ATAR Notes: Forum
VCE Stuff => Victorian Education Discussion => Topic started by: TheAspiringDoc on January 25, 2015, 07:22:25 am
-
Are our teachers really qualified? Should they need to know their subject to this depth?
-
Yes, some of them probably could, but does it matter? Your own results aren't always indicative of teaching abilities.
I had some teachers who were very intelligent but could not explain anything to people who didn't have the same intellectual prowess as he did (so all of the class). As long as a teacher is easy to understand, answers your queries, explains the course thoroughly and concisely then yes, they are well qualified.
-
I can guarantee that some of my teachers would not have scored perfect 50s; however, I daresay that other teachers that I have had would more than likely go extremely close to Premier's Awards.
Regardless, as Shenz0r suggested, I would much prefer a '40 study score' teacher who taught well, rather than a '50 study score' teacher who did not.
-
I always love teachers who can explain things simply, breaking down any complexity and not being afraid to provide alternative explanations and examples that may be different from what's in the textbook :) I guess it's not just about whether your teachers can 'score a 50' per se, but also about how effectively they can communicate the content and skills that are required for you to score a 50 or 40+ or 45+.
I think with tutoring/teaching, you really need to keep remembering how you felt when you were learning the subject content (whether that was when you were a student doing VCE or when you were studying the related subject at university level) - it's super important to acknowledge that everything is not completely easy at first, and a topic that you might know like the back of your hand right now is something that your students may not understand right away (just as you did not grasp it immediately either!). So I think it's way better to have a teacher who takes heed of that and works towards that - it's something that most 50 SS achievers can do but that's not to say that a 35+ or 40+ achiever wouldn't have that same motivation and drive for his/her students as well! :)
-
Getting a 50 isn't all about knowledge and intelligence - you could be the best and brightest kid in all of Victoria, and still fail to get a 50 without the proper preparation. To get a 50, you can't just rely on knowledge of the subject and curriculum, you need to:
a) Work hard, and make sure you don't make lots of mistakes under pressure.
b) Be familiar with the common questions asked by VCAA.
c) Be lucky.
Whilst a and b can be side-stepped (a by being really fast and proofing your work 20093409820984309 times, and b by just being THAT good), c is another story. Someone who gets a 50 one year, may not get a 50 another year. Hell, the difference between most scores above 40 is a bit of luck depending on the day. Not to say people who score that highly didn't deserve it, but rather they could've easily scored higher or lower just based on the day/questions in the exam.
Looking for a teacher who knows EVERYTHING is stupid. A teacher that can do your exam for your is pointless if they can't teach. If, because of the teacher, you can understand the curriculum, and they have given you enough independent thinking ability to answer the questions you come across, then they've done their job spectacular. If they've done that, who honestly cares if the highest score they can get is a 50 or a 10?
-
There's a teacher at my old school who graduated with like a 50 ATAR and was a bartender for a little while until one day he up and decided to become a teacher. The students hang shit on him (jovially), but I'm pretty sure he's generated more 40+ scores in the past few years than any other teacher at our school. He's a very dedicated teacher and a lovely guy.
-
It's kind of like football coaches who might not be able to compete against other players on the field, yet are able to turn out some amazing players.
-
The best teachers are not always the ones who are naturally intelligent, but the ones who actually struggled and had to put in lots of effort to learn, and can then explain things to other people of similar intellect
-
Regardless, as Shenz0r suggested, I would much prefer a '40 study score' teacher who taught well, rather than a '50 study score' teacher who did not.
Definitely agree with this. I also agree that you can never guarantee a 50 study score - there is too much dependence on the one exam and anything can happen on the day.
Anyway, this is sort of relevant:
Going into Year 12 last year, I found out that my Physics teacher was brand new to teaching and just graduated from uni. Being the incredibly nosy and curious person I am, I found through Quppa that he achieved a low 40 in Physics back when he did it (too much spare time xD).
Did that mean anything? Not at all. I was aiming for a 50 myself in Physics but I didn't look back on what he achieved in Physics. I instead looked at what he could help me achieve in Physics. I can say that I learnt the most about Physics from him the entire year - not from a textbook or from the internet. He really helped me work on the theory which I was having a hard time getting my head around.
So maybe he wasn't the "50" student, but his communication skills and dedication to students I think was a key factor in helping him get "50" students.
Just my two cents. :D
-
Teachers don't have to remember stuff so they can just read shit out of a book and regurgitate it. None of my teachers would have had the aptitude for a 50 and I think out of my six teachers maybe one would get a 40.
Brighton Grammar I think is now the most expensive school in Melbourne which I went to and it is a complete shit hole with the worst teachers. They've got a new headmaster whose going to fire all the shit c*nts but they are stuck with them for a few more years.
Mod edit: touching up on the language :P
-
It doesn't matter whether or not they are capable of getting 50. Heck, when I did Methods I only got a 32 and yet I went on to major in maths at university and am going to study to become a maths teacher. Obviously you need to know your subject well but just because you know it well doesn't mean that you will be a good teacher. A good teacher is much more than that.
-
I added the last option to the poll (for anyone confused who voted early).
I don't think it's fair or relevant to judge a teacher on how they did in school simply because it was so long ago (people change over time etc.) and I personally think experience in the subject and the ability to deliver the subject content in a concise, logical, simple and engaging way, is far more important.
Similarly, I don't think the hypothetical scenario of how they would do in an exam setting is a relevant one. Their job is to teach content, not sit exams. Your job is sitting exams, and let's keep those roles clear ;)
-
Is it true that to get a 50 in anything, you need to be able to teach the subject to the teacher's level?? What I mean is to be able to know the content so well that you would be able to teach it to others?
-
Is it true that to get a 50 in anything, you need to be able to teach the subject to the teacher's level?? What I mean is to be able to know the content so well that you would be able to teach it to others?
I don't think that's a prerequisite - a lot depends on how lucky you get with the exam - but in many cases, it's probably a happy coincidence. And, as this thread suggests, knowing the content and being able to teach it well are two completely different concepts.
I wouldn't worry too much; knowing a course particularly well won't sound nearly as daunting by the end of the year. :)
-
I can guarantee that some of my teachers would not have scored perfect 50s; however, I daresay that other teachers that I have had would more than likely go extremely close to Premier's Awards.
Regardless, as Shenz0r suggested, I would much prefer a '40 study score' teacher who taught well, rather than a '50 study score' teacher who did not.
This is so true 8) My spesh teacher this year is sometimes clueless but is the funniest guy haha ;D
-
Our methods teachers failed year 12 the first time round
That being said she wasnt a very good teacher IMO ahaha
-
It doesn't matter how well the teacher did, it's how he/she can teach the content. Case in point, I doubt my bio teacher would have got above 35 when he did it, but 25-30% of the kids in our class got above 40 last year.
Edit: Besides, getting a 50 is in large due to luck. Obviously you have to know your stuff, but the difference between 47-50 is so small it can come down to markers discretion, the right questions being asked of you, and possibly even how you were feeling that day.
-
Well, obviously a teacher should be able to get a better mark than they did when they actually did the subject in year 12. And I believe that, as a rule, a teacher's competence and ability to score well in the subject will strongly impact their ability to teach. While the 47 vs 50 isn't important, someone with a 45 is likely to be a better teacher than someone with a 25. Obviously there are many exceptions and ability to teach isn't simply determined by knowledge/ability to sit the exam.
Besides, getting a 50 is in large due to luck. Obviously you have to know your stuff, but the difference between 47-50 is so small it can come down to markers discretion, the right questions being asked of you, and possibly even how you were feeling that day.
Eek, I hate people undermining the happy delusion in my mind that my 50 was nothing to do with a lucky exam :P
-
Eek, I hate people undermining the happy delusion in my mind that my 50 was nothing to do with a lucky exam :P
Ahaha I didn't mean it like that. Obviously anyone who gets a 50 (or a 45+ really) knows their stuff back-to-front (and back-to-front again!), but the differences between a 50 and a 47 are soooo small that it really comes down to a handful of marks, meaning that getting the right exam questions can mean the difference between a 47 and a 50.
Congrats on your scores btw!
-
I think those in VCE overestimate just how hard it is.
Looking back, it seems so much easier. Going to university and just generally giving your brain those extra years to develop is amazingly helpful. In addition to the fact that for most of the state, VCE is the first time they ever seriously studied or put effort into it. It's the first environment where they were expected to seriously learn and be meaningfully tested. All the other years you were more or less just expected to be present. Many here (not I) went to good schools or private schools where this isn't true but for the majority of the state, VCE is the very first time you do all of that. You develop study skills, organisational skills, etc all on the fly. Going back and doing it again would be far easier i feel.
I think most teachers have the potential to get 50 if they try. Keep in mind to teach it, you usually need a qualification in it. To teach math, you need a university level qualification in mathematics which goes *far, far* beyond VCE. Methods is trivial for people who hack it all the way through that. Similar for Chemistry. It holds true for a lot of subjects. Some are more difficult like "Biology" which combines like 5-10 different things you can become an expert in. Just by virtue of this most teachers would do rather well i think.