That old rip on educators – “Those who cannot do, teach” – has always been bogus. Most teachers – at least, most of the ones I’ve known – went into the profession for one of two laudable, “do” reasons.
They loved education, or the “school experience,” and wanted to follow in the footsteps of a beloved teacher from their own upbringing. Or, they had fallen in love with their subject – math, English, history, science, art history, music theory, etc. – and wanted to spend their life sharing that passion with young people.
Teaching any of these subjects is emphatically a “do” kind of job. What more important work of history is there than to pass it along to the next generation? What greater service to the art of literature exists than to expose up and comers to the transcendent power of great story-telling? Maybe some would argue that writing research papers on the Spanish Armada or publishing a memoir are more proper ways of “doing” those subjects. But without an interested public, those pursuits cannot continue.
A scholar of history needs funding, which requires college students who pay tuition, alumni who donate, charitable contributions from the wealthy, and government policy that values her work. Good luck on that if most voting citizens never had teachers who brought those subjects alive within their hearts and minds. The same obviously applies to math, science, music, foreign language, drama, art, and so on.
Massachusetts Education Commissioner Mitchell Chester highlighted his state’s remarkable academic success, and attributed it to the insistence that all secondary teachers hold a master’s degree in their subject area.
. |
But I shirked a truth in my opening that ought to be acknowledged. There are some who go into teaching for more pragmatic reasons. The job security. The benefits. And sure, the summers “off.”
And a meaningful percentage of those educators graduate from college with a teaching degree.
I will clarify that I am not commenting here on elementary education. The work of K-5 teachers is simply astounding. There is never enough appreciation for the massive investment poured into an elementary classroom. And I think at that level, having a general understanding of and interest in the technical aspects of teaching are much more important than extensive, content-specific knowledge.
But for secondary teachers, is there an edge for students in the classroom of a highly-educated instructor as opposed to those with a teacher whose content knowledge is more limited?
According to some, the answer is an emphatic yes. At the 2014 Mayor of London education conference, several speakers offered their evidence for emphasizing an individual’s content expertise. Massachusetts Education Commissioner Mitchell Chester highlighted his state’s remarkable academic success, and attributed it to the insistence that all secondary teachers hold a master’s degree in their subject area.
And just to give an idea of how great an advantage Massachusetts students gain from this premium on instructor expertise, take a look at how their scores compare internationally to the U.S. general performance. On the Program for International Assessment (PISA), MA kiddos would rank 4th in reading, 7th in science, and 10th in math overall. The American average? A disappointing 17th, 20th, and 27th.
Of course, holding a PhD in advanced mathematics (or anything else) doesn’t translate into being a highly effective teacher. The qualities one must possess to achieve that distinction go far and away beyond simply being smart in one’s subject.
|
A similar story emerges from Finland. Unless a person plans on teaching preschool, they must acquire a master’s degree as well. Finnish students are Europe’s top PISA score holders.
Of course, holding a PhD in advanced mathematics (or anything else) doesn’t translate into being a highly effective teacher. The qualities one must possess to achieve that distinction go far and away beyond simply being smart in one’s subject.
But it seems worth considering how students who are exposed to someone genuinely engaged with a subject itself might experience a brighter kind of light in their classroom experience.
◊♦◊
I’ll close with a story from my own past. I wanted my students to think about something language-related. I honestly don’t remember what now. But in order to achieve this, I pulled the first page of Finnegan’s Wake, the incomprehensible tome that was James Joyce’s last “novel.”
There’s no way to follow the nonsense words and construction, but if you read it aloud, then you can’t help but sound Irish, and for some reason, this pertained to the lesson at hand.
One of my students approached me afterward about that book, and he ended up checking it out at the library. He later informed me that he’d read it, and while I’m not sure if his story is true, he did haul that laminated copy out of his backpack. So the library rental part was legit.
The only reason I know about that book is that I enrolled in more classes than I had to whilst getting my degree in literary studies, and in one of those “extra” courses, the young professor mentioned Finnegan’s Wake offhand, and I had to see for myself if book stores really carried such an unfathomable book.
I don’t have a PhD in anything (one day, that’s the hope!), but I do deeply love literature. And that meant one 14-year-old ended up with Finnegan’s Wake in his backpack.
Sometimes I wonder what good is a business, economic or accounting degree is with the way our CEOs have run their companies into the ground, can’t make good products, and have cause economic recessions/depressions since the beginning of time.