• You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community, you will have access to additional post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), view blogs, respond to polls, upload content, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free, so please join our community today! Just click here to register. You should turn your Ad Blocker off for this site or certain features may not work properly. If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us by clicking here.

Is Teaching Still a Viable Career? Advice Please!

Fidelia

Iron Maiden
Staff member
Joined
May 31, 2009
Messages
14,497
MBTI Type
INFJ
No, I love the actual teaching part. I don't enjoy the paperwork. I don't think that being introverted is the issue for me, as I find that when I get to really teach something, it is very energizing. What I object to is the changes that have taken place from the top down as well as on a student level which make it very difficult to effectively do my job.
 

Venom

Babylon Candle
Joined
Feb 10, 2008
Messages
2,126
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
1w9
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
No, I love the actual teaching part. I don't enjoy the paperwork. I don't think that being introverted is the issue for me, as I find that when I get to really teach something, it is very energizing. What I object to is the changes that have taken place from the top down as well as on a student level which make it very difficult to effectively do my job.

ah, I see. so for you its essentially:
<> behavior of children has become worse than you ever remember (ADD, cell phones etc)
<> parents don't see any problem with "my little jonnie" (but thats probably always been true)

(is this a fair assessment?)

May I ask what age level you teach (and subject if applicable)? In my sports background, I actually enjoyed teaching ages 9-12 the most. However, I would probably seek to teach high school based mainly on what subject matter I enjoy.
 
Joined
Jun 6, 2007
Messages
7,312
MBTI Type
INTJ
"Advanced" is all a matter of perspective. Generally, in most areas, I think grunts are as well equipped to perform the same task than people who have been there their whole lives. It's a matter of what kind of person you are, rather than how long you've been there. People value experience too much. Experience isn't gonna make you a Van Gogh or a Beethoven. Talent shines through irrespective of years of service or job position. Because if you look closely, the only thing that usually gets worse when you climb the ladder is responsibility. Tasks are usually easier the more you climb and so is the salary.

I don't think this is true. If grunts could perform the jobs that more experienced workers have, they'd get them. The grunts would command a lower salary for such jobs. I don't think experience is underrated at all. There's a learning curve for every job. Employers can't afford to throw someone talented but green into a position of great responsibility because they'll have growing pains, possibly costly ones.

Experience isn't going to make you a Van Gogh or a Beethoven if the talent isn't there, but likewise, even Van Gogh or Beethoven didn't spring out of the womb painting and composing masterpieces. In Malcolm Gladwell's book "Outliers", he examines what makes people a success, and he's determined that complete mastery of a skill takes roughly 10,000 hours. Obviously this is a generalization, but the point remains. Even prodigiously talented people need to nurture their talent.
 

Fidelia

Iron Maiden
Staff member
Joined
May 31, 2009
Messages
14,497
MBTI Type
INFJ
ah, I see. so for you its essentially:
<> behavior of children has become worse than you ever remember (ADD, cell phones etc)
<> parents don't see any problem with "my little jonnie" (but thats probably always been true)

(is this a fair assessment?)

May I ask what age level you teach (and subject if applicable)? In my sports background, I actually enjoyed teaching ages 9-12 the most. However, I would probably seek to teach high school based mainly on what subject matter I enjoy.

I've taught Grades 1-12 throughout my 12 year teaching history (as well as two years of university classes). I have taught regular classroom in both privileged neighbourhoods, oiltowns and Indian reserves as well as middle class areas. I have done three years of subbing at all age levels and subjects. My areas of specialty though where I have spent the most time teaching are in Music (band, fiddle, guitar, general music, orchestra) and French. In French, I was teaching Grades 1-8 at a middle class school. In music I have had the whole gambit from Grades 3-12, going to several different schools in one case, and teaching in a large N-12 reserve school of 1500 in the other case. I was struck by how similar the problems of neglect were between rich white kids and underpriviliged native kids. They were both spoiled and neglected, their parents were largely absent, peers were very important, and in many ways they were responsible for making their own decisions.

I feel strongly enough about this phenomenon that I have taken this year off teaching so that I can write about it, in hopes of reaching a wider audience. I come from a family of teachers (every one of the six kids in my mum's family either became a teacher or married one), my parents have both been highly involved in public, private and home education systems, and my sister and brother-in-law are also teachers. In my extended family, I have 3 teacher cousins and two educational assistant cousins. They are in rural, urban and private school settings). Many of my friends are also teachers who live in various parts of the country. I have taught in three provinces myself. I have also talked to a lot of experienced teachers who are not far from retirement. Separately they have all commented on the downward shift they have seen every year, but particularly in the last 4 or 5.

In summary to your assessment:

1. Behaviour of children is worse and their need for or dependence on parents is less: they have their own peer group, money, cell phones, vehicles, schedules, significant others, emotional baggage and very little time with their parents. They are much more alpha and generally act more entitled than ever before because they have more than they ever did with less responsibility.

2. Parents either don't see a problem because they don't know their child or don't want to deal with the implications of seeing a problem (they would be required to act) and they also have very little influence over the situation.

Obviously, there are some parents who are still trying to do a good job, but often their children are very neglected within regular school classrooms because they do not require the same attention as more demanding children with problem behaviours. The school system has become very behaviourist instead of developmental, which means that bad children are frequently given perks for acting good for small intervals, while good children are largely ignored.
 

Moiety

New member
Joined
Aug 3, 2008
Messages
5,996
MBTI Type
ISFJ
I don't think this is true. If grunts could perform the jobs that more experienced workers have, they'd get them. The grunts would command a lower salary for such jobs. I don't think experience is underrated at all. There's a learning curve for every job. Employers can't afford to throw someone talented but green into a position of great responsibility because they'll have growing pains, possibly costly ones.

Experience isn't going to make you a Van Gogh or a Beethoven if the talent isn't there, but likewise, even Van Gogh or Beethoven didn't spring out of the womb painting and composing masterpieces. In Malcolm Gladwell's book "Outliers", he examines what makes people a success, and he's determined that complete mastery of a skill takes roughly 10,000 hours. Obviously this is a generalization, but the point remains. Even prodigiously talented people need to nurture their talent.

Yes. But by grunts I mean people that at least know the theory behind their jobs. Just inexperienced. I didn't finish my major, yet I had harder projects in college than the jobs I found in the industry. And everywhere I look, most jobs are simply a matter of adaptation. After a year or so doing something....it usually does boil down to talent. At least imo. Let's put it this way - I think experience is overrated.

Teaching is a hard profession, and some people are intuitively more attuned to it. Like psychology etc


I realize my argument is far from strong, but holistically speaking, unless it's a very very technical area...most jobs are about getting used to it for a while and then rinse and repeat for the rest of your life.
 
O

Oberon

Guest
Experience doesn't necessarily make you a better worker, but it does give you a track record. The track record can reassure a potential employer that you are a good hiring risk. Therefore, employers will hire experienced people over inexperienced people (even inexperienced people with demonstrated talent, in many cases).

There's a lot more to a hiring decision than merely assessing whether the candidate can do the job. Potential employers want someone who has the skills plus a work ethic, initiative, social skills, a calm disposition, a professional demeanor, a stable personal life, reasonable health, and good grooming habits. All of this stuff is impossible to assess by a resume and an interview, of course, but work experience can at least demonstrate that you're capable of holding a job for a certain length of time. And that's huge.
 

Tamske

Writing...
Joined
Oct 22, 2009
Messages
1,764
MBTI Type
ENTP
When we talked about careers in high school, I was the only one who didn't want to do "anything with people". Now that was part stubbornness, I always went against the flow of my classmates, but it was mostly sincere. I thought it would be best, both for myself and for others, if I was kept away from people. I wanted to study lifeless things, like planets and stars and atoms.
It was only when I taught some classes as part of my PhD duties that I realized I actually liked it.

So: try it. Do you like explaining things? Do you find pleasure when someone understands something?
When I first stood before a class, I was acting. I was acting as if I was a real teacher and I felt like a fraud. But suddenly I realised that my acting was actually producing the same results as real teaching ought to do: students learned things!

I'm a teacher now. Yes, the only classmate who didn't want to do anything with people. I wanted to do something with knowledge and math and science. And I'm doing that, too.
 

Little Linguist

Striving for balance
Joined
Jun 23, 2008
Messages
6,880
MBTI Type
xNFP
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
I'm a teacher, and I have taught English at several different levels in many different age groups from little kids to pensioners. :) So if you want to discuss the matter in depth, I would be happy to do so. :D

And you don't get much more extraverted than Little Linguist. ;)
 

Chunes

New member
Joined
Sep 9, 2009
Messages
364
MBTI Type
INFP
Enneagram
9w1
I always viewed becoming a teacher a lot like enlisting. The intention is often nice, but you're basically signing yourself away to a monstrous hegemony, to be used at the whims of politicians. What students really need, your individual contributions, are precisely what federalized schooling takes away.
 

You

New member
Joined
Jun 8, 2010
Messages
2,124
MBTI Type
entp
Enneagram
7w8
No!

Give up.

It's over.​

You dont have a chance.​
 

Cookie Monster

New member
Joined
Sep 22, 2010
Messages
12
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
6w5
Several of my friends and classmates went into teaching. 5 years ago, they were hurting for teachers...now the market has become saturated, and my state's government has been of of the most notorious for slashing budgets. I think that once things stabilize with the economy, there will be a need for teachers again, but right now, markets are tough across the board.

The debate about experience and talent is interesting, but I have to agree with Sytpg in that employers these days are too focused on people with X years of experience. Yet, ( also agree with Ivy...people are not born talented...their gifts have to be nurtured. But the problem is that employers are so hell-bent on X years of experience and whether someone is employed, that they fail to actually LOOK at a resume and extract character traits. Plus, there are all kinds of politics and EEOC demands on who actually gets hired...meaning that the best person is often not hired (or even asked to interview) because of the narrow way people are looking at resumes. Part of this has to do with the economy and the sheer number of applicants, but we cannot deny the problem...a lot of raw, talented people are not able to break into professional jobs because of these things. Thus, many people who spend years and money getting their degree, highly achieving in school, getting involved in internships...are still struggling.

For most jobs, GPA and college extracurriculars are not seen as important. However, if I was hiring, I would look at a high GPA, lots of involvement as a candidate who puts forth 110%. A high GPA generally shows a hard worker, as grades are less to do with smarts and more to do with how hard someone works. Now who would not want to hire someone who gives 110%?

The bottom line...most people who make good hiring decisions are able to discern CHARACTER...along with talent and experience...from the resume and interview alone. And there is a lot more about a person you can tell just in a resume and interview if you really look at it. I don't care how many years of experience or how talented the person is...if they don't care, are not motivated to learn, have a nasty attitude...then I would rather invest extra time training than wasting time on a dud who is only going to drag me down.

A hire, like many things in life, is an investment. Don't buy a big shiny house because it looks real good, only to found the foundations are rotting. And this happens every day in business.
 
Top