View Single Post
Old 03-13-2009, 02:13 PM   #1
Ctrl Alt Del
Uncreative User
 
Ctrl Alt Del's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
Posts: 3,814
Current Game: Dishonored
Forum Veteran 
The new market of education on the US

Quote:
Originally Posted by Article
WASHINGTON (AP) Barack Obama promised Tuesday to double funding for charter schools, pay teachers based on performance and replace those who aren't up to the job, embracing education proposals normally more popular with Republican candidates.

The Democratic presidential nominee says both parties must work together to improve education in a pitch to independent voters in this presidential election swing state, where the fight over education reform has been the focus of a longtime partisan battle. It was the first of two days that Obama was spending on education policy.
Source: http://www.usatoday.com/news/politic...terstitialskip

I'd like to focus on one of the measures announced by Obama here; the capitalization of the professoriate. The question is: can we truly rate a teacher's performance?

On the condition of son to two college professors I daresay, no.

A similar approach has been implemented on Brazil some eons ago. Didn't worked. Several reasons were attributed to this failure. Although we can't quite compare the education system of a country with pitiable instruction reports (even more so on the past) with a first world country (with, actually, not good results on education either), I believe a line can be drawn here.

First and foremost, what's the occupation of teaching means? Is a teacher just an automaton that stands on a classroom throwing facts about diverse subjects to his students? If that's the case, we might just as well leave the teaching to a robot. After all, he won't forget stuff, won't get annoyed, tired or even ask for a raise. But I believe the office is a little more than that.

How to judge the quality of teaching of such professional? 'Oh, we can apply uniformed exams to his pupils', some might say. Really, now? The teacher can be as good as you get, but, ultimately, if the apprentice is studing or not is beyond his reach. And that's assuming that you can prevent the teaching body to cheat somehow - either by giving the answers to their students or in another fashion - because no one looks forward to lose his job, especially not during a crisis period.

I think it's only fair to conclude with something Adam Smith himself left us with; that everything should be controlled by the market, except the occupation of teacher. Judging by this, I can see his motives quite well.

Thoughts, contributions, divergent opinions? Dissertate, please.


Inspiration

.Bioshock inspiration.
Ctrl Alt Del is offline   you may: quote & reply,