Debatt ● gary hoffman
Master in teacher education, recruiting and other musings: an American’s perspective
The idea that children, of which 19 year olds still are, should be required to invest 5 years in order to be a teacher is, for me, absurd.
Publisert
Sist oppdatert
Denne teksten er et debattinnlegg. Innholdet i teksten uttrykker forfatterens egen mening.
Originally an American jazz musician from
New Orleans, in 2001, through quite an unusual set of circumstances, I found
myself in Nesna, newly married, and freshly employed as a music teacher at «Høgskolen i Nesna», now Nord University. In the ensuing years, I have
experienced a whirlwind of changes within Norway’s educational system. As my
description implies, stability is difficult in a whirlwind, with one of the
latest instabilities being that of poor teacher recruitment. I would like to
offer some perspectives from that of an outsider with a long experience being
an insider.
Last century, when I earned my bachelor, the last thing on my mind was starting on a master degree. I was incredibly eager to take what I had learned during my bachelor years and apply that practical knowledge outside of the walls of academia. Although I had quite a bit of practical experience and a bachelor under my belt, I also felt that I was not mature enough in my profession to pursue a master degree. At this time in the mid ‘80’s, the definition of the word «master» was still that of someone who had many years of experience in practicing their craft, having acquired the skills and wisdom therein. This included the profession of teaching. The master students I knew at that time were in their 30’s and 40’s, having taken a sabbatical from their teaching duties to dive deeper into the ocean of the teaching arts. Likewise, I returned to academia after 10 years at age 30 to undertake my master, filled with a decade of hard earned practical knowledge and a renewed eagerness to study.
...teaching is a performance art, not a theoretical art, and just like the theory of music, the theory of teaching is based on successful performance.
Gary Hoffman
Very few of the teachers I had while growing up, the majority of whom were quite excellent, had a master. Indeed, several of my university teachers had only their bachelor degree. It was around this time that universities in the United States started requiring a master from their teachers, often being given a two year window in which to complete their degree. This was mainly a culling exercise as many teachers educated in the huge, post WWII classes of the ‘60’s and 70’s had now obtained their masters. It was also a prestige project for the institutions. I had two excellent teachers that lost their job due to not having a master. They were masters of their craft, they just didn’t have the title.
Now, the idea that children, of which 19 year olds still are, should be required to invest 5 years in order to be a teacher is, for me, absurd. According to Khrono, there are 40.000 educated teachers in Norway with their bachelor degree that either quit early or never entered the profession after finishing their education. Either they found out that the career path they had chosen wasn’t right for them, or that it payed too little. Norway is asking modern, impatient, 19 year olds to invest 5 years of their life (an eternity!) in order to maybe, perhaps (hopefully!) have a career as a teacher, not to mention the 5 year wait before earning a salary!
A 3 year, practical based bachelors degree is a much better prospect for a 19 year old. Remember, teaching is a performance art, not a theoretical art, and just like the theory of music, the theory of teaching is based on successful performance. Let the students go out on the stage to mature and gain several years of performance experience, as well as earn money, and then go back to university and reflect and expound on the theoretical. At this point, they will have much more to offer within the theoretical field of education, relying on their own experience, and avoid, for example, the overuse of qualitative interview based masters theses that are unfortunately so prevalent today. Their master will, due to owning a practical based “bank of knowledge”, be easier for them, and the study will therefore have a higher chance of success.
Kari-Anne Jønnes (Høyre), on SV’s desire to remove the master requirement, says, «SVs forslag handler om mindre kunnskap, mindre forskning og mindre status. Det vil vi ikke være med på.» On the contrary, this is not about less knowledge. A 3 year, practical based bachelor, is enough to create excellent teachers. Need I remind Jønnes that the politicians on both sides of this argument received their own primary education from teachers with «only» a bachelor! Jønnes’ concern about less research is also unfounded. Today, there is more than enough research in education, perhaps too much, written by those already in possession of a master, a doctorate or a professorship! In any case, student research will pick up after a few years when ripe students return for their master. Finally, on Jønnes’ concern about status and prestige: Only politicians, Hollywood stars, “influencers” and some ladder climbers in higher education are concerned about status and prestige. Parents, on the other hand, are only concerned that their child is progressively learning the skills they will need as adults to succeed in life, taught by talented, caring and professionally strong teachers.
Next, the matter of pay as incentive will always be an important one. While I studied jazz performance, many of my fellow students took their bachelor in music education in order to have a good source of income while also performing artistically. In the United States, teacher’s salaries have stagnated so much over the past 30 years that almost all of my friends have quit the teaching profession. Several have re-educated themselves as nurses and others have gone into various business ventures. We can see the same signs in Norway (see above). Teacher’s salaries here, especially at the university level, have not held pace to that of the private sector. The duties outside of the classroom, especially administrative, for teachers from first grade to the doctorate level have increased dramatically over the past 25 years since I first started teaching in Norway. Prospective teacher students are not blind to this fact, especially after the government shutdown of the teachers strike last year.
Finally, I would like to address the seemingly endless need for ruling political parties in Norway to make their own mark on the educational system. This endless carousel of change for change’s sake is a blight on the system. For example, the unnecessary fusion of so many institutions that has led to a huge mess of administrative unruliness, homogeny that erases institutional uniqueness, high travel costs that, in turn, contribute to more pollution, separation of leaders and employees, not to mention a huge cast of leaders (with top pay), vice leaders, assistant vice leaders, next vice leaders and local leaders ad infinitum. It’s no wonder that leader education is one of the most popular studies offered in Norway! And consider «Kvalitetsreformen 2002» that allowed the larger institutions to open their doors to however many students they could cram into their lecture halls, effectively vacuuming the district colleges of many prospective students, reducing classroom quality and creating a student housing crisis in the larger cities throughout the past 20 years. In my honest opinion, big business models and New Public Management should not be a part of Higher Education. Just take a closer look at what’s happened in American since the ‘80’s with the present use of 60-70% adjunct, insanely high tuitions and multi-million dollar salaries for the leaders. You’ve been warned.
In conclusion, I’d like to give this bit of advice from Thomas Bertram Lance, adviser to President Jimmy Carter, «If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it». Ironically, the more each government tries to fix something they think is broken, the more broken it becomes! Some of the policies over the past 25 years were just fine. But before universities and colleges were able to complete integrations and evaluations of earlier policies, a new government would step in and introduce yet more sweeping changes. Teacher education recruitment at this point is obviously broken. Be very, very careful how you fix it.
