On Tuesday, October 27, 2009 I will be attending the public hearing on R.E.P.A. in Rochester, IN with some of our faculty and students. Please visit http://www.doe.in.gov/news/2009/07-July/REPA.html to become familiar with R.E.P.A.
Your online assignment this week is to voice your opinion by making a comment online at www.doe.in.gov/repacomment by October 30, 2009. Please also post your comment to this blog.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I am a part-time elementary education major. In addition to going to school, I am a wife, mother, choir director, IFCAA board member, and adoption support group founder. I am taking my education slowly, because I want it done right.
ReplyDeleteThere is so much to learn about teaching; so much more that just understanding basic content.
Because of my many roles, I will not be graduating until the spring of 2013. Now, under the new rules, that date will be delayed even longer because I will need to acquire a content-area minor. I am learning how to teach children. Understanding the content of another area WILL NOT make me a better educator. I will only be a better educator if I understand HOW to teach every individual learner.
Allowing a “career changer” to jump into education is an absolute disgrace. Education is not something one “jumps” into (unless this is strictly to be used in the case of auto-shop). Just because a person is knowledgeable in math or science doesn’t mean they know HOW to teach it to a student. What about the students with special needs? Do you really think someone who has been an accountant for 25 years is qualified to reach a child with autism? Teachers need to be TAUGHT how to differentiate instruction to meet the needs of ALL learners. You can’t jump into that!
I first realized there was more to teaching than being knowledgeable in a content area when my daughter started bringing homework home from school. She was only in first grade and I had been in the education program for a year. I remember thinking, “I get this; but, I don’t know HOW to explain it to her.” Only recently have I learned HOW children learn. Only recently have I sat down with my children confidently to TEACH them in ways that are developmentally appropriate.
Loosening the restrictions in the teacher licensure process will be a tragedy for our young students. Maybe it would be better to let the older teachers retire first, give the new ones a try, then evaluate whether or not to overhaul the system. You might be amazed at what we can do!
I already made a comment, last Thursday. I was just asking them questions and discussing how this will affect teachers and students that are going to become teachers.
ReplyDeleteWhat are the students that are going to college now suppose to do? Will we be able to graduate on time? How will this affect teachers that are teaching now? Did they think about teachers getting mad and boycotting this? What will the schools do without teachers?
Then I talked about the testing standards. Asking if they really know how students learn? Explaining that not every child does good on standard tests and how these tests will affect those students? Also, in the real world are we forced to take tests weekly?
After that, I discussed people that just get their degrees online. These people will not have any understanding of children, how they learn, the different stages they go through, and how their brain develops. Also, these "teachers" will not have experience in the classroom. What will they do with special needs children? If these types of people have never been exposed to this, what will they do?
I want to make this short and to the point. I believe that the new proposed laws will not make the education system better but worse. There are two things that bother me most. The proposed rule about Opens Door to Non-Traditional Administrators. How is it fair for children that individuals will be hired in the administration without any experience in the school setting. How does this benefit children? It won't. Secondly, I do not think that the Early Childhood major should be eliminated. Three year olds learn differently than a child in fourth grade. Think about it. Would you want your child being taught by a teacher who does not know how your child learns best? I doubt it. That is why there are specialized licenses that focus on different age groups. If these new proposed laws will be most beneficial to children, these laws should be looked at again. As a future teacher, one of the most essential tools for child learning is having experience in the classroom. It seems to me that teachers will be able to get hired without having any experience in the classroom. Again, this is not fair for our future children. I am appalled by some of the laws and think that in order to teach children the right and best way, we need specialized licenses that focus on different age groups. The five school setting is better then reducing it to the three school setting. Rethink what you are doing. It is our voice, as future teachers, that matter most.
ReplyDeleteI inadvertently forgot to copy and paste the comment I posted before I submitted it but this is basically what I said. I raised my concerns as a parent and future educator. As a parent, one of the most difficult things for me was to place my children of virtual strangers when they began school. I am also a Christian and I placed my faith in God that He would put my children in an environment that was best suited for them. Knowing that these teachers and principles and school workers had experience with children and were trained to know what their needs were gave me peace. If the rules change and a professional person without prior experience with children is allowed to become an administrator I whole-heartedly believe this is not in the best interest of the students. As a future educator, I believe that knowledge of the subjects you will be teaching but the process on how to teach these subjects, in my opinion, is far more important. I have heard of students who go through the whole education process without entering a classroom and upon entering student teaching they realize that it is not for them. Content knowledge is important but so is pedagogical knowledge. The most important information I have learned on my journey to become a teacher has been learned in the school environment and within courses that role-modeled how to successfully teach these subjects. I feel that if the rules change this will not only be detrimental to future students but also future educators. I feel strongly against these changes as both a parent and future educator.
ReplyDeleteI am a future educator, currently at a university that has an amazing education program. However, if the proposed changes occur, our program will produce extremely lacking professionals. I also feel so sorry for current teachers because if REPA passes, their license renewal is now down to one person who may or may not be able to make an unbiased judgment. And for current college students in education programs, half of our education is no longer going to count. I can understand wanting teachers to be very well versed in content area, but how will that even matter if said teachers cannot express their knowledge in a way that children will understand. Isn’t the whole goal here to get children as educated as possible? Wouldn’t knowing how they learn, knowing their special needs, knowing that home life and school settings affect their daily learning, seem like something an educator should be equipped with? REPA is taking all of that away. There will no longer be those stories that are so touching about teachers who affected the lives of so many students. Students will no longer remember that one teacher who helped them out in more ways than in content knowledge. Do you really want to take that away?
ReplyDeleteAs an elementary education major, I am disgusted with the proposed changes. It is unbelievable that the state would prefer teachers to have a content-based knowledge over a pedagogy-based knowledge. One could be incredibly knowledgeable in mathematics, science, history, or English, but be a horrible teacher. I feel that understanding HOW to teach and HOW students learn is much more important than a very content heavy education background. I have 8 classes remaining until I have my degree, but those classes are methods classes. It is very discouraging and disappointing to be so close to my degree, only to have my graduation date pushed back because the state would require me to take more content area classes. Just because I might be required to take more nonpedagogy classes, I will not become a better teacher. I believe that experiences in the classroom and being educated with pedagogy will make me an effective teacher. It is a disgrace that the state of Indiana is even considering these revisions.
ReplyDeleteI am going to make this short but to the point. I can't believe you want to have teachers teach children that learn from NO CLASSROOM EXPERIENCE. I am becoming a teacher and going through the classes to learn the BEST WAY to teach children. Having classroom experience is important and a great way to learn how to teach. Do you want your children being taught be someone who got their experience from online classes, or no classroom experience? How about by someone who has been an accountant for 15 years and knows hardly anything about teaching? I know I wouldn't. As teachers, we are here to teach children the best way and about everything we can teach them, from classes we took in college to our own experiences. Think about if an accountant becomes a teacher. Seriously, who would want that. I really hope you change your mind about what you are planning on doing to teachers and to children. Thank you.
ReplyDeleteI am curious to understand how educational leaders of our state could believe that these changes would be beneficial to the children in our schools? If the proposals are passed they will affect children dramatically, I can assure you that it will not be in a positive manner.
ReplyDeleteAs an educated professional would you seek a podiatrist’s council to treat your cancer? No, you would seek the advice and guidance of a seasoned professional who has had experience and is well versed on the latest technologies and treatments in regard to your illness. Why then, would you believe that parents would do any different when it comes to the lives of their children? Just because an individual owns a piece of paper declaring them a professional does not mean that they can successfully be a professional in any profession.
In many ways teachers are of the same caliber as a physician. Most have a passion for what they do, most are thorough and follow all of the guidelines and standards they are expected to uphold both legally and morally, most have the power to change many lives on any given day, and yes there are many that are inept at their job and lose their passion for their career. With this being said, in the case of teachers, I believe that there are many more teachers that continually make a positive impact in the classroom through their passion, pedagogical training, convictions, and yes their content knowledge than do not. When an individual chooses the career of teaching they are making a commitment to being a lifelong learner. It would make more sense to offer teachers more benefits in the way of opportunities in continuing education so that they may build upon what they have all ready learned.
To stray away from the pedagogy's of what makes an effective teacher great and focus strictly on content with a little “how to” on the side would cause a train wreck in an educational system that is all ready in peril. While I agree that teacher's must be knowledgeable about the material that they are teaching, they must also be trained on how to teach it!! Teachers need to be able to not only teach a child to read, but be able to help the child develop a love for reading and the written/ spoken language. Teachers need to be able to not only teach students mathematics, but also teach students how they will use it in the real world. I most certainly agree that there are teachers that need to leave the profession and that do not do their jobs effectively, but my question is how does this solve that problem effectively in a proactive manner?
I would like to know how the state is going to train an individual with an online degree to make all of the necessary accommodations for children that have special needs. I would like to know how they will differentiate school work in the classroom for them successfully. I would like to know how they will train them to have an inclusive classroom that will develop multiple intelligences and create a love for lifelong learning. The last time I checked an individual with a bachelor’s in math or science is not well versed in these areas. It takes someone special to be a teacher and to be GOOD at it, not just any piece of paper says that about a professional. I am a future educator, I am a concerned parent of two beautiful children, and I am a tax payer who is saying that the proposals on the table will not work.
Sincerely,
Michelle Sickles
I am halfway done with my studies in elementary education, and I feel that I would not be where I am now without having the experience I've had in classrooms. How is a person supposed to understand how children learn without actually experiencing it first hand? Every single person in the elementary education program has a passion for teaching and helping children and helping them to learn something. Someone who just ‘wants a job’ would not have this same passion. Someone who may know a lot of information would not necessarily be able to teach a classroom full of students. Also, taking only online classes would not do anything but pack a person’s head full of information when what they would need is hands on experience in a classroom. I really hope all of our concerns and comments are taken seriously.
ReplyDeleteI did not post a comment on the DOE website because I am not sure that I totally disagree with some of the changes. After reading about some of the concerns others in our class have, and after reading the Myth vs. Fact page, I have found that maybe there are some misconceptions. Some myths, according to the website, are that REPA eliminates pedagogy, is undermining the teaching profession, and allows people to teach without any field experience. The facts are that REPA will not eliminate pedagogy. REPA will find a balance between pedagogy and content knowledge. In my opinion, this is a very important idea. I think that teachers must be strong in both areas, and neither is more important than the other. In regards to the undermining of teaching, I am not sure that I believe that to be true. I do not think that it is such a horrible thing for someone to change their career. I think that someone who has a degree in mathematics or biology can be beneficial to students if they decide to become a teacher and go through the licensing procedure to become one. Also, in regards to the lack of field experience, all teachers (including on-line programs) must go through 9 weeks of student teaching. Within that time, the supervising teacher and principal will know if the person has what it takes to become a teacher.
ReplyDeleteThe only thing that I can say I would disagree with is that the principal is the sole person who will determine whether or not the teacher is progressing, and the ending results could be biased. I guess I am just not convinced, like some others may be, that pedagogy is totally removed from the licensing. If it was going to be, then yes, I would disagree. But as long as REPA still enforces pedagogy, I do not see a problem. Also, for example, some people keep saying that an accountant should not become a teacher. Why not? They already have a degree in accounting, they have been through at least 4 years of college, and now they want to become a teacher. What is so wrong with that? Maybe that accountant is bored working in an office all day, and wants to express some of his/her outgoing skills into a classroom because not only is this person knowledgeable in mathematics, but he/she also loves children. I am currently a manager in a restaurant, but that does not mean I do not love the idea of being a teacher and it certainly does not mean I do not have what it takes to become one. People can and should be knowledgeable and passionate about many different things, and opportunities should be available for people who want to become teachers, even though it does mean more competition for us! If REPA and accountants will benefit our children in education, then that is something we should be happy about, even if our college careers have to be extended. :)
I am currently in college studding to become an elementary major. While having a discussion in one of my classes, I to have become disgusted with the proposed changes the state is trying to make for future educators. It is crazy to think that the state would prefer teachers to have a content-based knowledge over a pedagogy- based knowledge. I think that as a student becoming a teacher it is important to be taught how to teach. Students may grasp the understanding of something but it takes special courses to teach students how to teach. I find these courses very educational and important. I would like to know how the state is going to train an individual with an online degree to make all of the necessary accommodations for children that have special needs. Isn’t the whole goal here to get children as educated as possible? Wouldn’t knowing how they learn, knowing their special needs, knowing that home life and school settings affect their daily learning, seem like something an educator should be equipped with? REPA is taking all of that away. Also, as a student in college for three years now I find it very discouraging and disappointing as well that it might take longer to receive my degree.
ReplyDeleteI am currently enrolled in the education program at Purdue North Central. After reading about REPA, I am confused about several things. For one, how will eliminating some of the classes that teach us how to teach make us better educators? In my experience, the pedagogical classes are where I have learned some of the most valuable information. Someone can know everything they could possibly know about a subject, but that doesn’t mean they will be able to teach it to a child in a way that makes sense, and isn’t that kind of the point of teaching? I agree that teachers should be knowledgeable of content area subjects. What I do not understand is why teachers should have a minor in one specific content area. It makes me wonder who is benefiting from this. Is it the future teacher who will have a less balanced education and an increased amount of knowledge in one little area of what they are expected to know? Or, perhaps it is the student whose teacher knows a ton of information about science, only the teacher is an ineffective instructor? Or, is it the student whose teacher is excellent when it comes to math, but falls short in every other subject? Shouldn’t every part of the curriculum get attention? The early years of education are so important for children. It provides the base of their education for the rest of their lives. Why would we want to send teachers who know less about teaching, but more about one small aspect of the entire curriculum, to help them build that base? Don’t we want teachers to go into their classroom confident in knowing how to teach and with an equal amount of knowledge across the curriculum? In addition, at the bottom of the website, I read that this proposal will not affect anyone who graduates prior to 2011. It just so happens that I graduate in 2011. So what happens to me and other students like me? Right before we graduate, all the requirements will be changed?
ReplyDeleteAs an elementary education student, I have very strong feelings about this proposal. You really want to bring in people who have never learned about the way different people learn to teach twenty kids at a time? It makes no sense for people to only have to student teach for 9 weeks and then all of a sudden they are ready to teach. While people who have taken education classes for four year are running out of jobs because of these proposals. It makes no sense to bring in people who dont understand the best ways to teach to take away jobs from the people who actually do know. They take the specific classes for a specific reason. That is to retrieve the best from every student through different learning styles.
ReplyDeleteI am currently a college student working on a degree for elementary education. I am also employed at a pre-school/daycare. There are many things that I have learned from my current and past classes that have been very successful at my place of work. I do not agree with the changing these things.
ReplyDeleteThere is so much more to teaching than just knowing what is to be taught. A teacher needs to understand her/his students, and know how to approach each student’s way of learning. Focusing on certain educational subjects for ones self should not override the focus on how to handle and understand the students that will be receiving the education in our classrooms. Teachers are not going to be fully prepared if changing is done to the education degree. The classes that we take now are specialized in teaching. Teaching is a certain profession, and should carry it’s own certain classes. That is why a college carries so many classes, to focus on the certain categories of work that are chosen. Changing this would be unbeneficial to future students and teachers. Also, only having an education major student have nine weeks of student teaching is senseless. We need the experience! There are many people that go into education after graduating, and then decide that it’s just not for them. This will most likely negatively affect the elementary students who have this person as a teacher. We need to be fully prepared for the classroom before we are in charge of one.
I am an elementary education major at a university. I feel I am getting an exceptional education there. The proposed changes that REPA includes are very unsettling. How in the world is 9 weeks of student teaching enough to ensure that a teacher is well qualified? I believe that this experience will make me a better teacher. Being in a classroom gives new teachers the experience they need. 9 weeks is not nearly enough time. That is one of the most senseless components in the REPA proposal. The proposal wants to reduce pedagogy courses and increase content courses. That, to me, is senseless too. Knowing HOW to teach is the whole purpose of teachers. Just because someone knows a lot content does not mean that he/she can teach it. Teachers are so special because they know HOW to teach children. They understand how each child learns differently. Also, there is no point in having a major in education and a minor in a content area. This may just mean that you are going to have more knowledge in one area than all the other areas that are equally important. Once again we need more pedagogy classes! I know that if it werent for the pedagogy classes, I wouldn't be the best teacher I can be.
ReplyDeleteI believe these proposed changes need to be revised even more than they have. Students who are currently in college going through their teacher education need to have plenty of pedagogy classes along with the content knowledge classes. At Purdue North Central, there are 52 credits worth of classes that are pedagogy. If we are to have no more than 30 credit hours that only allows us to have 10 classes instead of 18 classes of pedagogy.
ReplyDeleteAlso, the licensing should only affect those who are not teachers yet. Teachers who have their license already should be able to continue doing the same thing they are already doing. I agree that changes do need to be made to the licensing procedure but I think some of the things need to be the same. One example of a change to the licensing should be that the administrators or education board should not feel like they cannot fire a bad teacher just because he or she has been there for a certain amount of time. I have had plenty of teachers in the past who taught me nearly nothing because they basically didn’t care.
Another thing, if these changes are to take place, they should only affect the students who are just entering teacher education programs at the time the changes would take effect. Switching the programs around and changing requirements could keep current students in college longer. I have a 21st Century Scholarship that pays for my tuition for 4 years of college within 5 years of finishing high school. I want to finish school within those 4 years so I do not have to pay extra than I have to. If programs are changed and it keeps current students in college longer, the state needs to provide more financial aid to those students to help cover extra college expenses.
A quality education for the children of Indiana should be the top priority in deciding for The Rules Revision for Preparation and Accountability. Are these changes really for in the best interest for the children in Indiana? Are these changes that are being made going to give “flexibility and freedom to improve instructional quality,” Superintendent Bennett talks about? I question this freedom that will be given to Elementary education majors and Secondary education majors. These changes that will be made will “increase the ISTEP passing rate at 90%.” Are these passing marks really for the children or for just to meet state goals which would be making Indiana’s marks look better? Are these changes to the curriculum for the college students or are they for passing marks to make Indiana look good? So, if the state of Indiana strengthens the content area for Elementary educational majors and Secondary education majors in the Universities, and decreases the pedagogy knowledge this will improve teaching ability? I do believe a strong content is needed, but I also think very highly of pedagogy, it is just as if not more important for future teachers. This flexibility that is promised by Superintendent Bennett under minds the educational standards and it is not “flexibility” it is control. I do support change of expanding options to programs, but I have a hard time seeing the truth in these future goals that the program wants. One of the biggest problems I see with these changes is eliminating the Secondary education major. High school students are still kids, good content is important, but so is knowing how to teach high school and middle school. Regulating what these college students can major and minor in eliminates the promise of “flexibility” and does not save money or time for these students. I believe it should be up to the University for their Curriculum. I strongly urge REPA to amend some of these proposals.
ReplyDeleteI am half done with getting my education degree and this could change everything. I am concerned that I will need to know more content than I will need to know about how to actually teach in the classroom. It also really worries me that people could enter into a classroom with only nine weeks of student teaching. This is simply not enough and although it is an minimum, people will take advantage of it and enter a classroom with only nine weeks of experence. I feel that the way teachers get their degree now is for the best because there is a proper mixture of classroom experience and content. I do not think these changes will help at all.
ReplyDelete