Quote:
|
Originally Posted by cannibal.horse I go to a school ranked 187th, for the most part the staff at my school are older/better then those in the rest of the region (we're a rural area) but there are a few exceptions...
- My modern history teacher is shit, he gives us excel/maquarie photocopies for notes
- My advanced english teacher has had that many complaints by students he's not allowed to teach advanced next year
- My mate's electronics teacher burnt all the wires in his major project, due tomorrow.
You tend to find that a lot of comprehensive high schools in the sydney region (St Pius X and St Marys Cathedrel) get ranked within the 100-150's whereas schools in rural areas, well, usually start at about 150...
So are teachers in sydney areas, and particually at select and private schools of a better quality? (generally speaking) or is it just the students are more diligent?
arguements for:
- Sydney being a city might be more attractive for many teachers, and teaching good students in select schools would make these schools more attractive
arguements against:
- Pay and the transfer system is the same at every school, and with the exception of private schools you cant just dismiss staff because they are average teachers. |
Yeah, that's my school which is currently ranked 101 or 100!
Anyway, back on track: I don't know if all the good teachers are coming to the urban area. But I am sure about one thing: good teacher empower students to help themselves rather than spoon-feed them throughout the HSC year (or even durng the Preliminary year). Therefore, class environment has an impact on this matter as it affects students' learning environment and the knowledge they absorb. No matter, how much teachers spoon-feed them, if the students themselves are not self-sustaining and not working well, all the effort goes to waste. The reason why we perceive (usually) Selective teachers as the top quality is not necessarily due to the fact that they teach effectivey. It's the students' result that deceive us into thinking that the teachers' efforts go hand in hand with their results. But that's not necessarily the case.
Same story for many private high schools. Students usually are of the high quality than normal public schools and that's probably why they perform well, thus deceiving us to believe that teachers there are awesome to the core. So I think it's all up to the students when it comes to determining how good the teachers are. Apart from that way, how would you really come about determining whether that teacher is good or not? (when you didn't even experience that teacher yourself?)