[john_strinlai]

>The average starving PhD would be a much better and more knowledgeable teacher to high school students in the subject she took her PhD in

i dont think this is true.

there is an art to educating (especially the ~10-15 year old range) that does not just manifest itself because you are smart: how to engage students, how to keep them engaged, how to adjust the message to the audience's level and communicate it effectively (which changes kid to kid), how to earn a kids respect without becoming over-bearing (or too friendly), and dozens of other things that your PhD in compsci or whatever does not teach you.

some of the smartest PhD holders i know would be very shitty elementary/high school teachers.

(context: i teach at the college level. its a lot easier than teaching at the high school level.)

[mold_aid]

Yeah there's some truth to this - I find that my Ed students don't always have sophisticated understandings of their content area (though honestly I find that ENGR and BIOL students don't, either). But they do get more content area teaching than in ED.

ED as a field is 100% all-in on AI, too, so there's a lot of discussion amongst them about what skills in the field need to be automated and what has to stay artisanal. But I'm sympathetic to zozbot's claims too - I do think the reading scores would be higher if there were more comp/rhet specialists in sec. ed.

[zozbot234]

~10-13 mostly comprises the junior high range. By the time the kids are 14, they're plenty old enough to benefit from a "college-prep" educational approach. Sure, some PhDs will be better, others will be worse. But you solve that by throwing out terrible teachers and rewarding the best ones. There's no guarantee that an Education-credentialed teacher with negligible education in the actual subject they're supposed to teach would be any better.

[mlyle]

I'm retired from engineering. I did startups / exited / joined difficult technical domains for the funsies / etc.

I have taught 5 years at a private school. I do not have a teaching credential.

Knowing the stuff you're teaching is the easiest part. And I say that despite teaching in an environment with far better behavior, student buy-in, family support, and academic accomplishment than most places.

I thought that when I launched a student team doing spacecraft design (selected for orbital flight on the basis of the quality of their mission, btw, not their age) that the hard part would be teaching kids about power budgets, radiation aging, and the thermal environment.

Turns out the hard part is helping them figure out how to navigate the social dynamics of talking to each other, organizing their work, realizing what other people know, and coping emotionally with setbacks. Kids will teach themselves the stuff if you have buy-in and the culture in the room is right.

[RyanOD]

Yes to this! What makes a great teacher is the willingness to hold kids accountable for their behavior and their work. Sure, it helps to be a subject expert, but that won't matter if you can't manage your classroom.

And parents play an equally important role. One of the best things you can do for your child's education/life is support the teacher when they call you up and say, "Your child is making poor decisions..."

[Amezarak]

> Sure, it helps to be a subject expert, but that won't matter if you can't manage your classroom.

I've known plenty of highly credentialed teachers that were very poor communicators and/or could not manage their classroom. I think the idea that this can be, or is, effectively taught as part of the "education major" is very suspect.

Indeed, the worst-performing school districts are precisely those where "classroom management" is a serious problem, versus better districts where the children come to school ready to be managed. It seems older styles of classroom management now out of vogue and untaught by universities were more effective.

[RyanOD]

My first year of teaching high school mathematics was nearly a disaster. Managing my classroom was a nightmare. Fortunately, we had winter break which gave me an opportunity to step back and reflect honestly on why and I realized I was making a number of mistakes so I made some necessary adjustments and things went much better thereafter. I firmly believe the first year of teaching is when many teachers either rise up or give up.

Regarding managing kids...every school I've worked at (or my wife has worked at) has a mix of kids who are ready to learn and who need to be taught to learn. That includes districts in more wealthy areas and less wealthy areas.

In fact, my wife would tell you the students who cause the most problems in her classroom are from more affluent families. Why? Because they have entitled parents who don't hold their kids accountable and don't support the teacher.