You want every Tom, **** and Argent to be able to teach kids?I looked into becoming a teacher because I need a change. Through my research I realized practically every different teacher needs a different license. Teaching license based on grade level, administration license, special ed license, special reading license, special license to work at the AEA, special license to coach, etc.
Are all of these really necessary? Do these licenses only serve the schools who grant them? Why can't you use experience with one to fulfill the others?
I looked into becoming a teacher because I need a change. Through my research I realized practically every different teacher needs a different license. Teaching license based on grade level, administration license, special ed license, special reading license, special license to work at the AEA, special license to coach, etc.
Are all of these really necessary? Do these licenses only serve the schools who grant them? Why can't you use experience with one to fulfill the others?
Well, they already can -- just has to be at home. At least it's contained.You want every Tom, **** and Argent to be able to teach kids?
I can't wait until Argent gets to this thread. It'll be glorious.
Dang you're fast today.
I'm surprised the libertarians haven't weighed in yet. They hate licensure.
Many professions, not just teaching, require licenses. If you're in the field, you just get it.
Yeah, it's a way to protect your territory from new entrants. Recent studies have shown over 30% of all workers in the US require a license.
I'm not arguing against teachers needing a license. I am questioning why each different area needs a separate license. Hire good people and put them in positions to excel.
You want every Tom, **** and Argent to be able to teach kids?
Your hypothetical isn't helpful in overcoming the evident need to license in certain professions, which I'm sure are based on an identifiable professional need more than a whim. If you want to be a doctor, or a lawyer, or a barber, or an electrician, or a teacher, you go to the appropriate schools or training, take tests, and pay a small fee to show the world you are qualified.I don't think I've suggested getting rid of it altogether, but let's look at this example.
There was someone at my company who was really good at photoshop. We took him from a plan tech and made him the marketing guru. He's excelled in his new role all because he found an interest in photoshop. Our deliverables are better, our public outreach is better, and we look more unified. Now imagine if we said to him, "That's great you have an interest, but if you want to do marketing you'll need a marketing degree." We'd never have found a win-win because he'd be in a job he didn't like as much and we'd have to take a chance on someone we didn't know (a new marketing grad).
I'm not a teacher, but I know we have teachers on the board who could speak to this.Yeah, it's a way to protect your territory from new entrants. Recent studies have shown over 30% of all workers in the US require a license.
I'm not arguing against teachers needing a license. I am questioning why each different area needs a separate license. Hire good people and put them in positions to excel.