Sorry to cost you $20, Dan, but I think your list is pretty darn good. I especially liked “pop culture scholar” and “savvy organizationalist.” I think if more teachers took an interest (or pretended to take an interest!) in what kids are into these days, it would be an eye-opening experience to say the least.

As a former math teacher who DOES see the beauty in an indefinite integral, your Calculus analogy is quite insightful.

Thanks and have a great week!

— Scott

Wow, calculus is about staring at slices? Why didn’t anyone ever tell me? The whole trajectory of my life might have been different.

Anyway, I know I’m too late to cost you 20, but I’ll add imperturbable emergency responder thanks to today’s gun-related school shut down (still unverified whether a gun has actually been recovered)–the third this year.

I’m not sure I’ll ever master the savvy organizationalist, but feel I’ve made some strides this year as a graphic designer. Earlier this year, one of students called me hyphy, as the rest of the class nodded vigorously. I had to call my 22-year-old son, for guidance on that one. As long as I can get him quickly on the phone, I can somewhat feign the pop culture scholar thing.

I’m sharing this with my student teacher tomorrow morning. We’ll read it together. This is the stuff!

P.S. I’m hoping the pink slip is of the supremely annoying we will pink slip you in March and bring you back in the summer variety.

I grew up in Florida. The ocean is overrated. You need to take up skiing in a state where you can still afford to buy a house…

;-)

Dude. Philadelphia.

Our budget sucks. The murder rate is up. But SLA is a place where you will love the arguments you bring up.

Dan, don’t get this comment wrong. You all may well be right trying to get Dan to move. He’s an exceptional writer. But what seems curious is that nobody seems to be interested in his math credentials? That’s what he’s supposed to teach, right?

e — fortunately, I’ve had a few very long conversations about teaching and math and such… Let’s just say that if those were his interviews, I feel pretty confident in his ability to add a great deal to the SLA staff.

Dan, I don’t quite know what to make of your “pink slip” comment. Everyone so far seems to be taking it at face value, but when I try to do that, I’m only coming up with “WTF” (voiced loudly). I can only wish that my own children will have teachers as focused as you are at asking “what must I do to teach better?”

I’ve been lurking here for only about a month. This is only my second comment. But the lucidity of your posts have made your site a daily of dose of insight for me, and they are largely responsible for pushing me off the fence post on which I’ve been resting while decided if I should try teaching secondary math. Last week, I submitted my paperwork to join my state’s Alternative Route to Licensure program using my 20-year-old electrical engineering degree.

Please tell me this hiccup has more to do with your caustic attempts to unseat the status quo, and not with your abilities (and promise!) in the classroom. Otherwise, I’ll face my own “Career Crisis #1” before I even get a temporary credential.

Dude, I know if I were you I’d be majorly depressed. Just know this middle aged math geek looks up to you as the kind of person I want to become.

–Stephen

I concur with D when he says, “But whatever good I am as a teacher comes in large part from this personality trait that, though strengthened by UC Davis Teacher Ed, wasn’t built there.” I would also venture to say that what D knows and is able to do in terms of math content wasn’t built there, either. If we are completely honest, many of us would admit thay we did not receive much of an education via our respective Schools of Ed. Even the nationally-recognized Schools of Ed.

Dig it: Teaching is a profession largely developed on OJT (On the Job Training). And, many times, it draws on the resources – personal and financial – of the teacher him/herself to build, develop and maintain. This is unlike law or medicine, where the education time is spent developing a foundation on which to build. Schools of Ed, on the other hand, have failed miserably in this regard.

Why? Unlike schools of law and medicine, which are built on a common core of knowlege, and which doesn’t differ too much from state-to-state, or, from country to country, for that matter, Schools of Ed develop courses and theories and practices per the research whims of the faculty member. If we can put men and women on the moon, one would think that we could devise a common core of knowledge for teachers which is comparable to law and medicine in academic rigor and effectiveness. And, yes: I do believe that the training of teachers can and should be to a level which is comparable to that of legal and medical training. Once a person leaves the training, iti s up to him/her what he/she does with it. After all, like teachers, there are excellent doctors and lawyers, and mediocre doctors and lawyers.

Perhaps the most effective credentialing course in which I was enrolled was taught by an middle school principal. It was a course on classroom management. Actually, the course focused little on discipline, but more on what makes an effective teacher in terms of lesson planning, organization, taking care of oneself outside of the classroom, and dealing with parents.

Teachers don’t need Schools of Ed. They need a solid theoretical and pragmatic foundation in their content area(s). Then they need education courses which actually train them to become effective teachers. I think if we examine the base of knowledge used to educate and train doctors and lawyers, we may get some ideas which will help us to raise the level of attainment in the professional education and training of teachers. And, as far as discipline is concerned, I suggest that we bring in a group of old-school grandmothers. I’m actually not kidding here. We have certainly lost our way with respect to home training, which is why things have fallen apart at school, and reinforced by faulty School of Ed. theories. But, as they say, that’s another discussion.

BTW: As cool a flyguy as D is, I, too, want to return the discussion to its original intent. :) So, I’m with H on this one.

What both Dan and Miss Profe seem to agree on is that a strong autodidactic streak is a great asset, maybe a necessity, in a teacher. Dan furthermore breaks down the autodidactic inclination into particular approaches to movies, speeches, and the like – in neat accordance with his overall theme of breaking down the complex into possibly replicable parts.

This reminds me that I once planned to read “An inquiry into Autodidacticism” by Joan Solomon, in order to see whether it contained any wisdom about how to teach (or design learning experiences that might prompt) students to become self-motivated and self-directed learners. (Checking the reference again I realize that the reason why I never acquired the book was probably that it is heinously expensive.) Anyway, while there seems to be something pretty paradoxical about teaching anyone autodidacticism, it seems that’s what ed schools should be trying to develop in teacher candidates, and what we should develop in ourselves, of course. And here we have some particulars about how to go about it. Please keep it coming.

I’d still be interested in a recommendation for a good text in adolescent psychology.

H, it seems to me that what you are talking about is teaching someone how to fish, which comes from teaching kids how to learn – metacognition. It also means teaching kids how to construct knowledge – constructivism. Of course, in order for kids to change how they learn, teachers would need to change how they teach.

And, H, thank you for rescuing the point I was trying to make :).I knew that there was something valuable in my long commentary.