2 Likes
Hmmm it appears that some have spent the best day of the year so far living through their online personae, rather than going outside and interacting with actual people.
Bunch of fucking weirdos
My sister’s a teacher in a West Dublin school. She’s a member of any union and has no intention of joining. Doesn’t think teachers should expect special treatment ahead of guards, bus drivers, etc. I’d have to agree with her.
Bump. Fire away lads
Here’s a question.
Why does primary school teaching require higher entry requirements than say for instance Civil Engineering?
Is it simply to do with annual leave?
Supply and demand?
Why is teaching such a highly sought after posting though?
Surely trying to design or build a bridge would require more intelligence that teaching a child the Alphabet or how to long division?
It would seem people seek being teachers, I’m just saying it doesn’t take incredible intelligence, it merely takes the right manner, approach and genuine passion in teaching to be a good teacher.
Whereas the likes of engineering will generally require high levels of intelligence and competence in certain areas.
It’s a great job for the most part, being in the classroom particularly, great fun, who wouldn’t want to spend all day with a load of kids and he paid to do it, I can see how it’s attractive to an 18 year old,
Holidays are great, the training is very tough
People don’t want to grow up, more so now than ever, I think that’s part of it as well
Building bridges sounds very dull in comparison
That’s fair but I think the incentives for being a teacher are all wrong.
Teaching should seek to attract people who want to help kids, improve them and have a passion in that.
But a lot of the time it will attract people who want to earn good money for a job with very low hours and summers off who might actually despise the work itself.
I don’t think you are going to diminish the quality of teacher by reducing the pay and increasing the hours. And I don’t think you are going to reduce the quality of teachers by reducing the entry requirements.
You understand how the CAO devise the points?
There’s no point reducing entry requirements unless you go down some aptitude route as with medicine,
Why?
You don’t need to be a genius to be a primary school teacher. Secondary school is a different story and you do need a relevant standard of education in the subjects you teach.
With the way it is, teaching is confined to very intelligent people or bookworms - there’s nothing that suggest either of these are mandatory to being a good teacher. Someone who is of very average intelligence could make a lot better teacher than someone who is very intelligent. In fact I would say someone of more average level intelligence would be better equipped to explaining things.
I understand it’s like every other university entrance system, the more people apply, the higher the entry requirements go up. Therefore loads of students apply to do teaching and a real carrot to this is the perks of good pay, low hours, extended holidays, job security, guaranteed pay rises etc.
Completely disagree. It takes a highly intelligent person to engage, stimulate, manage and challenge 25 different people (with all their different characteristics ) effectively. You need to engage some bridge builders yourself and get a teacher to help you get over it.
8 Likes
Does it?
What does an A in Applied Maths show you about teaching children how to learn the ABCs?
You don’t need to be highly intelligent academically to teach kids but you do to design a bridge, interpret the law, write computer code, learn medicine.
Is there any logic to what you just typed, you just seemed to use a few buzzwords.
What academic subjects show you how to engage, stimulate, manage and challenge?
They sound like personal traits.
You might try and answer me this @Juhniallio?
What academic subjects test these personal characteristics?
I doubt many doing applied maths want to be teachers. I’d say they’d be likely to apply for civil engineering though.
But if it’s decided by grades or a points system then it’s not really a fair reflection.
I don’t think academic subjects are a fair criteria as to what make a good primary school teacher. Do you and if so can you explain why?
So you seem to place huge emphasis on academic intelligence. And applied maths/mathematical intelligence or bridge building ability is your peak intelligence. Would someone who teaches other people Applied maths then not have to be incredibly intelligent? As in intelligent enough to know all the stuff but a bit extra to impart the knowledge and enable others to understand it? You can answer in your own time there, I wont be badgering you for a reply as that’s childish.
3 Likes
I did applied maths. It’s not as hard as people build it up to be. Definitely easier than honours maths for me as it’s more visual. To be an applied maths teachers you’d need to be quite smart in that particular way. To be a primary teacher you’d need to have far more range in your ability.
You’re not grasping it.
Teaching places are handed out on academic results via their school exams. This is the sole basis of entry as far as I’m aware, if you get the relevant points then you’re in, think you need Irish which is understandable. I’m saying this approach is wrong. You contended this and you now seem to be lost for a basis to contend it which is why I asked you to do so.
You’re all over the place here and seem to be getting a bit angsty so calm down. I’ve already clarified I’m not referring to secondary schools so unless you know of applied maths in primary school then that is a preposterous point that is in no way related to what was asked.
I asked you as the entrance for teachers is set by their performance in academic subjects, which academics subjects test the personal characteristics of engagement, stimulation and ability to challenge and manage. I’m still waiting on that answer as you’ve chosen to throw a hissy fit rather than address your poorly made point.