moderate them and provide them from alternative viewpoints as well. You don't necessarily get this on your own. True learning isn't the assimilation of knowledge, but the questioning and testing of that knowledge against others. You need someplace to do that. The body of information in all fields expands or shifts over time, and continuing education will keep you up to date on such matters.

That doesn't mean everyone with a Masters is automatically a good teacher. Some people just suck at it, period. 12 doctorates won't help that. However, for most people with at least some passion and aptitude, they will ALWAYS be better the more education they receive in their field.

I personally think a Doctorate should be required for subject teaching, but then I'm a great lover of academics.

 

[Fear No Evil]

Of course you dont need a masters to teach most subjects nor does a masters make you are better teacher.

Yeah either the masters degree has little value or we screw the students they teach for 3 years.

 

[Mr. Pedantic]

I personally think a Doctorate should be required for subject teaching, but then I'm a great lover of academics.

I don't think so, but I think that some postgraduate qualification (including Honors) relating to the subject you are teaching should be compulsory. Even if it's a one-year research diploma or something, because it means that instead of getting dropouts that can't hold a job in their chosen profession, you get people that are passionate and dedicated, if not to teaching, then at least their subject of choice.

 

[PrinceofWands]

I don't think so, but I think that some postgraduate qualification (including Honors) relating to the subject you are teaching should be compulsory. Even if it's a one-year research diploma or something, because it means that instead of getting dropouts that can't hold a job in their chosen profession, you get people that are passionate and dedicated, if not to teaching, then at least their subject of choice.

I'd consider that close enough. It's not that I want people who have done their own work as much as people who have spent the time studying the field. Bachelors today are about what a high school diploma used to mean for general knowledge, and masters what I'd consider a bachelors level information. I picked doctorate because I want the best possible chance of the person spending 5-10 years studying their subject deeply, and not just churning out a degree.

 

[charrison]

Education ALWAYS makes you a better person. Always. Not better than some other neutral standard, but better than you personally were without it. Moreover, the more education you have in any field the better you will be qualified to teach it.

There are a couple reasons I say this. If you have a natural talent for something you may not be able to teach it to others because you never had to learn it yourself. Being in classes for it gives you the opportunity to see how it's done. Personal experience ALWAYS has biases. So does classroom teaching, but they're not always the same biases, and a good teacher will be sure to moderate them and provide them from alternative viewpoints as well. You don't necessarily get this on your own. True learning isn't the assimilation of knowledge, but the questioning and testing of that knowledge against others. You need someplace to do that. The body of information in all fields expands or shifts over time, and continuing education will keep you up to date on such matters.

That doesn't mean everyone with a Masters is automatically a good teacher. Some people just suck at it, period. 12 doctorates won't help that. However, for most people with at least some passion and aptitude, they will ALWAYS be better the more education they receive in their field.

I personally think a Doctorate should be required for subject teaching, but then I'm a great lover of academics.

I dont disagree more education is generally better for a person. I will disagree that it usually tranlates into more classroom performance.

 

[PrinceofWands]

I dont disagree more education is generally better for a person. I will disagree that it usually tranlates into more classroom performance.

Like I said, not automatically or on it's own...but it does provide the wellspring from which to draw improvement. Take two people of roughly equal passion, teaching ability, and skills; the one with more education will be the better teacher overall 9 times out of 10. Yes, that's a rigged comparison, but that's all I claimed.

If you take one person with greater passion, communication, and insight, and another with more years of school, then obviously the first person will make a better teacher. That's rigged too, however, since the more education a person receives the higher their skills in communication, or insight into the subject matter gets (generally). Moreover if they don't have the basic drive and ability for education then they shouldn't be there regardless of education...which people tend to intuitively know and act accordingly on.

But again, I'm HEAVILY biased here. I'm an absolute worshiper of academics. Intelligence and knowledge is like a religion to me. Not as a career field, but in purity of essence. I hold no greater respect than for the superior mind...unless it's for dedication to ideal.

 

[charrison]

Like I said, not automatically or on it's own...but it does provide the wellspring from which to draw improvement. Take two people of roughly equal passion, teaching ability, and skills; the one with more education will be the better teacher overall 9 times out of 10. Yes, that's a rigged comparison, but that's all I claimed.

If you take one person with greater passion, communication, and insight, and another with more years of school, then obviously the first person will make a better teacher. That's rigged too, however, since the more education a person receives the higher their skills in communication, or insight into the subject matter gets (generally). Moreover if they don't have the basic drive and ability for education then they shouldn't be there regardless of education...which people tend to intuitively know and act accordingly on.

But again, I'm HEAVILY biased here. I'm an absolute worshiper of academics. Intelligence and knowledge is like a religion to me. Not as a career field, but in purity of essence. I hold no greater respect than for the superior mind...unless it's for dedication to ideal.

I admire education as well. However more education by itself does not produce results in the class room, just by having it. Adding a masters degree to a teacher does not add to much when you are teaching a group of people that knows nothing of a subject.

 

[PrinceofWands]

I admire education as well. However more education by itself does not produce results in the class room, just by having it. Adding a masters degree to a teacher does not add to much when you are teaching a group of people that knows nothing of a subject.

I disagree. The pursuit of a Masters in one's discipline will expose one to both deeper and broader implications of their field. They will have to absorb and synthesize many times more information about it than they had until that point. They will be exposed to different sources, different teaching styles for the material, different classroom mixes which will elicit new dynamics of student interaction, they will have to explore new avenues of communication, etc. Perhaps most importantly, they will begin to have to formulate their own defensible arguments for a subject. It is only through such defenses that we gain a full understanding of a subject.

There is also the question of rather it's a masters in an unrelated field, a related field, their own field, or education. All of which would have different impacts on the teacher. A masters in psychology would drastically improve the interpersonal relations of a teacher. A masters of sociology could bear similar fruit. Unrelated fields would open new avenues of connection to remote students (ie using literature about science to bring students together from across those diverse fields). A masters in education would of course have direct impact on teaching ability.

I would say the same about someone with no post-secondary education obtaining an associates, a 2 year degree holder getting a bachelors, a masters holder getting a doctorate, etc. More education is always better. Always.

On a more general, and completely indefensible tangent - I firmly believe that any form of education enriches a person and makes them better at EVERYTHING they do. If you have a bachelor's and get a masters you'll be a better person, parent, worker, thinker, lover, mechanic, reader, writer, etc ad nauseum. There's simply nothing that isn't made better through more education. Nothing.

 

[charrison]

I disagree. The pursuit of a Masters in one's discipline will expose one to both deeper and broader implications of their field. They will have to absorb and synthesize many times more information about it than they had until that point. They will be exposed to different sources, different teaching styles for the material, different classroom mixes which will elicit new dynamics of student interaction, they will have to explore new avenues of communication, etc. Perhaps most importantly, they will begin to have to formulate their own defensible arguments for a subject. It is only through such defenses that we gain a full understanding of a subject.

There is also the question of rather it's a masters in an unrelated field, a related field, their own field, or education. All of which would have different impacts on the teacher. A masters in psychology would drastically improve the interpersonal relations of a teacher. A masters of sociology could bear similar fruit. Unrelated fields would open new avenues of connection to remote students (ie using literature about science to bring students together from across those diverse fields). A masters in education would of course have direct impact on teaching ability.

I would say the same about someone with no post-secondary education obtaining an associates, a 2 year degree holder getting a bachelors, a masters holder getting a doctorate, etc. More education is always better. Always.

On a more general, and completely indefensible tangent - I firmly believe that any form of education enriches a person and makes them better at EVERYTHING they do. If you have a bachelor's and get a masters you'll be a better person, parent, worker, thinker, lover, mechanic, reader, writer, etc ad nauseum. There's simply nothing that isn't made better through more education. Nothing.

I still disagree. There is a time and place for a more educated teacher work force in education. But realistically a masters in math is not required to teach high school algebra. The same can be said of pretty much any other class these kids might be in.

I doubt there is any research that says having teacher with masters get better results in k-12.

 

[HumblePie]

Prince, basically from everything I saw read, heard, called about, and know real teachers all you are saying is a bit on one end of the scale.

For every state, to teach public schools K through 12, one only needs a Bachelors degree and teaching certification for the appropriate level or a bachelors degree in teaching. Private schools have their own standards and most don't even require the certification. Do some teachers go the route of obtaining a Masters? Sure, but that is because many I know that go that route do so to teach evening or weekend courses at a College, which a Masters is required there. In no way shape or form is a Masters required for a teacher K-12. Also, teachers do not have upward mobility in their career field like other jobs. They either teach, or they don't. There is some higher courseware classes they can teach for a bit more money, like AP classes for high school, but a Master's is still not a requirement.

Also, if you have certification and are teaching with a Bachelors in one subject but want to teach another subject, you do not need a Masters in that area. Some do, I have no doubt, but all that is required is certification in that area or even just prior job experience.

Now for bigger schools with high prestige and pay more money will have more teacher applicants than they have positions for. I have no doubt that these types of schools have a bit more stringent hiring protocols, and may look for people with Masters over Bachelors. But it isn't a requirement for the job per say, just something to make an applicant to stand out more to get hired.

Also as I said the different courses have different amount of teachers wanting to teach. Most teachers are female. Most females do not do well with left brained activities such as math, science, and computers. Most females do well with right brained activities such as English, Social Studies, Art, and Music. Because of this, there may be hundreds of applicants for any given English teaching position for a mere handful for the Calculus teaching position. In fact, many high schools have had to resort to using video teaching for some of these courses because they could find no qualified applicants for those. These are even for nicer schools. I went a semester back in 1996 at one of the largest, and richest public high schools here in the state of Texas without a Calculus teacher. The last one left and they couldn't find a replacement over the summer break.

Sorry for rambling, so I'll sum up and reiterate. For public school K-12 teaching positions across the country, the only requirements are certification and a Bachelors in the subject to teach. That is it.