老師的素質---老掉牙的問題
這兩月事忙，沒有到來和大家交流，罪過。
天地旅者和幾位朋友都談老師的地位和素質問題，也使我有點感慨。
甚麼才是好老師？沒有人能回答。公開考試成績高---補習天王？關心學生----阿爸阿媽？學養精深，有所啟導----大學教授？活動出色----運動教練？風趣詼諧----娛樂巨星？社會對教師的要求是多樣的，不同時候就有不同標準和原則。學生也如是，上課要風趣，又要言之有物，不能吹水，考試成績要好，又能提高自己對某些科目的興趣......大家也忘了這原則有時會互相矛盾的。
香港是個國際城巿，也自然受到國際文明的影響。國際文明首重問責。古代有云：食君之祿，擔君之憂。學校拿公帑，老師拿公帑，自然也要受社會的監控。外國的問責原則較簡單，因為對教師工作的描述很具體，哪些是教師的責任，哪些是學校行政人員的責任，哪些是學校輔導人員的責任，相對地很清楚，甚麼是好老師，原則也清楚。香港對學校教育和教師的工作描述不清晰，自然也就不容易判斷誰是好老師了。若學校老師成了補習天王，用補習天王的方法，同學和家長又會不會說老師巿儈、欠缺教育理想呢？
這又令我回想起外評的報告。
自評和外評的目的本來只是讓學校培養自我檢視的文化，以求自我改進；可是，在缺乏公認的標準的情況下，無論自評和外評的工作都不易進行。要檢視，就需有指標；指標有主觀的、校本的，也有客觀的、全港性的。現時的問題和爭拗就是缺乏公認的、全港性的指標。就拿成績方面說，學校評核學與教的成效是甚麼？公開考試成績？合格率及優良率？增值成績？還是同學或教師的課堂表現？缺乏公認的標準，外評報告自然不能令學校信服。公認的標準，也不一定只是單一標準，也可以是上述全部的指標，只要教統局能清楚說明各種指標的輕重就行，例如，某校的合格率和優良率超越全港平均水平30%以上，那就無需檢視增值指標了。
天地旅者說學校的課程設計原則和精神受到家長的指責，其實也同時受同學指責。這是自然的。現今整個社會都以實利為目的，某種較理想化的教育理念當然受到極大衝激。某角度來看，這也是無可奈何的；某角度看，我們也應因時制宜的；又某角度看，我們也應擇善固執的啊。這不是吹水，隨便胡說。事實上，教育是多元化的藝術，只是現代社會只重視單元目標和成效，往往忽略了教育的本質，把教育和訓練混而一談。
在這現代社會，或後現代社會，這也是一種不可避免的現象，只是在香港這社會，這現象更趨混亂，因為我們根本缺乏我們的方向和原則，因為我們缺乏我們的根源和文化。
text/html
回應
温哥華的老師
對付不斷增高的要求，温哥華的老師倒有辦法。每年教師工會都罷工，要高質素就要高工資－－雖然高工資不代表高質素！
Possibly
However, the salary for now is already quite high, frankly, just the workload, responsibility and pressure is never compansated and can't be eliminated by the high salary.
Frostig good point
Good point Frostig. The problem is not many people, teachers included, are willing to cut their wages for a smaller workload.
Not 100% true
There are teachers who CAN handle their heavy workload, and MANY OF THEM who can't!
For those who can't handle it, they really don't mind having a lower salary. And as a matter of fact, the new teachers are not earning so much, even with a lighter workload. (Of course, for some problems, it is not a matter of magnitude, but the job nature, the problems themselves are horrible, which can't be lessoned.) A lot of the people are changing their jobs as well, prefer a lower salary than a more torturing job (teaching).
To educate the 'future' of HK, you don't expect people who aren't qualified to do the job, so, the current salary level is quite appropriate, I have to say. It is not very attractive, but the nature of work is nasty. Now, the teachers aren't really 'teaching' anymore, but more likely writing reports, etc. All the admin. work is torturing. I have a friend who teaches Music, and as usual, there is only ONE PERSON in her 'department' (she is the department head!!! HAHA!), but she is required to submit minutes of meetings!!!!!! I mean, reports would be alright, but MINUTES!!! See how frustrating the tasks of a 'teacher' can be?
Seperate teacher's roles
Maybe the education system can seperate the role of teachers. Some teachers are focused on teaching real knowledge, while the others focus on training the student how to beat the examination system.
Parents and students are free to choose the type of teachers as they see fits. If someone only choose to study for exam, he will have to pay for the price in long run.
It IS already seperated.
Aren't all those stupid money-cheating 'famous tutors' teaching all about the 'exam techniques' already?
The problem is, there is no more space for ANY teacher to teach real knowledge ANYMORE, but just to pump the information written in the textbooks, in the syllabus......
A friend just recommended a book to me. How to REALLY TEACH the students, the pupils? Not to throw those stupid data to the students and to make them recite them all, but to help them learn to THINK. Black Ants and Buddhists, the book is called.
If a space can be created for all the teachers with heart to TEACH students, not to teach the information, then that is the first ray at dawn for our sick education system, for our mad society......
real teaching
We can make "real" teaching extra curicular activities just like paino, drawing, karate, sports, etc. I am sure the parents in HK will make their kids have some "real" learning outside the school.
Then we can let the school focus on what it does best, teach the students to get good marks in public exam. Then the function of private tutorial class is redundant.
Can't agree with you.
As usual.
Well, schools SHOULD NOT be only 'good at' producing rubbish who can only get high marks in tests and exams, but some PEOPLE, some HUMANS who can think and analyse things around them INDEPENDENTLY. Critical thinking was what the teacher in 'Black Ants and Buddhists' tried, and successfully taught the students, the 6 , 7-year-old pupils. Can't imagine that American children are smarter than HK kids? But also can't imagine where HK teachers could ever find such a time, such a space to teach the students the things which really matters, like this. Of course, I mean EVEN if they want to and are capable of.
NO INTENTION TO ARGUE WITH YOU anymore. Go on being like that, but I don't want to respond to such pointless points anymore.
Teacher
Teacher? Old Pet Pet...No use, too naive, even cant teach his/her children well!! High salary monster!!
始終是同一個問題
大家談來談去，和教統局及整個社會談教育一樣。我們都找不到談話的中心焦點，談本港教育也好，談教師素質也好，最終要談的是，究竟我們希望學校為整個社會"製造" 怎樣的產品？
請恕我用"產品"這個詞語，我並非視學生如工業製成品，也並非視學校如工廠，我只是借用現代社會的術語而已。上面的問題也可轉成：究竟我們希望學校為整個社會培養甚麼人才？對的，究竟社會需要甚麼人才？我們的學校和老師又能否培養這人才？我們的政府又有沒有培養適當或優秀的教師以堷養這社會渴求的人才？
當我們責怪老師的表現和能力的時候，也不妨問問：這究竟是社會的錯，還是這位老師本人的錯？如果是化人的錯，那為甚麼他又能當教師呢？這又是不是我們制度又出錯呢？
哈哈！誰對誰錯呢？
resource?
I guess it is the problem is resource!! May I get wrong!! But more resource; higher salary will increase the competent of the teachers???
I have seen many senior teachers even dont know the basic assumption!!!
曾老師 , very true!
That's why I think that more 'space' and 'time' should be left to the schools and teachers themselves, so THEY KNOW what 'products' they want to produce and to use their own methods and approaches. The problem is, without everybody agreeing on the direction, there is ONLY ONE WAY to 'teach' nowadays.
Students HAVE TO take the same exams, follow the same route, with the same syllabus, etc.
I strongly recommend thos who really have hearts in education (esp. teachers) to read the book 'Black Ants and Buddhists' (I recommended above already.).
I can't force everybody to agree with my humanist approach for the real meanings of education. That's why I need space!!! You want to train your students and children to get 100A's in exam and to be richer than Li Kar Shing, go ahead; just don't force us who have ideals to follow your approach, ok?!
What kind of product we need!!
大家談來談去，和教統局及整個社會談教育一樣。我們都找不到談話的中心焦點，談本港教育也好，談教師素質也好，最終要談的是，究竟我們希望學校為整個社會"製造" 怎樣的產品？
請恕我用"產品"這個詞語，我並非視學生如工業製成品，也並非視學校如工廠，我只是借用現代社會的術語而已。上面的問題也可轉成：究竟我們希望學校為整個社會培養甚麼人才？對的，究竟社會需要甚麼人才？我們的學校和老師又能否培養這人才？我們的政府又有沒有培養適當或優秀的教師以堷養這社會渴求的人才？
當我們責怪老師的表現和能力的時候，也不妨問問：這究竟是社會的錯，還是這位老師本人的錯？如果是化人的錯，那為甚麼他又能當教師呢？這又是不是我們制度又出錯呢？
哈哈！誰對誰錯呢？
-- 曾老師 於 May 28, 2006 05:52 PM
Well, the basic method to evaluate the success of the education system is using the marking system to ranking the students' abilities!! It is a realistic method but it is not match with the ideal of education! Therefore, if you ask what kind of product we need....it is very simple!! Low crime rate more considerate society we want!!
So, if you evaluate the success of an education system in term of crime rate...it is better than just look at the high mark of students.....because in a limited resource with high demand education market.......no matter how good of the all students they are...they also need to face with a ranking curve, that mean there are no 100% A grade student!!
一位補習天王的說話
恕我不能說出是誰，但這位補習天王的意見頗值得回味。他說：
不是全部所謂補習名師可以名成利就，在市場的壓力下，只有真正能吸引學生的才可真的成為天王。
教師整體質素下降，主因是不合格的老師沒法被淘汰。如果有淘汰的機制，較差勁的老師便會有動力向上。
－－－－－－－－－－－－
姑勿論他是否正確，但眼觀今天補習社的運作，直可媲美律師行。所差者，是沒有補習老師公會作專業認可而已！
以甚麼來判斷質素？
補習社或補習天王自有他們成功之道，這也的確得來不易。我十分同意不是每一位補習老師都能成功，同樣地，不是每一位老師都是好老師。舉一個例子，小兒有一位補習老師，專補理科及附加數學，因為選修科目的問題，小兒要自修附加數。那位補習老師很不錯，小兒最後附加數取得B級成績。請問：那位補習老師與小兒學校的數學老師相比，熟優熟劣？或者可否這樣說：小兒的數學補習老師比一般的數學老師都好，因為他能使一位自修附加數學的學生取得B級成績？
問題是，要比較不同行業的人士表現，能否有一個平等的比較基礎，或相同的比較？補習老師和一般學校老師負責不同的工作和職務，學生到補習社和在學校各有不同的學習動機和態度，如何比拼呢？
怎樣才算優秀老師，或優秀學生？傳統名女校的英語科成績一向驕人，那麼那些學校的老師就是最優秀的老師了。可是，優秀的英語成績，背後是老師的功勞，還是家庭環境、學生動機及天賦的功勞？我們應該從結果來判斷優秀的標準，還是也應該從過程來判斷是否優秀的標準呢？
這些都是沒有答案的問題呢！
Danger!
It is dangerous to let the market chooses the 'good' teachers to stay behind, as this will force all teachers to make the students love them.
Some good teachers are really not that welcomed by students, when the less good ones can easily get the liking of students by giving tips, using the more 'in' bad words, and giving less homeworks, etc. Is it what that famous tutor mean?
A tutor can do so (I also please my students by talking with them about what they like), but can and should a teacher do so in school?
Then, just as Teacher Tsang said, what constitute a good teacher? We can't put students' preferences as the only or the most important criterion. (Of course it is somehow important also.)
Market for the teacher
Letting the student choose who is good teacher probably won't work in lower forms. However, from my experience, in high forms, students are mature enough to choose a good teacher from a bad teacher. Even my school has really serious discipline problem, we treat good teachers very different from bad teacher. We respect good teachers who know what they are teaching. We even stop those try to make troubles in good teachers' classes. On the other hand, we simpily the life of bad teachers very miserable. In an extreme case, we gave a particularly bad teacher several punchs on the last day of class before dismiss HKCEE.
In universities, students can evaluate professors. So far I havn't see race to the bottom problem in any universities. Students sort of accepted there is a bell curve. As long as it is not half of the class fail, they won't judge the prof. solely on the marks they get.
兩個大學教授評核的故事
聽來兩個大學教授評核的故事：
一、張五常教授初來港大任教，大受好評，當選最佳教授。期後，卻又當選最劣教授，由最好到最差，相信不是因為怹個人教學方法的轉變。
二、黃清霞博士在港大的同學評核得分很低，因為她評分要求嚴格。她憤而辭職，結束了數十年的大學教生涯，創立shakespeare4all機構，另展教學門徑，大受家長歡迎。
一切評核，都不客觀的，尤其是涉及人的評核。那麼，以甚麼來判斷教師質素？