Those that can, do. Those that's can't, teach. Anyone who actually has knowledge and skills in their fields of expertise will be applying them, not wasting time teaching others about them. Teaching has long been a congregation of failures.
Intro to [Stem Field] courses are a major drain on modern academia, as genius spergs are forced to half-ass students' first experience in whatever major they chose. The teachers don't give the slightest of fucks about teaching, and the students are left flapping in the breeze, either overwhelmed from difficult work poorly explained, or given free A/Bs from an absentee professor.
True, but many of them do have the motherly quality needed in elementary schoolteachers. This is frequently more important than having the rudimentary knowledge needed to teach spelling or arithmetic or to illustrate the life-cycle of a pepper plant.
I've never trusted men who teach elementary grades.
Kids in school are not "kiddos" who need a mommy. They are students, they need educators. If they "frequently" need the "motherly qualities" you describe, and aren't even aware that pepper plants exist, there is something seriously wrong.
Which we all know. The whole thing is borked, and it's in no small part of exactly what you're describing as a good thing. Jaysus.
Kids in school are not "kiddos" who need a mommy. They are students, they need educators.
"Students" of the ages common in K-5th grade are children. Teachers serve "in loco parentis." Kids spend more time with teachers than with family, especially if both parents work.
Milk-and-cookies, sing-alongs, and nap-time are not scholarly pursuits, and no special knowledge is needed to teach kids the three Rs in K-5. At these ages, theoretical expertise in child psychology is no substitute for instinctively motherly qualities.
Who would you rather have consoling a child who scrapes his knee on the playground or gets glue squirted in her pencil-box? A scholar or a matron?
I'm sorry you're so indoctrinated you see men enjoying working with kids and think "pedophile". That feminist line of thinking is why it went from a more even split to almost entirely women K-8.
Indoctrinated, my ass. I am in the process of shedding my social conditioning.
I, like many other Americans, spent 6 years in elementary school, and all my teachers were women. This is the basis of my opinion.
And, contrary to your hot take, I believe women are better suited to teaching children than men for the reason I state, not because I assume men teaching elementary school are pedophiles.
Men are not as capable of nurturing children as women are. With few exceptions, men cannot be "motherly," and this quality is suited for teaching kids in grades K-5 or 6.
Modern teaching isn't even teaching these days, it's getting children to "listen to the message" and regurgitate the correct words at the correct time. There's little to no critical thinking promoted because wrongthink is bad.
Those that can, do. Those that's can't, teach. Anyone who actually has knowledge and skills in their fields of expertise will be applying them, not wasting time teaching others about them. Teaching has long been a congregation of failures.
Maybe the mistake was in making it a profession in and of itself, rather than as a retirement job for masters of other professions.
Intro to [Stem Field] courses are a major drain on modern academia, as genius spergs are forced to half-ass students' first experience in whatever major they chose. The teachers don't give the slightest of fucks about teaching, and the students are left flapping in the breeze, either overwhelmed from difficult work poorly explained, or given free A/Bs from an absentee professor.
those who REALLY can't, are women
True, but many of them do have the motherly quality needed in elementary schoolteachers. This is frequently more important than having the rudimentary knowledge needed to teach spelling or arithmetic or to illustrate the life-cycle of a pepper plant.
I've never trusted men who teach elementary grades.
That’s modern brainwashing. You don’t need a “motherly” quality for schoolteachers.
OK Mr. Gradgrind.
Kids in school are not "kiddos" who need a mommy. They are students, they need educators. If they "frequently" need the "motherly qualities" you describe, and aren't even aware that pepper plants exist, there is something seriously wrong.
Which we all know. The whole thing is borked, and it's in no small part of exactly what you're describing as a good thing. Jaysus.
"Students" of the ages common in K-5th grade are children. Teachers serve "in loco parentis." Kids spend more time with teachers than with family, especially if both parents work.
Milk-and-cookies, sing-alongs, and nap-time are not scholarly pursuits, and no special knowledge is needed to teach kids the three Rs in K-5. At these ages, theoretical expertise in child psychology is no substitute for instinctively motherly qualities.
Who would you rather have consoling a child who scrapes his knee on the playground or gets glue squirted in her pencil-box? A scholar or a matron?
I'm sorry you're so indoctrinated you see men enjoying working with kids and think "pedophile". That feminist line of thinking is why it went from a more even split to almost entirely women K-8.
Indoctrinated, my ass. I am in the process of shedding my social conditioning.
I, like many other Americans, spent 6 years in elementary school, and all my teachers were women. This is the basis of my opinion.
And, contrary to your hot take, I believe women are better suited to teaching children than men for the reason I state, not because I assume men teaching elementary school are pedophiles.
Men are not as capable of nurturing children as women are. With few exceptions, men cannot be "motherly," and this quality is suited for teaching kids in grades K-5 or 6.
Modern teaching isn't even teaching these days, it's getting children to "listen to the message" and regurgitate the correct words at the correct time. There's little to no critical thinking promoted because wrongthink is bad.