As a Social Studies & Computer Science teacher in Michigan, my first reaction to this had nothing to do with pay, but rather with priority. If we pay more for two of the core subject areas, what does that say about the other two core subject areas (English and Social Studies)? Jealousy over pay would definitely occur, but even worse the state government would be neglecting the other two areas. Now this might seem logical to those not familiar with our educational system (you know, one of the only non-nationalized education system of post-industrial nations), but students can't learn math or science without being able to read, write, speak and think in English.
Furthermore, every student needs a solid Social Studies education so that they can actually function as productive citizens. This sounds abstract and idealistic, I know, but think about it for a second. Most of the students I work with don't even understand their own rights as a citizen of the United States or how to navigate their way across town while using a map (and these are junior and senior year high school students I'm talking about!).
We have four core subject areas for a reason. They all provide information that is absolutely essential for children to know before they can become fully functional members of our society. All students should have highly qualified teachers - lets not limit it to math and science.
Finally, the "highly qualified" term comes from the No Child Left Behind Act and does not necessarily reflect upon the qualifications of a teacher. For example, NCLB requires certain qualifications of teachers (this differs depending on which state you are in because for the most part, it is up to the state to decide what "highly qualified" means). I know several teachers who have been successfully teaching History and Geography or Algebra and Calculus for over two decades but now are not "highly qualified" because they did not take enough college credits in one of their subject areas. Just something to think about before we all get upset about these statistics. Remember, you can't compare them on a state-to-state basis because the definition of "highly qualified" changes.
Slashdot Mirror
...just name them after the US presidents. Personally, I always reserve Taft for my single Windows box.
As a Social Studies & Computer Science teacher in Michigan, my first reaction to this had nothing to do with pay, but rather with priority. If we pay more for two of the core subject areas, what does that say about the other two core subject areas (English and Social Studies)? Jealousy over pay would definitely occur, but even worse the state government would be neglecting the other two areas. Now this might seem logical to those not familiar with our educational system (you know, one of the only non-nationalized education system of post-industrial nations), but students can't learn math or science without being able to read, write, speak and think in English. Furthermore, every student needs a solid Social Studies education so that they can actually function as productive citizens. This sounds abstract and idealistic, I know, but think about it for a second. Most of the students I work with don't even understand their own rights as a citizen of the United States or how to navigate their way across town while using a map (and these are junior and senior year high school students I'm talking about!). We have four core subject areas for a reason. They all provide information that is absolutely essential for children to know before they can become fully functional members of our society. All students should have highly qualified teachers - lets not limit it to math and science. Finally, the "highly qualified" term comes from the No Child Left Behind Act and does not necessarily reflect upon the qualifications of a teacher. For example, NCLB requires certain qualifications of teachers (this differs depending on which state you are in because for the most part, it is up to the state to decide what "highly qualified" means). I know several teachers who have been successfully teaching History and Geography or Algebra and Calculus for over two decades but now are not "highly qualified" because they did not take enough college credits in one of their subject areas. Just something to think about before we all get upset about these statistics. Remember, you can't compare them on a state-to-state basis because the definition of "highly qualified" changes.