Wednesday, 15 August 2007
...those who can't, teach
Right now, I don't think there's anything I want to do less than teach. Which is a problem, as two weeks from today, I start my postgrad teacher training [which, among other things, I slid past 400+ candidates for one of 7 places]. And I'm really not sure today. It's mostly because, having spent the afternoon reading up on some stuff, and preparing for some work I have to do in lieu, I've once again reminded how teacher training and professionals (that aren't actually teachers) seem to have reduced the profession itself to more mind-numbingly boring guidelines and stupendously redonkulous, PC-hugging twaddle. What's worse, the paradoxes are rampant. Every child matters, and I must always be aware of their own personal standing, but this is within a national curriculum ruled by statistics - this year we need more mathematicians, so we're going to push maths in school. We need more kids to stay in school, so we're introducing Lego Studies.
Sometimes I wonder if Steiner might not be a complete nutcase. No scratch that, he was a nutcase. But he had one very good thread of thought in the midst of the madness: maybe a child should be first allowed to find what area they are best in, and then encouraged and trained with particular emphasis on that idea. I'm bastardising a bit for my own usage, but this sounds a much sounder proposal than just pushing kids in the directions we need to fill on the employment maps. Five years ago, everyone needed workers for the tech industry and all our careers talks were from engineers and IT firms. I wonder what it is now. Other western European nations, with their "happier" workforces and lower unemployment, often demonstrate a much freer interpretation of their curriculae.
Times like this I want to get a soap-box and re-enter politics (SRC member definitely counts as a political post). And then we get all the way back around to the first argument from last episode... looks like a revival for the Coalition of Independents, boys...