The totally off-topic thread

[anat0l]

anat0l - Your post is too long.

A bad habit. Extends to emails as well. Hard to break.

Australian high school leavers are so illiterate that they do not know how to read more than 160 characters.



NB - Whilst this post is tongue in cheek, it is unfortunately also true.

That's just getting scary.

 

[medhead]

I'm not hot on the idea that schools are being saddled with issues that the wider community and many parents are unwilling or unable to cope with. The "unwilling" ones are inexcusable, but I suspect that schools can't "get out" of this one mainly due to the overall voices outside the school speaking louder than the voices of reason. The "unable" ones are much more interesting, as it suggests that people really haven't spelt out what those issues are, and then moreover why should schools be saddled with the responsibility of dealing with those. That is not to say that there are some issues that may be better dealt with by schools or should be, however I think at the moment the general sentiment is that schools are simply being "dumped" with these issues to deal with without any proper consideration at all. People may think that having a higher education budget input and paying higher private school fees justifies all of this, but it is actually unfair on everyone involved.

Attendance at high school is compulsory until age 15 or 16. I had at least 2 people in my classes who had zero interest in university or anything beyond year 10. One wanted to be a truck driver and the other a mechanic or some other trade. That was it, and year 10 was kind of a waste for them. Thankfully for them, they did get to spend one afternoon a week at TAFE doing trade useful stuff. It really isn't comparable to university experiences.

In a way, we all "teach to the tests", with some exception. This is where uni tutoring may be very different, as - at least for the courses I tutored - students had access to past exams. The irony of it all is that the content rarely changed from semester to semester. Whilst all the content we teach in class can viably be on the exam, when the exam is written, there will always be some questions rewritten to test the same material in a different way (what students like to refer as "tricks"), or critical thinking questions (especially those with no numerical answer, which catches out the "robots" who can't actually understand what they've gone through in the working). Even then, the questions would be at least numerically different but for most part the content was very similar each semester. At face value, this should make it almost impossible to fail, though that doesn't mean everyone will get a High Distinction either (we don't bell curve). Yet the failure rate has been fairly consistent from semester to semester, at best being about 3% from the average. We find this is mainly because people don't listen and don't prepare (from marking exams, it is not unusual to see someone turn in what is basically a blank empty answer booklet for a 2 hour exam); so much for "teaching to the tests"...

I always found uni to be very much about teaching how to do things. Past exams were just part of that process of learning. Not really about teaching to a test, as such.

But then, perhaps a little story about second year maths were I got 2/20 on the mid semester test that was worth 20% of the grade. I simply did not prepare for the test and the mark reflected that situation. But I knew that the test was easy, we'd covered the work, it was a simple matter to just run through the calculations etc. I even had an argument to that point with a couple of others who were complaining that the test was way too hard. They'd prepared and the test was hard, I'd failed terribly but I knew that it should've been easy if I knew what I was doing. Ended up with a distinction for that subject. the value of preparation is amazing.

 

[RB]

A bad habit. Extends to emails as well. Hard to break.



That's just getting scary.

I was going to post something similar to penegal. Many eyes would be glazed over while they were "waiting for the good part"

 

[Bindibuys]

As a parent, the choice of both primary & high schools were high on our agenda. One of the high percentage of reasons we moved from Sydney to country was schools.
Both our kids attended a 1 teacher primary school. That's 1 teacher for all grades k-6. The most students during their stay was 18 kids.
Our reasons: when they were being taught say yr 5 maths, the teacher was one on one with them, at their desk, while other students completed their level.
Once they had completed their work, they then had to help others in the grades below - re-enforcing what they had been thru in previous years.
On a social scene, they HAD to get on with kids of all ages, there was not another 20 kids in the same class to choose from.
Having said that, it takes a special kind of teacher to cope with this scenario.

 

[Katie]

Overwhelmed by car shopping. Still waiting for the $$ to arrive from the insurance company after the assessor deciding to write off the car last week.

Fortunately or unfortunately, I work very close to BMW, Mercedes, Jag, Land Rover, Lexus, Infiniti, Mini Cooper and Audi. Ford, Honda, Holder are all a bit further away.

I have no idea what to get! Well, maybe I do, but I'm not sure about the $$ involved in some models I've looked at. Too tempting, I think.

 

[blackcat20]

Some Teachers are still on the old awards, meaning they leave their position and it's still there in seven years time.

I thought this still existed? At least it did a few years ago when I did my DipEd....

Qualified teacher here who gave up on the idea of teaching. So many schools with a massive distrust of anyone with a PhD ("you will rush back to research given the chance" was the line trotted out over and over again, nevermind the apparent shortage of good science teachers). I did enough relief teaching to realise I didnt want to deal with poor behaviour on a daily basis, its exhausting and demoralising. I've gone back to science, but in an administrative role, and I love it. I dont get threatened physically or verbally, and I dont have to take my work home with me. Its a pity; I love the interaction with students, I've done teaching in some capacity since I was an honours student but the current crop of kids and their parents make me want to run a mile.

 

[JohnK]

Nurses, paramedics, police, other emergency services workers and teachers deserve at least a 50% pay rise. What they have to cope with these days far outweighs the compensation provided by pay and entitlements.

R. Barlow PBOST

(Poor Bloody Old School Teacher)

A friend told me what his wife was earning as a school principal in inner city Sydney and I started crying.

Apparently she is in $120,000+ a year and she is retiring this year on 3/4 of current salary for the rest of her life :shock: . That's still more than I earn in a specialist IT position.

 

[anat0l]

So many schools with a massive distrust of anyone with a PhD ("you will rush back to research given the chance" was the line trotted out over and over again, nevermind the apparent shortage of good science teachers).

Boggles the mind.

I have to admit having some reservations going back to uni to do a Grad Dip Ed, carting my proverbial tail with me sporting a PhD and 2 Bachelor degrees. The administrator at the School of Education told me though that they've had several PhDs walk through the doors as a teacher.

As for the distrust, what a crock. Would it be of any wonder then that teachers - for that matter, good teachers - are difficult to retain if that is the outset attitude?

Would I go back to research if I had the chance? On face value, absolutely! I'm still looking for that chance now; it isn't there, I tells you! The odd thing about it all is that after I complete my Grad Dip Ed, that will be another year before I start teaching. Let's give one year in teaching. That'll be two years since I stopped research. That's two years with no research related work history, no academic achievements, no papers, no conferences, no grants. It will be closer and closer to 5 years since I received my PhD. And I'm over 30 years old. Unless I pigeon hole into a specific research field of demand, who is going to want to employ me?

 

[TomVexille]

...
Would I go back to research if I had the chance? On face value, absolutely! I'm still looking for that chance now; it isn't there, I tells you! ...

While I'm not in research, everyone who isn't associated with it (or doesn't have a close relationship with someone in research) is dumbfounded when I tell them that the jobs are very scarce.

 

[blackcat20]

Boggles the mind.

I have to admit having some reservations going back to uni to do a Grad Dip Ed, carting my proverbial tail with me sporting a PhD and 2 Bachelor degrees. The administrator at the School of Education told me though that they've had several PhDs walk through the doors as a teacher.

As for the distrust, what a crock. Would it be of any wonder then that teachers - for that matter, good teachers - are difficult to retain if that is the outset attitude?

Would I go back to research if I had the chance? On face value, absolutely! I'm still looking for that chance now; it isn't there, I tells you! The odd thing about it all is that after I complete my Grad Dip Ed, that will be another year before I start teaching. Let's give one year in teaching. That'll be two years since I stopped research. That's two years with no research related work history, no academic achievements, no papers, no conferences, no grants. It will be closer and closer to 5 years since I received my PhD. And I'm over 30 years old. Unless I pigeon hole into a specific research field of demand, who is going to want to employ me?

Right there with you; had a two year break from research while I did my DipEd, and 6 months trying to get a teaching job. Over 60 applications and interviews all over the state. Walked into a research/admin job instead. Three years there, and now in a pure admin role (in a Uni). Gave up my teaching registration at the end of the year. Would I like to go back to the lab? Definitely! But the stress of grants, papers, etc is such a pain.

 

[anat0l]

While I'm not in research, everyone who isn't associated with it (or doesn't have a close relationship with someone in research) is dumbfounded when I tell them that the jobs are very scarce.

To be fair, they aren't really "scarce" on a pure count, but since research has all sorts of different topic areas, we say it is scarce because there is normally a larger pool of people competing for few jobs in that area.

When you have industrial booms of sorts, sure, plenty of those positions open up. Relatively speaking.

A researcher can't just fill any researcher's job. It's like asking someone who was trained in business law to work in constitutional law. It's not as easy as, say, a plumber is a plumber and can fill "any" plumbing job, though I'd bet that that is too a gross oversimplification.

 

[medhead]

A friend told me what his wife was earning as a school principal in inner city Sydney and I started crying.

Apparently she is in $120,000+ a year and she is retiring this year on 3/4 of current salary for the rest of her life :shock: . That's still more than I earn in a specialist IT position.

Must be on a defined benefit super scheme.

I vaguely recall mum mentioning the point when she first took home $1000 a week after tax as a deputy principal in the 1990s. Still it was fair compensation for all the expenses/sacrifices that the family had to carry in moving around the state, having to maintain 2 households (1000 miles apart) at times because both my parents had senior positions that simply were not available at the same location. (There were 2 deputies per school, but dad's position was only available at 13 schools in queensland).

Then there was years of harassment, late night phone calls, kids walking past shouting things at the house, my brother being chased home from primary school by a gang of high school kids, that sort of thing. Stuff only stopped by threats of physical violence, or actual violence in one case.

On the flip side, they were well off when they retired even before Dad died. No defined benefit super. Accumulation super, but Joh did one good thing, as their super is fully funded and has one of the best super managers in Australia with consistent good returns.

 

[TomVexille]

To be fair, they aren't really "scarce" on a pure count, but since research has all sorts of different topic areas, we say it is scarce because there is normally a larger pool of people competing for few jobs in that area.

When you have industrial booms of sorts, sure, plenty of those positions open up. Relatively speaking.

A researcher can't just fill any researcher's job. It's like asking someone who was trained in business law to work in constitutional law. It's not as easy as, say, a plumber is a plumber and can fill "any" plumbing job, though I'd bet that that is too a gross oversimplification.

Well, no. There's different types of plumbing and they don't quite overlap. But your point stands. My field can be similarly segmented, but it's likely far easier to cross train than in many of the sciences.

 

[cove]

I was surprised about the job advert for a head honch at our local city council can get $370,000 in salary plus kickers. No wonder our shire rates have been rising this decade. Our council has no real city precinct.

 

[blackcat20]

To be fair, they aren't really "scarce" on a pure count, but since research has all sorts of different topic areas, we say it is scarce because there is normally a larger pool of people competing for few jobs in that area.

When you have industrial booms of sorts, sure, plenty of those positions open up. Relatively speaking.

A researcher can't just fill any researcher's job. It's like asking someone who was trained in business law to work in constitutional law. It's not as easy as, say, a plumber is a plumber and can fill "any" plumbing job, though I'd bet that that is too a gross oversimplification.

And even with a specialisation in genetics, I cant do just any genetics...because I dont have the training. Plus the field has changed so much since I did my PhD that a lot of my skills are redundant now. It's hard to catch up again.

 

[JohnK]

I was surprised about the job advert for a head honch at our local city council can get $370,000 in salary plus kickers. No wonder our shire rates have been rising this decade. Our council has no real city precinct.

That's pretty poor compared to Sydney and Brisbane where council CEOs are earning over $500,000/year.

Obscene doesn't begin to describe it. The upper circles have really lost touch with reality.

 

[cove]

I thought we got the last decades slew of prime ministers for around $370,000. It's just their kickers are bigger.

 

[coco50]

both my parents were teachers and there has always been the expectation of doing stuff out of hours. the problem is the teachers who are slack and don't do that stuff.



hahaha. When my mum started teaching all the female teachers were sacked at the end of the year and then rehired at the end of January. She had to resign when she got married. She had to resign when she had children. Anything to save a $, still seems to apply.

My mother was a teacher. She was taken from 4th year in High School and put through a one year course at Sydney Teachers' College. This was because of a teacher shortage due to poor planning. Then, at the age of 18, posted to Bankstown Primary School. She was conditionally certificated - that is she was paid first year out pay from 1928 until 1962, when she did bridging courses to get two year trained status. She was a great teacher and the stinking NSW Dept. of Ed. got her services on the cheap.

Most teachers (>98%) in my 38 years teaching experience are not slack and do much preparation and marking out of hours. Very few teachers can survive on a 9:00 - 3:30 working day.

 

[JohnK]

That depends on how important it was to you.

Sounds like you had another set back; if I am right in my thinking.

For some people it is very important and will keep trying for ages.

For some of us we have goals or dreams, I remember reading sometimes that if you keep trying it can consume your life.

My current signature is a current thought I have, keep trying for something but enjoy where you are at.

Not quite a setback but more a question on focus/priorities in life.

Dreams/goals can be very costly. Both emotionally and financially. You need to be careful they do not become an obsession but also know when to cut your losses.

Can you keep failing? Recent developments are ok but there is a time where you need to question your motivation.

Fingers crossed life doesn't get more complicated.

 

[medhead]

My mother was a teacher. She was taken from 4th year in High School and put through a one year course at Sydney Teachers' College. This was because of a teacher shortage due to poor planning. Then, at the age of 18, posted to Bankstown Primary School. She was conditionally certificated - that is she was paid first year out pay from 1928 until 1962, when she did bridging courses to get two year trained status. She was a great teacher and the stinking NSW Dept. of Ed. got her services on the cheap.

Most teachers (>98%) in my 38 years teaching experience are not slack and do much preparation and marking out of hours. Very few teachers can survive on a 9:00 - 3:30 working day.

I would totally agree with all of that, seen all too many piles of marking, etc., to be done at home during school holidays (even did some of that marking myself ). It is the occasional rubbish teacher who gives a bad name to the rest.