<<back to publications<<
É....... ..
.......>> to Teach0logy.xyz>>
Numbers Say: The High School Physics Teachers Shortage
Will Be Fixed In 130 Years.
According to this report
https://www.aip.org/sites/default/files/statistics/highschool/hs-courses-enroll-13.pdf
in 2013 about 40 % of high school students took a
physics course.
According to this source
https://www.census.gov/hhes/school/data/cps/2013/tables.html
in 2013 there were close to
16,000,000 high school students in the U.S. That would give about 4,000,000
graduates. Forty percent of this number is equal to 1,600,000 students.
The more accurate number is 1,400,000; in 2013 this many high school students were enrolled in a
physics course (thank you David Meltzer for finding out this information: see
Appendix I).
LetÕs use a very conservative estimation.
LetÕs assume that each class had 30 students, and one
teacher was teaching four classes. That gives us about 11,666 physics teachers.
According to PhysTec
coalition
https://phystec.physics.cornell.edu/content/crisis-physics-education
only 1/3 of all high school physics teachers have a
degree in physics or physics education.
Which means, high schools need to hire about 7,777
properly prepared high school physics teachers.
According again to PhysTec
coalition, the members of the coalition gradate about 60 teachers per a year -
check the Ò5+ clubÓ (this number has been addressed in the further
communication; see Appendix III).
Keeping this pace, we need to wait for about 130 years
until every high school in the U.S. will have a highly qualified
physics teachers.
Please, note: we only talk here about a high school
level, only about physics, and only about 40 % of students!
Adding middle school science teachers and including
all students would quadruple the number.
Clearly, whatever PhysTec
coalition is doing, will not help us to solve the problems of a physics (or
science) teachers shortage.
The problem even deepens if we take into an account
the fact that many teachers do not stay in schools for a long time.
The Guardian says,
https://www.theguardian.com/education/2015/sep/15/not-enough-teachers-science-shortage-teaching-jobs
that too many of teachers leave the profession, and
too few qualified professionals go into the profession.
If we assume that our calculations are correct, and
The Guardian is right, the focus has to be shifted from teacher preparation to
teacher retention and professional development of in-service teachers.
P.S. At this point the natural question to ask is ÒWhy
do teachers leave a schoolÓ?
In the context of this publishing we should rephrase
the question to: ÒWhy do science teachers leave a school?Ó
What do we do these days when we need to find an
answer to a question?
Of course!
We Google it!
And Google says: ÒYour search did not match any
documentsÓ!
What does it mean, if even Google does not have an
answer?
It simply means there is no data on this matter; no
one publishes on this matter; no one study this matter (I would appreciate to
be proved wrong on this issue).
I could have been speculating and offering my own
opinions, but why would anyone take my speculations seriously?
That is why I just stop here.
But if anyone would like to share their thoughts,
please, feel free to comment!
https://teachologyforall.blogspot.com/2017/02/teachers.html
ÒWhy do science teachers leave a school?Ó
Appendix I
From David
Meltzer
On the number of
high school students taking physics
Source:
Susan White and
Casey Langer Tesfaye, High School Physics Courses
& Enrollments: Results from the 2012_13 Nationwide Survey of High School
Physics Teachers (AIP, College Park,
MD, 2014). Available at:
https://www.aip.org/statistics/reports/high_school_physics_courses_
enrollments_0
High School Physics
Courses & Enrollments | American ... www.aip.org
This report examines
enrollments in high school physics during the 2012_13 school year.
__
Appendix II
From Jane Jackson
Why do teachers
leave? Teacher morale has plummeted in recent years, with educators saying that
school reform has made them the scapegoat for problems in public education.
According to a Sept.
2016 report by the Learning Policy Institute at Stanford University, most
teachers who leave do so because of dissatisfaction __ ranging from physical
conditions such as class sizes, facilities, and classroom resources Ü to
unhappiness with administrative practices, such as lack of support, classroom
autonomy, or input to decisions Ü to policy issues, such as the effects of
testing and accountability. Assessments & accountability measures are the
biggest dissatisfactions.
Reducing attrition
by half could virtually eliminate shortages.
Fewer people are
entering teacher preparation programs. Enrollments are down 35 percent and
graduates dropped by 23 percent between 2009 and 2014.
Download the full
report (Sept. 2016) at
https://learningpolicyinstitute.org/product/coming_crisis_teaching_brief
From me:
Jane Jackson makes a good point. Still, would be useful to
see the ranking (!) of the factors of the teacher dissatisfaction. Also, the
reports (one of which is this https://
__
Appendix
III (self-explanatory)
Dear
Ms. Plisch,
I
appreciate very much your input with the response to my letter.
First,
I have to point out that after David MeltzerÕs letter I corrected the number of
students to 1,4 million graduates, and recalculated the number of years to 130
(based on: 30 students per a class_ 4 classes per a teacher_ 60 new teachers
per a year this data show how the estimation was made).
In
your response, you provided a large volume of information.
1.
You quote:
According
to AIP, there were 27,000 high school physics teachers in 2013
https://www.aip.org/sites/default/files/statistics/highschool/hswhoteaches13.pdf
*
This document does NOT provide information on how the estimation had been made.
But
letÕs use it.
2.
You write:
According to PhysTec coalition
https://phystec.physics.cornell.edu/content/crisisphysicseducation
only 1/3 of all high school physics teachers have a degree in
physics or physics education.
While
this is the case (from AIP reports), teachers with a degree in physics or
physics education are more likely to teach a larger number of physics classes.
According to the US. Department of Education, about 47% of all high school
classes are led by a teacher with a physics or physics education degree.
http://www.phystec.org/webdocs/shortage.cfm
*
Your comment does not affect the calculation: (27,000/3)*2
= 18,000
3.
Then you write:
Which means, high schools need to hire about 35,000 properly
prepared high school physics teachers.
The
total number of new physics teachers hired per year is 1400, of which about 600
have a major or minor in physics or physics education. This indicates that 800
additional well-prepared physics teachers per year would address the national
shortage, since over time the well-prepared new teachers would replace teachers
who retire.
http://www.phystec.org/webdocs/TaskForce.cfm
*
No matter of other factors_ according to AIP 18,000 ( =
2/3 of 27,000) high school physics teachers do not have a degree in physics or
physics education. Manipulating with any other numbers does not change this
fact. Any discrepancy only means that different sources of information provide
to us incoherent numbers. Your example addresses new or retired teachers, there
might be some interesting dynamics, some interesting formula, but if we have
today 18,000 teachers who do not have a degree in physics or physics education,
we need at least 18,000 teachers who will have a degree in physics or physics
education.
4.
You write:
The
300+ member institutions of the PhysTEC Coalition,
which include many more institutions than those who received The
5+ Club award, prepare over half of the highly qualified physics teachers in
the U.S. according to Title II data.
https://title2.ed.gov/Public/Home.aspx
*
This statement may be related to the actual numbers of actual graduates, a.k.a.
prepared physics teachers, but the relationship is not clear. I was also not
able to find this particular number using the link you provided
(https://title2.ed.gov/Public/Home.aspx).
However, previously you provided a number of Ò600 have a major or minor in
physics or physics educationÓ. Unfortunately, I do not know the source of this
number. But letÕs assume it is correct. In that case (a) 60 graduates a year is
a drop in a bucket_ (b) 18000 / 600 = 30 years.
5.
You write:
This
conclusion is unnecessarily pessimistic.
In
science, we should not treat numbers as pessimistic or optimists (those terms
reflect human emotions regarding a fact).
In
science numbers are correct, or wrong, which depends on the quality of the
collected information and the logic applied to the analysis of the information.
6.
You write:
If
the ~750 physics departments in the U.S. each recruited and educated ~1 more
physics teacher per year, it would take ~30 years (the maximum number of years
a teacher will typically spend in the classroom) to fully replace the current
physics teacher workforce with new hires, all of whom are well-prepared to
teach physics. As a rough check these numbers, 800 teachers * 30 years = 24,000
teachers, which approximately equals the current total number of physics
teachers (27,000).
*
I agree that 30 years is much better than 600, or even 130.
I
agree that Òif ÉÓ etc.
But
that is a big IF. According to the available data this has not been happening Ð
for decades. Why would it start happening now?
I do not think we (scientists, policy
makers, managers) should bas planning of our actions on a wishful thinking
(ÒWhat if!Ó), we should base our planning on the observed trends described via
measurable indicators (e.g. the year-to-year number of the 5+ club graduates).
Currently,
if we use the collection of available data (which itself is open to a critic),
and if we manipulate with the data, the best-case scenario gives us at least 30
years. That does not include the fact that teachers leave a school.
And
again, Ð if Ð we want that ALL high school students would be taking physics,
and Ð if Ð we want them taking physics during two years of study_ we would have
to largely increase the number of years (keeping all other parameters the
same). And still, this does not address middle school level.
From
my point of view, even the best-case scenario number (30 years) does not
reflect the urgency of the situation in STEM related fields reflected in many
reports (including cited by you).
Do
you think we should tell business and industry leaders "you need to wait
for at least 30 more years before our schools begin producing enough STEM
prepared/oriented graduates"?
I
think, this discussion will be useful if we try to look for ideas and
approaches which have not been a part of the previous discussion.
Sincerely
yours,
Valentin
___
Appendix IV
From
DAVID.
Been reading the threads and
wanted to add my two cents:
A little ranting
As a teacher of physics that
is teaching high school as a second career I find most of the studies on what
is ailing the profession and causing burnout peculiar at best. Most of the
attention is focused on compensation Ð but after basic needs are met
compensation is much lower on the priority list. Autonomy and collegiality rank
among my top priorities. Nothing quite as lonely as teaching. You stand in
front of students all day but donÕt have an interaction with peers. One seldom
has a real exchange of ideas about the stuff you teach.
Administration is an issue. I
am evaluated each year by a person with a degree in organizational management,
who doesnÕt know a thing about my subject. They walk into my classroom with a
checklist of ÒactivitiesÓ and teaching ÒtechniquesÓ they are looking for and if
they didnÕt see all of them in the 20minute window they afforded me I am marked
down.
Administration does not
support the teacher Ð they advocate for the student, the parents and the
community. Nobody represents the teacher. (One may want to argue that teachersÕ
unions do this but they are part of the problem_ more concerned about
protecting the status quo and their collective bargaining position than
improving the classroom.) The teacher is to blame if little Johnny is flunking.
It canÕt be the fact that Johnny has done a lick of homework and doesnÕt come
in to ask for help. Administration makes big statements about professional
development, but if you take away from class time you are penalized and are not
compensated for the basic expenses.
So the teacher is pretty much on their own. Especially
if you teach in a small school where you are THE science department. This is
where organizations like AAPT can play a big role. But it is very expensiveÉdues,
conference fees, travel, etc.
Rant is now overÉSo this
isnÕt a problem that we need to throw more money at. We need to fundamentally
change how we allow our teachers of physics to operate their classrooms and
raise the expectations on the students and parents, holding them responsible
for JohnnyÕs grades.
I moved from a career in the
Air Force to a mediumsized public school to a small
independent school. Each transition cost me some pay. The move to the
independent school gained me autonomy in my classroom and the ability to work
with my administration to improve science education at the school. I get paid
less but I have smaller classrooms, more control over what I teach and how I
teach it, and when I pick up the phone to talk to a parent little Johnny comes
back to class with a new attitude.
So I guess a lot of my observations echo the study.
P.S. I havenÕt been to an
AAPT national meeting for a few years now because my administration doesnÕt
support itÉI really miss you all.
DAVID
Science & Math Teacher,
College Counselor
***
I would like to stress two
excellent points:
1. Nothing quite as lonely as teaching.
2. Nobody represents the teacher.
3. We need to fundamentally change how we allow our
teachers of physics to operate their classrooms and raise the expectations on
the students and parents, holding them responsible for JohnnyÕs grades.
<<back to
publications<< É....... ..
.......>> to Teach0logy.xyz>>