Talk:Teacher

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is part of WikiProject Education, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of education and education-related topics. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to featured and 1.0 standards, or visit the WikiProject page for more details.
Portal
Start This article has been rated as start-Class on the quality scale.
High This article has been rated as high-importance on the importance scale.
To-do list for Teacher: edit · history · watch · refresh
  • Add citations to the article.
  • Clean up the article and reorganize it into a more coherent and consistent form.
  • Clarify any questionable and/or erroneous information.
  • Aggressively patrol vandalism.
  • Add more information directly related to traditional school-teaching settings.

Contents

[edit] What the freak?!!!

"This article is primarily dedicated to professionals who teach in traditional school settings". is a terrible line to start this article, yeah, its accurate, but its terrible... Aren't those private tutors that thaught children while acctign as their sitters teachers too? Of course they belong to the past but... Who thinks teachers is exclusive of modern education? Even the article on education assumes modern public education as the only form of education, more specifically, school education... THIS IS SOMETHING THAT SHALL BE CORRECTED!!!!Undead Herle King (talk) 05:03, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] General talk

I'm a fan of Wikipedia but this page is poor. On many pages I'm happy to jump in and correct minor problems, but I think this page needs a major rethink. And then it needs to be locked. 82.36.228.136 19:08, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

They usually have high esteem but low salaries. Not exactly. I know in Korea (and probably Japan, too) teachers are generally respected, but it isn't the same in many other places, especially if for teachers below the college and university levels. -- Stephen Gilbert

It's also POV. Kilo-Lima|(talk) 19:36, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

The image doesn't really mean anything. Could we get a shot of a teacher actually teaching? -- Tarquin 17:53, 30 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Hope the recent image helps. Unfortunately, we will be losing Brian Hodge as he moves to Japan this summer to marry and work over there. Brian: If you read this, buddy, you will be missed by colleagues and students alike. LIVE WELL! Weaponofmassinstruction 23:35, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

---

"Educationalist" redirects to "teacher". But does the two words mean the same. Isn't an educationalist a philosopher or researcher of education?

wildt 26. marts 2004 00.50

Never heard of the word "educationalist", and I am a teacher. :-) Is it perhaps specific to one country? Jwrosenzweig 23:52, 25 Mar 2004 (UTC)
Wow - 2 minutes! ... According to Danish-English dictionary Danish "paedagog" can be translated with: teacher if it's someone actually working with children, or if it's a theorist "educationalist". And the word is used about Alexander Sutherland Neill. wildt
According to my dictionary, it's chiefly a British usage. :-) I wasn't familiar with it (I'm American). It apparently does refer more to a theorist in education, but I don't know if we have an article on that. Perhaps it should redirect to pedagogy or something like it? Jwrosenzweig 00:25, 26 Mar 2004 (UTC)

I'd like to start an article specifically about the troubles teachers face nowadays--from growing teacher shortages to school shootings. But should this be specifically about teachers, as opposed to any other profession? Should this be related to labor issues, or to educational issues, or what? Thanks. Mjklin 23:57, 22 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Start small. Teachers only (well, educators and educational administrators only) and both labor and educational issues. If it grows bigger, it grows bigger. ;) --Dante Alighieri | Talk 00:08, Apr 23, 2004 (UTC)

I removed the POV posted on the teacher page. It doesnt really contribute anything new to say that "everyone has an opinion on teachers and how they are misguiding the youth." --RolandG 21:43, 23 Jun 2004 (UTC)


---

The article "So you want to be a teacher" is about 20 years old and refers to what will in the 1990's.


[edit] Improvement drive

Public education is currently nominated to be improved on WP:IDRIVE. You can support the article by voting for it there.--Fenice 20:47, 5 August 2005 (UTC)

---

Can anyone please explain what the hell this "apple for the teacher" thing is all about, in North American (US?) culture? --NeoThe1 23:32, August 30, 2005 (UTC)

Although late, I will try to help explain. The tradition of giving an apple to the teacher stems to the early days of North American Public Education in the late 1800s. In that era, school teachers were usually VERY poorly compensated, especially in small rural centres. Gifts of food for (literally) hungry teachers was commonplace. The "apple for the teacher" became symbolic of this. It is still used as a symbol for many Teachers Professional Organizations today such as can be seen at http://www.mbteach.org. hope that helps! Weaponofmassinstruction 23:43, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
It's still very common for students in the US to be given small gifts of appreciation from students who like them. I'm a teacher, and it's well-known that I like spiders, so I have students actually bring me live spiders for "brownie points." I was once given three tarantulas in one day. RobertAustin 12:39, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Incorrect Information

Information regarding Teacher's in Canada is incorrect and needs to be updated. Teachers in Canada now require a degree in Education to be able to teach in elementry, middle, or high schools.

Do not understand why "didactics" direct to this page, even though related. Doesn't didactics have a broader connotation? Lped999

I've done some work on the Canada section. Hope it clarifies a few things. I'm a little leery about leaving the whole section on "may require a TB test.... THAT smacks as an illegal requirement to provide medical information/history. Somebody is definitely getting sued if I get asked to take a TB test, Strep test, HIV test, or drug test as a condition of my employment! Unless somebody can back that statement up, I'd like to see it killed. Weaponofmassinstruction 23:08, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

A teacher serves many purposes. Often, people solely name teachers as being the people who are in front of the classroom, the adults leading the class in discussion, the individuals discussing and introducing new topics to the children, and those responsible for evaluating the progress of the pupils inside the classroom. That is one way of looking at the term “teacher”, but that simple definition shouldn’t be all there is to define such a complex and significant role. A teacher is anyone who passes information through the process of communication from themselves to another individual. A teacher can be anyone ranging from an elderly adult to a very young child, there is no age requirement for someone to be considered a teacher. On the contrary, not just anyone can be a teacher any given moment of the day. It requires specific traits and strengths for someone to be a teacher. A teacher is also someone who can, most importantly, effectively pass information from their personal knowledge onto someone else. A teacher does not just necessarily use only verbal communication to teach an individual. Some might teach by example, drawing a picture, acting something out, or in many other endless ways. A teacher is someone who adjusts their teaching methods to the individual to whom they are teaching. A teacher is someone who works and relays information every hour of the day, every day of the week, every week of the year, and every year of their life. A teacher is a mother or father showing their child good eating habits, table manners, and respect. A teacher is not necessarily someone that went to college for a teaching degree, and received a teaching certificate; but, it can also be the student who never even graduated from high school. A teacher can be your five year old son that teaches you to love life and be grateful for everyday that you are given to live on this earth and be around the ones you love, or it can be their simple thoughts that teach you not to make things so complicated. WASTREL 09:53, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Unsupported Information

The section on Australian bachelors' degrees being ranked lower than other countries' needs to be referenced in some way. I would be rather interested in the source of that information myself, actually, having not come across the claim before. GrubLord 10:09, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

I'd like to see a source on the US teacher payscale -- the school district that I work for doesn't differentiate between primary and secondary teachers as far as pay goes, and I'm not familiar with any other one that does. --Tthaas 10:48, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

I agree, the opposite is probably true. I saw a pbs story being shown in Australia on sbs and it showed things being taught in a US Masters course that are first year B.Ed material here. The 4 year Australian B.Ed would not be considered less than an American degree, especially as all 4 years are spent on course specific knowledge not a generalist courses like a B.A. Tmothyh 22:54, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Blaming Teachers

While I think this section is a good one, it really needs work. There needs to be some more organization and worded to be less POV. MrMurph101 03:25, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

I understand the contributor's reasons for including this section, but I don't think it fits here. Essentially, the section discusses a particular problem or issue that teachers and students (and parents) have to contend with. Rather than "Blaming the teacher", the title of the section should probably be "Teachers vs. students - responsibilities for learning" or something like that. An intelligent discussion about teacher and student responsibilities in the learning process is what is needed. I think, however, that this would be way beyond the scope of this article. There can be lots of discussion about the millions of other problems that the teaching profession must deal with (e.g. are they paid too little, do they get too much time off, should teachers be paid for prep time, should parents stay out the the classroom, should parents have a say in hiring and firing, should parents have a hand in managing a school, how should discipline be handled, and so on.) Where would it end? So, the real question is, should this article start discussing the problems associated with teaching/learning? The article is not a forum. Perhaps, if anything, a separate article is needed. This can get sticky and complicated. If the section is to be kept, it needs a lot of work. It's confusing with lots of errors and it is POV. Unless the original contributer can make this less POV and more understandable, I vote we remove the section in a week. BrianC 19:17, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

Im sorry. I've removed my contribution. RandallFlagg Scotland 22:09, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

Slow down, now... being one of those lucky enough to be "in the trenches" as a career choice, I definitely think that hese things mentioned above DO need to have voice put to them. however, the general article here is likely not the place for it. It "could" be yet another valuable tangent in the Wikipedia, though. the tough part will be in determining what to call it. It goes without saying that it should link back here.Weaponofmassinstruction 23:49, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

Maybe a section entitled "Burdens?" It could lead to a new article discussing it further. MrMurph101 02:18, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

Bodhisattvaspath (talk) 21:27, 8 January 2008 (UTC): I think it might be worth a mention some of the obstacles that teachers face today. Being an American teacher, I can only speak toward problems that professionals in my country experience, however, contributors from other countries might be able to expand on difficulties that teachers in those countries face. As for American teachers, there's growing press on "teacher misconduct" (both real and false-accusation of), a very limited "average teacher tenure" meaning how long the average teacher in America works as a teacher before leaving the profession, the growing difficulties with "entitlement" students (students who feel they are entitled to greater privileges, rights or possessions than would be appropriate for a student of that age), the pressures of the latest federal education mandates, etc... These are all very real aspects of being a teacher and anyone who might use this article to find out about teachers has a right to know what to expect out of their teachers or what to expect if they were considering teaching as a career.

Please make any additions along these lines with reliable sources. Anything that is potentially controversial will be deleted if its without those. • Freechild'sup? 23:41, 8 January 2008 (UTC)


Some Teachers Need Blaming the 200 Teachers Acused of inproper behavior toward children Nation Wide in Australia for example. Teachers who do not turn up to teach their student for another. teachers who brag about speeding to 17 year old student is another reason for putting blame on teachers. Teachers who dress inapropriatly. and the Education System in Australia is full of this type of teacher!!! you all know who you are —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.209.67.197 (talk) 10:13, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Good Article

I think this is a good article, and I have added it to the list.whicky1978 19:47, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

Is that a specific list, like the one Nixon kept? :D Weaponofmassinstruction 21:23, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
It is a pretty good article but it needs work to earn featured article status. Wikipedians are pretty strict about that I've noticed. MrMurph101 17:04, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
It might be a good idea to nominate this article for a Peer Review. MrMurph101 03:29, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

I've removed the sentence "An example of a good teacher is Diana Bishop" from the Primary and Secondary Teaching heading. It has no hyperlink, no source and no use - I have no idea who Diana Bishop is, and for a wikipedia article it's not exactly neutral. Crimson Blacknight 16:45, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Master's Degree within Five Years?

Quoting the article: "Teachers in almost all states must have a Bachelor's degree with the appropriate teacher preparation course and complete a Master's degree within five years." I'm a teacher in Arkansas, and have never heard of this five-year rule. Exactly how many states have such a rule? Can anyone provide examples, or citations? RobertAustin 14:03, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

I know in California you receive a "preliminary" credential that lasts five years without a renewal but if you do some more things you can get a "clear" credential which can be renewed every five years. There is no requirement to get a Master's but it is recommended and the pay scale is better if you have one. I think that could be part of where the confusion comes from. MrMurph101 23:14, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
In Ohio, a qualified college graduate holding a bachelor degree may apply for a two year, non-renewable, Alternative Educator License due to shortages of teachers in grades 7 thru 12. The applicant must must also pass the required subject area of the Praxis 2 assessment. Then, and I'll have to clarify this and report back, a Master's Degree is required. I'm not sure what the timeline is with this, one would think that it would be a Master's Degree upon the end of the two year licensure but I seem to remember being told that there is a 5 or 10 year requirement. I'll get back with the info as soon as reasonably possible, in the mean time, I would check with your State/Province/Country official website as most seem to have one. User:paulsprecker 4/23/2007

In Oregon, you must have your Bachelor's to teach. You have to have proof that you are working towards your Master's with in 10 years. I believe that it changed from 7 to 10 years just recently.


New York has initial and professional certification processes. The teacher is given 5 years to complete the professional certification. There's so many ways to approach teacher certification that it'd make a person's head spin. Some programs let you teach in NY at needy schools with only a bachelor's degree under a special type of license and then you are required to get professional certification within 3 years, for example. So even in states where the 5 year thing exists... it's only 1 of many ways to get certified. (My own initial certification which I'm in now IS a master's degree, but a second master's will be needed for my professional certification.) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.148.118.190 (talk) 09:41, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] What Math is required to be a teacher?

I do not know? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 66.75.117.27 (talk) 05:07, 8 March 2007 (UTC).

Probably at least the amount of math needed to get a college degree. I'm sure more if you plan to teach math yourself. MrMurph101 03:51, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

If you are going to be specifically a math teacher, then of course. If you aren't going to be a math teacher then no. Elementary school teachers learn enough mathematics in high school and elementary school to teach math to younger children. Loghead1 20:43, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

Yes, Elementary teachers learn math in high school, but that has nothing to do with being able to teach math to elementary students. I took several required courses in my college of education that supplied us with methods and techniques for teaching math. You cannot assume just because you had math in high school, that you would be able to teach a room full of 30 second graders about fractions.

[edit] A senior Teacher

Teachers who look after the whole school are called head teachers, school principals, headmasters or headmistresses. The equivalent in colleges and universities is called the dean, principal or vice-chancellor. See also school leadership. Teachers of this status rarely teach students. A teacher in a grammar or public school in Britain may also be a Head of House. Houses were also used in secondary and comprehensive schools.

As with most large organizations a school needs a hierarchical structure of command, allowing matters to be delegated to a specific department or the senior teachers of the school. In many cases there are deputy headteachers, heads of department (or subject, such as science or history) and heads of year. A head of year is in charge of the pastoral care of one year group.

Every school has a disciplinary procedure which dictates how punishments should be given to misbehaving students. One common method of coping with problems is the idea of escalation whereby the classroom teacher attempts to deal with the student(s) themselves before passing it on to a more senior teacher. Eventually, should the situation not be resolved, the headmaster becomes involved. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 66.75.117.27 (talk) 05:08, 8 March 2007 (UTC).

"Teachers of this status rarely teach students." That's not really true, and I'm not sure why you are talking about disciplinary procedures here (it's not particularly relevant to the article, I'd say). violet/riga (t) 07:37, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Salaries

It is americentric to leave USD as they are but convert GBP, so i have included salaries in USD/GBP/EUR. I tidied up the section to include the differences. if specific salaries of US and England without citations are acceptable, then Scottish salaries with a full citation should not have been removed, they are reinstated. --Brideshead 19:20, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

Americentric? That's a scary word if I've ever heard one...

[edit] Poor article

I know there will be lots of SOFIXIT replies, but this article is a very poor example of our work. We should greatly improve this vital article. violet/riga (t) 15:30, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

This article was better at one time but definately no FA candidate. This article is written focusing on a formal education teacher and not in the general sense. I wonder if "teacher" should be disambiguated into articles that focus on more specific terms that would define a teacher. A "teacher" does not only constitute a person who stands in front of the classroom and writes on the chalkboard. More generally, it is someone with some sort of knowledge that attempts, hopefully successful, to give someone the ability to acquire that knowledge. Do you see what I'm getting at? There are other dynamics besides teacher/student like master/apprentice or master/pupil and so on. It seems that this article should define that better. MrMurph101 02:26, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
I understand your idea but can't quite see how it would logically split. There is some content not directly related to a classroom teacher but not a great amount. violet/riga (t) 07:42, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
I put a global tag on the article. The article does focus mainly on the western model of teaching. There might not be enough material at the time to make any splits but we should address how other parts of the world teach and the history of how teachers taught. I guess my issue is the scope of the article. MrMurph101 02:32, 7 April 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Excellent Article

This article has all the makings of a highly informative and helpful piece of work which will benefit thousands of wiki-users. Please stop the negativity and start adding useful material. Rosser 22:37, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

You could say that the tiniest stub has the makings of an excellent article, but this is a very poor reflection of what Wikipedia is capable of. violet/riga (t) 20:00, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

This is my point - many excellent teachers etc out there and yet no one is keen on adding to this article.Rosser 11:08, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Notably Saskatchewan??

"A teacher may be replaced by another teacher if he or she is absent due to illness, death, or planned absence. In the United States and some parts of Canada, notably Saskatchewan, replacement teachers are known as substitute teachers (or more informally as "subs") and more recently "guest teachers"."

Why, in this bit in which I copied from the article, does it say notably Saskatchewan? I don't understand why Saskatchewan is mentioned here. What is so important about Saskatchewanian supply teachers?

Loghead1 14:40, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Teacher gift tradition

Why do students offer teachers an apple? Is this some kind of tradition? And if so, when and where did it started? Does this tradition still exists(golden apple awards)?

[edit] Apples

Teachers usually like apples. In second grade, we had an apple math day. Each of us brought apples. At the end of the day, the teacher actually collected over 16 apples.

[edit] Redirects and missing articles

Teach and teaching redirect here. I'm thinking teaching would be a more logical article to start out from, but can't find anything from a more sociobiological perspective, e.g. tuition of young by parents of any species. To what article would I link in the following sentence: "An elaborate study in 2005 showed that mother dolphins were most likely teach the behaviour to their daughters." Tuition and teaching don't fit the bill, and cultural transmission, a broader concept, is non-existent. Richard001 08:06, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

I moved the redirect for teach from teacher to education. That's a better fit - although the real solution would be to recognize the taxonomy of terminology involved here:

• Freechild'sup? 16:56, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Teacher certification

As I was looking at the Student teacher article I decided to work on the Certified teacher redlink there. However, upon scanning this page I found all of the content was already here, so I forked it into the new article on Certified teachers and redirected teacher certification there as well. I think that addresses a little bit of the confusion about this article and what Richard001 mentions above. • Freechild'sup? 16:49, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Greenspan's comments not relevant to article

For some reason, Alan Greenspan's comments about "improving teacher's salaries" with free market price-setting is included in the article. I doubt it belongs. Cherry-picking one argument out of many in education policy is weird practice. - 71.252.83.4 (talk) 06:04, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

I am moving the Greenspan comments here until someone can identify sources. Otherwise it reads like a section from a term paper. Along with that its simply too long. • Freechild'sup? 01:08, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
In Alan Greenspan's book, The Age of Turbulence, an interesting solution is offered for the problem of comparative deficiencies in mathematics and science for U.S. secondary school students. In Greenspan's opinion, a highly-skilled workforce is essential to the future of the economy, with math and science serving as the foundations for skilled vocations like medicine, engineering, and finance. A logical "first step" for improving student performance in these subjects would be to increase the quality of math and science educators within the system. According to Greenspan, the tenured pay scale used by most public school districts within the United States essentially injects "price controls" that oppose the fundamental tenets of the free market economy which they serve.

[edit] What on Earth is a Teacher?

I did feel the urge to open the ball for changing this article. My strategy for doing so is apparanty not well received. What I started to do was to create a general philosophical approached outline, which could encompass further editing of the topic/concept of "Teacher" in a way that should be strived for being intercultural and unbiased. This was what I put in:

== General outline ==

A teacher is someone acknowledgeed as a guide or helper in processes of learning. Teaching is manifest in all things living; from the most basic transitions of form and matter via an organizing aggregator which imply some sort of meaningmaking & meaningful relation inhabited by the current who is involved in the learning process and its umwelt.

A teacher is consequently an eventual progenitor (or possibly epigenitor) of situations involving the experience of teaching.

Systematized ways of teaching is a core phenomena in all culture, and is synonymous with cultivation in all cultures.

All human cultures seem to develop basic concepts and teaching practices of virtue. Whether virtue here are understood as in craftmanship, in spiritual practices, or in regard of the virtues involved in becoming a responsible community member, or simply skillful in the art of living and respectful in the art of dying.

Those who become looked upon as helpful for the whole of a community in regard of an evolution inherent in all ways of teaching are looked upon as teachers for those cultures.

A paradox is involved in that the teachers also, in different ways, develop the concept of teaching and the definitions of cultivation and culture. This indicate that there are no easy ways to differ between whom to trust as good teachers and whom to not trust. This problem is solved if the definition of the teacher is by the initiative of the pupil/student. If one recognizes the pupil by the initiative, the teacher is recognised by the capacity to guide the pupil to the experience and acknowledgement of the teaching.

In modern schools and most contemporary occidental societies, where scientific pedagogical research are practiced, the teacher is defined as a specialised profession on the same level as many other professions. The teacher is herein performing a professional role which is possible and required of the professional teacher to take off when not in his or her professional context; or if moving further to other jobs in the market of work opportunities." —Preceding unsigned comment added by Xact (talk • contribs)

A teacher should be a person who inspires their student to do their best, by means of suporting and making Education interesting, not by being a mean spirited individual who prasses some of their students and neglecting others. a teacher should respect all students rights. and work to a code of Ethics, which i have noted missing in some teachers in Australia. be aware if your children are not doing well it is probably due to bad teaching Ethics. I chalenge the govenment to do somthing about this within Australian Schools by placing Cameras and catching out bad teaching habits within Australian Classrooms —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.209.67.197 (talk) 10:22, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Proposals for further editing and contributions

Further ideas for the topic:

* Concepts for the Teacher from different cultures and spiritual cognitive practices (i.e. religions)

* History of the Teacher (from different traditions)

* The teacher's role in arts & crafts

* The academic "hierarchies" of teachers from the traditional schoolteacher to the acknowledged professor and his/her titles

* The spiritual teacher: Lama, Guru, Master, Rabbi, Pastor, Sage, Magi etc

* The role and concept of the Mentor in late capitalism

* The inner teacher

* A list of great teachers who can be said to have been founders or of importance for cultures and cults, arts and enterprises

* The role of the school teacher since Johann Herbart and the first pubic schools in Preussen.

* The change in the role of the teacher after the introduction of the "new" sciences : Pedagogy, Psychology and Sociology

I hope we can all together envision a huge resourceful and inspiring entry on the topic of the teacher here at Wikipedia.

I hope that in stead of simply deleting this introduction, those who are offended by my proposal for an outline on the topic, may come with a better proposition. The concept of a teacher is extremely wide, and cannot be simply defined as a traditional school teacher. Although the traditional school teacher should arrive at a level of acknowledgement which encompasses the inherent quality of a Teacher assumed by children/pupils. I have dared to come with my initiative in regard of my position in the New School in Norway, a a free initative research school in the tradition of humanistic scientific pedagogy (cf. Peter Petersen and the Jenaplan pedagogy), but in a strong cooperation with the Educational Government of Norway, developing it as a practical research school for the Public School in Norway. The idea of the New School in Norway is not merely an idea and practice of a new pedagogy for kids, but interdependent on that it's defining principles: self-initiation, democracy and Freedom from Caste and Age-segmentation) are developed for standard general education/enlightenment of the people's project as is Wikipedia to my understanding.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Xact (talk • contribs)


[edit] Consider revamping article

This might just be me, but the organization of this article seems spastic and incredibly out of focus. I especially see this flaw when there is an incredibly rough transition from 'here's what teachers make in America' to 'Hindu gurus.' I think it would make more sense to have a generic teachers page, maybe including foundational concepts on pedagogy or educational theory etc. Then you could have articles that would branch off that would cover specific kinds of teachers (i.e. spiritual teachers and academic teachers) as well as other information concerning pay scale and such. As it is the article briefly mentions disconnected topics without ever being substantive or in depth on any one of those topics. Just think it would be highly beneficial to have greater organization in the layout and more detailed information on each separate part rather than lumping it all together haphazardly. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jdlund (talk • contribs) 14:41, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] School marms

I think there should be a section on the old-fashioned school marm. Angie Y. (talk) 16:58, 26 January 2008 (UTC)


[edit] This entry is pathetic.

This article needs to be completely wiped out and rewritten by someone who actually knows what they are talking about. I and other teachers around the world would be hard-pressed to endorse this entry as a credible authority on the teaching profession. Teachers, remember this: Future teachers are likely to come here to seek information on the profession. Let's keep it apolitical and objective.

From reading the discussions taking place on the talk page, I can see that there are many (primarily Eurocentric and anti-American) biases at work and find it deeply concerning ("What the hell is the apple about?" etc. -- What's with the "hell"? Like "God how stupid, what the hell is that about?" I could go on and on). Considering this is an article about TEACHERS and not about international benchmarks of student performance, it is incredibly dubious to include Alan Greenspan's speculative suggestions for better student performance in the United States. Also, Greenspan is NOT a pedagogue -- he is an ECONOMIST. He is not a reliable source of information on the teaching profession. A good teacher knows what a good source is, so let's try to find a couple of good sources and leave Greenspan to his book-keeping. It is for this reason that I am compelled to remove the Greenspan paraphrase/passage.

What we want to show here is WHAT a teacher IS and WHAT a teacher DOES, which is for the most part universal across the board. This childish nitpicking about whose students do what how well or poorly is simply out of order. Leave the misguided politics in the pubs and teachers' lounges. It is impossible in this entry to do justice to the teaching profession in all of these diverse nations, each with unique educational landscapes and concerns. Let's keep it simple and present only facts about teaching as a profession. We can create separate entries for the teaching professions in other nations -- that does not have to be located here, but I suspect there will be even more Eurocentric political opinions flowing into those. Alas!

Thimaeus (talk) 04:39, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Hi there! Well first off, feel free to improve the article! Re-organization of the material and addition of new material is encouraged. Be sure to include citations to reliable sources for any information included, in this article they should be in the form of footnotes. Separate articles for individual countries wouldn't be appropriate, however, until those sections became long enough that they're weighing down the article and they're also lengthy enough to stand up on as independent articles. I do think that the Spiritual teacher section needs to be prosified. I don't think that the Greenspan section is inappropriate since that section is dealing mostly with teachers' salaries- the section could be shortened though. I disagree with your assertion that what a teacher is and does is the same throughout all the world's cultures; Gurus, Sensais, and Rabbis are all also types of teachers with much longer histories than the more modern Western culture profession. Those are my thoughts anyways, your mileage may vary. Thanks, and happy editing! —Elipongo (Talk contribs) 20:02, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Dubious

The misconduct section is biased and needs to be removed. I will remove it in the hopes that someone will find a way to present facts in an unbiased manner.

"A study by the AAUW reported that 9.6% of students in the United States have received unwanted sexual attention from educators sometime during their educational career.[13] A study in England showed only a 0.3% prevalence of sexual abuse by any professional, a group that included priests, religious leaders, and case workers as well as teachers.[14]" (emphases added)

Why is this necessary? It is quite obviously a comparison that says "See? In England, teachers aren't sexual predators like in the United States -- 10% of US teachers are pedophiles, whereas 99.7% of English professionals are overall just wholesome and nurturing." Perhaps I'm hypersensitive to this, but the use of these "flavoring" words makes all the difference in meaning. The person who wrote this has apparently chosen not to take into consideration the fact that many such cases go unreported and/or unprosecuted in Europe.

Thimaeus (talk) 04:49, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Hi there and thanks for your comments. I'm the one who added the section, it was in response to an anonymous user who persistent kept posting a line about how it's a growing problem in the U.S. diff. Sorry for the word "only", I think that may have come from the source material I used- you are right that it isn't from a neutral point of view so I've removed the word. I don't think the section should be deleted outright, since it is certainly an issue that attracts a lot of attention from reliable sources. It can be improved substantially, though, it's only a stub section after all. Feel free to be bold and expand and balance the section, always making sure to cite reliable sources for additions. Thanks! —Elipongo (Talk contribs) 18:40, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
I have to agree with the previous poster that the current misconduct section has got to go. It compares an American study of how many students have been abused with a British study of how many teachers are abusers-- apples and oranges, since a typical student will have 30 to 50 teachers. The stuff about the sample size and margin of error is meaningless if the studies themselves are not comparable, which they are not. A simple summary of the AAUW study might be appropriate, shorn of the weasel words and verbiage. Incidentally, I also don't see where the AAUW study that media or court attention is "increasing", just that it is substantial. I'll delete the section unless I hear objection. CouldOughta (talk) 05:10, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
Take it out! WP is neither a place for biased perspectives nor original research; therefore, that section, as its written, has no place. • Freechild'sup? 11:44, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
Hello again. When I first created the section, it amounted to a two sentence paraphrase of the reliable source that I found. As I stated above, I wrote it rather than continue on a deletion crusade against anons who were trying to add similar unsourced, and very much biased, information. The neutral point of view policy requires that all views be represented fairly, proportionately and without bias. The section, before it's expansion with what is indeed an original research analysis of the study, was indeed proportional since it only amounted to a couple of sentences. No comparison between the US and the UK was implied; I would have thought the difference in numbers was clearly explained by the UK study's inclusion of several professions besides teachers. If you think that the section is too US-centric, then improve it by finding sources from other countries. I can't support deletion of the section because otherwise this becomes a puff piece, cheerleading article. —Elipongo (Talk contribs) 20:15, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
Elipongo, if you feel that strongly about maintaining what is there you should locate that source again and parse the information back to what it originally was. As it stands this particular section amounts to WP:OR and makes the whole thing dubious. Actually, I'm going to tag the section as such. • Freechild'sup? 21:05, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
Bodhisattvaspath (talk) 16:26, 7 February 2008 (UTC): Additionally, in the first pages of the study by the AAUW, the study admits that it is not limited to teachers, but rather any adult that has anything to do with a school system, including (but not limited to) volunteers, cafeteria workers, bus drivers, administrators, counsellors, janitorial staff, etc... The study itself is a very poor resource for the position it is being used for.
Bodhisattvaspath (talk) 20:52, 6 February 2008 (UTC): The presentation of information that suggests that the profession is rife with abuse, whether you're presenting a U.S.-centric or U.K.-centric perspective presents a biased perspective against the profession. You present no information that balances your one-sided studies that suggest that teachers abuse students, and as a previous comment stated, you're comparing apples to oranges by comparing the statistics of abused students in one country to the statistics of all professions known to have abused children in another. You failed to present "all" views fairly, especially a point of view that teachers are just as often the victims of false accusations as they are the perpetrators of genuinely grievable conduct, if not more often the victims of false accusations - which I'm sure there are studies out there to assist in terms of the necessary information.
While it may not have been your intent to imply a comparison between the U.S. and the U.K., providing only information about those two countries when teaching is a worldwide profession provides a very Eurocentric point of view on the one hand, and a very "look at what's happening in this country as opposed to this one over here" point of view which very much compares the two countries in a direct fashion (with no other comparisons present). The difference in numbers is not clearly or readily explained to the common reader, who will not immediately (or in some cases, ever) grasp the point of your information, which would only serve as inflammatory against the teaching profession as a whole, particularly in the United States according to the information you presented. With no frame of reference for comparing the statistics that you've given, the average reader will see "9.6% of students are sexually abused by teachers in the U.S. and less than 0.3% of students in the U.K. are". You're also comparing a study that concentrates on "unwanted sexual attention" which may or may not be biased by the perspective of the students polled and may or may not include sexual abuse, while the U.K. study directly targets sexual abuse and does not include any other "unwanted sexual attention, real or perceived".
Ultimately, while teacher misconduct is certainly a valid subject for discussion and inclusion in the article, comparing two studies, one that appears to be criminal in nature and covers any professional (the U.K. study) and another which appears to be opinion-based - as any student who receives a look that they determine to be sexual in nature and unwanted could answer yes to a potential question in the AAUW's study - does not accurately represent or address teacher misconduct in either country. Furthermore, to fail to balance that with misconduct against teachers, either in the same section or another equally developed section implies a sort of "teachers are sexual predators of children" point of view that certainly would be struck down on neutrality alone. I would strongly recommend that you find better studies to compare and any studies related to misconduct against teachers before re-addressing this section's development. Also, keeping in mind the informative mission of Wikipedia, to remove the misconduct section entirely until such time as it can be presented with a neutral point of view as I have outlined here would not establish this article as a cheerleading article about teaching as there is nothing else I see within the article that presents a biased point of view toward teachers. To remove a section with a bias against the topic fails to meet with any biased perspective toward the subject. With what I read of the section, I am forced to agree with Freechild, that the misconduct section should be removed until such time as it can be presented without bias. If Elipongo would like the subsection to remain, than I strongly suggest that Elipongo presents more clear information without the biased point of view, rather than encouraging other users to clean up the section for him/her as an alternative. After all, the burden of satisfying Wikipedia's various standards for articles lies with the content contributor, not with the content's opponents.
Hi all. Sorry for the delayed reply; I've been kind of busy to do more than minor editing over the past several days. Anyways, your points are certainly fair ones. You can see the original form of the stub section that I added (as well as the POV and unsourced anon edit I removed) here. Obviously that version won't fly, so tell me what you think of this rephrasing:

Misconduct by teachers, especially sexual misconduct, has been getting increased scrutiny from the media and the courts.[1] Studies conducted so far in the United States and United Kingdom have reported widely ranging rates of incidence from as low as 0.3% to as high as 50.3%, depending on the study method.[2]

Please let me know if you think that's okay or if there are any more changes you'd like to suggest. Thanks! —Elipongo (Talk contribs) 23:52, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
Bodhisattvaspath (talk) 04:34, 14 February 2008 (UTC): The following is quoted from page 1 of the AAUW study. The emphasis is mine.
In this review, “educator” includes any person older than 18 who
works with or for a school or other educational or learning organization. This service
may be paid or unpaid, professional, classified or volunteer. Adults covered by this
review might be teachers, counselors, school administrators, secretaries, bus drivers,
coaches, parent volunteers for student activities, lunchroom attendants, tutors, music
teachers, special education aides, or any other adult in contact in a school-related
relationship with a student.
The following is taken from page 17. The emphasis is mine.
During your whole school life, how often, if at all, has anyone (this includes
students, teachers, other school employees, or anyone else) done the following
things to you when you did not want them to?
The following is taken from page 18. The emphasis is mine.
Of students who experienced any kind of sexual misconduct in
schools, 21 percent were targets of educators, while the remaining 79 percent were
targets of other students.
These three sections alone cause me to question the bias of the study and the validity of using it to support misconduct claims against teachers, specifically.

[edit] this article used to be much better

See, for example, http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Teacher&oldid=113102315 , from about a year ago. A fair amount of content has been lost that should perhaps be restored. Calliopejen1 (talk) 00:50, 9 February 2008 (UTC)