Teaching maths - what is salary likely to be?!

dmg24

Anihilator wrote: »

Yes it is ridicolously elitist

There will be plenty of maths graduates who dont earn anywhere near 44k.

I know of four maths grads, only one earns more over £40K. He would probably be the least capable of teaching!

Edit: The one earning more than £40K went to Leicester.

alunharford

Oldernotwiser wrote: »

Excellent universities as they are, I hardly think that a degree from Oxbridge or similar is a necessary requirement to teach 3C basic algebra!

As far as I'm concerned, that is the crux of the problem. We recruit teachers without enough knowledge of mathematics so we can't change the syllabus to reflect the modern world (where we have these things called 'computers' and they're kind of important) because our teachers wouldn't be able to teach the course.

Some stuff that is taught to university students is so fundamental to modern life that it needs to be taught pre-GCSE. To do that, you need teachers who have a good degree (the people who have the academic credentials to currently teach it to undergrads).

Gödel's incompleteness theorem really should have been discovered by the ancient greek mathematicians, but we got unlucky - it wasn't discovered so it wasn't taught. As soon as the theorem was discovered, every mathematician in the world knew it would change the world forever (for any non-mathematician who may have wondered in here, the short story is that it breaks logic - computers were invented by Alan Turing as a way to demonstrate it easily).

We should have acted to ensure that every child was properly aware of it in 1932, but our teachers lacked the understanding needed to teach it to them. But because it wasn't taught to them, the next generation of teachers couldn't teach it either.

We need to break the cycle! And we need to make sure that we don't make the same mistake again - we simply don't know what teachers will have to teach in 5 years time.

EDIT: In case you're thinking Mathematics is a static subject that doesn't change much, remember what education system you're a product of!

Anihilator

What a load of crap.

If anything the problem is Maths teaches a syllabus that doesnt reflect any of the knowledge the vast majority are likely to need. We certainly dont need to teach even more complex problems to them.

If anything imo Maths needs to be simplified at school. If people want to further learn it then that is what uni is for.

Oldernotwiser

alunharford wrote: »

As far as I'm concerned, that is the crux of the problem. We recruit teachers without enough knowledge of mathematics so we can't change the syllabus to reflect the modern world (where we have these things called 'computers' and they're kind of important) because our teachers wouldn't be able to teach the course.

Some stuff that is taught to university students is so fundamental to modern life that it needs to be taught pre-GCSE. To do that, you need teachers who have a good degree.

Whilst I agree with you about falling educational standards at all levels, I have to say that you seem to have very little idea of the sort of Maths that is required by the great majority of school students.

pinkshoes

Teaching is a unique skill and requires a particular aptitude. From my experience it tends to be a personality trait that someone possesses, rather than something you can learn.

Teaching is not about money. It's about using your natural ability and to get paid for doing something you love. If the first thing you think about is the money and salary limitations, then I would say teaching is not for you.

I think the government needs to start giving aptitude tests to those wanting to teach, and those that just don't have what it takes can then save their money and seek a career elsewhere.

A maths degree from Cambridge means nothing if you lack the aptitude and charisma to teach.

alunharford

Anihilator wrote: »

If anything the problem is Maths teaches a syllabus that doesnt reflect any of the knowledge the vast majority are likely to need. We certainly dont need to teach even more complex problems to them.

To an extent, I agree with you. The majority of the Maths syllabus is a complete waste of time.

Long division is pointless these days.
Ditto all written methods of calculation.
Properties of shapes (internal angle, loads of stuff on circles, etc).
Much of 'handling data' dealing with non-computer-based methods.
Order of operations.
Loci.
Most trig.
Most elementary calculus.

I'd drop all of this in exchange for a small bit on axioms at KS2 (what is an axiom, inconsistent and consistent systems in plain language), an explanation of Godel's incompleteness theorem at KS3, and some stuff on RSA at A-level.

Deal?

alunharford

pinkshoes wrote: »

A maths degree from Cambridge means nothing if you lack the aptitude and charisma to teach.

Agreed. But the aptitude and charisma required to teach means nothing if you don't have enough knowledge of the subject.

People who have both are highly prized by industry, particularly in mathematics and computing. When you tell them 'you could earn up to 35k a year' they tend to give you strange looks.

If the government thinks it can fill all the posts with people who will give up everything to teach no matter the salary then they really need to take that phrase out of their advertising and focus instead on making sure that people with an aptitude for teaching can get the appropriate qualifications.

PennyPincher_L

a more lucrative business is opening up a tuition center (at your home initially) and growing from there when you have a quantity of students

Oldernotwiser

alunharford wrote: »

I'd drop all of this in exchange for a small bit on axioms at KS2 (what is an axiom, inconsistent and consistent systems in plain language), an explanation of Godel's incompleteness theorem at KS3, and some stuff on RSA at A-level.

Have you ever met an average 14 year old?

iamana1ias

Oldernotwiser wrote: »

Have you ever met an average 14 year old?

:rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl: