From: hari@NeoSoft.com (Doug Andersen)
Subject: Re: Good Teachers in Public Schools (Was Re: Clinton ... (was Re: Theft))
Organization: NeoSoft Communications Services -- (713) 684-5900
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1992 17:44:03 GMT

In article <21681@rpp386.lonestar.org>, jfh@rpp386.lonestar.org (John F. Haugh II) writes:
> Not to argue just for the sake of a arguing, but what exactly leads you
> to believe that teachers aren't a commodity item?  I mean, I know plenty
> of people who've become teachers with non-education backgrounds (though
> most of them teach at the college level).  Teaching is a basic skill.
> At others jobs moreso than my current, I've had to "teach" plenty of
> people about systems we were using, etc.  Many parents teach their
> children at home ("Home Schooling").  Others teach non-academic subjects
> or offer tutoring.
> 
 
That hardly proves that teaching is a commodity. Many people sell
things, but sales jobs are hardly a commodity.  In fact, just about
everyone has sold something at one time or another, either an idea or
themselves (for a job interview, or to convince someone to go out with
them).  
 
I've seen plenty of training classes and trainers in areas like Unix,
software development, etc and there is certainly a wide variation betweeen
the teachers I've seen.  I certainly had teachers in school who were
totally useless, and others who could really teach.
 
Teaching is a skill like any other.  I think that if we ever got rid of
the goverment monopoly on teaching we would see a lot of variation in
teacher salaries. 
 
> >I think your facts are a bit off.  Accountants out of college get paid
> >more than most non-technical degrees (i.e., everything except engineering
> >and computer science).  I was just looking at some numbers recently, and
> >at about 28K/year out of college, that puts them ahead of most business
 
> BA in accounting or CPA?  I'd like to know the source for that number
> since I find $28K for a BA in accounting to be kinda high.  I know
> people with experience and that degree who don't make that much.  Perhaps
> I could tell them where to get new jobs ;-)
 
Of course problem with those sorts of numbers is that they only include
the people who actually have jobs and who tend to be most attractive to
employers.  I suspect there are plenty of people who BA's in accounting
who are making a lot less because they job really doesn't require a BA
(they are working as a bookeeper or some sort of GL/AR clerk).
 
> 
> >I think there are plenty of engineers, however, who have a very good grasp
> >of science and mathematics who would do a much better job than your
> >average science/math teacher nowadays.
> 
> Sure, and teaching high school math and sciences doesn't require Statics,
> Mechanics, Dynamics, Analytic Geometry, Differential Equations, Nuclear
> Physics, Organic Chemistry, Developmental Physiology, etc. ...
> 
> Once you figure out how many courses high school teachers DON'T need,
> you'll find that the number of people who have taken courses or who have
> experience that they DO need is quite large.
> 
 
But you assume that we will always have this current low level of
achievement in our schools.  In many other countries secondary schools DO
teach differential equations, high-end calculus, physics, organic
chemistry, etc.  There is no doubt that the average high school student
who is planning to study engineering in college could handle a college
level differential equations course.  In fact, one of the biggest problems
with engineering right now is that there is too much material to teach in
four years.  If they could assume that all entering freshmen had calculus
and introductory diff q, they could spend more time teaching design.
-- 
Doug Andersen
hari@Sugar.NeoSoft.com