Teachers' Oath

[fossilhound]

This thought is inspired by some of the threads in this section.
After the manner of the Hipocratic Oath used by medical doctors, what should a Teachers' Oath contain? What does a dedicated teacher owe absolutely to his or her students and profession? I'ver been teaching for 25 years and have a few ideas from experience:

I will accept any student where he is at point a in his education, and do my best to get him to point b;

I will write interesting interactive lesson plans that are scaffolded and bracketed, & teach to the various learning modalities;

I will exercise patience, understanding that each student is an individual, with individual needs.

Any ideas from parents, teachers, students or administrators?

[gnome]

I like the third.

The first two seem too vague. I would be more descriptive as to what "point a" and "point b" are--and avoid buzzwords like "scaffolded" "bracketed" and "Learning modalities". There ought to be a plain language method of saying the same thing.

[fossilhound]

I like the third.

The first two seem too vague. I would be more descriptive as to what "point a" and "point b" are--and avoid buzzwords like "scaffolded" "bracketed" and "Learning modalities". There ought to be a plain language method of saying the same thing.

You do bring up a valid point. Parents and even students should be familiar with the terminology of the art and science of teaching.

"Bracketing" and "scaffolding" are 2 SDAIE strategies used to teach students with language issues.

"Learning modalities" refer to how a student learns: by reading; listening; watching; manipulating, etc.

From point a to b means accepting a student where he/she is and advancing them as far as you can in the context of the class.

But there must be other tacit promises that a teacher could affirm. I'd like to have a document I could pass around at faculty meetings & pin to my bb.

[majamin]

Any ideas from parents, teachers, students or administrators?

I will strive to protect students from undue distress, harm, or ridicule

I will provide meaningful lessons that will foster critical thinking, curiosity, and discussion.

I will provide students with constructive feedback of and for their learning

I will strive to include best practices and methods, as provided by modern research, into my lessons


... just some on the fly ... I hope this thread keeps going ... I like it :)

[elipse]

Frankly, remembering a few of my teachers, I think "do no harm" should stay in there.

How about:

"I will encourage critical thinking, even and especially when it is directed against me."

[drkitten]

This thought is inspired by some of the threads in this section.
After the manner of the Hipocratic Oath used by medical doctors, what should a Teachers' Oath contain? What does a dedicated teacher owe absolutely to his or her students and profession? I'ver been teaching for 25 years and have a few ideas from experience:

I will accept any student where he is at point a in his education, and do my best to get him to point b;

I will write interesting interactive lesson plans that are scaffolded and bracketed, & teach to the various learning modalities;

I will exercise patience, understanding that each student is an individual, with individual needs.

Any ideas from parents, teachers, students or administrators?

I think this is terrible. It's too buzzword heavy, not only in phrasing, but in content. What happens in ten years when learning theorists decide that "learning modalities" isn't all it's believed to be today, or when "scaffolding/bracketing" are replaced by some other trendy method of writing lesson plans?

Hell, what about those of us who don't write lesson plans at all? As I recall, in Montessori schools, students write their own "lesson plans" on the theory that people do better when they get input into their own goals. You've just written an "oath" that excludes a substantial part of the teaching community.

[majamin]

I think this is terrible. It's too buzzword heavy, not only in phrasing, but in content. What happens in ten years when learning theorists decide that "learning modalities" isn't all it's believed to be today, or when "scaffolding/bracketing" are replaced by some other trendy method of writing lesson plans?

Hell, what about those of us who don't write lesson plans at all? As I recall, in Montessori schools, students write their own "lesson plans" on the theory that people do better when they get input into their own goals. You've just written an "oath" that excludes a substantial part of the teaching community.

[***]




[***] This is where we would have enjoyed your take on a better list

[themusicteacher]

It's not my job to stroke the ego of each and every kid by somehow "making" things interesting. I do my best to find interesting material (music) and work on developing skills and knowledge so that they can work towards becoming competent, confident individuals. I give them opportunities to learn, teach them how to practice the material on their own, provide them with learning tools and resources and come prepared to class. They are given auxiliary support, have extra study sessions offered to them and encouraged to audition for honor groups and perform in solo/small group situations (this is even arranged for them). When they don't learn, I do look at what I'm doing but it's not my job to bend over backwards to make things easy for them. Learning is hard sometimes and there are no shortcuts. If the student is not willing to put forth the effort required and I've done what can be reasonably expected and they still are not learning, that is not my fault.

It's a good thing we don't have to take silly oath's such as this because it just further solidifies the notion that education is a one-way street, teachers being the pitcher, students the receptacle. Teaching and learning are far more dynamic than a teacher following some prescriptive plan and students receiving wisdom from the master. I can allow for LD, ED, MR and every other affliction under the sun and I can be sensitive to that. However, there are far too many lazy students that just want you to make them feel good about being mediocre or just plain poor. When a student is taking advantage of all the resources I provide and making every attempt to practice the right way at home and they are still stagnating, then we'll talk. Until then, I've got better things to do.

[majamin]

It's not my job to stroke the ego of each and every kid by somehow "making" things interesting.

If done properly, this is called scaffolding, not "stroking the ego".

I do my best to find interesting material (music) and work on developing skills and knowledge so that they can work towards becoming competent, confident individuals. I give them opportunities to learn, teach them how to practice the material on their own, provide them with learning tools and resources and come prepared to class. They are given auxiliary support, have extra study sessions offered to them and encouraged to audition for honor groups and perform in solo/small group situations (this is even arranged for them).

Nicely put.


When they don't learn, I do look at what I'm doing but it's not my job to bend over backwards to make things easy for them.

Would you agree that it's your job to properly determine where they are at, and in some cases adjust materials in order to bridge the gap?


It's a good thing we don't have to take silly oath's such as this because it just further solidifies the notion that education is a one-way street, teachers being the pitcher, students the receptacle.

I don't think you understand the basis of the hippocratic oath (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hippocratic_Oath). Historically, it was a symbolic decree when someone was appointed to a role of large responsibility. It's all about ethics not methods. As a profession, teaching has a large responsibility, and hence ethical issues do play a role. Having to take a hippocratic oath, is, of course, debatable. But it's not an irrational premise.

The modern (medical) hippocratic oath does not focus on specific procedures, but outlines an ethical framework to guide decisions. It's not meant to guide specific actions. That's the job of scientific research. I honestly think that teaching is no different.

[Dancing David]

This thought is inspired by some of the threads in this section.
After the manner of the Hipocratic Oath used by medical doctors, what should a Teachers' Oath contain? What does a dedicated teacher owe absolutely to his or her students and profession? I'ver been teaching for 25 years and have a few ideas from experience:

I will accept any student where he is at point a in his education, and do my best to get him to point b;

I will write interesting interactive lesson plans that are scaffolded and bracketed, & teach to the various learning modalities;

I will exercise patience, understanding that each student is an individual, with individual needs.



Any ideas from parents, teachers, students or administrators?

What is more important useless oaths or practice?

[Dancing David]

Would you agree that it's your job to properly determine where they are at, and in some cases adjust materials in order to bridge the gap?


And the last time you were in a public school was?
Lets see this week they have to do the math assessments, in two weeks they have to do the reading assessments. Most class in both my schools have two-three children who are 'high flyers' and require a lot of behavior modeling and interventions, then there are usually 5-7 who are distracting, disruptive and prone to self derailing. We have one math, one science, two reading and one social studies areas to instruct them in daily. There are specials and lunch as well, Most classes have 20-28 students.

What are teachers supposed to do manage the class and teach? Or engage in some ivory tower abstracted theory?

These are already standard practice people, nothing new. Maybe the should throw money at schools.

[Jeff Corey]

I think this is terrible. It's too buzzword heavy, not only in phrasing, but in content. What happens in ten years when learning theorists decide that "learning modalities" isn't all it's believed to be today?...
At least four years ago, the "learning style matching the teaching style" pseudoscience was debunked. http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.121.348 Now it looks like "styles" have become "modalities". As someone who actually studies learning and applications of behavior analysis, I have to laugh when these education types start spouting their jargon.

[Emet]

What is more important useless oaths or practice?

I agree. We had to stand up and recite The Veterinarian's Oath (http://netvet.wustl.edu/vetoath.htm) at graduation. It was silly, and many of us had been drinking during the ceremony. I don't recall any of my classmates taking "the Oath" seriously, even those who were sober.

ETA: Nothing but an old ceremonial practice.

[drkitten]

[***] This is where we would have enjoyed your take on a better list

I gave it to you.

Here it is again, in case you missed it the first time. Bracketed so you can find it more easily this time.

[]

Why do we need a list at all? This looks suspiciously like writing a mission statement instead of doing real work.

[fossilhound]

This conversation is a lot more interesting than I thought it would be. I am not advocating an oath. I'm exploring it. It may very well be "ivory tower" idealism. But aren't teachers idealists to begin with? Didn't we all get into the vocation thinking we could make the world a better place in some small way?

In this scenario, the lazy or noncompliant students cited above are something of a red herring. I know how difficult it is to teach. I recognize that a new bandwagon paradigm rolls through every 3 or 4 years, then rolls out of favor just as quickly. And yet perhaps having the higher best practices ideal to aspire to can protect us from meddling administrators and teaching theories of the week.

themusicteacher: you sound like an excellent teacher. But I've been the UTLA (United Teachers Los Angeles) guy at my school on and off for the last 15 years, and believe me there were many teachers I represented who deserved to be written up. If I had some sort of code to hold before them, perhaps I could have interceded before they got a memo in their files.

Referring to another response: if I were one of those teachers who don't write lesson plans, I'd be very embarassed to admit it. Well-written plans are my greatest friends, especially when I have to try and reach the lazy and disinterested students, or meet the needs of advanced students who are powering through at twice the speed of their peers.

Joe

[majamin]

And the last time you were in a public school was?
[snip]

What are teachers supposed to do manage the class and teach? Or engage in some ivory tower abstracted theory?

These are already standard practice people, nothing new. Maybe the should throw money at schools.

I don't quite know what you were driving at. I asked:

Would you agree that it's your job to properly determine where they are at, and in some cases adjust materials in order to bridge the gap?

All I can discern is that you disagree and that we should not, in any case, adjust materials in oder to bridge the gap for some students.

[majamin]

I'm more interested in exploring the values that guide us ethically. I don't really care if this is in the form of an oath (what fossilhound mentioned above), maybe a list of agreed-upon values.

Teachers should be ethically-accountable professionals, and I have no problems advocating for a list of reasonable guiding principles. For example, (from above)


I will strive to protect students from undue distress, harm, or ridicule

I will provide meaningful lessons that will foster critical thinking, curiosity, and discussion.

I will provide students with constructive feedback of and for their learning


The simple question is: are these examples of principles that teachers should aspire to, and if not, why?

[Piscivore]

"I will not look at my students as a dating pool"

[fossilhound]

"I will not look at my students as a dating pool"

LOL

[fossilhound]

I do my best to find interesting material (music) and work on developing skills and knowledge so that they can work towards becoming competent, confident individuals.

I give them opportunities to learn, teach them how to practice the material on their own, provide them with learning tools and resources and come prepared to class.

They are given auxiliary support, have extra study sessions offered to them and encouraged to audition for honor groups and perform in solo/small group situations (this is even arranged for them). When they don't learn, I do look at what I'm doing... (elipse added)

I can allow for LD, ED, MR and every other affliction under the sun and I can be sensitive to that. (context altered by fossilhound.)

See... everything you already do can be aspired to. I hope I do as well as you.

ETA My point is that you teach to a set of ideals.

[fossilhound]

At least four years ago, the "learning style matching the teaching style" pseudoscience was debunked. http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.121.348 Now it looks like "styles" have become "modalities". As someone who actually studies learning and applications of behavior analysis, I have to laugh when these education types start spouting their jargon.

Thank you for the citation. I am going to purchase and study it. However, one single thesis doesn't refute the body of literature that supports teaching multiple modalities. I admit I don't have a critical citation to support my claim (yet).
ETA
What is an "education type" by the way (other than an appeal to ridicule, spite or a circumstantial ad hominem)? I'm rather proud of being a good teacher.

As someone who actually studies learning and applications of behavior analysis... Are you citing yourself as an expert? Do you imagine I am not? I too have advanced degrees in social sciences, yet I don't cite my own authority.

[Jeff Corey]

Thank you for the citation. I am going to purchase and study it. However, one single thesis doesn't refute the body of literature that supports teaching multiple modalities. I admit I don't have a critical citation to support my claim (yet).

What is an "education type" by the way (other than an appeal to ridicule, spite or a circumstantial ad hominem)? I'm rather proud of being a good teacher.
There are links to earlier studies in that citation and the last time this myth came up, I googled some newer ones. It's myth #18 in Lilienfeld, et al(2010) "50 Great Myths of Popular Psychology".

An "education type" is a teacher who teaches education. Such as one who once said,"You teach behavior analysis? I use that in my classes to negatively reinforce students who cheat!"
"Why do you want your students to cheat more?"
"Huh?"

[drkitten]

Referring to another response: if I were one of those teachers who don't write lesson plans, I'd be very embarassed to admit it. Well-written plans are my greatest friends, especially when I have to try and reach the lazy and disinterested students, or meet the needs of advanced students who are powering through at twice the speed of their peers.



Well, I'm sure that Maria Montessori would be very embarrassed to admit that she didn't have the flexibility and creativity to meet the different needs of different students on-the-fly. I guess we all differ in what embarrasses us. I must admit that I'm more on Maria's side than yours, because (in my experience) the best way to reach the lazy and disinterested students is to have the flexibility to respond to whatever glimmers of interest they might show.

But that's the real problem with the oath as proposed. While I understand that you might disagree with Maria, your oath goes even further and brands her as unethical and incompetent. Basically, what it does is raise some rather dubious and controversial teaching techniques to an ethical norm; Jeff Corey is a bad teacher because he reads different journals than you do.

That's not ethics -- that's a heresy trial.

[fossilhound]

Jeff Corey is a bad teacher because he reads different journals than you do.

That's not ethics -- that's a heresy trial.
I never said that. Please quote me if I did and I'll retract it. You're putting a lot of words in my mouth and changing the tenor of the discussion.

However, "educational types" as defined by Jeff, is obviously a Straw Man argument. I don't teach "education." I teach students, and I remember the craft of teaching as I struggle. And boy, is it a struggle.

As for Montessori... I never mentioned her, so I never attacked her. More words in my mouth.

Joe

[fossilhound]

There are links to earlier studies in that citation and the last time this myth came up, I googled some newer ones. It's myth #18 in Lilienfeld, et al(2010) "50 Great Myths of Popular Psychology".

Thank you again for the citation. You have a lot of good information.

[Jeff Corey]

...However, "educational types" as defined by Jeff, is obviously a Straw Man argument...
I'll bet one or more of them taught you this, "I will write interesting interactive lesson plans that are scaffolded and bracketed, & teach to the various learning modalities."

[drkitten]

I never said that.

You implied that. You specifically proposed, via the oath, that an ethical teacher will "teach to the various learning modalities," implying that a teacher who does not is inethical.

Jeff Corey pointed out that 'the "learning style matching the teaching style" pseudoscience was debunked. http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc...10.1.1.121.348 Now it looks like "styles" have become "modalities".' He specifically called it "pseudoscience" and provided journal articles in support. It doesn't take a great stretch of the imagination to believe that he would refuse outright to "teach to the various learning modalities" -- I'll leave him to object if he chooses to.

You responded that your reading ("the body of literature that supports teaching multiple modalities") disagrees with his. In other words, your journals support your theories of learning -- and your proposed oath still privileges your style (as supported by your journals) over his.

I stand by what I wrote. You accuse Jeff of teaching unethically because he reads different journals.

You're putting a lot of words in my mouth and changing the tenor of the discussion.

And I'm perfectly happy to do that. I see no reason to dress wrong ideas up in pious platitudes.


As for Montessori... I never mentioned her, so I never attacked her.

No, you merely criticized "those teachers who don't write lesson plans," a group of which she is a rather well-regarded and famous member.

You don't need to mention someone by name to criticize them.

More words in my mouth.

If you're not going to stand behind your ideas, don't write them.

[fossilhound]

You implied that. You specifically proposed, via the oath, that an ethical teacher will "teach to the various learning modalities," implying that a teacher who does not is inethical.

Jeff Corey pointed out that 'the "learning style matching the teaching style" pseudoscience was debunked. http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc...10.1.1.121.348 Now it looks like "styles" have become "modalities".' He specifically called it "pseudoscience" and provided journal articles in support. It doesn't take a great stretch of the imagination to believe that he would refuse outright to "teach to the various learning modalities" -- I'll leave him to object if he chooses to.

You responded that your reading ("the body of literature that supports teaching multiple modalities") disagrees with his. In other words, your journals support your theories of learning -- and your proposed oath still privileges your style (as supported by your journals) over his.

I stand by what I wrote. You accuse Jeff of teaching unethically because he reads different journals.



And I'm perfectly happy to do that. I see no reason to dress wrong ideas up in pious platitudes.



No, you merely criticized "those teachers who don't write lesson plans," a group of which she is a rather well-regarded and famous member.

You don't need to mention someone by name to criticize them.



If you're not going to stand behind your ideas, don't write them.

You know what? I'm just not gonna bite. You're adding a lot of acrimony that just doesn't need to be here. This is only an intellectual exercise. And I stand by everything I said regardless of your desire to add inflection and to misinterpret my tone.

By the way: refusing to prepare lesson plans is simply an indefensible position, and I don't care what famous name you drop.

[fossilhound]

I'll bet one or more of them taught you this, "I will write interesting interactive lesson plans that are scaffolded and bracketed, & teach to the various learning modalities."

Does this equate to teaching it to the students rather than teaching the curriculum? I should hope not.

[drkitten]

You know what? I'm just not gonna bite. You're adding a lot of acrimony that just doesn't need to be here. This is only an intellectual exercise. And I stand by everything I said regardless of your desire to add inflection and to misinterpret my tone.

Good. I stand by everything I said as well, so it appears we're even.

[Dancing David]

I don't quite know what you were driving at. I asked:

asked when the last time you were in school was, what makes you think that teachers do differentiate instruction?




All I can discern is that you disagree and that we should not, in any case, adjust materials in oder to bridge the gap for some students.

No that isn’t what I said at all, I said that is standard procedure and should be best practice.

Um, I asked because it is apparent you aren't in a school, where did you get the idea that lessons are not adapted for the low/middle and high students?

But teachers who are managing 20+ students also don't have a lot of time for further differentiation any how, the ability of students is measured in the extreme already.

What do you think reading assessments and math assessments are?

Seriously , where do you get your ideas? What do you think the word assessment means?

A single teacher with 20-30 kids to manage, with five subjects is going to do what?

How do you think they are to manage the work load and make these individual adjustments? They can modify curriculum, they can adapt work to some extent. But they also have to keep teaching.

What you ask for is going to cost money. Special education students already don't get enough support and they even have extra funding and staff.

So now you want a teacher to alter space and time and clone themselves to provide extra support to students who are 'very low'? Maybe schools districts should provide extra staff for that.

When was the last time you were in a class room? And where?

[Jeff Corey]

Oh no, I'll admit it. I'm a horrible teacher. Just ask some of my students.
I never wrote a lesson plan in over 40 years of teaching. Behavior objectives, three published study guides and quizzes for intro psych, articles on teaching reading and introductory psych in the journal of Apllied Behavior Analysis, a bunch of articles in the Teaching of Psychology and the Handbook for the Teaching of Psychology vol. I, II and III, maybe.
But never a lesson plan.

[Dancing David]

The simple question is: are these examples of principles that teachers should aspire to, and if not, why?

And your data is?

[Jeff Corey]

Does this equate to teaching it to the students rather than teaching the curriculum? I should hope not.
I don't understand how what I wrote implies anything of the sort.

[Dancing David]

"I will not look at my students as a dating pool"

Add the obvious:
"I will not hit, belittle or use students as slaves".

[Jeff Corey]

Add the obvious:
"I will not hit, belittle or use students as slaves".
Didn't you ever hear of graduate research assistants?

[drkitten]

Oh no, I'll admit it. I'm a horrible teacher. Just ask some of my students.
I never wrote a lesson plan in over 40 years of teaching. Behavior objectives, three published study guides and quizzes for intro psych, articles on teaching reading and introductory psych in the journal of Apllied Behavior Analysis, a bunch of articles in the Teaching of Psychology and the Handbook for the Teaching of Psychology vol. I, II and III, maybe.
But never a lesson plan.

How indefensible :rolleyes:

Obviously you'd be a much better teacher if you knew less psychology and more buzzwords.

[majamin]

[...]This is only an intellectual exercise. And I stand by everything I said regardless of your desire to add inflection and to misinterpret my tone.[...]

Great OP fossilhound, but I find the participants in this discussion are only interested in derailing the initial intellectual exercise that you proposed.

Flippant, quick to assume, and judgmental comments rule this thread, and I'll have no part in it.

Cheers ...

[Jeff Corey]

Great OP fossilhound, but I find the participants in this discussion are only interested in derailing the initial intellectual exercise that you proposed. ...
It's not a derail to discuss points raised in the OP. Especially if it contains some questionable assumptions.

[fossilhound]

Back to the OP:

I will share my experience and knowledge with colleagues;

I will endeavor to inspire the love of erudition;

[Jeff Corey]

Back to the OP:

[I]I will share my experience and knowledge with colleagues;...

Yes, that is enforced by the rule "Publish or perish" in the groves of academe.
I think that some of the communication problems here involve different systems with different contingencies.
Teaching at the university level usually means you have some say in assigning the textbook. You don't have a lesson plan. You don't have to pay attention to people who gibber about different learning modalities. That's the good part.
The sticky part is that one is expected, nay, required to produce appropriate peer accepted output from your lab or whatever. And document it to the satisfaction of your department Promotion and Tenure Committee, the Dean, the Academic Vice President and the Board of Trustees.
That's why being a slave as a grad student steels us for the rigors that may lie ahead of us, unless we take a huge dose of LSD, as my friend Jim did, and leapt from the shrubbery onto the back of his faculty advisor, screaming, "YOU,you did it."

[LostAngeles]

Oh no, I'll admit it. I'm a horrible teacher. Just ask some of my students.
I never wrote a lesson plan in over 40 years of teaching. Behavior objectives, three published study guides and quizzes for intro psych, articles on teaching reading and introductory psych in the journal of Apllied Behavior Analysis, a bunch of articles in the Teaching of Psychology and the Handbook for the Teaching of Psychology vol. I, II and III, maybe.
But never a lesson plan.

Given that I have to come in and substitute teach some days, having a lesson plan is incredibly helpful because my students will lie to me, with varying qualities of lies.

Having started to write lesson plans of my own, I'm finding that it's a lot easier to help me stay on track, that I can tell my students what the plan is for the week (which often helps to ease their anxiety), and administration knows what nefarious deeds I'm up to, I mean, what if I'm meeting state standards.

Mind you, I'm also new at this and I have an incredibly difficult population of students. If I don't have a lesson plan coming in, it becomes a lot easier to get pulled off task managing all the behavioral issues that come up in a single period. A lesson plan gives me a structure and helps establish the structure that my students need. I can bend and rewrite it as need be, but it's still there.

I don't know what I'd do without a lesson plan.

[Dancing David]

Didn't you ever hear of graduate research assistants?

Those the ones that live in the quaint log cabins?

[Dancing David]

Great OP fossilhound, but I find the participants in this discussion are only interested in derailing the initial intellectual exercise that you proposed.

Flippant, quick to assume, and judgmental comments rule this thread, and I'll have no part in it.

Cheers ...

Oh so actual discussion is cause to flee. Welcome to the JREF!

[drkitten]

I think that some of the communication problems here involve different systems with different contingencies.

But I think the other communication problem is that the proposed oath is far too specific in terms of techniques.

The OP mentions the Hippocratic Oath, but I'm not sure the poster is actually familiar with it. First, the Hippocratic oath is a pretty lousy statement of medical ethics; half of the oath is about preserving the social status of doctors. The other half is about what not to do, most of which is inappropriate and out of date (e.g. I will not do kidney stone surgery; I will not perform euthenasia even if the patient asks for it)

The most famous line from the Oath (as cited by post #5) -- "First, do no harm." -- isn't even in there. (That's a Latin maxim, Primum non nocere, dating back only to the 1840s.)

What's left when you strip out all the parts of the Oath that have been overtaken by changes in society and advances in medical technology is,.... basically, nothing. Perhaps "I won't sleep with the wives of my patients."

So the original oath is a bad idea, or at best a quaint historical relic that "does no harm." The proposed new oath adds several more bad features, most notably a mandate to use dubious and outdated teaching methodologies.

[fossilhound]

Yes, that is enforced by the rule "Publish or perish" in the groves of academe.
I think that some of the communication problems here involve different systems with different contingencies.
Teaching at the university level usually means you have some say in assigning the textbook. You don't have a lesson plan. You don't have to pay attention to people who gibber about different learning modalities. That's the good part."

This is probably our disagreement right on the nose. I teach high school. Haven't taught adults since grad student days (except for the adult school attached to my H.S., and a few years of community college English, which was just remedial H.S. English) My published stuff is utterly irrelevant to my vocation, but I feel like this is where I'm supposed to be.

ETA: If there were an oath, it certainly would have to be specific to the level of education... perhaps even specific to the district and population of students being served.

[fossilhound]

Another difficulty I have is that my H.S. is reconfiguring this year. The district has just opened a new H.S. in the area so our population will drop by over a third. We're moving into Small Learning Communities (SLCs: schools within a school) and our bell schedule will be 90 minutes per period, as opposed to the 61 minutes we had last year. We've been given a little leeway as to how we administer ourselves, so we've been forced to do a LOT of planning. I have to make sure I'm effective for the full 90 minutes, bell to bell, 4 times per day (5 if I have to teach an auxiliary).

[Jeff Corey]

That's a bitch. The numbnuts who decide class schedules decided to make all the 50 min. classes that met three times a week into 75 minute classes that meet twice a week. This makes no sense whatsoever. About 80 years of research on learning has shown that presenting frequent smaller bits of material (distributed practice) is much more efficient than large hunks presented less frequently. That's why I give weekly tests. That seems to work with advanced courses like Critical Thinking.
But Intro Psych is another story. Last semester was a fail.
So next Spring, I'm going to try a variant on this.http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1311043/

[fossilhound]

Numbnuts is right. It's the latest bandwagon. We're going to discover a lot of teachers who cannot teach a 90 minute lesson. I can already point at the people who will fill the deans office with noncompliant students.
Thank you for the link.

[Jeff Corey]

I don't know what you teach, but if fossils are involved, it must be science. I use hands on classroom demos to keep their attention. http://skepticreport.com/sr/?p=194

[Jeff Corey]

No problem, I'm trying to follow the Plait Dicktum. What do you teach?

[fossilhound]

I teach Composition and Literature in East Los Angeles. Have MFA in writing. My fossilhound handle is based upon my other degrees and life-long hobbies. It's what I do during the summer.

[fossilhound]

quoting: Perceptual Learning Style and Learning Proficiency: A Test of the Hypothesis; Gregory P. Kra¨tzig and Katherine D. Arbuthnott
University of Regina
p245: "Thus, helping individuals learn effective memory strategies across all stimulus modalities and contexts, rather than only assessing learning type, may prove to be better for both the student and the education system. As discussed throughout the learning styles literature, presenting material to students in multiple sensory modalities is undoubtedly beneficial to learning and interest..." (elips added)

I agree 100%. This is what I do. I try to build lessons that at some point address as many learning modalities as possible. Good essay.

[Alt+F4]

What does a dedicated teacher owe absolutely to his or her students and profession?

Try your best, same as in any other profession.

[Larry Barrieau]

Yes Alt+.

I don't make too many oaths, but this is how I feel about my teaching; I will do my best to teach the students how to learn and I will teach them the course subject material.

[fossilhound]

Learning modalities are derived in part form Gardiner's Multiple Intelligences (http://www.tecweb.org/styles/gardner.html) (follow this link). I'm of the opinion that the modality of instruction should suit the subject. However, if there's a student at the secondary level who cannot be reached, it is fruitful to determine if perhaps he/she can be reached by teaching to his/her strengths, which might mean teaching English kinesthetically, etc.

Yes, it is more work. Yes... it might be "jumping through hoops." But it is good teaching as well.

[Jeff Corey]

Learning modalities are derived in part form Gardiner's Multiple Intelligences (http://www.tecweb.org/styles/gardner.html) (follow this link). I'm of the opinion that the modality of instruction should suit the subject. However, if there's a student at the secondary level who cannot be reached, it is fruitful to determine if perhaps he/she can be reached by teaching to his/her strengths, which might mean teaching English kinesthetically, etc.

Yes, it is more work. Yes... it might be "jumping through hoops." But it is good teaching as well.

The problem here is that Gardiner's theory is not widely accepted in the field of psychological testing. G, the concept of general intelligence, is the predominant model. Second, many of the different learning styles that have been proposed have little or no relation to Gardiner's controversial theory. For example, the Honey-Mumford model.

[fossilhound]

The problem here is that Gardiner's theory is not widely accepted in the field of psychological testing. G, the concept of general intelligence, is the predominant model. Second, many of the different learning styles that have been proposed have little or no relation to Gardiner's controversial theory. For example, the Honey-Mumford model.

Kratzig's Stimulus Modalities must be different from Learning Modalities, then?

[Jeff Corey]

The terms are often used interchangeably.http://psychology.wikia.com/wiki/Learning_styles

[fossilhound]

"I will write interesting interactive lesson plans that are scaffolded and bracketed, & teach to the through various learning modalities;" as appropriate to the subject matter and needs of the students.

I think this addresses the conclusions of Kratzig and Arbuthnott. It's still just an intellectual exploration. I'm not intent on foisting an oath of any kind on my peers.

Perhaps if I'd worded the OP differently:
What ideals do effective teachers teach to;
and
What research into learning is pertinent and applicable to the secondary classroom?