Crappy biology instruction

[Gooch's Dad]

I just asked our Advanced Biology teacher if he ever teaches about endogenous retroviruses in his class.

He didn't even know what they are. His response was "that sounds kind of interesting, I'll go look that up online."

Wow. How can a biology teacher NOT know this stuff?

[Matty]

When there are biology teachers in the world who think evolution is false, i can live with him needing to look up ERV's.

To be fair i think the first time i came across them was probably undergrad embryology classes. Albeit that ten years back.

[Ray Moscow]

At which level is the course?

I think ERV's are a fairly recent discovery, so perhaps this teacher doesn't keep up with the literature. (and probably shouldn't be teaching this subject)

[Cath B]

How old is the Biology teacher?

I studied Biology at University in the late 70s to a level more than adequate for teaching Biology at school at that time. In those days endogenous retroviruses were not known to exist AFAIK.

I do recall coming across a hypothesis then or soon after that some viruses may have been become sufficiently adapted to be symptomless or nearly so and to have become incorporated into the cell's DNA and transmitted to future generations but in those days evidence was, I think, inconclusive.

I can well imagine that not all Biology teachers are sufficiently enamoured with the subject to keep abreast of every line of new research. Perhaps this teacher is more interested in ornithology, ecosystems or collecting fossils. Or perhaps he/she likes to get away from Biology altogether outwith the classroom. That doesn't in itself make him or her a poor teacher.

[Gooch's Dad]

This is a senior-level class, for students who are very good at science. And the HS where I teach tries very hard to be excellent in all academic areas. I know that the physics instruction is great (a little pat on my own back there!), and the freshman level Honors Biology is very good too.

This teacher just doesn't want to work very hard. I've heard from a number of students that this Advanced Bio class is mostly a rehash of the biology they learned their freshman year.

[Cath B]

Ah, I was thinking of something equivalent to English "A" levels or Scottish "Advanced Highers".

Sounds as though the pupils at your place are older and more advanced.

[Matty]

yeah i was thinking late school age. if this is uni lecturing then i think yeah, he should be more abreast of things both in his area and more generally if it has wide ranging implications.

like cath says though, sometimes you get someone who is not an al rounder and some areas are considerably sketchier, as a biological jack of al trades i'm the other way but i meet and know a lot of people that have excellent focused knowledge and enthusiasm but not anywhere like it for more generalized biology, not related to their field. seems weird to me, anyway


I guess the most important aspect is that he DID say he would go look it up. thats a positive thing assuming he does, and even if he should maybe be a little sharper in his colleagues and certainly student's opinions. Make sure to ask him about it down the line and see if he did or not ;)

[nygreenguy]

Its really not that big of a deal in biology. Thinks like glycolysis, cell division and stuff like that are much more important and for good reason.

[Zygote]

But for an advanced senior bio class where the students have already covered glycolysis, cell division, etc. as freshmen, one would expect more than review.

[nygreenguy]

But for an advanced senior bio class where the students have already covered glycolysis, cell division, etc. as freshmen, one would expect more than review.

Ok, then do it more in depth. ERVs are still pretty much irrelevant to ANY hs biology class.

[Jobar]

They might come up during an in depth coverage of evolution, and the many proofs of it that have been found. Or perhaps in a chapter on viruses in general. But I can see even an advanced high-school class not touching on them; it would depend on how the class was structured.

[BWE]

This is high school, not university. What is 'advanced biology' in High school?

Biology is an umbrella term. Is it ecology work or microscope work in orientation?

[BWE]

But for an advanced senior bio class where the students have already covered glycolysis, cell division, etc. as freshmen, one would expect more than review.

Ok, then do it more in depth. ERVs are still pretty much irrelevant to ANY hs biology class.

I took some pretty advanced biology classes, albeit specialized in marine sciences and I couldn't tell you squat about ervs except from what I've read, ironically mostly on ERV's blog.

[DMB]

Probably most school teachers in any subject fail to keep abreast of developments in the subject. So looking it up is likely to be the best they can do. Years ago when I taught maths to 11-19 yos, I used to go on courses for maths teachers from time to time. My objective was always to learn more about how to teach aspects of the subject. I was always disappointed to find that the majority of people came to these courses expecting to be taught the mathematics. I would have thought that if they were any good they could have read up on it themselves.

[BWE]

I spend a fair bit of time involved with curriculum development and I know a lot of teachers and have watched a lot of teachers.

I'd rather have a smart, good teacher in a classroom who is a week ahead of the students (except in chemestry, physics, trig and calc) than someone who knows a lot and thinks it matters that the students learn facts rather than a structure for information verification and application.

[Ray Moscow]

I've heard that our knowledge of biology doubles every 10 years. (This strikes me as an understatement.)

It would be hard to keep up with such a vast and growing field of knowledge. Still, I'd want a teacher to try to keep up with the major stuff.

[nygreenguy]

I spend a fair bit of time involved with curriculum development and I know a lot of teachers and have watched a lot of teachers.

I'd rather have a smart, good teacher in a classroom who is a week ahead of the students (except in chemestry, physics, trig and calc) than someone who knows a lot and thinks it matters that the students learn facts rather than a structure for information verification and application.

Exactly. Ive taken tons of college level bio classes (it is my major after all) including evolution and Ive never encountered ERVs in the classroom. I dont even think it was in my evolution book.

Actually, Id be willing to bet most biologists wouldnt think it belongs in the curriculum.

[DMB]

Regardless of whether something is formally in the curriculum, shouldn't teachers be expected to respond to questions about things that belong to their subject?

[Quizalufagus]

Seeing as most high school teachers don't even have a graduate degree in the field they teach, expecting them to know about some specialized topic is a little crazy. High school teachers aren't supposed to be experts FFS.

[DMB]

Don't they specialise in a single subject? Why wouldn't they have a degree in it?

[Quizalufagus]

AFAICT, the situation is this: Most high school teachers in the U.S. have a bachelor's degree in education with maybe 5 or 6 courses in the field they teach. Some have a bachelor's degree in the field that they teach, but that isn't typical. Relatively few have graduate degrees in any subject, and most that do have graduate degrees in education rather than the field that they teach.

With as few as 5 university level courses in their chosen field, it is completely unreasonable to expect a high school teacher to be able to answer questions requiring specialized knowledge. Hell, 5 courses is barely enough to know the basics of a field.

[BWE]

AFAICT, the situation is this: Most high school teachers in the U.S. have a bachelor's degree in education with maybe 5 or 6 courses in the field they teach. Some have a bachelor's degree in the field that they teach, but that isn't typical. Relatively few have graduate degrees in any subject, and most that do have graduate degrees in education rather than the field that they teach.

With as few as 5 university level courses in their chosen field, it is completely unreasonable to expect a high school teacher to be able to answer questions requiring specialized knowledge. Hell, 5 courses is barely enough to know the basics of a field.

This is a really weird thing. In Portland, All teachers have M.Ed and at least a Bachelors in whatever subject. They have to pass competency exams in the field they teach to get the certification, 'HQT' (highly qualified teacher). They cannot remain in a classroom without HQT if an HQT is available.

Often one is not available so a non HQT teacher will fill in for a year or a few. Usually, if that teacher is a good fit, they will study for the exams and become HQT. They are not easy tests.

Portland, BTW, is not broken despite the constant best efforts of administrators. It is possible in portland public schools to get a world-class education if you know how to find it and you aren't the kind of parent who likes to tell teachers the best way to teach.

By many accounts the rest of the country is fucked. Maybe we need to start building a wall...

[BWE]

Oh sorry, forgot one thing:

A M.Ed. is the most important degree for anyone teaching anything at below college level. If you want kids to learn, all the knowledge in the world kept in your head won't help put it into theirs.

Pedagogy is the most important thing by a factor of maybe 10.

I couldn't stress that enough.

[nygreenguy]

Regardless of whether something is formally in the curriculum, shouldn't teachers be expected to respond to questions about things that belong to their subject?

Its BIOLOGY. Its the study of LIFE. I wouldn't expect a professor to be able to any possible biology question. I could think of a million questions that would stump a biologist, and Im sure they have PLENTY that would stump me. Now, if the guys degree was in plant physiology and you asked about p680, then sure, id expect him to respond, but hes a high school biology teacher. They are expected to know broad, general biology.

[Valheru]

None of my varsity biology books mentioned ERVs, and this was around 15 years ago.

A lot of biology teachers teach biology curriculum, and that's that. They're not necessarily armchair biologists.

It's not a problem until a bright kid comes along that asks challenging questions outside the curriculum, and I don't think that is very rare....

[Cath B]

It's not a problem until a bright kid comes along that asks challenging questions outside the curriculum, and I don't think that is very rare....

Yes, I think you're right there.

Some teachers are just fine for pupils who just want to see their way through a course without too much effort.

But it's a different story for more gifted and/or interested youngsters who want to go beyond that.

It's good if they can meet a teacher who shares their passion for learning once in a while.

[Valheru]

They are expected to know broad, general biology.

I agree. ERVs are most definitely not "broad, general biology". On the gripping hand... this isn't exactly high-school level biology. You'd expect a lecturer at tertiary level to at least have heard of ERVs.

The kid made him go research it. I'd say it's a win-win.

[BWE]

This is a senior-level class, for students who are very good at science. And the HS where I teach tries very hard to be excellent in all academic areas.[...]

Valerhu, HS=High School

[DMB]

And if I have it right, US high school usually finishes about age 17, a year earlier than Europe, at the end of 12th grade. So at the international school my kids went to there were quite a few US students who did only the first year of the IB course and then left to go on to college, whereas the rest did the two-year IB course, finishing at the end of 13th grade and hoping to leave with the IB Diploma. But that IB Diploma, if they did well in it, would usually get them off the first year of a US university course.

[DMB]

Incidentally, in England the norm has been to do a degree in a specialist subject (English degree courses are usually much less general than US ones, so my degree was just in mathematics and nothing else). After that they do a professional qualification for teaching.

[BWE]

And if I have it right, US high school usually finishes about age 17, a year earlier than Europe, at the end of 12th grade. So at the international school my kids went to there were quite a few US students who did only the first year of the IB course and then left to go on to college, whereas the rest did the two-year IB course, finishing at the end of 13th grade and hoping to leave with the IB Diploma. But that IB Diploma, if they did well in it, would usually get them off the first year of a US university course.

yeah. Our city has one HS with IB. But you've got it right.

[Quizalufagus]

A M.Ed. is the most important degree for anyone teaching anything at below college level.

If you say so. In my experience people with degrees in education aren't any better at teaching than anyone else who's spent a lot of time in school. I'm pretty skeptical about a lot of the results in educational research, too--they are not tested rigorously enough for my liking.

Also, why make the distinction between college level education and below college level? The average college freshman is not substantially different from the average high school student in terms of educational needs AFAICT.

[Worldtraveller]

A M.Ed. is the most important degree for anyone teaching anything at below college level.

If you say so. In my experience people with degrees in education aren't any better at teaching than anyone else who's spent a lot of time in school. I'm pretty skeptical about a lot of the results in educational research, too--they are not tested rigorously enough for my liking.

Also, why make the distinction between college level education and below college level? The average college freshman is not substantially different from the average high school student in terms of educational needs AFAICT.
I'd have to agree with this.

I worked my way through college as a tutor, and a big part of where I worked was the training we got through the College Reading and Learning Association.

I know tutoring is a lot different from teaching in a classroom, but a lot of the Ed. majors I tutored were terrible at trying to explain a simple concept, and some hadn't even heard of the different learning styles. Admittedly, the training I got focussed on adult learning, but I know a lot of it was applicable to pretty much any age.

Ed. Majors seem to focus on developing a curriculum, and testing, although their test developing seems to leave out the central point of testing....trying to determine what it is you're actually trying to measure before you write a test.

My wife did curriculum development and test development for the training dept of a software/tech support company, and she did a lot of research into the topic. I read a lot of it out of curiosity, and what I learned seemed to be that Ed. majors (at least where I went to U) were not learning any of this stuff.

[BWE]

A M.Ed. is the most important degree for anyone teaching anything at below college level.

If you say so. In my experience people with degrees in education aren't any better at teaching than anyone else who's spent a lot of time in school. I'm pretty skeptical about a lot of the results in educational research, too--they are not tested rigorously enough for my liking.

Also, why make the distinction between college level education and below college level? The average college freshman is not substantially different from the average high school student in terms of educational needs AFAICT.

My bad. I meant below H.S.

H.S. is general core knowledge in a content area. 9th grade being the go either way year.

Also, My wife got an M.ed. after teaching at a university for many years and it was a very valuable experience. It's possible that her experience is outside the norm because she was very focused on learning pedagogy.

IME, what really matters below high school is teaching practices. My wife famously (in her program) remarked to her students one year that they would be taking state tests that year and, because they had followed an intersting tangent that took 3 months, she wouldn't be teaching that material. She pointed to a bookshelf in the room which she had stocked with state test study guides and told the kids they could prepare from the books if they wanted.

All but 2 students increased by a substantial amount that year and those two stayed even with their previous test scores.

Even in high school, students are still learning study skills as well as core information. In college, you can learn any material you miss in high school but you can't learn how to learn as easily. Good teachers don't have to know everything. They have to be interested in discovering things. In fact, teachers who know too much often like to deliver information without sourcing it, making themselves the source. That has the potential of turning kids into people who don't know how to fact check very well.

College is different from H.S. Just as H.S is different from middle school.

But, again, my bad. The M.Ed. is useful probably in H.S. too but critical below that.

And, experience does count, but informed experience is better. Almost any 10th year teacher is better than almost any first year teacher. But when you get closer together in experience the pedagogy matters.