https://www.theblaze.com/news/2018/...aze%20Daily%20AM%20-%20last%20270%20days

I find this disturbing on so many different levels. I often feel like my gifted children are smarter than their teachers. Or, at least, that was the case in elementary school. Are the tests really so difficult, or we're now scraping the bottom of the barrel when it comes to hiring teachers?

It appears they believe that if they teach 3rd graders they should only have to be proficient in maths up to third grade level.

LOL, yep, exactly. The teachers presumably have college degrees. Well, if they are able to graduate college but then can't pass a test with elementary level math standards, something is seriously wrong. Either the teacher training programs are incredibly dumbed down and anyone who has a pulse can graduate, or something is very wrong with the tests. But what? My kids seem to always do well on them, no matter how dumb they may be. But teachers with high school and college degrees can't pass them?

The article and the article it references say that the math portion questions are most likely out of touch with what might be expected of an elementary school teacher. For example, one person quoted says her high school graduate who took AP math couldn't answer some of the practice questions. The other indicated that it was 11th grade material - which is several years past 'elementary'.

It's buried in the second article, but it sounds like teachers have to pay to take the test and the test prep, so the company has a financial incentive not to make sure the test relates to teaching ability or success, but to make sure it's hard to pass. Why get one payment when you can get four? The school corporation in question didn't bother to check to see if it was a good test either, including having no way of tracking progress.

Teaching programs are indeed incredibly dumbed down.

Sample question from the NC test:


Other questions required subtracting two numbers written in scientific notation, an understanding of the slope of a line (basic algebra 1), a very basic geometry problem, and a probability problem (8th grade level?). I can understand that some people would forget some of this stuff if they hadn't done it in a while, but there's no excuse for not knowing what the slope of a line is when you've known for four years that the test is coming up.

There's also a full practice test. I looked through the questions. They require a decent but not stellar knowledge of algebra I and high school geometry, but nothing beyond that. If people can't pass that test, it's not the test's fault.

Elementary ed. teachers --- really, anyone coming out of a college degree --- should have a good knowledge of basic algebra and geometry.

I honestly wish that the teacher corps would stop making excuses and blaming the test for lack of knowledge. Also, recent college graduates who can't pass a math test set at an 8th - 10th grade level have no right to call themselves "educated."

I know that there are some highly educated and intelligent teachers out there. But there are too few of them, and the problem is not simply teacher pay. They're just as clueless around here, where pay averages $75K+ per year for 8-9 months of work.

A recent college graduate should be able to pass a test set at an 11th grade level, and yes, elementary school teachers should know mathematics well beyond what they're teaching. You can't teach something if you don't know what's coming later, and know it well.

But, as noted, that test is set at an 8th-10th grade level (with most material being 9th grade and below).

https://www.abcactionnews.com/longform/teachers-failing-state-certification-test-at-alarming-rates

This link has a very short "sample test" at the end that you can take yourself. I got all of them correct and thought the answers were obvious, and I bet even my 11-year-old could get them all correct, so I guess I don't see why people think these tests are so unfair. We don't want dummies teaching our kids. But with teacher shortages, that's the direction we're headed.

So what are you doing instead of teaching? Just curious.

Personally, since I view education as being about communication, not calculation, I'd be much more worried if teachers had trouble passing reading comprehension, critical thinking, or writing tests.

My husband does not come close to making 75+ after 13 years teaching.

The BLS stats for elementary teachers in CA show a mean salary of 77K and in NC a mean of 45K. Those work out to the same more or less adjusted for cost of living. So Val is right mathematically, but I wouldn't head out west.

The assertion that the test taker is responsible for failing the test relies on the assumption that the test provider is not making errors.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...-problems-a-list/?utm_term=.ac8c8ae18529

"[C]ulture emphasizing profitability and cost-cutting" doesn't sound like a paragon of pedagogy.

...

I think I'm being upset on a subconscious level here because the pejorative dumb/dummies is being bandied about here against people who aren't even present. For nearly forty years I had it drilled into me that before there were terms like 2e and learning disabilities there was only dumb an lazy. That my life was better for those terms not being the go to explanation anymore.

I may internally struggle with understanding why people have so much trouble learning skills, but I don't attack them and call them dumb. In fact I lay most of the blame on myself. If I was better at teaching they would understand. I was taught that the one way to know that you actually learned something is not passing a multiple choice test, but can you actually teach it to someone else.

But the thing is that many teachers aren't passing math knowledge onto someone else. They can't, because they don't have it themselves.

I'm no fan of multiple choice tests (and Pearson) for many reasons. I agree that high scores aren't evidence of the kind of knowledge needed to solve complex problems. But poor scores ARE strong evidence of lack of knowledge.

Future teachers have the lowest or near-lowest average SAT and GRE scores. They struggle to pass 9th-grade-level state certification tests that they know are coming for years --- there's no excuse for that.

I agree that knowing HOW to teach something is very important, but a person has to have the knowledge first. The teaching corps seems to make excuses on this point by claiming that soft skills around the knowledge are what's really important. That's not true. Both things are important.

I'm sorry about your struggles, but the facts are that certification tests aren't set at a high level. If they look hard or unfair, it's because of lack of knowledge, and people who have that knowledge can see this very easily.

My struggles have never been with tests or grades.

Thanks for trying to help me understand you perspective.


It's been a decade since I had to demonstrate knowledge using a test, but I used to compensate by using leftover time to work all of the (math) problems in reverse. (Doesn't really work on other subjects.) Multiple choice math is also my favorite because if I have the knowledge, but make a coding error, my error is usually so nonsensical as to not be one of the options, which tips me off that I did it wrong. Where I ran into problems eventually is that I might have perfect knowledge of the principles, but a coding/transcription error in the first step of a multipart question can lead to a cascade of wrong answers.

I believe you. But we're not talking about one person here. We're talking about averages in the teacher corps as a whole.

Lower overall test scores, less math knowledge overall than other groups of college students.

I view it as a bit of a vicious cycle. I think most of us here agree that general math education in North America leaves something to be desired, with much of the gap originating from poor foundational math skills, which are closely related to the effectiveness of math instruction in elementary school--which leads back to the deficiencies in math skills (let's leave aside descriptors of intelligence, and speak strictly of skills) of many elementary school teachers.

I have in my circle quite a few teachers, at all levels (as you might expect), some of whom are really quite good at pedagogy, and also very intelligent in their areas of strength. Those with both typically are able to acquire content knowledge when properly instructed, often for the first time as adults. For example, I know special education teachers who learned 10th grade math while teaching it alongside math content specialists in an inclusive setting, and now have the skills to pass the high school math teacher certification tests. An elementary teacher I know found teaching math in a curriculum aligned to the much-maligned Common Core frameworks to be eye-opening, as, for the first time in their experience, reasoning, problem-solving, and multiple methods were included in math instruction. (I will note that this teacher received training in the new curriculum, and actively engaged with it, unlike many of the others in the district.)

So yes, quite a lot of certified teachers lack foundational math skills, but a fair amount of that can likely be ascribed to, well, the lack of good math instruction in K-12 education.

Sorry if "dummies" offended people. I'm not referring to innate ability, but a lack of knowledge, lack of education, etc. If they don't understand math, or other subjects, how can they teach it? The link I posted had English questions as well. If teachers have a disability that prevents them from doing well on a test, then they should get accommodations, like increased time. One of my kids has problems focusing on tests like that, but who knows...might make a good teacher. But the questions themselves did not seem difficult and left me with the feeling of wanting to yell, "Please don't teach if you can't understand these questions!"

So what's the solution if teachers lack proper foundational math skills? I think they need to go through remedial math courses. And if they still can't pass the test (with accommodations if they need them), then they shouldn't teach. I don't think lowering the bar so anyone and everyone can teach is a good solution. We need some minimum standards and a certain level of knowledge, as well as teaching skills.

I didn't find them difficult, but I can see how they would be tough for anyone who has not learned to play the standardized test game. In particular, you need to read every answer and weigh them against one another to decide which is "best" instead of picking the first one that seems right. (This is more of an issue with the English questions than the math.)

A couple questions made me take a second look, and maybe they could write the English questions in a more straightforward way. The math questions weren't tricky at all. Just figure out the answer and find the right choice. On the other hand, by the time teachers take this test most of them should have taken dozens of multiple choice tests like this.

I just have a sinking feeling that people are ignoring the elephant in the room. There is a teacher shortage and the bar keeps going lower and lower. If teachers can't pass they will make it easier and easier til almost anyone could pass. We're already seeing a trend in certain cities--teachers don't even need to have a license, because of a shortage. People love to blame Common Core or standardized tests for all problems in education. But I think a major problem that people like to ignore or not discuss is that a lot of teachers are under-qualified. In the case of gifted kids, that could mean the kids have a better grasp of the material than their teachers. I also think this is related to boxed curriculums, computerized learning, etc. Districts eat it up, can't spend enough money on "curriculum" where teachers basically read a script. Administrators don't trust teachers to actually teach, and in the case of some of them, maybe there is a good reason why.

I tend to agree. There are a lot of problems in our schools. A big one is that different groups have staked out positions, which makes it almost impossible to talk honestly about our problems. Many teachers lack knowledge. This is a huge problem, but the unions often cry "teacher bashing!" when it's brought up. Teachers in some areas (not around here) are underpaid, which pushes people with other options away. But then...if you lack knowledge in your chosen career area, why should you get a lot of pay? It's a vicious circle in some ways. The Ed. department tried to fix it by defining "highly qualified teachers," but the definition leaves something to be desired:


I'm thinking that these would be minimum requirements to be a teacher, not the definition of someone who went far beyond. This definition is evidence that many teachers lack knowledge.

Education schools are part of the problem. Now, I don't blame future teachers for following required courses, but there does need to be an honest admission that if you failed a math test set at a 9th grade level and you'll be teaching math, there's a serious problem, and it's not with the test.

Meanwhile, the school industry sees education as a profit center, and it's having a lot of success there, to the detriment of learning (IMO). Plus, we have a thriving anti-intellectual, anti-science, alternative-facts movement in this country. And where does all that bond money go?

There's no simple solution, but I think the first requirement is going to be a national will to fix the schools. Right now, I don't see that happening, given all the dueling opinions about what that term means (evolution vs. creationism, bubble tests vs. slower-to-grade, more meaningful assessments, etc. etc.). As a nation, we're stuck in quicksand that we made ourselves.

It just makes me sad.

Makes me sad, too. Esp. not being able to talk about the issue, because then people will say you are bashing the poor teachers. We spent the last year dealing with horrible incompetence. And when I tried to talk about it to administration, it was like talking into a black hole. They can't acknowledge anything, because of teacher contracts. Which I support, but not for the teachers who are actually incompetent or not doing their jobs. I want high pay and union rights for competent teachers. We have the same situation here where people seem overpaid. Elementary school teachers making $80,000 per year with about 15 weeks of vacation. Administrators raking in $200k. The cost of living is average here, not high. So, I don't think the "answer" is necessarily to give better wages. In places where teachers are clearly under-paid that may help. But at a certain point you get to a level where paying more is not going to bring in or retain better teachers. Also, something seems to be seriously lacking in terms of teacher training programs. I think they should be selective and challenging and if teachers make it in, and then make it through, they should be rewarded with high pay kind of like doctors are rewarded with high pay to make up for the cost and challenge of medical school. Imagine a world where people could make it into medical school even though they scored in the 20th percentile on their SAT and floated through college getting C's and D's. Kind of scary. So I don't know why it's acceptable for teachers.

What's your source for education majors averaging in the 20th percentile on SATs?

(I am sad too, but I think it's depression, maybe OCPD. I don't think it's teachers. )

(Note: she didn't say that education major scores AVERAGED the 20th percentile, only that it was possible.)


This site lists average SAT scores by major, presumably for 2013, which would be about when the would-be teachers in the OP were taking the SAT.

The average math score was 482, which is the 38th percentile. If you dig around the College Board site or do a web search, you'll find that education majors as a group have long had low SAT scores.

The College Board has set a math score of 530 as indicating that the student is ready for college-level work:


Education major average reading scores were also 482, which puts them barely into the college-ready category. And that category has a low bar: a 75% chance of getting a C in "college courses" --- but I'm not sure why algebra and pre-calc are called college courses. They're high school courses. But we've dropped our expectations to a point where 11th grade math counts as a "college course" now.

In this sense, I don't blame education majors or anyone else who goes to college thinking they're ready for college classes when they aren't. Education romantics can pretend that algebra 2 is a college-level course by renaming it "college algebra," but that won't change the reality of STEM and other degrees that start with Calc 1. This is a bit OT, but IMO, it's shameful that we tell lies to children, encourage them to attempt majors for which they're unprepared, and then leave them with enormous student loan bills after they fail and drop out. It's wrong. Literally half of my eldest's freshman engineering class failed. He was aghast as he watched his classes shrink during the year. That is just wrong.

Completely off-topic but my youngest is on track to complete Calc 1 in 9th grade. Are there any high school math courses that go higher than that? Not sure how that's going to work, if he runs out of math.

The SAT scores are not impressive. I don't think most people realize that. Are those scores education K-12, or just elementary? I'm hoping they are higher for secondary teachers.

My son is a Sophomore this year and taking APCalc BC. His school has a course called Advanced Math Topics 1 and 2. After talking to some of the kids and knowing who teaches the course it will be a self learning experience I am sure. It is a weighted class but I doubt there is any accountability. I know it will not prepare you for any college board exam. We will look else where for something.

My son participated in math competitions up thru elementary and middle school with highly qualified and motivated teachers/instructors. I am working on it but in this High School it is lacking in involvement in this area. They do a few competitions, math league, AMC but they are just unaware of what is out there and don't know how to spark interest or have no interest.

My son got finished with one of the math league test last year and afterwards approached proctor/teacher with a question. The teacher said "I don't know I didn't read the question's". He was not interested in reading the questions either my son said.

My son was put off by the teachers not knowing the problems to the test or going over any of the solutions. There are only 6 problems each month for 6 months.
I just don't think the teachers are interested.

sorry for the mini-rant

I doubt that SAT math scores are much higher for secondary teachers than elementary.

I agree that secondary teachers who are not math teachers probably had lackluster SAT math scores. But actual math teachers, especially high school math teachers, need to take quite a few college math courses to be certified, at least in my state.

The thing that drives me crazy about high school (and college and grad school) instructors who have zero understanding of math is that their grading can be completely wonky. As in, they give a ton of low point assignments, take off a "few" points for extremely trivial things on each one, and then artificially increase the value of those assignments by making them worth some large percent of the grade. I've seen this happen over and over at all levels.

Or here's another one. I've also seen this at all levels, but the most disturbing place was at a graduate school of education at a major state university. They had a grading rubric for written work that defines the values 0-10 like this:

9-10 Excellent, 6-8 very good, 3-5 satisfactory, 0-2 unacceptable

And then they averaged these scores and expressed them as a percent. The course grades were awarded as follows:

94-100 A, 84-93 B, 70-83 C, 0-69 F

According to this scheme, a student could get a mixture of "very good" and "excellent" scores and still fail the course.

Why even have a grading rubric if you're not going to use anything but the high end? And this isn't a problem that was peculiar to one particular school. As far as I can tell, it is pretty much standard practice to use rubrics this way.

So my point here is that a teacher not understanding math has more implications for students than just poor math instruction.

If you have a local community college, try that route. High school students are often allowed to dual-enroll in CCs for free.


That score is an overall average. Scores are a little higher for high school teachers...which means that they're a little lower for K-8 teachers.

I don't have time to find a link now, but the information is out there.

My son likes competition math and we commuted to a middle school where there were many kids that also enjoyed AMC's and other academic competitions. DS took AP Calc BC in 9th and we initiated the AMC 10 and 12 at his high school and there is very little interest. I think he found 5 kids for the 20 spots we had.

Similar story with Mu Alpha Theta...the school did the first and third tests but forgot to do the second one.

DS spent significant time trying to locate middle school kids in our area to teach competition math (he gave up on high school kids) and we found two that were family friends. Luckily they seem to enjoy it and plan to get the AMC 8 offered next year at their school.

We live in a high-income area where the majority spend time on sports, not academics.

Good grief. DS already has high school credit and I figured out that basically his entire grade (or probably 90 percent of it) is based on chapter tests. So If you mess up a single test, which may only be 10 or 20 questions, there goes your A. There may only be one or two other tests that trimester to try to make it up. Luckily DS got an A but I was cringing at the thought all along of a 10 or 11-year-old's screw-ups being on a permanent transcript. One huge negative of acceleration. I wonder if it will be clear from a transcript that someone took a course when they were far younger than "normal"? Because moving forward this still makes me nervous.

In our state, if it is only subject acceleration, the grades from any courses taken prior to actual enrollment in 9th grade are only on the high school transcript if the parent wants them to be.

School (as opposed to homeschool) transcripts are generally grouped by year, so it should be obvious that the courses were taken at a young age. But if they're being submitted as part of the high school record, they will be incorporated into the GPA.

My acceleration philosophy is that the student should be advanced enough to produce A quality work in an honors level class. Unfortunately, the way most classes are run, an A is more about executive function than actual knowledge.

This is how it is for my son grading wise and transcript too.

I hate the amount of 5 pt daily quizzes.

His APUSH teacher this year gives the kids a list of terms and you have to find them in the book like a word search game. It is driving him nuts.
His WHAP last year gave them the whole syllabus for the year up front with everything due on Mondays for the whole previous week. He loved the way that worked. If he was really interested he could stay ahead of the game.

Yup. The 5 point quizzes in my son's AP Econ class caused his grade to go from an A to a B. The quizzes were always five questions from the reading the night before, reading that had not yet been discussed in class, so if a kid didn't understand something immediately, well, too bad. My son got many Fs and Ds on those quizzes, because he frequently missed 2 or 3 questions. I know he was reading the book because after a string of low scores, I made him do it in front of me every single night. We tried everything in an attempt to improve those scores--and nothing worked consistently. Not taking notes, not reading aloud (by either him or me), not doing the comprehension questions, not discussing it with me, nothing. There were even a few times that he got 5s after *not* doing the reading.

Then after all that, he would end up getting close to 100% on the chapter tests. Go figure.

I was about to write how things hadn't changed in 24 years, but then realized my example of unrelated assignments of questionable educational value still involved thinking and writing. Now I feel silly or sad. Probably both.

I think what happens is that the grade goes on the transcript but it isn't part of the GPA. I think they have to take something like Algebra and have it go on a transcript, because it's required by the State to graduate. If the student doesn't do well in a high school course when they are not yet in high school, they could re-take the course for a better grade. But none of those courses taken in elementary school or middle school count towards the GPA. He has ADHD and acts like a space cadet. So I don't think he ever studied for a single test or quiz. He doesn't even know when they are most of the time. One thing I found disturbing was this year he finished the book early, so the teacher had him do a bridge building project with his peers, working in groups. His team didn't do very well--for instance they probably didn't glue it properly, it was sloppy, and the kid who was in charge of doing the math didn't do the calculations right. Well, that ended up going into his Algebra grade. The bridge building really had nothing to do with high school algebra!