[dethtron5000]

>> At many universities (certainly my undergrad) the mean and median students in the Education department are weaker than students in other departments. Taking the weakest to bring out the best in our students seems very odd. There is some research that suggests teacher certification can actually be counterproductive. [1] If we were in the situation of Finland (teachers are in the top 10% of their class) then we would not need this type of intervention.

To the degree to which this is accurate,this flips the cause and effect. Finland, as a society, invests in its teachers and in teaching as a profession. In the US teaching isn't a terrifically paid job and isn't respected as a profession. If we invested more in teachers and teaching then we'd see those ratios start to change, maybe generationally. As it stands, though, teachers tend to get the brunt of the blame for "failing" schools - by both the right and the left politically now.

[mathattack]

My understanding of Finland isn't that teachers are paid more, it's that they are highly respected. (Similar to Singapore) They are in a positive cycle: Teachers are respected -> The elite want to become teachers -> Teachers are respectable.

We are in the converse of that: Teachers are not respected -> The bottom want to become teachers -> Teachers are not respectable.

I'm not putting all of the blame on teachers. Some part of the problem is individual teachers. Some is the stupidity of their unions. Some is poor administration. Some is society for not demanding more out of everyone involved in education.