Teachers behave like children at their conferences

kevin12345

Inspector Coptoor wrote: »

Very true, however, the fact a primary school teacher can train for 3 years, leave Pats or Mary I at 20/21 & earn a full wage while doing their dip year is/was very wrong.
It should be a MINIMUM of 4 years full time study.

I did a 4 year science degree, had a year out, then did my PGCEducation & began teaching at 24.

Except it is a 4 year course now. They changed it last year.

Inspector Coptoor

Which is why I said is/was.....
It covers those who did 3 years before and those who are still doing 3 years now.

I fully approve of the increased course duration

Vito Corleone

Teachers are a lot like dogs, they fall to the ground when hit by a car.

road_high

Live down the street from Campagne restaurant (Michelin star one) in Kilkenny...looks thronged tonight with these "poor" overworked teachers from their conference. In fact they were in such a rush to get there, about 5 of them walked straight out in front of me driving...ps know they were teachers from the conferences badges...and the 141 car they stepped out of

ian87

road_high wrote: »

Live down the street from Campagne restaurant (Michelin star one) in Kilkenny...looks thronged tonight with these "poor" overworked teachers from their conference. In fact they were in such a rush to get there, about 5 of them walked straight out in front of me driving...ps know they were teachers from the conferences badges...and the 141 car they stepped out of

Flog the teachers!! How dare they spend their wages on goods and services! Is the extortionately high VRT paid on that 141 car not good enough for the public coffers? Or the vat and tax on top of said car? I sincerely doubt the hoteliers and restauranteurs of Kilkenny are resentful of the money all of those "greedy" teachers are leaving behind them.

I deal with comments like that on a daily basis. I drive a BMW that's worth less than ANY of my teaching colleagues mondeos, golfs and avensis', I pay 1494 in road tax a year and 60 a week in diesel. I worked hard to pay for that car without a loan and to keep it on the road. And the **** I get for it is frankly disgusting at times as it's perceived I'm "loaded" to be driving such a car. I'm far from claiming we are poor but the material things I have in my life weren't easily earned and like any other worker, public or private, I made sacrifices, got up out of the bed to face 24 demanding little faces, and did my job to the best of my ability. If a person can't enjoy the fruits of their labour well let's all move to North Korea.

FrStone

ian87 wrote: »

It exists for postgrad applicants and the standard of teachers who came through the postgrad system versus undergrad system (of which I'm a product of) tends to be of a higher standard. I know of several principals who actively look for and put a higher value upon post grads over undergrads when sorting through the many hundreds of cvs they recieve when advertising a job.
Not to say that the undergrads who trained aren't more than capable. One may say I'm putting 2 and 2 together to make 5 with my statement but I think there is more to it than coincidence.

I've heard quite the opposite said about postgrads too, granted mainly the ones who do the online course vs the actual postgrads in MaryI and St Pats.

Even though in more recent years I've been told that the reason post grads wouldn't be held in such high esteem is that as soon as the bust came - different professionals such as engineers, architects etc decided to become primary school teachers thinking they would be entering a cushy job and weren't in any way ready for the actual stress that teaching brings.

ian87

FrStone wrote: »

I've heard quite the opposite said about postgrads too, granted mainly the ones who do the online course vs the actual postgrads in MaryI and St Pats.

Even though in more recent years I've been told that the reason post grads wouldn't be held in such high esteem is that as soon as the bust came - different professionals such as engineers, architects etc decided to become primary school teachers thinking they would be entering a cushy job and weren't in any way ready for the actual stress that teaching brings.

I've worked with two graduates of the online system. They started the course together on the same intake. If I had children in the school I would pull them out if they went into one of those teachers classes. The other teacher is nothing but exemplary. Both trained and worked as secondary teachers prior to making the change. The online course is a business first and a training college second, and it shows at times.

Belle E. Flops

I did honours maths in the Leaving Cert and what I learned about vectors, matrices, calculus etc has in no way been of benefit to me when teaching maths at primary level.

These teacher bashing threads are getting pretty tired at this stage.

mad_man4

They act like a class of students on the friday evening before a long weekend.

mrsdewinter

I just hope the teaching unions know who to blame when the public turns their backs on their members. Teaching used to be a respected profession. After today's performance, I'd say the town dog catcher is held in higher esteem.

bodice ripper

mrsdewinter wrote: »

I just hope the teaching unions know who to blame when the public turns their backs on their members. Teaching used to be a respected profession. After today's performance, I'd say the town dog catcher is held in higher esteem.

The public turns on the teachers with such frequency as to impart a constant background whirring sound.


Also, Dog Catching is like 550 points in the LC afaik.

doolox

...Higher level English and Higher Level Irish are required for entry into teacher training then there should be an element of consistency and a requirement for a higher level in the remaining core compulsory subject...Maths.

Quinns remarks about the gender specific nature of honours Maths is unfortunate but used to bear some element of truth. Many former girls schools had no Honours Maths classes at LC and those aspiring to do so had to attend Hons LC Maths classes at the nearest available boys school. The coed nature of the vast majority of modern post primary schools should have fixed this.

Women tend to be better than men at Languages, which is probably why there was no issue in setting an Honours only standard for entry in the 2 Core languages.

I wonder why the existing teachers are upset or concerned about the new proposed requirement for Honours Maths for entry into the profession? Surely this requirement will not be retrospective and hence will not affect existing teachers over much? Is there a fear of increasing standards and future competition from the younger teachers coming on stream in future years?
Are existing teachers afraid for the chances of their sons/daughters etc getting into the profession?

It has been posited before that Honours Maths requires a higher amount of work than other subjects and hence is more readily dropped than other subjects because of this. A method needs to be found to balance the level of work required across all available subjects on the LC so that none require more work/effort than others at a given award level, maybe Maths is too broad and needs to be divided into two subjects at LC level, one for Science/Eng purposes another for Statistics/Business purposes for example.

No one would propose having Physics/Chem/Biology as all one subject at LC so this problem of broadness in a subject has been encountered and sorted out in the past.

Cantremember

bodice ripper wrote: »

The public turns on the teachers with such frequency as to impart a constant background whirring sound.


Also, Dog Catching is like 550 points in the LC afaik.

According to a lady on Vincent Browne the new JC has courses in dog grooming.

Hotale.com

Do teachers really get paid 9 months pay over 12 months?

Why do people give out about teachers so much? They do their job, what else do you expect??

bodice ripper

Cantremember wrote: »

According to a lady on Vincent Browne the new JC has courses in dog grooming.

Still a better love story than Transition Year.

doolox

I looked up qualifax and it sizes up like this:- For entry into teaching:

(c) They must have the following minimum grades in:

1) Gaeilge: Grade C3 on the Higher Level Paper

2) English: Grade D3 on the Higher Level Paper or Grade C3 on the Ordinary Level Paper

3) Mathematics : Grade D3 on the Higher or Ordinary Level Paper



....so a person with C3 in hons Irish, C3 in Ord English and D3 in Ord Maths could theoretically enter the profession.

There seems to be a linguistically discriminatory approach to our 2 official languages in that a lower std is required of English although English is the everyday language of over 95% of the citizens of this country. This is not the only case where native Anglophones are discriminated against in this flawed republic.
The standard required of Maths is also very low but bears comparison to the standard required for entry into many courses in Science etc where the necessary Maths standard is, hopefully, reached at 3rd level.

Pass Maths wouldn't get you into Engineering or Actuary courses but Honours Maths is probably not needed in teachers at National level. A case could be made for equal treatment and standards required of our 2 official languages, either by dropping the honours requirement for Gaeilge or increasing that for English. Parity of esteem for our 2 traditions indeed!!!

Cantremember

bodice ripper wrote: »

Still a better love story than Transition Year.

Yes. I see.

Belle E. Flops

Hotale.com wrote: »

Do teachers really get paid 9 months pay over 12 months?

Why do people give out about teachers so much? They do their job, what else do you expect??

Yes it is true.

I don't understand why teachers are the target all the time. I wouldn't dream of giving out about any other profession or job when I haven't actually worked in that area. I know what a nurse/guard/taxi driver/doctor/retail worker does but to claim to know how their jobs should be changed, or how much they should be paid etc is ridiculous. How can anyone be so ignorant?
It amazes me how many people think they are experts in education and act like it was teachers who broke this country.

I suppose it's just the popular opinion to hold.

Barely There

Belle E. Flops wrote: »

.


I don't understand why teachers are the target all the time. I wouldn't dream of giving out about any other profession or job when I haven't actually worked in that area. I know what a nurse/guard/taxi driver/doctor/retail worker does but to claim to know how their jobs should be changed, or how much they should be paid etc is ridiculous. How can anyone be so ignorant?

So by your logic teachers so decide their own pay?

Sorry Einstein, but as a taxpayer I'm entitled to an opinion as to what all public servants should be paid.

The teachers conference yesterday really showed these over-prvileged, over-protected little drama-queens up they behaved like spoilt brats throwing a tantrum. As with any spoilt brat, the best course of action is to ignore them and press ahead with much needed reform.

Barely There

Belle E. Flops wrote: »

.


I don't understand why teachers are the target all the time. I wouldn't dream of giving out about any other profession or job when I haven't actually worked in that area. I know what a nurse/guard/taxi driver/doctor/retail worker does but to claim to know how their jobs should be changed, or how much they should be paid etc is ridiculous. How can anyone be so ignorant?

So by your logic teachers should decide their own pay?

Sorry Einstein, but as a taxpayer I'm entitled to an opinion as to what all public servants should be paid.

The teachers conference yesterday really showed these over-prvileged, over-protected little drama-queens up they behaved like spoilt brats throwing a tantrum. As with any spoilt brat, the best course of action is to ignore them and press ahead with much needed reform.

newport2

Belle E. Flops wrote: »

Yes it is true.

I don't understand why teachers are the target all the time. I wouldn't dream of giving out about any other profession or job when I haven't actually worked in that area. I know what a nurse/guard/taxi driver/doctor/retail worker does but to claim to know how their jobs should be changed, or how much they should be paid etc is ridiculous. How can anyone be so ignorant?
It amazes me how many people think they are experts in education and act like it was teachers who broke this country.

I suppose it's just the popular opinion to hold.

I agree with what you are saying.

That said, while I had no problems with them in school, I find it hard to warm to teachers as a whole for the last decade or so. They do themselves no favours PR wise, the people who they choose to represent them come across as sanctimonious, full of entitlement and condescending on the news/radio, almost as if they're wagging their fingers at the general public like they were school children.

In general teachers are great people, who I think do a great job. But like every profession, people - subconsciously perhaps - are going to make generalist assumptions about you based on the people that represent you in the public eye and I think that's where some of their problem lies.

Belle E. Flops

Barely There wrote: »

So by your logic teachers should decide their own pay?

Sorry Einstein, but as a taxpayer I'm entitled to an opinion as to what all public servants should be paid.

The teachers conference yesterday really showed these over-prvileged, over-protected little drama-queens up they behaved like spoilt brats throwing a tantrum. As with any spoilt brat, the best course of action is to ignore them and press ahead with much needed reform.

Well you're an absolute treat. I never said anything about teachers deciding their own pay but don't let what I actually said get in the way of your own self-righteous, ignorant comment.

I'm out of here, this thread is going nowhere new. I'm going to enjoy the rest of my holidays.

ectoraige

bodice ripper wrote: »

And if they were teaching Honours Level Maths in primary school, you would have a point...

To be a good teacher in *anything* you need to have an intuitive understanding and flair for it. It seems perfectly reasonable to expect anybody wishing to teach the core English, Irish, and Maths subjects should have displayed such a competence by at least passing the honours level *school* curriculum. We're not looking for astrophysicists, we're looking for the people who didn't ask "why do we have to even do maths" in school.

Primary school teachers are jack-of-all-trades - if they don't display a wide range of competence in their own leaving cert, they shouldn't be aiming to teach at primary level.

If they are particularly good at particular subjects then they can do more for children by bringing that passion for a subject to secondary schools.

I have a lot of support for teachers, and have seen some fantastic teachers. I have also encountered a teacher whose main criticism of our son in junior infants was that he was "really interested in knowledge" and she didn't know why he would be.

Windorah

Another teacher thread???


-heaps of extra unnecessary paper
-no lunch breaks
-longer hours
-less pay
-no job security
-possibly minimal hours (if any!)
-zero respect for their profession

Seriously? Were ye expecting them to give him a bualadh Bos??

ectoraige

Daisies wrote: »

And to add to this a lot of people I know who did OL did so because to do well in HL maths requires work, a lot of additional time that they could dedicate to other subjects. These people would have been able for HL but getting a C on HL verus using the time to get an A in HL biology (for an example) meant more.

Isn't there a 25-point bonus for leaving cert honours maths? A C2 in both HL biology and HL maths would be worth 15 more points than an A2 in HL biology and an A2 in lower maths.

ectoraige

Bananatop wrote: »

I've an honours degree in Mathematics. I'm a primary school teacher. My Maths qualification doesn't help me teach maths to children, my teaching qualification, along with my experience, does. I have a huge interest in Maths, and I like to share my love of it with the children. But if I don't package the information in a way the children will enjoy and understand, I might as well be flinging faeces at them!

This is the core of the argument. That's the attitude that we hope the teachers of the next generations have in the classroom.

Like it or not, we use the leaving cert as a mechanism to determine where people's talents lie. It is a coarse tool, but it is the one that we have. It's not that we expect primary school teachers to teach what they learned on the honours leaving cert course; we expect people who have a love of the subject to have shown that love by taking it at honours level.

ectoraige

oak5548 wrote: »

So whats the general AH consensus?
I personally think its madness to have higher level maths requirement for primary school teachers.

For secondary school teachers, possibly yeah. But having a higher level requirement for primary would prevent so many people from becoming teachers, it would be downright unfair.

It may prevent some people from teaching it as a core subject at primary school level, true, but it wouldn't prevent them from being secondary teachers, or from other roles with younger children. If you want to argue for an interview-based tertiary education system, go ahead, but in the contect of the points system we have, requiring honours level in the core subjects is reasonable for teachers of the core subjects.

Inspector Coptoor

Quinn's real speech...

http://johnkilleagh.wordpress.com/2014/04/22/the-ministers-real-speech/

I Heart Internet

Giovanni Fresh Lifesaver wrote: »

Its complete nonsense suggesting that HL maths is in anyway required to teach the very basic maths required at primary school level.

All it does is needlessly exclude people from becoming primary school teachers who are not able to do HL maths or would need to neglect other subjects in order to pass it.

There is huge gulf between HL maths at leaving cert and primary level maths. Ordinary level maths at leaving cert is more than enough for someone to teach it to primary school children.

This is just a charter for mediocrity.

Sure they're only teaching little kiddies sums, they don't need to be good at maths at all. A pass in Junior Cert english is enough to teach reading too...

Iwasfrozen

I Heart Internet wrote: »

This is just a charter for mediocrity.

Sure they're only teaching little kiddies sums, they don't need to be good at maths at all. A pass in Junior Cert english is enough to teach reading too...

Passion for teaching children is a much more valuable skill for a primary school teacher than HL maths. The problem with this is it will exclude passionate teachers who may have only done ordinary maths.