Report: 50% maths teachers not qualified

Orlaladuck

Lol I found the answer to that question long ago.
When you're in class, it IS real life. Right there and right now and as you're using it to pass the LC, it has a purpose. Ta Daa!

Lawliet

doc_17 wrote: »

One huge problem I hear from stuents on a daily basis in maths class is "when are we ever gonna use this".

The people who use to say that annoyed me so much, I just felt like telling "It's doesn't matter if you never use it in real life, it's still coming up in that exam paper! So just STFU and learn it!"

Melanoma

Lawliet wrote: »

The people who use to say that annoyed me so much, I just felt like telling "It's doesn't matter if you never use it in real life, it's still coming up in that exam paper! So just STFU and learn it!"

I guess having given multiple answers to this question being a teacher I found a lot of students did not really care too much about the reasons. I think some just wanted to hear themselves talk and get notice. It is good to give some feedback but when teaching time is very limited so you cant just spend it going on about applications or you would not get enough done to set homework and you'd effectively loose a day of learning. I like going on about applications but I tell students bits when I plan to as part of a lesson and avoid being dragged into conversations that are designed to distract.

Some newer teaching strategies that use more talking and discussion might prevent students feeling the need to just ramble. They are really hard to adjust into what is an extremely crammed 35 minute class though. Internationally lessons are often for an hour and depending on the school lessons can vary from 4 per week to 6 per week.


You make a good point about it coming up on the exam paper and as I say if you never use maths again as such you will use the ability to logically work things out and I compare this to countries were education ends at say 12 and despite low labour costs companies will not go there as you have to hold everyone's hand to get anything done.

HowAreWe

well.....

my teacher was a nice person and all, but I found out towards the end of the year that she got a C in her own leaving cert. She also did maths through arts.

kinda scared me.

randylonghorn

HowAreWe wrote: »

well.....

my teacher was a nice person and all, but I found out towards the end of the year that she got a C in her own leaving cert. She also did maths through arts.

kinda scared me.

The Maths through Arts bit though is normally pretty irrelevant, in fact sometimes someone who has taken a two-subject BA in Maths and X will have taken more Maths modules than someone who has taken Maths as part of a BSc.

The real question is: could she teach it? Did her students do well?

Also, bear in mind that the fact that someone has studied something to a very high level may not be any better at teaching it ... or sometimes worse in fact if they find it difficult to come down to the students' level. Someone who might have struggled a bit at times themselves in the past will often be more patient with students, and have more understanding of what's tripping them up.

HowAreWe

randylonghorn wrote: »

The Maths through Arts bit though is normally pretty irrelevant, in fact sometimes someone who has taken a two-subject BA in Maths and X will have taken more Maths modules than someone who has taken Maths as part of a BSc.

The real question is: could she teach it? Did her students do well?

Also, bear in mind that the fact that someone has studied something to a very high level may not be any better at teaching it ... or sometimes worse in fact if they find it difficult to come down to the students' level. Someone who might have struggled a bit at times themselves in the past will often be more patient with students, and have more understanding of what's tripping them up.

Ah, I guess I never saw it that way for the ''Maths through Arts''.


For your question however the answer is undoubtedly no, she simply couldn't control the class. She'd spend so much time trying to get the messers to stop that the rest of us would just start chatting.

She never checked homework which IMO is crucial for any subject but even more so for Maths, even just from time to time otherwise....people will start to take advantage. I mean you could get away with it for say an English or a History essay once in a while, but Maths, you'll just fall behind so quickly IMO anyway. Obviously there are those geniuses out there who never do their homework or study for Maths and just find it easy, fair enough but I don't, I really had to work my ass of for maths as it probably was my worst subject.

So maybe a bit more ''efficiency'' from the teacher in her job would have been nice. Revise Wise is what taught me, not my teacher. I feel awful for criticizing her because she is/was such a nice person but to go back to the point yes she was qualified, but not cut out for the job (maybe down to lack of experience? this was a young enough teacher now)

Ah well...

Killian In The Name Of

My Maths teacher was excellent, only problem was I'm hopeless at maths.

rainbowtrout

HowAreWe wrote: »

Ah, I guess I never saw it that way for the ''Maths through Arts''.


For your question however the answer is undoubtedly no, she simply couldn't control the class. She'd spend so much time trying to get the messers to stop that the rest of us would just start chatting.

She never checked homework which IMO is crucial for any subject but even more so for Maths, even just from time to time otherwise....people will start to take advantage. I mean you could get away with it for say an English or a History essay once in a while, but Maths, you'll just fall behind so quickly IMO anyway. Obviously there are those geniuses out there who never do their homework or study for Maths and just find it easy, fair enough but I don't, I really had to work my ass of for maths as it probably was my worst subject.

So maybe a bit more ''efficiency'' from the teacher in her job would have been nice. Revise Wise is what taught me, not my teacher. I feel awful for criticizing her because she is/was such a nice person but to go back to the point yes she was qualified, but not cut out for the job (maybe down to lack of experience? this was a young enough teacher now)

Ah well...

That's not a lack of mathematical ability, that's a lack of teaching ability/classroom management skills.... two very different things.

Also you mention that she got a C in Leaving Cert maths. That means absolutely nothing in the general scheme of things.

The subject I teach now I didn't do for my LC, but I did as part of my degree and when my LC students ask me how I got on in it and I tell them I didn't do it for LC, they are shocked and then ask me how I can possibly teach it for LC. There is a strange belief in many LC students that you must have done the subject for LC and this supercedes any degree you have in the subject.

Orange juice

I have the best maths teacher ever! Through all of secondary teaching i'v had 5 maths teachers!
My LC maths teacher was the best of them all and the funny thing is... He's not even a qualified maths teacher! I have no doubt that it was him who got me my A in honours maths!!

Canard

Now that I think of it, my JC HL teacher wasn't qualified. Still got me from a D to a B, though again, it was the JC hahaha. Definitely was one of the best teachers I've ever had and knew it inside out, went to Brendan Guildea's course in Trinity shortly before the LC and my old teacher would give him a run for his money! :P

leaveiton

My maths teacher was fully qualified, yet she was a terrible teacher. Not just from a teaching point of view (controlling the class, correcting homework etc) but she was also not very good at maths (made mistakes in every class, and not always just little things like -3 x -3 = -9). Whereas I got grinds from my sister's fiance, a chemical engineer with no maths or teaching qualifications, and he was fantastic at explaining things and at actually doing the required maths. So being "qualified" doesn't necessarily mean anything.

HowAreWe

rainbowtrout wrote: »

That's not a lack of mathematical ability, that's a lack of teaching ability/classroom management skills.... two very different things.

Also you mention that she got a C in Leaving Cert maths. That means absolutely nothing in the general scheme of things.

The subject I teach now I didn't do for my LC, but I did as part of my degree and when my LC students ask me how I got on in it and I tell them I didn't do it for LC, they are shocked and then ask me how I can possibly teach it for LC. There is a strange belief in many LC students that you must have done the subject for LC and this super-cedes any degree you have in the subject.

Actually, I didn't mention that it was a lack of mathematical ability.

Now that you mention it though, she did make mistakes quite often and students would point it out, sometimes she couldn't even remember how to do a certain thing and would ask could anyone remember the procedure/method.

I know very well you don't need to have done the subject for your own LC to teach it, my own Economics teacher didn't do it for her LC and was the best teacher I've ever had. I don't really get why you're pointing this out. There's a difference between Maths and Economics ( this is just an example, I don't know what you're teaching). You do maths from the very beginning, you don't suddenly become good at maths, you're either good at it or you're not.

Theoretically let's say someone didn't sit maths for their LC, could they become a maths teacher?

Not a chance. They wouldn't be good enough.

So if she got a C back then, even after her degree she certainly wouldn't get an A now. So why should she be allowed teach it? I know you're going to tell me ''well she got her exams at college level..." Yes that's all very well, but she still makes mistakes and can't control a class. Not good enough.

That's all I'm saying.

Canard

Yeah I have to say I agree with HowAreWe. My maths teacher had gotten a B, but he did it in TCD and was a great teacher who really knew his stuff.
I'd say fair enough to your teacher with her C but if she can't remember her stuff a lot of the time, that's pretty...bad, for something as important as maths. No one's perfect but there's nothing more frustrating than knowing your teacher couldn't get an A if they were to do the exam themselves.

randylonghorn

Orange juice wrote: »

I have the best maths teacher ever! Through all of secondary teaching i'v had 5 maths teachers!
My LC maths teacher was the best of them all and the funny thing is... He's not even a qualified maths teacher! I have no doubt that it was him who got me my A in honours maths!!

Yep, had a teacher for JC Science whose degree was in Geography (which has a strong scientific element, sure, but isn't really what we would normally think of as a science) and he was just terrific ... could explain everything simply and without confusing us. His classes always had excellent results. Had a teacher too with an Hons degree in Irish, and a Masters, and she was completely fluent ... lovely to hear her speak Irish. Couldn't teach for nuts, though, and her classes generally did quite poorly.

HowAreWe wrote: »

Theoretically let's say someone didn't sit maths for their LC, could they become a maths teacher?

Well, everyone sits maths at LC ...

HowAreWe wrote: »

So if she got a C back then, even after her degree she certainly wouldn't get an A now. So why should she be allowed teach it? I know you're going to tell me ''well she got her exams at college level..." Yes that's all very well, but she still makes mistakes and can't control a class. Not good enough.

That's all I'm saying.

I think the point RB is making is that the issues you outline don't really have anything to do with whether she got a C at LC or an A, and I would agree tbh.

I have to admit I roll my eyes when people go on about "50% maths teachers not qualified".

Firstly, they're (for this purpose) defining "qualified" narrowly.

Secondly, as a number of people have pointed out in one way or another, "qualified" according to their specs is not necessarily equal to a good teacher of maths.

You yourself are talking about someone who IS qualified, yet not a great teacher of the subject. Others (including myself) are giving instances of people who weren't specifically qualified in a subject, yet could teach it extremely well.

Thing is, there are several things involved in being a good teacher of a subject, including particularly:
(a) knowledge of the subject, obviously, and preferably a recognised qualification in it
(b) ability to teach / communicate / explain clearly
(c) classroom management skills.

This survey only looks at (a) and at the second part of it at that: the formal qualification. And fair enough, it's the easiest bit to measure.

But it's far from being the full story ... as your own input is proving!

dropinthocean

dunno if this quesiton was answered already, but what do you actually mean by qualified?

If you mean that you must have done an undergrad in maths, and then a H. Dip, then you'll find that some of the best maths teachers in Ireland aren't qualified having not fulfilled the latter. (I believe one of the H.L. maths teachers in the Institute has a maths degree, without a H. Dip)

randylonghorn

dropinthocean wrote: »

dunno if this quesiton was answered already, but what do you actually mean by qualified?

If you mean that you must have done an undergrad in maths, and then a H. Dip, then you'll find that some of the best maths teachers in Ireland aren't qualified having not fulfilled the latter. (I believe one of the H.L. maths teachers in the Institute has a maths degree, without a H. Dip)

Thread started in February 2010, so I'm finding it difficult to find a link to the original survey, but my memory is that they were defining it quite narrowly, and throwing up their hands in horror at the fact that people were teaching Maths with degrees which would have had a pretty high maths component but weren't in "pure" maths per se. Most I think would have had the HDE or equivalent; that didn't seem to be the bit they were concentrating on.

Personally I think that improving training / providing CPD in how to teach maths better would be a more useful step ... I have a feeling that there's a bigger problem there in many cases tbh.

But again, we're back to the easy soundbites ...

Sucette!

randylonghorn wrote: »

Thread started in February 2010, so I'm finding it difficult to find a link to the original survey, but my memory is that they were defining it quite narrowly, and throwing up their hands in horror at the fact that people were teaching Maths with degrees which would have had a pretty high maths component but weren't in "pure" maths per se. Most I think would have had the HDE or equivalent; that didn't seem to be the bit they were concentrating on.

Personally I think that improving training / providing CPD in how to teach maths better would be a more useful step ... I have a feeling that there's a bigger problem there in many cases tbh.

But again, we're back to the easy soundbites ...

When this report came out first, it came up as a topic in our HL maths class, Our teacher who is a really good teacher, is quite old and has been in the school for simply years, told us that he under this report is not qualified to teach maths.

He explained the reason is because he teaches Business aswell and he did a Business and Maths degree in college (25-30 years ago now) and because it was joint he doesnt quailify to be a maths teacher. And thinking about it no teacher in the school JUST teaches maths, its Maths and Science, Maths and Business or Maths and Irish, so technically as far as my understanding goes no teacher is 'qualified' to the reports standerd.

But wouldnt a teacher who can teach maths AND something else not be more likely to get a job than someone who soley teaches maths? because they would be more usefull? thats just my thinking on it anyway!

rainbowtrout

Sucette! wrote: »

When this report came out first, it came up as a topic in our HL maths class, Our teacher who is a really good teacher, is quite old and has been in the school for simply years, told us that he under this report is not qualified to teach maths.

He explained the reason is because he teaches Business aswell and he did a Business and Maths degree in college (25-30 years ago now) and because it was joint he doesnt quailify to be a maths teacher. And thinking about it no teacher in the school JUST teaches maths, its Maths and Science, Maths and Business or Maths and Irish, so technically as far as my understanding goes no teacher is 'qualified' to the reports standerd.

But wouldnt a teacher who can teach maths AND something else not be more likely to get a job than someone who soley teaches maths? because they would be more usefull? thats just my thinking on it anyway!

It's not that simple. Your teacher probably has a business degree where he did maths in say in the first two years of the degree. A substantial amount but not enough to be officially qualified to teach maths.

You can do an Arts or Science degree in two subjects, e.g. History and Maths (Arts) or Physics and Maths (Science) and be qualified to teach both, as the degree would be 50% of each and the Teaching Council requirement is that at least 30% of your degree is in that subject for you to be qualified to teach it.

That's the simplified form, so it's not true to say that the Science/Maths, Irish/Maths, Business/Maths teachers in your school are not qualified, some of them might be and some might not based on what their original degrees were in.

It's also possible (and I have done this myself) that teachers have upskilled and done a second degree at night or done the relevant modules necessary to become qualified in maths (or any other subject). Obviously because they don't tell you about their personal lives you would not be aware of this fact.

Sucette!

rainbowtrout wrote: »

It's not that simple. Your teacher probably has a business degree where he did maths in say in the first two years of the degree. A substantial amount but not enough to be officially qualified to teach maths.

You can do an Arts or Science degree in two subjects, e.g. History and Maths (Arts) or Physics and Maths (Science) and be qualified to teach both, as the degree would be 50% of each and the Teaching Council requirement is that at least 30% of your degree is in that subject for you to be qualified to teach it.

That's the simplified form, so it's not true to say that the Science/Maths, Irish/Maths, Business/Maths teachers in your school are not qualified, some of them might be and some might not based on what their original degrees were in.

It's also possible (and I have done this myself) that teachers have upskilled and done a second degree at night or done the relevant modules necessary to become qualified in maths (or any other subject). Obviously because they don't tell you about their personal lives you would not be aware of this fact.

Thank you for explaining it, I understand it much better now!