My aide will be last year's teacher!

Join Teachers.Net

Chatboards

Recent Groups

Private School

MEMBERS

3 Members

+ Join Group

Pinned Posts

ALLAll Teachers

Teachers.Net LIVE CHAT Support group - Tues eve!

Featured Jobs

Full-timeMontessori Teacher

Maple Ridge, British Columbia, Canada

TemporaryTeachers, rural schools

Peace River North School District

Full-timeHead Teacher: 2nd/3rd Grades – Mills College Children’s School

Mills College

Teaching Jobs on Teachers.Net

Featured Job special only $39!

https://teachers.net/jobs

Become a Teachers.Net sponsor!

Private School Teachers Chatboard

My aide will be last year's teacher!

by new teacher

Jun 3, 2009

I just got hired to teach at a private school. I'm currently working towards my teaching certificate and this is my first time teaching. At this school, you have 3 to earn your certificate while you teach. My aide will be last year's teacher!! She's been there for 10 years, teaching for 3. She didn't get certified for some reason or another and is stepping down as the aid. I've been warned by another aide that she has no intention of stepping down and will run this classroom like it's her own. What should I do? I just don't want her to make my first year teaching unbearable because the only one's that will suffer are the children.

Comment

(17)

report post

view previous comments

An art cert Certified Teach speaks the truth - few understand it and too few have the courage to say what she's said. Public school teaching is an industry and the certification process is a part of it. Of course, there are those who get something valid out of courses taken and that's ideal. But here in my state at least, every college and university is free t...See MoreCertified Teach speaks the truth - few understand it and too few have the courage to say what she's said. Public school teaching is an industry and the certification process is a part of it. Of course, there are those who get something valid out of courses taken and that's ideal. But here in my state at least, every college and university is free to establish its own certification program - and there's something ideal in that freedom I suppose. But what common body of knowledge is there then? None. So the point of certification is....? If its more than a hoop to be jumped through than the point is that one get an education which is what non-certified teachers have as well. I regret that developmental psychology isn't uniformly required but my common sense tells me that even if it were that doesn't mean everyone learns it or remembers it or would utilize it in their teaching and we'd still have 1st graders doing 'research reports'.

Textbooks are written with the state of Texas in mind because they buy more than any other state so the litmus test for textbooks is - will it play in Texas? The NEA and AFT have nothing to do with children or their well-being but have Tremendous control over their daily experience in school and the taxpayer's dollar. Children neither vote nor pay taxes so the voice of the largest consumer of public education is a silent one.

I celebrate any inroad into the industry that could make it less of one - any alternative pathway that might bring some innovation or throw some light into the corners. Alt cert programs are just fine with me and non-cert hires the same - I've met some pretty bad teachers who were fully certified.

I'd like to see schools using surveys to examine themselves and their faculty. I'd like to see each school have a Parents' Council that participates in forming policy and determining practice and hiring but with that I've gone off on a tangent.

> I did attend an ivy-league school, and that is where I learned in > a fantastic teacher education program not to be fooled: public > education has evolved into a huge industry with lots of people, > publishers, companies, etc relying on the public education system > for their incomes at it's heart. If it were all about the kids > there would be no union, lobbyists, etc. > > > On 8/19/09, Ooii wrote: >> True, there are good teachers who are not certified. Just >> like there are good pastors who have not gone to >> seminary. And good artists who haven't gone to art >> school. But I think that the purpose of teacher >> certification goes far beyond "supporting a great >> business." (Was the person who wrote that article burned >> by a bad teacher's ed program or something?) >> >> Here are some of the things I got out of my education >> program: >> >> -A chance to observe and practice numerous teaching >> methods in a variety of school settings, including inner- >> city schools, suburban schools, an expeditionary school, >> and a head-start type program. >> >> -A chance to interact with collegues from many different >> school backgrounds. This lead to an extensive, on-going >> exchange of ideas. >> >> -The opportunity to learn a variety of methods for >> teaching reading, writing, and math. If students are not >> successful with one method, I am able to try a different >> one. >> >> -Methods for recognizing common special needs and >> accomodating students with those needs in my classroom, as >> well as where to find resources to support the families of >> the students. >> >> -At the end of my certification program, I was given the >> opportunity for a mock interview with a retired principal, >> and then critiqued and offered suggestions. The college >> also offered me on-going job search support in their post- >> grad office. >> >> I did not go to an expensive ivy-league college. I went >> to the cheapest four-year college in my state. >> >> Sure, people can be great teachers without the >> certification. And I don't think someone should be hired >> just because they have the certification. >> >> But teacher education can add some great tools to >> someone's teaching. >> >> >> >> On 7/14/09, certifiedteach wrote: >>> Why Certification? >>> 1. A government requirement for people who desire to >>> teach in government operated public schools receiving >>> government monies. They realized they could make money >>> on people wanting those jobs. >>> >>> 2. To standardize the way education is provided in >>> government funded schools by setting the standards so >>> all students would receive a similar education. >>> >>> 3. Because the powers that be determined certification >>> would be the way to guarantee that teachers have the >>> minimal skills required, and that would be enough to >>> teach in public schools. >>> >>> 4. To support a great business: colleges make money >>> preparing the teachers, the states make money granting >>> certifications, teachers get jobs and support teachers >>> unions, etc. It's all about business at the core. >>> >>> 5. A better question: If the top, elite, boarding and >>> private schools in the country do not require a teacher >>> to be state certified, but instead rely on the >>> scholarship and practices of the individuals teaching, >>> and in turn those students go on to some of the most >>> elite colleges and universities in the country/world, >>> why do we think teachers need state certification >>> saying only that they have the minimal skills necessary >>> to teach the kids that can't afford elite schools and >>> have to be educated in public schools? If uncertified >>> teachers have the results they do at so many incredible >>> schools, they MUST be doing a LOT right (and I am >>> talking from K through high school here!) Luckily, the >>> government does not have the monopoly on education, and >>> therefore, private schools can set even higher >>> standards than just certification to get teaching jobs. >>> Hard to really admit, yes. Basically true, yes. Why >>> don't more people realize this; because we have all >>> been taught to think the way the government wants us to >>> to support the business of education in this country. >>> If certification is so crucial to true teaching, why >>> don't college professors have to be certified? Think >>> about it! >>> >>> >>> On 7/14/09, e payton wrote: >>>> >>>> Then why do we need certification? e payotn >>>> >>>> >>>> On 7/06/09, certifiedteach wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> On 7/06/09, scary wrote: >>>>>> Yikes! Two uncertified teachers in one classroom! >>>>>> Do any of you think that the shrinking >>>>>> enrollments have anything to do with this sort of >>>>>> practice? I would not send my child into a >>>>>> classroom with unqualified personnel... >>>>> >>>>> Why do you assume uncertified teachers will not be >>>>> talented or do a fantastic job? I hold 2 >>>>> certifications, yet I realize that plenty of very >>>>> talented individuals can be outstanding teachers >>>>> without certification. Think of college professors >>>>> - I had fantastic ones, yet they didn't go to >>>>> school to "get certified" to teach - they >>>>> shared their knowledge and skills and therefore >>>>> were teachers. Certified teachers are not the only >>>>> ones who have intelligence, knowledge, and a gift >>>>> for teaching and working with students! Get over >>>>> that old idea! I would rather have my children >>>>> taught by a skilled, talented, enthusiastic >>>>> uncertified teacher versus a mediocre certified one >>>>> any day!

Aug 21, 2009

report post

I am certified AND teach in a Catholic School I am bothered by a couple comments here. First, it sounds as though private schools do not hold the same standards for hiring qualified, certified teachers. This is not true in my situation. The diocese I work for requires ALL teachers to be certified to teach before they are hired. It isn't a "take a class now and in three months after your teachi...See MoreI am bothered by a couple comments here. First, it sounds as though private schools do not hold the same standards for hiring qualified, certified teachers. This is not true in my situation. The diocese I work for requires ALL teachers to be certified to teach before they are hired. It isn't a "take a class now and in three months after your teaching job begins and you get certified, you're "good to go". No, we MUST be licensed first. So, please don't paint a broad brush by giving the impression that ALL private schools don't require licensure. Mine does.

Secondly, not all certifications ensure the teacher is a great teacher. Teaching is 90% interaction and 10% content teaching. A "certified teacher" could know everything in the world they need to know about a specific subject, but if they can't relay that information to students, get them to understand and apply it to their lives, then they are NOT teaching. I work with a teacher who is certified, but for the last four years hasn't done a damn bit of "teaching" because she doesn't engage or understand the students, the parents dislike her, and she basically sets them on a book and tells them to take notes, answer questions and take a quiz. Oh, this is a SCIENCE class. NO labs, no experiments, no NOTHING. Yet somehow the state has deemed her 'certified'.

Lastly, college professors DO have their "certifications" so to speak, in the form of Master's degrees or Ph.D.s, It's just called a degree, but it qualifies them as being able to work with adults (big difference - licensure and certification means working with children). Also, anyone with a law degree can work in a university, because the JD is basically a Ph.D., without the Masters to bridge. I have a girlfriend who was a JD and became a college professor, but then had to go BACK and get her Masters.

On 8/20/09, certifiedteach wrote: > You did not read carefully. I never wrote that teacher education > or the study of education is not beneficial. What I wrote is that > "certification" as a teacher is not necessary to be a fantastic > teacher. There is a difference. Plenty of people study the field > of education but do not pursue certification after they are done > studying. Some become teachers, and some go on to work in the > field of education beyond the classroom. > I did attend an ivy-league school, and that is where I learned in > a fantastic teacher education program not to be fooled: public > education has evolved into a huge industry with lots of people, > publishers, companies, etc relying on the public education system > for their incomes at it's heart. If it were all about the kids > there would be no union, lobbyists, etc. > > > On 8/19/09, Ooii wrote: >> True, there are good teachers who are not certified. Just >> like there are good pastors who have not gone to >> seminary. And good artists who haven't gone to art >> school. But I think that the purpose of teacher >> certification goes far beyond "supporting a great >> business." (Was the person who wrote that article burned >> by a bad teacher's ed program or something?) >> >> Here are some of the things I got out of my education >> program: >> >> -A chance to observe and practice numerous teaching >> methods in a variety of school settings, including inner- >> city schools, suburban schools, an expeditionary school, >> and a head-start type program. >> >> -A chance to interact with collegues from many different >> school backgrounds. This lead to an extensive, on-going >> exchange of ideas. >> >> -The opportunity to learn a variety of methods for >> teaching reading, writing, and math. If students are not >> successful with one method, I am able to try a different >> one. >> >> -Methods for recognizing common special needs and >> accomodating students with those needs in my classroom, as >> well as where to find resources to support the families of >> the students. >> >> -At the end of my certification program, I was given the >> opportunity for a mock interview with a retired principal, >> and then critiqued and offered suggestions. The college >> also offered me on-going job search support in their post- >> grad office. >> >> I did not go to an expensive ivy-league college. I went >> to the cheapest four-year college in my state. >> >> Sure, people can be great teachers without the >> certification. And I don't think someone should be hired >> just because they have the certification. >> >> But teacher education can add some great tools to >> someone's teaching. >> >> >> >> On 7/14/09, certifiedteach wrote: >>> Why Certification? >>> 1. A government requirement for people who desire to >>> teach in government operated public schools receiving >>> government monies. They realized they could make money >>> on people wanting those jobs. >>> >>> 2. To standardize the way education is provided in >>> government funded schools by setting the standards so >>> all students would receive a similar education. >>> >>> 3. Because the powers that be determined certification >>> would be the way to guarantee that teachers have the >>> minimal skills required, and that would be enough to >>> teach in public schools. >>> >>> 4. To support a great business: colleges make money >>> preparing the teachers, the states make money granting >>> certifications, teachers get jobs and support teachers >>> unions, etc. It's all about business at the core. >>> >>> 5. A better question: If the top, elite, boarding and >>> private schools in the country do not require a teacher >>> to be state certified, but instead rely on the >>> scholarship and practices of the individuals teaching, >>> and in turn those students go on to some of the most >>> elite colleges and universities in the country/world, >>> why do we think teachers need state certification >>> saying only that they have the minimal skills necessary >>> to teach the kids that can't afford elite schools and >>> have to be educated in public schools? If uncertified >>> teachers have the results they do at so many incredible >>> schools, they MUST be doing a LOT right (and I am >>> talking from K through high school here!) Luckily, the >>> government does not have the monopoly on education, and >>> therefore, private schools can set even higher >>> standards than just certification to get teaching jobs. >>> Hard to really admit, yes. Basically true, yes. Why >>> don't more people realize this; because we have all >>> been taught to think the way the government wants us to >>> to support the business of education in this country. >>> If certification is so crucial to true teaching, why >>> don't college professors have to be certified? Think >>> about it! >>> >>> >>> On 7/14/09, e payton wrote: >>>> >>>> Then why do we need certification? e payotn >>>> >>>> >>>> On 7/06/09, certifiedteach wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> On 7/06/09, scary wrote: >>>>>> Yikes! Two uncertified teachers in one classroom! >>>>>> Do any of you think that the shrinking >>>>>> enrollments have anything to do with this sort of >>>>>> practice? I would not send my child into a >>>>>> classroom with unqualified personnel... >>>>> >>>>> Why do you assume uncertified teachers will not be >>>>> talented or do a fantastic job? I hold 2 >>>>> certifications, yet I realize that plenty of very >>>>> talented individuals can be outstanding teachers >>>>> without certification. Think of college professors >>>>> - I had fantastic ones, yet they didn't go to >>>>> school to "get certified" to teach - they >>>>> shared their knowledge and skills and therefore >>>>> were teachers. Certified teachers are not the only >>>>> ones who have intelligence, knowledge, and a gift >>>>> for teaching and working with students! Get over >>>>> that old idea! I would rather have my children >>>>> taught by a skilled, talented, enthusiastic >>>>> uncertified teacher versus a mediocre certified one >>>>> any day!

Aug 11, 2012

report post

MaryAnn I'm wondering what you have to know about the Catholic religion to teach in a Catholic school. I would love to teach in any private school but, aside from daily prayers, is there much teaching of religion? I am Catholic but don't feel qualified to teach religion - any religion - to kids. Do I have a shot of landing a job in a parochial school with ...See MoreI'm wondering what you have to know about the Catholic religion to teach in a Catholic school. I would love to teach in any private school but, aside from daily prayers, is there much teaching of religion? I am Catholic but don't feel qualified to teach religion - any religion - to kids. Do I have a shot of landing a job in a parochial school with this dismal lack of "religion skills"?

8/11/12, I am certified AND teach in a Catholic School wrote: > I am bothered by a couple comments here. First, it sounds as though > private schools do not hold the same standards for hiring qualified, > certified teachers. This is not true in my situation. The diocese I > work for requires ALL teachers to be certified to teach before they > are hired. It isn't a "take a class now and in three months after > your teaching job begins and you get certified, you're "good to go". > No, we MUST be licensed first. So, please don't paint a broad brush > by giving the impression that ALL private schools don't require > licensure. Mine does. > > Secondly, not all certifications ensure the teacher is a great > teacher. Teaching is 90% interaction and 10% content teaching. A > "certified teacher" could know everything in the world they need to > know about a specific subject, but if they can't relay that > information to students, get them to understand and apply it to > their lives, then they are NOT teaching. I work with a teacher who > is certified, but for the last four years hasn't done a damn bit of > "teaching" because she doesn't engage or understand the students, > the parents dislike her, and she basically sets them on a book and > tells them to take notes, answer questions and take a quiz. Oh, this > is a SCIENCE class. NO labs, no experiments, no NOTHING. Yet somehow > the state has deemed her 'certified'. > > Lastly, college professors DO have their "certifications" so to > speak, in the form of Master's degrees or Ph.D.s, It's just called a > degree, but it qualifies them as being able to work with adults (big > difference - licensure and certification means working with > children). Also, anyone with a law degree can work in a university, > because the JD is basically a Ph.D., without the Masters to bridge. > I have a girlfriend who was a JD and became a college professor, but > then had to go BACK and get her Masters. > > On 8/20/09, certifiedteach wrote: >> You did not read carefully. I never wrote that teacher education >> or the study of education is not beneficial. What I wrote is that >> "certification" as a teacher is not necessary to be a fantastic >> teacher. There is a difference. Plenty of people study the field >> of education but do not pursue certification after they are done >> studying. Some become teachers, and some go on to work in the >> field of education beyond the classroom. >> I did attend an ivy-league school, and that is where I learned in >> a fantastic teacher education program not to be fooled: public >> education has evolved into a huge industry with lots of people, >> publishers, companies, etc relying on the public education system >> for their incomes at it's heart. If it were all about the kids >> there would be no union, lobbyists, etc. >> >> >> On 8/19/09, Ooii wrote: >>> True, there are good teachers who are not certified. Just >>> like there are good pastors who have not gone to >>> seminary. And good artists who haven't gone to art >>> school. But I think that the purpose of teacher >>> certification goes far beyond "supporting a great >>> business." (Was the person who wrote that article burned >>> by a bad teacher's ed program or something?) >>> >>> Here are some of the things I got out of my education >>> program: >>> >>> -A chance to observe and practice numerous teaching >>> methods in a variety of school settings, including inner- >>> city schools, suburban schools, an expeditionary school, >>> and a head-start type program. >>> >>> -A chance to interact with collegues from many different >>> school backgrounds. This lead to an extensive, on-going >>> exchange of ideas. >>> >>> -The opportunity to learn a variety of methods for >>> teaching reading, writing, and math. If students are not >>> successful with one method, I am able to try a different >>> one. >>> >>> -Methods for recognizing common special needs and >>> accomodating students with those needs in my classroom, as >>> well as where to find resources to support the families of >>> the students. >>> >>> -At the end of my certification program, I was given the >>> opportunity for a mock interview with a retired principal, >>> and then critiqued and offered suggestions. The college >>> also offered me on-going job search support in their post- >>> grad office. >>> >>> I did not go to an expensive ivy-league college. I went >>> to the cheapest four-year college in my state. >>> >>> Sure, people can be great teachers without the >>> certification. And I don't think someone should be hired >>> just because they have the certification. >>> >>> But teacher education can add some great tools to >>> someone's teaching. >>> >>> >>> >>> On 7/14/09, certifiedteach wrote: >>>> Why Certification? >>>> 1. A government requirement for people who desire to >>>> teach in government operated public schools receiving >>>> government monies. They realized they could make money >>>> on people wanting those jobs. >>>> >>>> 2. To standardize the way education is provided in >>>> government funded schools by setting the standards so >>>> all students would receive a similar education. >>>> >>>> 3. Because the powers that be determined certification >>>> would be the way to guarantee that teachers have the >>>> minimal skills required, and that would be enough to >>>> teach in public schools. >>>> >>>> 4. To support a great business: colleges make money >>>> preparing the teachers, the states make money granting >>>> certifications, teachers get jobs and support teachers >>>> unions, etc. It's all about business at the core. >>>> >>>> 5. A better question: If the top, elite, boarding and >>>> private schools in the country do not require a teacher >>>> to be state certified, but instead rely on the >>>> scholarship and practices of the individuals teaching, >>>> and in turn those students go on to some of the most >>>> elite colleges and universities in the country/world, >>>> why do we think teachers need state certification >>>> saying only that they have the minimal skills necessary >>>> to teach the kids that can't afford elite schools and >>>> have to be educated in public schools? If uncertified >>>> teachers have the results they do at so many incredible >>>> schools, they MUST be doing a LOT right (and I am >>>> talking from K through high school here!) Luckily, the >>>> government does not have the monopoly on education, and >>>> therefore, private schools can set even higher >>>> standards than just certification to get teaching jobs. >>>> Hard to really admit, yes. Basically true, yes. Why >>>> don't more people realize this; because we have all >>>> been taught to think the way the government wants us to >>>> to support the business of education in this country. >>>> If certification is so crucial to true teaching, why >>>> don't college professors have to be certified? Think >>>> about it! >>>> >>>> >>>> On 7/14/09, e payton wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Then why do we need certification? e payotn >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On 7/06/09, certifiedteach wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> On 7/06/09, scary wrote: >>>>>>> Yikes! Two uncertified teachers in one classroom! >>>>>>> Do any of you think that the shrinking >>>>>>> enrollments have anything to do with this sort of >>>>>>> practice? I would not send my child into a >>>>>>> classroom with unqualified personnel... >>>>>> >>>>>> Why do you assume uncertified teachers will not be >>>>>> talented or do a fantastic job? I hold 2 >>>>>> certifications, yet I realize that plenty of very >>>>>> talented individuals can be outstanding teachers >>>>>> without certification. Think of college professors >>>>>> - I had fantastic ones, yet they didn't go to >>>>>> school to "get certified" to teach - they >>>>>> shared their knowledge and skills and therefore >>>>>> were teachers. Certified teachers are not the only >>>>>> ones who have intelligence, knowledge, and a gift >>>>>> for teaching and working with students! Get over >>>>>> that old idea! I would rather have my children >>>>>> taught by a skilled, talented, enthusiastic >>>>>> uncertified teacher versus a mediocre certified one >>>>>> any day!

Aug 11, 2012

report post

Zodea I think it depends on your grade level and where you teach.

I'm not Catholic and I teach in a Catholic School. I teach science, not religion.

If you taught in an elementary school, I think it would be more difficult. We say prayers in my class and I go to Mass with my homeroom students. It's really not a big deal. There are only a...See MoreI think it depends on your grade level and where you teach.

I'm not Catholic and I teach in a Catholic School. I teach science, not religion.

If you taught in an elementary school, I think it would be more difficult. We say prayers in my class and I go to Mass with my homeroom students. It's really not a big deal. There are only a few major differences between Catholics and Protestant. I know which areas are "hot topics" and try to avoid them. (Not always easy with high school students.)

BTW - I am licensed and certified to teach all my classes. Actually that may be why the keep me... I have a physics certification ;-)

Zodea

On 8/11/12, MaryAnn wrote: > I'm wondering what you have to know about the Catholic religion to > teach in a Catholic school. I would love to teach in any private > school but, aside from daily prayers, is there much teaching of > religion? I am Catholic but don't feel qualified to teach religion - > any religion - to kids. Do I have a shot of landing a job in a > parochial school with this dismal lack of "religion skills"? > > 8/11/12, I am certified AND teach in a Catholic School wrote: >> I am bothered by a couple comments here. First, it sounds as though >> private schools do not hold the same standards for hiring qualified, >> certified teachers. This is not true in my situation. The diocese I >> work for requires ALL teachers to be certified to teach before they >> are hired. It isn't a "take a class now and in three months after >> your teaching job begins and you get certified, you're "good to go". >> No, we MUST be licensed first. So, please don't paint a broad brush >> by giving the impression that ALL private schools don't require >> licensure. Mine does. >> >> Secondly, not all certifications ensure the teacher is a great >> teacher. Teaching is 90% interaction and 10% content teaching. A >> "certified teacher" could know everything in the world they need to >> know about a specific subject, but if they can't relay that >> information to students, get them to understand and apply it to >> their lives, then they are NOT teaching. I work with a teacher who >> is certified, but for the last four years hasn't done a damn bit of >> "teaching" because she doesn't engage or understand the students, >> the parents dislike her, and she basically sets them on a book and >> tells them to take notes, answer questions and take a quiz. Oh, this >> is a SCIENCE class. NO labs, no experiments, no NOTHING. Yet somehow >> the state has deemed her 'certified'. >> >> Lastly, college professors DO have their "certifications" so to >> speak, in the form of Master's degrees or Ph.D.s, It's just called a >> degree, but it qualifies them as being able to work with adults (big >> difference - licensure and certification means working with >> children). Also, anyone with a law degree can work in a university, >> because the JD is basically a Ph.D., without the Masters to bridge. >> I have a girlfriend who was a JD and became a college professor, but >> then had to go BACK and get her Masters. >> >> On 8/20/09, certifiedteach wrote: >>> You did not read carefully. I never wrote that teacher education >>> or the study of education is not beneficial. What I wrote is that >>> "certification" as a teacher is not necessary to be a fantastic >>> teacher. There is a difference. Plenty of people study the field >>> of education but do not pursue certification after they are done >>> studying. Some become teachers, and some go on to work in the >>> field of education beyond the classroom. >>> I did attend an ivy-league school, and that is where I learned in >>> a fantastic teacher education program not to be fooled: public >>> education has evolved into a huge industry with lots of people, >>> publishers, companies, etc relying on the public education system >>> for their incomes at it's heart. If it were all about the kids >>> there would be no union, lobbyists, etc. >>> >>> >>> On 8/19/09, Ooii wrote: >>>> True, there are good teachers who are not certified. Just >>>> like there are good pastors who have not gone to >>>> seminary. And good artists who haven't gone to art >>>> school. But I think that the purpose of teacher >>>> certification goes far beyond "supporting a great >>>> business." (Was the person who wrote that article burned >>>> by a bad teacher's ed program or something?) >>>> >>>> Here are some of the things I got out of my education >>>> program: >>>> >>>> -A chance to observe and practice numerous teaching >>>> methods in a variety of school settings, including inner- >>>> city schools, suburban schools, an expeditionary school, >>>> and a head-start type program. >>>> >>>> -A chance to interact with collegues from many different >>>> school backgrounds. This lead to an extensive, on-going >>>> exchange of ideas. >>>> >>>> -The opportunity to learn a variety of methods for >>>> teaching reading, writing, and math. If students are not >>>> successful with one method, I am able to try a different >>>> one. >>>> >>>> -Methods for recognizing common special needs and >>>> accomodating students with those needs in my classroom, as >>>> well as where to find resources to support the families of >>>> the students. >>>> >>>> -At the end of my certification program, I was given the >>>> opportunity for a mock interview with a retired principal, >>>> and then critiqued and offered suggestions. The college >>>> also offered me on-going job search support in their post- >>>> grad office. >>>> >>>> I did not go to an expensive ivy-league college. I went >>>> to the cheapest four-year college in my state. >>>> >>>> Sure, people can be great teachers without the >>>> certification. And I don't think someone should be hired >>>> just because they have the certification. >>>> >>>> But teacher education can add some great tools to >>>> someone's teaching. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On 7/14/09, certifiedteach wrote: >>>>> Why Certification? >>>>> 1. A government requirement for people who desire to >>>>> teach in government operated public schools receiving >>>>> government monies. They realized they could make money >>>>> on people wanting those jobs. >>>>> >>>>> 2. To standardize the way education is provided in >>>>> government funded schools by setting the standards so >>>>> all students would receive a similar education. >>>>> >>>>> 3. Because the powers that be determined certification >>>>> would be the way to guarantee that teachers have the >>>>> minimal skills required, and that would be enough to >>>>> teach in public schools. >>>>> >>>>> 4. To support a great business: colleges make money >>>>> preparing the teachers, the states make money granting >>>>> certifications, teachers get jobs and support teachers >>>>> unions, etc. It's all about business at the core. >>>>> >>>>> 5. A better question: If the top, elite, boarding and >>>>> private schools in the country do not require a teacher >>>>> to be state certified, but instead rely on the >>>>> scholarship and practices of the individuals teaching, >>>>> and in turn those students go on to some of the most >>>>> elite colleges and universities in the country/world, >>>>> why do we think teachers need state certification >>>>> saying only that they have the minimal skills necessary >>>>> to teach the kids that can't afford elite schools and >>>>> have to be educated in public schools? If uncertified >>>>> teachers have the results they do at so many incredible >>>>> schools, they MUST be doing a LOT right (and I am >>>>> talking from K through high school here!) Luckily, the >>>>> government does not have the monopoly on education, and >>>>> therefore, private schools can set even higher >>>>> standards than just certification to get teaching jobs. >>>>> Hard to really admit, yes. Basically true, yes. Why >>>>> don't more people realize this; because we have all >>>>> been taught to think the way the government wants us to >>>>> to support the business of education in this country. >>>>> If certification is so crucial to true teaching, why >>>>> don't college professors have to be certified? Think >>>>> about it! >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On 7/14/09, e payton wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Then why do we need certification? e payotn >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On 7/06/09, certifiedteach wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> On 7/06/09, scary wrote: >>>>>>>> Yikes! Two uncertified teachers in one classroom! >>>>>>>> Do any of you think that the shrinking >>>>>>>> enrollments have anything to do with this sort of >>>>>>>> practice? I would not send my child into a >>>>>>>> classroom with unqualified personnel... >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Why do you assume uncertified teachers will not be >>>>>>> talented or do a fantastic job? I hold 2 >>>>>>> certifications, yet I realize that plenty of very >>>>>>> talented individuals can be outstanding teachers >>>>>>> without certification. Think of college professors >>>>>>> - I had fantastic ones, yet they didn't go to >>>>>>> school to "get certified" to teach - they >>>>>>> shared their knowledge and skills and therefore >>>>>>> were teachers. Certified teachers are not the only >>>>>>> ones who have intelligence, knowledge, and a gift >>>>>>> for teaching and working with students! Get over >>>>>>> that old idea! I would rather have my children >>>>>>> taught by a skilled, talented, enthusiastic >>>>>>> uncertified teacher versus a mediocre certified one >>>>>>> any day!

Aug 11, 2012

report post

To Mary Ann I am Catholic, but not very well schooled in religion. I had to take a basic religious education course (paid for by the diocese I work in) and will have to get advanced religious education courses by a certain time frame. Up until this year, I did not have to teach religion classes. This year, I will. The basic religion classes are what "qualifies...See MoreI am Catholic, but not very well schooled in religion. I had to take a basic religious education course (paid for by the diocese I work in) and will have to get advanced religious education courses by a certain time frame. Up until this year, I did not have to teach religion classes. This year, I will. The basic religion classes are what "qualifies" me to teach religion at this time, but they really want me to get more (and I agree).

The dioceses are fairly strict about that, but they also understand that most teachers these days don't include religion in their education.

Besides, any good quality teacher can teach a subject, as long as the content is given to them.

Go for it!

On 8/11/12, MaryAnn wrote: > I'm wondering what you have to know about the Catholic religion to > teach in a Catholic school. I would love to teach in any private > school but, aside from daily prayers, is there much teaching of > religion? I am Catholic but don't feel qualified to teach religion - > any religion - to kids. Do I have a shot of landing a job in a > parochial school with this dismal lack of "religion skills"? > > 8/11/12, I am certified AND teach in a Catholic School wrote: >> I am bothered by a couple comments here. First, it sounds as though >> private schools do not hold the same standards for hiring qualified, >> certified teachers. This is not true in my situation. The diocese I >> work for requires ALL teachers to be certified to teach before they >> are hired. It isn't a "take a class now and in three months after >> your teaching job begins and you get certified, you're "good to go". >> No, we MUST be licensed first. So, please don't paint a broad brush >> by giving the impression that ALL private schools don't require >> licensure. Mine does. >> >> Secondly, not all certifications ensure the teacher is a great >> teacher. Teaching is 90% interaction and 10% content teaching. A >> "certified teacher" could know everything in the world they need to >> know about a specific subject, but if they can't relay that >> information to students, get them to understand and apply it to >> their lives, then they are NOT teaching. I work with a teacher who >> is certified, but for the last four years hasn't done a damn bit of >> "teaching" because she doesn't engage or understand the students, >> the parents dislike her, and she basically sets them on a book and >> tells them to take notes, answer questions and take a quiz. Oh, this >> is a SCIENCE class. NO labs, no experiments, no NOTHING. Yet somehow >> the state has deemed her 'certified'. >> >> Lastly, college professors DO have their "certifications" so to >> speak, in the form of Master's degrees or Ph.D.s, It's just called a >> degree, but it qualifies them as being able to work with adults (big >> difference - licensure and certification means working with >> children). Also, anyone with a law degree can work in a university, >> because the JD is basically a Ph.D., without the Masters to bridge. >> I have a girlfriend who was a JD and became a college professor, but >> then had to go BACK and get her Masters. >> >> On 8/20/09, certifiedteach wrote: >>> You did not read carefully. I never wrote that teacher education >>> or the study of education is not beneficial. What I wrote is that >>> "certification" as a teacher is not necessary to be a fantastic >>> teacher. There is a difference. Plenty of people study the field >>> of education but do not pursue certification after they are done >>> studying. Some become teachers, and some go on to work in the >>> field of education beyond the classroom. >>> I did attend an ivy-league school, and that is where I learned in >>> a fantastic teacher education program not to be fooled: public >>> education has evolved into a huge industry with lots of people, >>> publishers, companies, etc relying on the public education system >>> for their incomes at it's heart. If it were all about the kids >>> there would be no union, lobbyists, etc. >>> >>> >>> On 8/19/09, Ooii wrote: >>>> True, there are good teachers who are not certified. Just >>>> like there are good pastors who have not gone to >>>> seminary. And good artists who haven't gone to art >>>> school. But I think that the purpose of teacher >>>> certification goes far beyond "supporting a great >>>> business." (Was the person who wrote that article burned >>>> by a bad teacher's ed program or something?) >>>> >>>> Here are some of the things I got out of my education >>>> program: >>>> >>>> -A chance to observe and practice numerous teaching >>>> methods in a variety of school settings, including inner- >>>> city schools, suburban schools, an expeditionary school, >>>> and a head-start type program. >>>> >>>> -A chance to interact with collegues from many different >>>> school backgrounds. This lead to an extensive, on-going >>>> exchange of ideas. >>>> >>>> -The opportunity to learn a variety of methods for >>>> teaching reading, writing, and math. If students are not >>>> successful with one method, I am able to try a different >>>> one. >>>> >>>> -Methods for recognizing common special needs and >>>> accomodating students with those needs in my classroom, as >>>> well as where to find resources to support the families of >>>> the students. >>>> >>>> -At the end of my certification program, I was given the >>>> opportunity for a mock interview with a retired principal, >>>> and then critiqued and offered suggestions. The college >>>> also offered me on-going job search support in their post- >>>> grad office. >>>> >>>> I did not go to an expensive ivy-league college. I went >>>> to the cheapest four-year college in my state. >>>> >>>> Sure, people can be great teachers without the >>>> certification. And I don't think someone should be hired >>>> just because they have the certification. >>>> >>>> But teacher education can add some great tools to >>>> someone's teaching. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On 7/14/09, certifiedteach wrote: >>>>> Why Certification? >>>>> 1. A government requirement for people who desire to >>>>> teach in government operated public schools receiving >>>>> government monies. They realized they could make money >>>>> on people wanting those jobs. >>>>> >>>>> 2. To standardize the way education is provided in >>>>> government funded schools by setting the standards so >>>>> all students would receive a similar education. >>>>> >>>>> 3. Because the powers that be determined certification >>>>> would be the way to guarantee that teachers have the >>>>> minimal skills required, and that would be enough to >>>>> teach in public schools. >>>>> >>>>> 4. To support a great business: colleges make money >>>>> preparing the teachers, the states make money granting >>>>> certifications, teachers get jobs and support teachers >>>>> unions, etc. It's all about business at the core. >>>>> >>>>> 5. A better question: If the top, elite, boarding and >>>>> private schools in the country do not require a teacher >>>>> to be state certified, but instead rely on the >>>>> scholarship and practices of the individuals teaching, >>>>> and in turn those students go on to some of the most >>>>> elite colleges and universities in the country/world, >>>>> why do we think teachers need state certification >>>>> saying only that they have the minimal skills necessary >>>>> to teach the kids that can't afford elite schools and >>>>> have to be educated in public schools? If uncertified >>>>> teachers have the results they do at so many incredible >>>>> schools, they MUST be doing a LOT right (and I am >>>>> talking from K through high school here!) Luckily, the >>>>> government does not have the monopoly on education, and >>>>> therefore, private schools can set even higher >>>>> standards than just certification to get teaching jobs. >>>>> Hard to really admit, yes. Basically true, yes. Why >>>>> don't more people realize this; because we have all >>>>> been taught to think the way the government wants us to >>>>> to support the business of education in this country. >>>>> If certification is so crucial to true teaching, why >>>>> don't college professors have to be certified? Think >>>>> about it! >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On 7/14/09, e payton wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Then why do we need certification? e payotn >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On 7/06/09, certifiedteach wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> On 7/06/09, scary wrote: >>>>>>>> Yikes! Two uncertified teachers in one classroom! >>>>>>>> Do any of you think that the shrinking >>>>>>>> enrollments have anything to do with this sort of >>>>>>>> practice? I would not send my child into a >>>>>>>> classroom with unqualified personnel... >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Why do you assume uncertified teachers will not be >>>>>>> talented or do a fantastic job? I hold 2 >>>>>>> certifications, yet I realize that plenty of very >>>>>>> talented individuals can be outstanding teachers >>>>>>> without certification. Think of college professors >>>>>>> - I had fantastic ones, yet they didn't go to >>>>>>> school to "get certified" to teach - they >>>>>>> shared their knowledge and skills and therefore >>>>>>> were teachers. Certified teachers are not the only >>>>>>> ones who have intelligence, knowledge, and a gift >>>>>>> for teaching and working with students! Get over >>>>>>> that old idea! I would rather have my children >>>>>>> taught by a skilled, talented, enthusiastic >>>>>>> uncertified teacher versus a mediocre certified one >>>>>>> any day!

Aug 12, 2012

report post