When you need your car fixed, do you ask the repairman which scientifically valid studies he bases his methods on? Scientists study things and advise on new methods (that often turn out to be worthless). Front line workers do the work they are paid for. But when the repairman says "I think that's your gear box", it often turns out to be true. And yes, a teacher is a professional. Teaching is a profession, and probably one the topmost important in Our society. If one day you end up trying to teach something to a bunch of angry teenagers, you'll quickly realize why. It's really fucking sad that so many people don't realize that.
There's a difference between a repairman and a teacher.
The repairman's techniques are immediately assessable. If you pick up your car and it doesn't work, his technique failed.
A teacher's results are not obvious until many years after the fact.
It is for this reason that when purchasing a car, we expect manufacturers to use engineering processes informed by scientific study that lead to longer-lasting cars. When mistakes in their quality are discovered, their cars develop particular reputations and sometimes have to be recalled.
Indeed, and that's why teachers are analogous to repairmen and the engineering equivalent is called a researcher in education science. The latter has nothing in common with teachers and effectively doesn't teach except sometimes at the college or university level. It's a bit rich to blame teachers when they're not actually empowered with the ability to redesign pedagogy principles. Additionally, everyone bitches about the lack of research, but I'd be very interested to know how many financially able families would keep their children in an experimental school ('cause you'd have to inform them). Interventional education research has a huge selection bias, and I'm speaking from personal experience.
All in all, the schooling system issues are analogous to those of the industry. How often do I read about devs complaining that management is stupid and academics are in ivory towers and know nothing of the front lines? Certainly, many teachers are quirky, but people dismissing them altogether live comfortably in their fantasy world.
There is a lot of education research done in both public and private schools. Everything from the school lunch programs to textbook paper has been invested, in practice it’s largely ignored because education is very highly politicized. Mandates for more testing are pushed by companies that administer standardized tests etc etc.
Something as simple as testing which Math textbook to use is never part of the process.
"Professionals keep up with developments in their field, insist on scientifically valid studies to inform their methodology, and so on."
That's ironic, because amongst the group of teachers that's much of their discussion. They've also been poo-pooing the learning styles business that you linked to as long as I can remember.
Now, these are high achieving teachers, winning state academic competitions with their students and what not, so I'll admit they might not be the norm.
Learning Styles and other silver bullet education things tend to be pushed hard by clueless administrators. The teachers I work with have been calling it BS from the start.
> Professionals keep up with developments in their field...
Teachers are required to do a ridiculous amount of ongoing education, inservice stuff, credentialing. Typically on their own time with their own money.
Whatever your obvious grievance is with teaching, it's not for lack of professionalism or training.
While we now know a lot about teaching, a lot of misconceptions have been found recently regarding “truths” about teaching, its a fascinating subject really, and the main problem seems to be lack of rigorous repeatable double blind testing for all of those things.
I happen to work in academic research. Let me just say that research in 'soft science', i.e. that which uses statistics to 'prove' things does very little to convince me. I'd trust a senior pro over the last shiny study anytime, precisely because I happen to produce such studies.
Yes, often times they are incredibly jaded and abused by the system. For example, my mom was a public school teacher. Lots of boys in her class were diagnosed with ADHD. She would make the children run off their energy before lessons, but this is not policy. The other teachers would just take a rowdy kid and send him off to assessment for ritalin or whatever drug they give these days. That was the 'standard practice'. Guess which one actually works?
I feel bad for the boys who would have excelled academically had they been chasing after farm animals the first two hours of the day instead of being given neurodepressents to calm down.
Yes my mom did too. After several times she failed to deliver them to the school nurse for their daily tranquilizers, she was eventually put on administrative leave and then denied tenure. unfortunately, you cannot fight the system. The boys she had were excelling, but the schools could not stand that they were being showed up by a mother of boys with no 'formal' research experience.
That depends on if you think the equilibrium will be something like 25% of boys needing drugs to normalize them (where it is trending in ‘leading’ counties).
Ritalin, obviously. ADHD isn't "too much energy", it's a neurological condition that, to a first approximation, can be defined as "the cluster of problems that respond well to treatment with stimulant medication".
I do feel bad for kids whose symptoms were ignored or mitigated by interventions as described, and therefore were not diagnosed, only to discover at age 30 or 50 that the reason they've struggled so much through life is because they have an executive function disorder, the methods for effectively managing it have existed for decades, and they could've made use of them if only people didn't dismiss them in childhood as "rowdy kids" in need of more exercise.
Really?