If you were a prison guard, would you rather guard violent criminals, or non-violent criminals?
I think the answer is obvious. Prison guards like people who are easier to deal with, because it makes their job easier. (Forget for now the traditional nature of a prison guard’s job.)
Well, how about if you were a teacher? Would you rather teach students who are hard to teach, or students who are easy to teach? (Forget for now the traditional nature of a school teacher’s job.)
Might that depend on what is “easy”? What if it is harder to teach students who have both willingness and capability, than those who are not? Might that depend on the definition of “teach”? To posit two extremes, suppose a teacher has the choice between teaching a mentally retarded child and a gifted child?
Is it possible that because of lower expectations, hopeless students are considered “easier”?
I’m not seeing easy answers, only an easy blog post.
Comments
5 responses to “What makes a job easier?”
Thinking back on my own career of 37 years in academe, it seems to me that I didn’t teach anyone. For the average student and worse, I provided the structure and incentives they needed to learn the material themselves as best they could. For the gifted students, I tried to stay out of their way.
In K-12 you get extra rewards for teaching gifted.
And bob is absolutely right about “get out of the way” re: gifted.
I think the middle would be the easiest. I wouldn’t want to teach a class of disruptive kids or kids far smarter than me.
In most of my undergrad classes, kids paid attention without challenging the professor. Everyone played their rolls.
As a graduate business student, we challenged the professors. We had a liberal professor who taught the mandatory Organization Design class. He was just destroyed in debates by military Veterans, engineers, and experienced business people. Almost made me feel sorry for him.
Bram,
Without naming names could you touch on some of the debate points with the prof. ?
The “Get out of the way” comment for gifted students is quite incorrect. At least at the high school level. The idea that smart and successful students will study and apply the discipline needed to master difficult material is largely a fantasy. I teach AP Physics with great results indicated by a growing program with excellent test scores and the college success of my students. Sure, one in a couple of hundred will study physics out of a personal interest, but even that student will not have the discipline to get a well-rounded mastery of a subject like physics.
To teach gifted students, the instructor sets appropriate challenges, presents the material in an engaging manner, provides ample opportunity for practice and gives specific and timely feedback to each student. Actually, pretty much what you do for any group of students.
The difference is that gifted students work hard and can detect bullshit. The teacher has to be prepared. Also, the parents of gifted students have high expectations and require good service. Some among them are powerful in the district.
I have taught lower level, but general ed. students. Parents frequently have little engagement. Classroom management is a bigger issue, but students won’t challenge the teacher intellectually. The students are generally more gregarious and entertaining, but less academically motivated.
My experience is that an AP teacher puts more time into planning and lesson preparation, but class time is delightful. The teacher of lower level students doesn’t put in as much prep. time, but class is more of a challenge with management issues.
It comes down to teacher preference.