Re: Advice on teacher education?

["Richard W. Tarara" <rtarara@SAINTMARYS.EDU>]

I would certainly advise that (in any subject) an instructor needs at least
the knowledge (which usually means the formal training) at least one level
above that which will be taught.  While most of us will have experienced the
'teacher' who was too advanced (never could come down to our level), most
will also have experienced the 'teacher' who was trying to instruct at their
highest level of understanding.  This most often would happen at the
graduate level where only the lucky amongst us were blessed with instructors
who really knew the material well enough to distill it for the initiates.

The problem for a general science teacher is to get that one level beyond in
all the disciplines.  It might suggest that special college level courses
need to be developed for middle-school teachers that can sufficiently do
this.

Rick

*********************************************
Richard W. Tarara
Associate Professor of Physics
Department of Chemistry & Physics
Saint Mary's College
Notre Dame, IN 46556
219-284-4664
rtarara@saintmarys.edu

Free Physics Instructional Software
Win9x, Win3.x, Dos, Mac, PowerMac versions.
Details at  www.saintmarys.edu/~rtarara
*************************************************
----- Original Message -----
From: "kyle forinash" <kforinas@IUS.EDU>
To: <PHYS-L@lists.nau.edu>
Sent: Thursday, March 09, 2000 8:42 AM
Subject: Advice on teacher education?


> I am in a position to influence a change in which physics classes
> students in the education program here take. The committee I'm on is
> pretty clear about what science courses elementary and secondary ed
> students should take (and I'm fairly satisfied with our decisions);
> the question we have is at the middle school level. The state
> (Indiana) is suggesting that middle school teachers specialize like
> they do in high school. A middle school teacher has 35 hrs of science
> courses and they can take these hours in one of 4 'concentrations'.
> The physical science concentration is the area I have influence over.
>
> The scenario we are considering is 13 hrs of chem and 13 of physics
> (2 semesters algebra based physics plus a jr level environmental
> course). Now I'm all in favor of more content but there are three
> questions that I have with this: 1) this scenario leaves only 9 hrs
> for ALL OTHER science and math courses (biology, geology, computers,
> math beyond algebra). Shouldn't a middle school teacher have a
> broader science background?; 2) it seems to me that a good 100 level
> Hewitt based course is really the highest level a middle school
> teacher should be teaching at. Should we teach teachers the same
> stuff they themselves will be teaching or should we teach them at a
> higher level than they will actually need? 3) We have good evidence
> that the current requirements (the first semester of physics only)
> drives students away from a physical science concentration. Are these
> additional requirements going to further deplete the available
> teachers in this area?
>
> These opportunities to affect the future generation of teachers only
> occurs once in a while and I want to do it well. Any advice on this
> would be appreciated.
>
> kyle
> -----------------------------------------------------
>    kyle forinash   812-941-2390
>    kforinas@ius.edu
>    Natural Science Division
>    Indiana University Southeast
>    New Albany, IN    47150
>    http://Physics.ius.edu/
> -----------------------------------------------------