I would argue strongly that the ultimate goal in pursuing graduate education is not to leave the students in less capable hands but rather, ultimately, to be there for the students at the college level.

I say this as someone pursuing a graduate education in the History of Science while simultaneously seeking a full-time teaching position and subbing for nearly two years. If the school system continues to cut teacher jobs so vigorously that a highly qualified recent graduate like me ends up teaching as a graduate assistant before I ever get a high school classroom, that is their loss and no fault of my own.

I can’t argue with Johanna. I mean I’m only about to start my first year teaching but I’ve found over and over again the best teachers leaving to do other so called better things. Why are we not instead saying (as the best teachers) “No I will not leave my classroom. I became a teacher to help kids. THIS is the best job.”

We do need to keep good teachers in the classroom and I truly hope that Dan is planning a temporary absence, for all the reasons stated above.

As a math teacher educator, I’d like to believe that working with teachers can have a tremendous, albeit indirect, benefits for students. I’m a recent reader of dy/dan, but I can see that he has the potential to think big in terms of change at the secondary level. Spreading his personal version of mathematics enthusiasm and creativity to his generation of secondary math teachers is a very exciting prospect indeed.

My best examples from K-8 land are Marilyn Burns and Deborah Ball, who “sort of” left the classroom. BUT, the important part is that both continued to interact with kids continually as they worked on curricular and professional development with teachers. One year, Marilyn even arranged her traveling and other work schedule in order to partner with a classroom teacher to be THE math teacher for that one class. Deborah has also partnered with a nearby school to allow her regular teaching assignments. The work of both women has always been grounded in a “how does this work in the real classroom” component.

So, Dan, it’s an exciting opportunity to think of someone doing for secondary math what these two women have done for the K-8 classrooms. Best of luck and I hope that dy/dan will keep us upraised of the new developments.

First of all, I want to commend both Johanna and Dan for putting this out there. Brave on both parts. My initial reaction to hearing that Dan was “moving on” was similar–sadness and a bit of frustration–and that’s coming from someone who made the same choice two years ago.

I see Johanna’s point in her challenging the idea that leaving the classroom for a doctorate is laudable and how this is wrapped up in status, but I do think she’s making some assumptions. First of all, I would guess that Dan would get lots of “good lucks” for any change, and these may have less to do with him moving on to perceived greener pastures and more to do with the fact that change is scary and exciting and we as humans like giving and receiving reassurance.

Secondly, I really can’t say how much status has to do with Dan’s decision. For me, I will be completely honest and say that status definitely played a role in my decision to go to graduate school, specifically because someday I want to start a school and I just didn’t see this as feasible from a fundraising/charter writing perspective without having an advanced degree (now I know plenty of people have started charter schools without doctorates, but I’m interested in a relatively radical school environment). And I want to be a part of starting a school because I want the opportunity to teach in a way that I think is valuable and missing from the landscape. So Johanna, don’t write Dan off as permanently leaving the classroom and Dan, don’t write yourself off.

While Dan is probably the only person who really knows how much status played a role in his decision, the fact that getting a doctorate is a step up from being a classroom teacher is a problem with society, not Dan. While I agree that we need great teachers (ignoring the fact that calling/assuming Dan is a great teacher brings up status issues in and of itself), but we also need great curriculum writers and teacher educators.

I also think there could be room for people to be both classroom teachers and formal researchers (I think every classroom teacher is an informal researcher, trying new things out and evaluating their effectiveness). I’m not sure how well this role fits into the current paradigm of schools, though. I taught full-time last year while in my first year of an EdD program (a big part of why I chose an EdD program over a PhD program…ah, more status issues) and part-time this past year. Next year I’ll be returning to the classroom to teach full-time and conduct research in my own classroom for my dissertation. Finding a place to do this was EXTREMELY DIFFICULT. Granted, the economy is different, but my job offer to interview ratio was much higher when I was fresh out of college with no teaching experience 11 years ago looking for teaching jobs than this past year when I was job hunting with 11 years of experience and a master’s degree (status, status, status, status).

Anyway, I’m rambling so I’ll stop there.

Hey Dan and Everyone Else,

Big-G Gratitude on the insights and for rounding out the lines on this one. I can appreciate the points about mining the depths of your teaching practice and bringing those depths to some sort of fruition (or compost). (P.S. I hope it’s fruit, Dan.)

I wish your marriage to be like the one of Baucis and Philemon. All the best.

Johanna

For what it’s worth, I’ve been reading Dan’s blog for about a month and have an entire year’s worth of inspiration. I’ll be entering into my 9th year of teaching and hope Dan can continue to contribute. The one thing I think we’ll miss is his commentary on how things went in his class when he tried this or that. Oh, and Dan, thanks for being awesome!

@Johanna,

As Breedeen pointed out, I don’t think it’s necessarily more important for great teachers to be present at the college level than at any other point in a student’s career. I was simply indicating that leaving primary and secondary education with an eye towards teaching at the college level deprives students of nothing in the long run. Most doctoral students will teach classes – so many in fact that the use of ABDs as cheap labor has frequently been cited as a problem in higher education.

Moreover, there is nothing about having earned a PhD that prevents anyone from going back to teaching secondary or primary students. Would that every kindergarten teacher could be a developmental psychologist, every AP Physics teacher trained as an astronomer, and every math teacher a cryptographer.

If I have learned nothing else from two years in other peoples’ classrooms it is that students respond enthusiastically to expertise and a willingness to engage with them and the material.

“Moreover, there is nothing about having earned a PhD that prevents anyone from going back to teaching secondary or primary students.”

Sorry, Mickey. No go.

It is the exceptionally rare– near absent, I would say– educator who can return to the public classroom with a Ph.D. and have it be of use systemically and/or compensated adequately. In my district, there are no avenues in which a Ph.D. purchases you opportunities to put that in-depth training to use while still maintaining a teaching relationship with kids. It’s admin or nothing.

A Ph.D. simply placed back in a standard classroom role (provided they even hired you, as you would be a financial liability) does not even compensate fiscally; it nets you at most 10% (pre-tax, by the way) of what you paid to get the thing, with no other tuition reimbursement or paid leave.

Dan’s skill and purity of heart notwithstanding, and false dichotomies duly acknowledged, his move effectively means that he will never be a K-12 classroom teacher again. And he has stated himself numerous times over the years that if the profession were, indeed, *professional,* it would have delayed his departure.

The only response I have to that is grief.

I have sort of done Dan’s route. I taught math for 8 years then went back to school for the Math Ed masters. Taught math at the college level for 10 years then back to high school teaching. Then back for the PhD in Ed. I bagged out on the PhD after 1 year. What a waste of time. I was hoping to improve my teaching skills but the PhD consisted primarily of reading other peoples theories unsupported by real experience. When some some fancy research article that everybody claims is a seminal work was written by someone with 3 years of high school teaching experience, I begin to wonder. Teaching at the college level, for me, was terrible. I taugh intro math courses; PreCalc, Stats, etc. I really did not have time to teach. With 8 or 9 people teaching the same subject it was required we all be on the same schedule teaching the same topics. There is no time for real investigation by the students. I also taught the Elementary Math Methods course for prospective elementary teachers one year. And I thought high school students whine a lot. Of the 30 or so students in the class, maybe 5 wanted to be teachers, the others just wanted summers off. They simply did not understand the teaching was hard work with low pay and huge personal satisfaction. I am back in the high school classroom with too much work, no money and extremely happy.

Good luck Dan, you will be back.

As I think about your departure from the classroom, I find myself reflecting on my own departure to pursue doctoral studies. I taught secondary math for 8 years before leaving the classroom to work with teachers. I came across many individuals who felt like I was “abandoning” teaching. The popular comments were, “math education need teachers like yourself”or “what will happen to the students who really benefit from your teaching?” Knowing that I can reach more students by reaching more teachers, my question to others became “what about the teachers who could really benefit from my successful experiences as a classroom teacher?”

I’ve been out for a couple of years and I admit, there are times that I miss working with students. There are times working in administration was less fullfilling than teaching students. However, it was those moments when I had teachers recognize better ways to engage students in learning that made leaving the classroom all more purposeful.

Good luck in your studies and have you decided what your research focus will be yet!

Hah, this is good for me to read (I’m one year out of college) as my plan is to do a lot of other things first, then “retire” into classroom teaching when those other avenues have been exhausted.

Michelle, with no facetiousness intended– sounds like heaven. When you find a district that is willing to support such a professional, instead of a district that tells them (as Rafe Esquith so poignantly documented in his first book) that they can’t hire that person again once they’ve left, please let me know.

Also, “as long as you don’t mind the lack of income” is far too casual for this conversation, I’m afraid. It sounds worrisomely like the currently popular rhetoric of “real teachers shouldn’t care about money.” I’ll let the needs of my two growing children, aging widowed mother, and disabled brother speak as testimony against that statement.

This whole thread takes me back to a conversation with my late father-in-law. When I planned to marry his daughter he questioned me about my plans for the future. I was changing careers INTO teaching – 15 years later I’m still loving it, and I’m still frustrated that my sisters in law and brothers in law ALL earn BONUSES that are larger than my annual salary!

It frustrated me to realize during that conversation with my father in law … that in my chosen career … the only way to be considered as having ambition, in the eyes of someone in a “real profession” (law, medicine, engineering …) is to leave it and move on …….

I wish Dan the best … and will miss him. Although I just found him (via TED) He inspired and re-energized my outlook on my 9th grade conceptual physics course …

Good luck Dan … you will be missed … by more than just your future students ….

Tim

Standardized tests are far more than that. They are politically driven welfare for certain companies, especially ones that have made the proper contributions to the correct politicians. e.g. http://articles.mcall.com/2009-05-22/news/4377849_1_graduation-tests-social-studies-rendell-administration

It isn’t the PhD that gets the salary. PhD-level positions in universities often pay less than starting-level wages for teachers (look at the postdoc salaries sometime). Even university faculty with PhDs and 28 years of teaching and research experience in engineering make less than an assistant superintendent.

http://www.santacruzsentinel.com/ci_13493373
indicates that in Dan’s county, there are 23 administrators at County Office of Education making over $100k a year.
There are hundreds of full professors at UCSC making less than that http://www.santacruzsentinel.com/ci_13741287

The purpose of getting a PhD is to do research or to teach at a university. Only rarely will it get you an entrance any where else.