GI bill is a great corollary. As a government social service, education should be taking advantage of other government domains when creating incentive structures. The GI bill is a good example, and offering public school teachers free further education at public universities would hit on two points in the article, more teacher training a…
GI bill is a great corollary. As a government social service, education should be taking advantage of other government domains when creating incentive structures. The GI bill is a good example, and offering public school teachers free further education at public universities would hit on two points in the article, more teacher training and life-long learning in general.
As far as teachers owning their own materials and syllabi, I think it's crucial, but maybe needs to be done differently for different subjects. I think there's something to be said for the idea that we should find the highest quality material possible on a given subject, and have teachers save time and not re-implement the wheel again and again, but right now the opposite is happening in my mind: most school curricula are built by companies for profit, optimized to push schools to buy new content every year, and to buy as much supplementary material as the school budget can handle. The content isn't made by teachers who have good intuitions for what the material should cover, but instead corporate content writers. Platforms like TeachersPayTeachers (curriculum content that teachers can buy from other teachers) is an interesting alternative system, I don't know that it's perfect but definitely seems better to me than the current corporate-educational content setup.
GI bill is a great corollary. As a government social service, education should be taking advantage of other government domains when creating incentive structures. The GI bill is a good example, and offering public school teachers free further education at public universities would hit on two points in the article, more teacher training and life-long learning in general.
As far as teachers owning their own materials and syllabi, I think it's crucial, but maybe needs to be done differently for different subjects. I think there's something to be said for the idea that we should find the highest quality material possible on a given subject, and have teachers save time and not re-implement the wheel again and again, but right now the opposite is happening in my mind: most school curricula are built by companies for profit, optimized to push schools to buy new content every year, and to buy as much supplementary material as the school budget can handle. The content isn't made by teachers who have good intuitions for what the material should cover, but instead corporate content writers. Platforms like TeachersPayTeachers (curriculum content that teachers can buy from other teachers) is an interesting alternative system, I don't know that it's perfect but definitely seems better to me than the current corporate-educational content setup.