Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Sure. The issue isn't trying new things but the way those new things tend to be implemented. Oftentimes admin will find some new and exciting thing, role it out and force teachers to implement is (often with a lack of training, understanding or enthusiasm). Then a year or two later they will be on to the new thing before the teachers have had the time to develop the skills to do the last thing well.
In my experience new exciting ideas work better when they originate with teachers and are supported by admin. Teachers should be encouraged through funding to learn new methodologies and should be supported in implementing those.
Also this way different approaches can be more easily be compared between schools in a district or classrooms in a school.
Lastly we know based on Hattie Effect Size that traditional methods work, maybe not perfectly or for every kid but they do work well enough most of the time. We can't constantly be throwing the baby out with the bathwater for the new hot approach. Especially when the academic side of education lacks the rigor necessary to have reliable literature on these methods.
Perhaps administrators (and by the way, not all of us are enamored with every new thing that comes along, so thanks for stereotyping us ) do what they do becasue so few teachers do want to try something new. Most teachers end up teaching like their teachers taught them...whether it was really good or bad. And I say that because, to a degree, that's how I thought as a teacher for at least a good part of my 13 years. The balance that I had, fortunately, was that I not only thought students should learn new things, I thought I should learn new things.
Perhaps administrators (and by the way, not all of us are enamored with every new thing that comes along, so thanks for stereotyping us ) do what they do becasue so few teachers do want to try something new. Most teachers end up teaching like their teachers taught them...whether it was really good or bad. And I say that because, to a degree, that's how I thought as a teacher for at least a good part of my 13 years. The balance that I had, fortunately, was that I not only thought students should learn new things, I thought I should learn new things.
I didn't stereotype administrators. Keywords are "tend" and "oftentimes" I also feel like I made it clear that I have had positive and supportive experiences with administrators.
There are good administrators and bad administrators. And there are good administrators who sometimes make bad choices or are bad at certain things.
I find that trying to force some, usually older, teachers to change their methods can lead to greater issues. It's important to have buy-in first. I think getting that from your staff is a major skill that good administrators have. It's the same thing as teaching: you need relationships and relevance alongside rigor.
That’s the excuse that is always given when there are good ideas presented. “Oh it can’t work in the US because we are so diverse.” Or if the other area is also diverse, it is a different type of diversity and doesn’t count. It gets pretty tedious. Just because a country is diverse doesn’t mean that kids need to do tons of homework everyday. One thing other countries do have is more robust childcare systems that aren’t that expensive.
70% of Finnish children are in full-time preschool funded by the government. We don’t have that in the US, and it isn’t due to lack of interest. I am sure if families had access to full-time preschool that they didn’t have to pay for with tuition, they would be happy. Instead we have a patchwork of offerings, with some states not offering full-time school until first grade and others offering fairly robust preschool programs starting at age 3 or 4. If you want to go a long way toward leveling the playing field, giving everyone access to enriching activities from a young age would be helpful. It doesn’t matter how “diverse” the country is. Preschool is preschool and all kids can benefit.
Not at all. It won't work in the US because our government is so focused on race and economic status of students. That's why. Take skin color and economic status out of the picture and then we could have an objective discussion.
As far as corruption....
Dept of Ed, Dept of Justice, Education law....
"Dear Colleague, Here's some guidance.........Do this or funds may be withheld."
And that is why I don't think it would work in the US. Our government is too busy telling us that skin color and economic status are just as important as brains.
Not at all. It won't work in the US because our government is so focused on race and economic status of students. That's why. Take skin color and economic status out of the picture and then we could have an objective discussion.
As far as corruption....
Dept of Ed, Dept of Justice, Education law....
"Dear Colleague, Here's some guidance.........Do this or funds may be withheld."
And that is why I don't think it would work in the US. Our government is too busy telling us that skin color and economic status are just as important as brains.
Having a robust social safety net, like Finland, seems like a good way to take economic status "out of the picture."
Having a robust social safety net, like Finland, seems like a good way to take economic status "out of the picture."
From what I understand they can have that safety net because they are an "homogenous" country.
Those nordic countries have all that stuff because of this "social homogenousism".
All I know is if I were a kid I'd be real interested in this "no homework" aspect of the Finnish system. Anybody know about school day length and how much vacation they get over there?
Last edited by eddie gein; 05-14-2023 at 03:35 PM..
Many educators agree that Finland has one of the best educational systems in the world. For the most part, Finnish teachers do not assign homework. Their schools are student centered, and the focus is on cooperation, and not competition.
With the exception of a test that is given right before graduation, there are no standardized tests. Time spent in the classroom is not as long as it is in the US. Children take breaks and are encouraged to play outside, even in the cold Finnish winters. I am going to guess that fewer children are diagnosed with ADD in Finland. Play is valued and encouraged, especially in early elementary school.
I could buy into adapting such a system for the US. Probably the biggest problem will be getting the teachers to buy into the same requirements on getting into teaching as the Finnish system.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sheena12
Their teachers are also different from those in the US. Teaching is a highly regarded profession. Only individuals with master's degrees from specialized universities that teach people how to teach. There are some states that require a master's degree. In my home state of N.Y., education majors have five years after graduation to obtain their master's degrees. Even so, many resort to proprietary universities such as The University of Pheonix, or relatively inexpensive sub-par universities such as Liberty. In NYS, there is a university that grants master's degree within an hour of most people's homes. SUNY has a rigorous masters program, many of which can be taken online. When I found out that my son's teacher was getting her master's at Liberty, I was shocked. I pointed out the fact that there are not one, but two SUNY institutions on Long Island, in addition to Long Island University, Hofstra University and several others. Her response? "Liberty is easy. All of the teachers know that". She giggled, I did not.
.
A couple years ago our city hired a new director. The paper gave her bio. She had several master's and a couple of EdD's. Then looked at her resume since collect. There is simply no way, in any real subject other than education, to have held a full time job and gotten so many degrees. A typical PhD is five to seven years post bachelors in school full time. It really shows how watered down those degrees are when they can collect so many of them while attending part time.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sheena12
In Finland teaching children is a thought of as an important job. As important as an MD or an engineer. Teachers are handsomely compensated. It's a prestigious profession.
We need to listen to our children. We also need to pay teachers more AND to expect more out of them. Teaching should not be a fallback occupation for B- graduates of mediocre colleges. Not all, but many people who choose teaching do so because they want the summers off. Education is not even taught at our best colleges, much less specialized universities dedicated to teaching.
Then, we need to pay teachers well, because their job will be as important. if not more, than a physician or an engineer.
There are, or were, a lot of specialized universities dedicated to teaching, called Normal Schools. And many/most of our major universities have them. I think a big difference is, as I understand, getting into one in Finland is a big deal and highly competitive. I've often said I'd be willing to adapt a market pay scheme for teachers that pays according to how market pays for a particular subject matter. Which may mean different pay for different skill sets.
Engineering and other professions pay well because they are hard to get into. Hard to complete the education and have a limited number of people who can complete the requirements. Are teachers willing to raise the bar to the same level of difficulty to go along with the pay?
Quote:
Originally Posted by sheena12
In the US, many vocational schools are for profit. They charge exorbitant tuition, and frequently the instructors and the curricula are out of date. Many of these "trades" are low paying, and not nearly enough to warrant the steep tuition. Many of these "trades" pay less than $15 an hour. It's a scam.
The US would do well to study Finnish schools, and to admit that our choices are often made for the wrong reasons. Proprietary, for profit school, and charter schools are not the answer. Nor is the hyper-focus on STEM subjects.
.
While there are for profit vocational schools, every state has state funded vocational schools post high school. Used to have them in high school as well but that got dropped when the push for "everyone must go to college" started.
Our choices, as a country are often made for the wrong reasons. Equity being one of them as this topic is about. Everyone has different abilities and no matter how hard you try, you are not going to be able to bring every kid to the top level of academic performance.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
) do what they do becasue so few teachers do want to try something new. Most teachers end up teaching like their teachers taught them...whether it was really good or bad. And I say that because, to a degree, that's how I thought as a teacher for at least a good part of my 13 years. The balance that I had, fortunately, was that I not only thought students should learn new things, I thought I should learn new things.
