Sorry i dont buy it, not on any significant level anyway.
First, like most claims, they sound better if theres an element of truth to them. While some schools particularly the elite schools in europe that have very, very, very low turnover, it can seem that those schools are very close, and they are. New staff, especially when such schools often hire a single person in a year, can feel like an outsider. I can understand how someone might have the feeling even though its a maturational effect, and not a planned collaboration.
Second, OK there are some for profit schools, where the owner or head of the school will put a person close to them (spouse, girlfriend/boyfriend, family member) in a leadership position that they are not qualified to really do. Nepotism is very much alive in the world, but its no more common or different in an international school then it is anywhere. Back when I was in the states, the school board would hire friends, or family on occasion.
Third, I'm sure on a very, very small scale it happens. 1)Maybe a new school or a school trying to reinvent itself will hire a new head, and that person may bringa few people, but its hardly a conspiracy (happened a few years ago at Simmaras Academy in Indonesia). 2) Im also sure there are a couple horror stories where this has happened exactly the way your associate described, but they are like great white shark attacks, sensationalistic, but exceedingly rare.
HOWEVER, the level of conspiracy your post alleviates too, just isnt very feasible.
1) Teaching couples have a difficult enough time finding schools with vacancies for both spouses, much less to arrange positions for a whole slue of friends.
2) Teachers dont make hiring decisions and Im pretty sure any teacher who required such consideration for friends and coworkers would be laughed out of the interview.
3) International Teachers are not at-will employees, they have a contract, and they cant just be dismissed. Even in places where this would be easier, the majority of the remaining faculty wouldnt tolerate it.
4) Administrators dont really have that many friends, sorry its just not true. The teachers that work under an administrator, might very well be "friendly" with them, but they arent their friend. An admins going to have his family, and maybe 1 or 2 junior administrators they might consider friends, and even then its unlikely to be THAT close/serious of a relationship.
Ok so personally my experience is this. A teachers aid at a school I was at basically became involved with the principal. It wasnt an affair or anything, and while it wasnt secret they were discreet. At the end of the year one of the PYP5 teachers was let go for falling enrollment. When the new year started, an unexpected increase in enrollment in PYP1 required another teacher. The principal decided to place the teachers aid that he was dating into the PYP classroom... Now before you feel vindicated a couple of points to consider. First, this person wasnt certified as a teacher but did have a degree (B.Ed), and about 3 years experience, 2 as a full time aid (in early years PYP), and 1 year as a substitute. Second, its PYP1, which is little more then kindergarden/nursery. Third, our principal brought it up at the first staff meeting for professional development before the school yer even started. He didnt ask anyones permission, or ask for a vote. He simply informed the staff, and asked if there were any comments. We spent about an hour, asking questions, and giving opinions. He was very receptive, and calm. Some of the comments made were very abrasive, and embarrassing. Now you could argue pretty easily her relationship got her the job, and id agree with you, but there wasnt anything sinister about it, and honestly, we all "hope" to do the same thing really, we just call it "networking".
*Sigh*, let the verbal assaults commence....
Is there an old boy network in the international schools
I think having contacts can help you get an interview ... but I am not sure it helps you get a job if u do not deserve it.
For instance, if you apply for a job at Singapore American School, they actually have a section in their application form that asks you to list any current employees/admin at SAS that have worked with you. Hopefully, those SAS teachers will talk you up and help you get an interview. However, if you mess the interview up, I would doubt that their recommendations will get you the job.
For instance, if you apply for a job at Singapore American School, they actually have a section in their application form that asks you to list any current employees/admin at SAS that have worked with you. Hopefully, those SAS teachers will talk you up and help you get an interview. However, if you mess the interview up, I would doubt that their recommendations will get you the job.
-
purpleturtle
- Posts: 3
- Joined: Sun Nov 06, 2011 5:02 am
[quote] ts PYP1, which is little more then kindergarden/nursery[/quote]
Because any bonobo monkey with a pulse can teach the youngest children, right? Since all early childhood teachers do is wipe noses and sit around while children play?
I've taught preschool, grades 1, 4, and 5, ESOL, middle school math, and high school English and drama. I can tell you without a doubt that preschool and kindergarten were by far the hardest on all levels: emotionally, physically, and mentally. I had to think harder and spend more time prepping for the little ones than I ever did for any other levels. Good quality early years teachers are few and far between, and they need to have just as much training and specialization as any high school subject area teacher. It's high time they earn the respect they deserve as professionals.
Think before you speak, Psyguy. If you're half as experienced as you like to make yourself out to be, then you should know how important and specialized early years teaching is. And how challenging it is.
And learn the difference between "your" and "you're," for the love of all that's good. You make native English speakers look bad.
Because any bonobo monkey with a pulse can teach the youngest children, right? Since all early childhood teachers do is wipe noses and sit around while children play?
I've taught preschool, grades 1, 4, and 5, ESOL, middle school math, and high school English and drama. I can tell you without a doubt that preschool and kindergarten were by far the hardest on all levels: emotionally, physically, and mentally. I had to think harder and spend more time prepping for the little ones than I ever did for any other levels. Good quality early years teachers are few and far between, and they need to have just as much training and specialization as any high school subject area teacher. It's high time they earn the respect they deserve as professionals.
Think before you speak, Psyguy. If you're half as experienced as you like to make yourself out to be, then you should know how important and specialized early years teaching is. And how challenging it is.
And learn the difference between "your" and "you're," for the love of all that's good. You make native English speakers look bad.
-
overseasvet2
- Posts: 191
- Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2011 10:50 pm
hiring those you know
In every school I've seen acquaintances of the head who've been hired called names like FOB (friend of Bill) or FOD (friend of Dennis). When you think about how expensive it is to hire new teachers and how little you can learn at a job fair interview, it makes sense that heads of school would hire people they know are good. I was at one large Asian school that started the recruiting season by asking staff if they know anyone out there who is a great teacher.
It may look like a "good ol' boys" network but I agree with PsyGuy, it's not a conspiracy - it's called networking. No, it's not fair to those new to the international scene but it doesn't take long before you're in a position where you know people here and there. We used those connections to get interviews at several schools while traveling but in the end, we're the ones who got the job through our interviews.
Hot jobs are hard to get and you have to stand out in some way. One way is to be known as a stellar teacher.
It may look like a "good ol' boys" network but I agree with PsyGuy, it's not a conspiracy - it's called networking. No, it's not fair to those new to the international scene but it doesn't take long before you're in a position where you know people here and there. We used those connections to get interviews at several schools while traveling but in the end, we're the ones who got the job through our interviews.
Hot jobs are hard to get and you have to stand out in some way. One way is to be known as a stellar teacher.
[quote="purpleturtle"][quote] ts PYP1, which is little more then kindergarden/nursery[/quote]
Because any bonobo monkey with a pulse can teach the youngest children, right? Since all early childhood teachers do is wipe noses and sit around while children play?
I've taught preschool, grades 1, 4, and 5, ESOL, middle school math, and high school English and drama. I can tell you without a doubt that preschool and kindergarten were by far the hardest on all levels: emotionally, physically, and mentally. I had to think harder and spend more time prepping for the little ones than I ever did for any other levels. Good quality early years teachers are few and far between, and they need to have just as much training and specialization as any high school subject area teacher. It's high time they earn the respect they deserve as professionals.
Think before you speak, Psyguy. If you're half as experienced as you like to make yourself out to be, then you should know how important and specialized early years teaching is. And how challenging it is.
And learn the difference between "your" and "you're," for the love of all that's good. You make native English speakers look bad.[/quote]
I would have to agree with you on this one for sure! I taught all divisions, and primary was the hardest. In New Zealand and Australia alone, you would need 4 years of B.Ed for Primary because the theory and practice goes that the years from age 3 - 7 are crucial to the psychological development of the child that will be imprinted with them for life. In premier schools, Elementary ( especially primary ) are assessed quite hard by the principals and directors. They also get a lot of praise / reward and support because after all, these are the entrance years....Why on earth would parents enrol their young ones in a school with a Primary division that is less than desireable? So there is a profit-based reasoning attached to the formation and quality of the Elementary/ Primary divisions. For many schools, the Elementary and Primary divisions are equally important ( if not more ) than the senior high school divisions.
I think that people like Psyguy who consider Primary / Elementary teaching as something along the lines of " wiping kids' noses " have a very backward, traditional, erroneous view of teaching and educational theory ( particularly in the field of Child Psychology ). Plus, there is the view that Senior High School teachers or principals that are generally good and effective were once Primary / Elementary school teachers. Why? Because they have worked very hard and knows what it feels like to be cautious at most times while making very important decisions that could affect the child's very real psychological well-being. This means that they also had to make important decisions when dealing with overly anxious parents who still care about their child's education ( unlike senior high school parents who tend to be more independent and blase with their children's progress ). They also have to work extremely hard in presenting BASIC concepts that we take for granted as adults ( learning how to form sentences or basic reading ) in the most creative, interesting, memorable way so that it may stick in the developing mind. If Primary school teaching was so unimportant then why on earth do countries like Canada, US, New Zealand, Australia and Northern European countries have LABS ( yes, laboratories ) that focus on child psychology? Most of these labs have preschools attached to them so the University students and researchers can actually have the on-site experience / observation to obtain knowledge to create the child psychology theories that are being spewed in all Teacher's Colleges now.
How do I know all this? I used to be a Primary / Elementary school teacher for 4 years, then became a Junior High School teacher for 2 years and eventually became a High School teacher for 4 years and now I am an administrator for a premier school in Tokyo. Out of those 10 years, I would say that I would want to go back to Primary / Elementary if I had to, because they were the most rewarding and I actually learned the most from that division.
Because any bonobo monkey with a pulse can teach the youngest children, right? Since all early childhood teachers do is wipe noses and sit around while children play?
I've taught preschool, grades 1, 4, and 5, ESOL, middle school math, and high school English and drama. I can tell you without a doubt that preschool and kindergarten were by far the hardest on all levels: emotionally, physically, and mentally. I had to think harder and spend more time prepping for the little ones than I ever did for any other levels. Good quality early years teachers are few and far between, and they need to have just as much training and specialization as any high school subject area teacher. It's high time they earn the respect they deserve as professionals.
Think before you speak, Psyguy. If you're half as experienced as you like to make yourself out to be, then you should know how important and specialized early years teaching is. And how challenging it is.
And learn the difference between "your" and "you're," for the love of all that's good. You make native English speakers look bad.[/quote]
I would have to agree with you on this one for sure! I taught all divisions, and primary was the hardest. In New Zealand and Australia alone, you would need 4 years of B.Ed for Primary because the theory and practice goes that the years from age 3 - 7 are crucial to the psychological development of the child that will be imprinted with them for life. In premier schools, Elementary ( especially primary ) are assessed quite hard by the principals and directors. They also get a lot of praise / reward and support because after all, these are the entrance years....Why on earth would parents enrol their young ones in a school with a Primary division that is less than desireable? So there is a profit-based reasoning attached to the formation and quality of the Elementary/ Primary divisions. For many schools, the Elementary and Primary divisions are equally important ( if not more ) than the senior high school divisions.
I think that people like Psyguy who consider Primary / Elementary teaching as something along the lines of " wiping kids' noses " have a very backward, traditional, erroneous view of teaching and educational theory ( particularly in the field of Child Psychology ). Plus, there is the view that Senior High School teachers or principals that are generally good and effective were once Primary / Elementary school teachers. Why? Because they have worked very hard and knows what it feels like to be cautious at most times while making very important decisions that could affect the child's very real psychological well-being. This means that they also had to make important decisions when dealing with overly anxious parents who still care about their child's education ( unlike senior high school parents who tend to be more independent and blase with their children's progress ). They also have to work extremely hard in presenting BASIC concepts that we take for granted as adults ( learning how to form sentences or basic reading ) in the most creative, interesting, memorable way so that it may stick in the developing mind. If Primary school teaching was so unimportant then why on earth do countries like Canada, US, New Zealand, Australia and Northern European countries have LABS ( yes, laboratories ) that focus on child psychology? Most of these labs have preschools attached to them so the University students and researchers can actually have the on-site experience / observation to obtain knowledge to create the child psychology theories that are being spewed in all Teacher's Colleges now.
How do I know all this? I used to be a Primary / Elementary school teacher for 4 years, then became a Junior High School teacher for 2 years and eventually became a High School teacher for 4 years and now I am an administrator for a premier school in Tokyo. Out of those 10 years, I would say that I would want to go back to Primary / Elementary if I had to, because they were the most rewarding and I actually learned the most from that division.
-
lightstays
- Posts: 116
- Joined: Tue Sep 20, 2011 9:07 am
- Location: Americas
Are we serious?
Is the sky blue?
Is the pope Catholic?
Of course there is an old boy network in international schools. Any institution, or group of institutions, that caters to an international elite and whose implicit, or often explicit, mandate is to assist them in getting the educational credentials that will help them succeed in holding their iron grip on power and money definitely has a very strong referral network in place to make sure the right teachers are getting the right jobs. This is simply how the world works in 2011.
It's no conspiracy either--and if we take the time, Psyguy, to read each other's posts closely, it would be clear that the OP is in no way alluding to (or alleviating to) a conspiracy.
Is the sky blue?
Is the pope Catholic?
Of course there is an old boy network in international schools. Any institution, or group of institutions, that caters to an international elite and whose implicit, or often explicit, mandate is to assist them in getting the educational credentials that will help them succeed in holding their iron grip on power and money definitely has a very strong referral network in place to make sure the right teachers are getting the right jobs. This is simply how the world works in 2011.
It's no conspiracy either--and if we take the time, Psyguy, to read each other's posts closely, it would be clear that the OP is in no way alluding to (or alleviating to) a conspiracy.
Hey! Shouldn't you be camped out in Zuccotti Park? (just kidding!)
I am not so sure about power and elites.
It just makes sense that if you are an administrator and you worked with a teacher in the past - and they did a good job - then it would be sensible to hire them again. They are a known quantity.
What's more, if you work with teachers you trust and they say, "he was fantastic with the students", or "she is one of the better teachers I worked with," then it would again be sensible to have a chat with them.
What I have found after 10 years overseas is that you keep meeting teachers and admin at schools that have worked with or for your current admin or colleagues. So it certainly is not wise to burn bridges in this game. However, if you are a team player who is well regarded at a school, then this can help in the future because there is a high possibility that the administrators you are applying to will know someone in your current school. This is especially the case if you manage to get into the more established (so called Tier 1) schools.
PS - I have never met a teacher (or heard of a situation) where an incumbent teacher was fired or moved on to make way for a 'friend' of an administrator. I'd be amazed if this happened at any reputable school (which, I guess, is the type of school we are all aiming to work in).
I am not so sure about power and elites.
It just makes sense that if you are an administrator and you worked with a teacher in the past - and they did a good job - then it would be sensible to hire them again. They are a known quantity.
What's more, if you work with teachers you trust and they say, "he was fantastic with the students", or "she is one of the better teachers I worked with," then it would again be sensible to have a chat with them.
What I have found after 10 years overseas is that you keep meeting teachers and admin at schools that have worked with or for your current admin or colleagues. So it certainly is not wise to burn bridges in this game. However, if you are a team player who is well regarded at a school, then this can help in the future because there is a high possibility that the administrators you are applying to will know someone in your current school. This is especially the case if you manage to get into the more established (so called Tier 1) schools.
PS - I have never met a teacher (or heard of a situation) where an incumbent teacher was fired or moved on to make way for a 'friend' of an administrator. I'd be amazed if this happened at any reputable school (which, I guess, is the type of school we are all aiming to work in).
-
wrldtrvlr123
- Posts: 1173
- Joined: Sat Feb 06, 2010 10:59 am
- Location: Japan
[quote="purpleturtle"][quote] ts PYP1, which is little more then kindergarden/nursery[/quote]
Because any bonobo monkey with a pulse can teach the youngest children, right? Since all early childhood teachers do is wipe noses and sit around while children play?
I've taught preschool, grades 1, 4, and 5, ESOL, middle school math, and high school English and drama. I can tell you without a doubt that preschool and kindergarten were by far the hardest on all levels: emotionally, physically, and mentally. I had to think harder and spend more time prepping for the little ones than I ever did for any other levels. Good quality early years teachers are few and far between, and they need to have just as much training and specialization as any high school subject area teacher. It's high time they earn the respect they deserve as professionals.
Think before you speak, Psyguy. If you're half as experienced as you like to make yourself out to be, then you should know how important and specialized early years teaching is. And how challenging it is.
And learn the difference between "your" and "you're," for the love of all that's good. You make native English speakers look bad.[/quote]
Ha ha. Psyguy, you really bring it on yourself sometimes. Yes, my wife teaches young ones at a PYP school and it is not all playtime and nose wiping. 5 page reports for 4 year olds seems excessive but they have to do them. In fact, they have to do basically the whole program, but geared towwards that age group. Easy it's not.
Because any bonobo monkey with a pulse can teach the youngest children, right? Since all early childhood teachers do is wipe noses and sit around while children play?
I've taught preschool, grades 1, 4, and 5, ESOL, middle school math, and high school English and drama. I can tell you without a doubt that preschool and kindergarten were by far the hardest on all levels: emotionally, physically, and mentally. I had to think harder and spend more time prepping for the little ones than I ever did for any other levels. Good quality early years teachers are few and far between, and they need to have just as much training and specialization as any high school subject area teacher. It's high time they earn the respect they deserve as professionals.
Think before you speak, Psyguy. If you're half as experienced as you like to make yourself out to be, then you should know how important and specialized early years teaching is. And how challenging it is.
And learn the difference between "your" and "you're," for the love of all that's good. You make native English speakers look bad.[/quote]
Ha ha. Psyguy, you really bring it on yourself sometimes. Yes, my wife teaches young ones at a PYP school and it is not all playtime and nose wiping. 5 page reports for 4 year olds seems excessive but they have to do them. In fact, they have to do basically the whole program, but geared towwards that age group. Easy it's not.
I have taught HS, MS and ES. They all have their advantages and disadvantages. However, in terms of having to be on your toes, super organised and super energetic through the school day, ES wins hands down. I find the big advantage over HS, esp. if you teach IB, is the grading load is far far less down in ES. However, as for working your backside off during the school day, ES is easily the hardest (IMHO).
I guess all of this is off the topic of the original post.
However, it is evident that many many schools reserve ES positions for 'trailing spouses.' Even a stellar school like JIS used to write on their website for ES positions ("spouses of applicants for HS positions are encouraged to apply" - or words to that effect). I am sure that does not mean they would take duds - but I know many ES principals who have been frustrated, as they could not hire their 1st choice applicant because the position was being reserved for a spouse.
I guess all of this is off the topic of the original post.
However, it is evident that many many schools reserve ES positions for 'trailing spouses.' Even a stellar school like JIS used to write on their website for ES positions ("spouses of applicants for HS positions are encouraged to apply" - or words to that effect). I am sure that does not mean they would take duds - but I know many ES principals who have been frustrated, as they could not hire their 1st choice applicant because the position was being reserved for a spouse.
Ego-Centrism
Every teacher thinks that their subject and their grade level is important. It's either formative in primary or its summative in secondary. I've taught primary and secondary, and....
Sorry, I cant do it rocket science in Dip.2 physics actually involves 1) rockets, and 2) science. In PYP1 its "what color is the rocket"? I've seen the books in PYP1 they have a couple words per PAGE, and you do seem to spend a large ordinate amount of time coloring... On top of that you get graham crackers and juice boxes with a nap around noon. Grading involves looking at a worksheet with wiggly lines on it. Frankly the only people who care how well a PYP1 student is "doing" is mom, because their child is of course very special, talented, gifted, etc. They had them tested when they were 1 year old with the WPPSI, and they scored "very well". Never mind that the child cant decide between eating boggers or paste.
Yes you need to have energy to be a successful primary school teacher, but you need to have a lot of energy to be a successful salesperson as well. Energy doesnt equal expertise though.
News for you, EVERY teacher needs to be well versed and informed of educational methods and pedagogies. What do you think, we just recruit secondary teachers off the street, or order them online from Amazon? You think you have a monopoly on teacher education? Yeah, you might have a more functional knowledge of child psychology but secondary teachers have a deeper functional knowledge of adolescent psychology. Both fit under a broader term called "developmental psychology", and if you werent so ego centric youd recognize that primary teachers are no better trained and educated then secondary teachers, so go back to your nose wiping, until you grow up.
Postal script: I know the difference between there and the contraction they're (they are), i just dont believe in apostrophes. They're a waste of a key stroke and there is little efficiency gained, except by grammar gnomes who maintain dominion over their use as if they had owned them.
Sorry, I cant do it rocket science in Dip.2 physics actually involves 1) rockets, and 2) science. In PYP1 its "what color is the rocket"? I've seen the books in PYP1 they have a couple words per PAGE, and you do seem to spend a large ordinate amount of time coloring... On top of that you get graham crackers and juice boxes with a nap around noon. Grading involves looking at a worksheet with wiggly lines on it. Frankly the only people who care how well a PYP1 student is "doing" is mom, because their child is of course very special, talented, gifted, etc. They had them tested when they were 1 year old with the WPPSI, and they scored "very well". Never mind that the child cant decide between eating boggers or paste.
Yes you need to have energy to be a successful primary school teacher, but you need to have a lot of energy to be a successful salesperson as well. Energy doesnt equal expertise though.
News for you, EVERY teacher needs to be well versed and informed of educational methods and pedagogies. What do you think, we just recruit secondary teachers off the street, or order them online from Amazon? You think you have a monopoly on teacher education? Yeah, you might have a more functional knowledge of child psychology but secondary teachers have a deeper functional knowledge of adolescent psychology. Both fit under a broader term called "developmental psychology", and if you werent so ego centric youd recognize that primary teachers are no better trained and educated then secondary teachers, so go back to your nose wiping, until you grow up.
Postal script: I know the difference between there and the contraction they're (they are), i just dont believe in apostrophes. They're a waste of a key stroke and there is little efficiency gained, except by grammar gnomes who maintain dominion over their use as if they had owned them.
psyguy - just bail out of this discussion because you don't have a clue about early childhood.
There is a reason why there are so many conferences, pd opportunities and elite schools pushing their EC department. Highly qualified EC educators draw on resources from child development, family counseling, child psychology, understanding the dynamics of early cognition, applying learning through play fundamentals, experiential learning, child nutrition, and parent-teacher teamwork building.
The human body and brain develops most dramatically between the ages of 2-5. A child's level of self confidence has already solidified by the age of 4-5. Highly qualified early child educators maximize that window of opportunity during the greatest amount of development and shape a child holistically on every level.
Basically, your being handed wet clay and asked to mold it, whereas in grade school you are given hardened clay and asked to help shape it.
Just look at the physical differences that occur between the ages of 2-5. Now stop and think about what must be going on inside. Highly qualified EC teachers not only have to ensure that the classroom and activities promote developmentally appropriate practices, they also have to be aware of developmental stages/ milestones in order to ensure the child is developing holistically. Not only do the teachers have to do all of this for the child, in many cases they also have to teach the parents because most parents have no clue about child development. I teach my parents on a daily basis about their child and it is an expected part of my job. I also provide parents with resources on family counseling because it is my responsibility to both recognize and assist my young students when they experience a traumatic event at home. I have to have both the knowledge and experience to recognize when a child is just acting up for attention, is bored, or is acting out in a manner consistent with internal strife due to stress and trauma.
Early Childhood Education seperates the pretenders from the dedicated professionals instantly. Walk into any elite EC program and ask the teacher about child development and they will draw on resources from every science. They will discuss nutrition, proper exercise, classroom lighting, multiple intelligences and child intelligence profiles. They will also point out areas in the room that support the different types of intelligences and how they are used to both encourage and develop their application. A teacher will also be able to explain the dynamics of child play, the developmental practices in play and how they apply to both motor skills and social interraction.
You look at a kid coloring and playing and see just that. A kid coloring and playing. A highly qualified Early Childhood Educator looks at that same things and instantly recognizes the dynamics that are in play and how best to maximize those dynamics in the given environment and structure.
Its a whole different world. I do not expect you to understand but please recognize that you do not understand and its better to just leave this one alone.
There is a reason why there are so many conferences, pd opportunities and elite schools pushing their EC department. Highly qualified EC educators draw on resources from child development, family counseling, child psychology, understanding the dynamics of early cognition, applying learning through play fundamentals, experiential learning, child nutrition, and parent-teacher teamwork building.
The human body and brain develops most dramatically between the ages of 2-5. A child's level of self confidence has already solidified by the age of 4-5. Highly qualified early child educators maximize that window of opportunity during the greatest amount of development and shape a child holistically on every level.
Basically, your being handed wet clay and asked to mold it, whereas in grade school you are given hardened clay and asked to help shape it.
Just look at the physical differences that occur between the ages of 2-5. Now stop and think about what must be going on inside. Highly qualified EC teachers not only have to ensure that the classroom and activities promote developmentally appropriate practices, they also have to be aware of developmental stages/ milestones in order to ensure the child is developing holistically. Not only do the teachers have to do all of this for the child, in many cases they also have to teach the parents because most parents have no clue about child development. I teach my parents on a daily basis about their child and it is an expected part of my job. I also provide parents with resources on family counseling because it is my responsibility to both recognize and assist my young students when they experience a traumatic event at home. I have to have both the knowledge and experience to recognize when a child is just acting up for attention, is bored, or is acting out in a manner consistent with internal strife due to stress and trauma.
Early Childhood Education seperates the pretenders from the dedicated professionals instantly. Walk into any elite EC program and ask the teacher about child development and they will draw on resources from every science. They will discuss nutrition, proper exercise, classroom lighting, multiple intelligences and child intelligence profiles. They will also point out areas in the room that support the different types of intelligences and how they are used to both encourage and develop their application. A teacher will also be able to explain the dynamics of child play, the developmental practices in play and how they apply to both motor skills and social interraction.
You look at a kid coloring and playing and see just that. A kid coloring and playing. A highly qualified Early Childhood Educator looks at that same things and instantly recognizes the dynamics that are in play and how best to maximize those dynamics in the given environment and structure.
Its a whole different world. I do not expect you to understand but please recognize that you do not understand and its better to just leave this one alone.
Last edited by ExpatGuy on Tue Nov 08, 2011 5:14 am, edited 1 time in total.
Took the same classes
Yeah I took the same classes in child psych and development, and independently primary is important, and within primary even PYP1 is important, but as soon as I start comparing primary to secondary (especially when getting to upper secondary, like A levels, Gymnasium, and Diploma) they just dont compare to primary grades especially early childhood grades when it comes to the significance of student outcomes.
The same arguments can be applied to Special Ed, or any other special student population. Adolescent minds are just as difficult in the early teens when being saturated with hormones. Again, every teacher thinks their grade, and age group is special and difficult to teach. The only people that dont snicker at the "importance" of primary education, are primary teachers, and primary students parents.
The same arguments can be applied to Special Ed, or any other special student population. Adolescent minds are just as difficult in the early teens when being saturated with hormones. Again, every teacher thinks their grade, and age group is special and difficult to teach. The only people that dont snicker at the "importance" of primary education, are primary teachers, and primary students parents.
Re: Took the same classes
[quote="PsyGuy"]Yeah I took the same classes in child psych and development, and independently primary is important, and within primary even PYP1 is important, but as soon as I start comparing primary to secondary (especially when getting to upper secondary, like A levels, Gymnasium, and Diploma) they just dont compare to primary grades especially early childhood grades when it comes to the significance of student outcomes.
The same arguments can be applied to Special Ed, or any other special student population. Adolescent minds are just as difficult in the early teens when being saturated with hormones. Again, every teacher thinks their grade, and age group is special and difficult to teach. The only people that dont snicker at the "importance" of primary education, are primary teachers, and primary students parents.[/quote]
You definitely took the same classes I took. I assume you also have a MS Early Childhood and near completion of a PhD in EC. Congrats, thats impressive.
No respectable professional educator snickers at early childhood education. Do you snicker at the concept of girls attending school as well?
The same arguments can be applied to Special Ed, or any other special student population. Adolescent minds are just as difficult in the early teens when being saturated with hormones. Again, every teacher thinks their grade, and age group is special and difficult to teach. The only people that dont snicker at the "importance" of primary education, are primary teachers, and primary students parents.[/quote]
You definitely took the same classes I took. I assume you also have a MS Early Childhood and near completion of a PhD in EC. Congrats, thats impressive.
No respectable professional educator snickers at early childhood education. Do you snicker at the concept of girls attending school as well?