46 thoughts on “Lawrence Krauss: Should Science Teachers Be Paid More Than Humanities Teachers?”

  1. Your remark at 2:25 is spot on: teachers at the middle and high school level do not know science very well. I have a major in chemistry, a minor in physics. After a career in industry, I went back to school for my teaching certification in the state of Illinois. The state "exams" are so simple, I could not believe it. Student engagement is an issue, for certain. But I was amazed at the depth of knowledge that many science teachers have. It is not their fault, it is a system problem. Teachers are offend assigned classes they are not able to teach well. An excellent book I read which speaks to the issues you bring up is "The Smartest Kids in the World and How They Got That Way" by Amanda Ripley. Anyone interested in improving our education system would benefit from reading the book.

  2. Your remark at 2:25 is spot on: teachers at the middle and high school level do not know science very well. I have a major in chemistry, a minor in physics. After a career in industry, I went back to school for my teaching certification in the state of Illinois. The state "exams" are so simple, I could not believe it. Student engagement is an issue, for certain. But I was amazed at the depth of knowledge that many science teachers have. It is not their fault, it is a system problem. Teachers are offend assigned classes they are not able to teach well. An excellent book I read which speaks to the issues you bring up is "The Smartest Kids in the World and How They Got That Way" by Amanda Ripley. Anyone interested in improving our education system would benefit from reading the book.

  3. His underlying point is correct (if you have a science degree, you can almost always make more money in the doing other jobs then you can in education, therefore raise salaries) but why does that have to specifically entail paying science teachers more than other teachers? I agree that teacher pay in general needs to go up if we want our schools to be better off, but I don't see why only paying science teachers more would solve anything.

  4. We can live without technology but not without the humanities. The humanities are literally the meaning of life.

  5. I'm a teacher and I disagree. All teachers, regardless their subject, have to use scientific inquiry model to approach any topic they want to address. Want to teach about WWII? What are the possible questions? They have to ask. We suppose to help them identify the credible resources to do their research, teach them how to use evidence to form their arguments, and help them practice different ways of presenting their findings. Regardless of their questions, we suppose to teach them the same skills of thinking critically.

  6. As a science teacher with training and education in the science (a Geology B.S. degree and 19 geology graduate credits), the easiest and most effective way to get more scientists to be educators is to raise pay for all teachers AND most importantly, encourage them to go into teaching. Scientists are so focused on recruiting and keeping students to be grad students that they ignore those who are potentially good teachers or have an interest. There is never enough encouragement that a person trained in the science can teach it. It's always, "you gotta have an education degree to teach."

  7. I mostly disagree (with the title). Being a good science teacher is a lot more being a good teacher than being a good scientist: i have met a thousand brilliant minds that were not good at communicating ideas or creating interest. So, more than paying well science teachers (attracting good scientists but not necessarily good teachers) you should start by making teaching a lot more attractive in general (paying them more, yes, but also respect, time, etc.) and then maybe making small advantages for science teachers. And i say maybe because asking questions and critical thinking is also an integral part of philosophy, for instance: he's talking a lot more of a way of teaching and learning than of a specific trait exclusive to science.
    And why shouldn't you apply the rules of the market? Because we are talking of education, of forming citizens, not of a commodity. Different disciplines are needed in order to have an equilibrated society, they add to each other and iwork better if not in tension or competition.

  8. I wanted to be a teacher. 3 years into college I got a job as a car salesman. I made close to $100,000 my first year selling cars and dropped out of college. I'm now married to a teacher who has a contract with the School district. A full time teacher's contact is for 165 days a year. I now wish I was a teacher based on the fact that they work half of the year.

  9. 41% (not 10%) of middle school science teachers have at least a bachelor's degree in science or science education

  10. There are 2 problems with science teachers. First is that most are not properly trained. The second is the dishonesty of teachers that are religious. Not all teachers that are religions are dishonest but there are many who will intentionally undermine science cause it threatens their religious beliefs so they either intentionally or unintentionally undermine what they teach.

    I agree that we should pay more to teach science to get better science teachers. We have an abundance of teacher that can teach English, history, arts but not science. Most science teachers don't even know or like the subject they are teaching.

  11. I read through the comments, men , I must say this channel is for intellectuals or any with broad and open mind

  12. Academics also works in the principle of supply and demand curves and payments are mostly based on the revenues.

  13. Who's to say a well paid engineer from a big firm would make a good teacher?
    Teaching requires dedication and a set of skills beyond mere knowledge of the subject.

  14. Yay science. Asserting their superiority by knocking humanities over since the beginning. Firstly asking questions has always been the art of humanities. We always think scientists were so great but always forget that almost all pioneers of the sciences were knowledgeable in humanities especially literature philosophy and history. Scientists are actually a conservative bunch. Most ask questions from the paradigm which is dominant. The ones who pioneer are the ones who go back to the philosophical roots and open up new questions which were assumed to be non existent.

  15. I have a degree in Mathematics and I declined my school board's offer to become a Math teacher due to the fact that I will be paid less than a clerk (no offence) who shuffles papers around with a most likely a diploma at hand at most with some office training. On the other hand, I spent 5 years of countless nights studying for toughest problems on earth……really? no thanks….. i will be paid WAYYY more in financial market or software industry……

  16. This is the core problem with American society, all subjects should be equal in importance because all teach something more than surface level applications. Major universities have agreed it's time to put this thought aside and let each subject propel the other into its full potential. On a side note, writing is so much more than what he is making it out to be.

  17. this guy might be smart but not very wise. the real problem Is allowing our government to run our schools. Americans need to get control of our money and use it to fund private schools and that kind of competition would get the best teachers and produce a better education at a much better price.

  18. The real ticket here is to increase the pay of all teacher. The reason there is such a dearth of highly qualified teachers is that, for the time and effort it takes to go through the education curriculum in college, it's a poor return on investment. Thus you only get teachers who do it somewhat selflessly. They pay the opportunity cost of getting a higher paying job in order to do something that they feel is for the greater good. Now it is fantastic that some people, myself included, would give up the opportunity of higher pay in order to contribute to the future of education, but the fact that the pay is so low discourages others who would like to contribute to education, but are unwilling to do so for the low salary.

  19. what about Math teachers??? because you can't do certain sciences without knowledge of mathematics

  20. A poor argument considering that scientific questions only reach us to the physical limit of space and time without questioning the very need for humans to think well beyond the scientific. Humanities, while their "economic" value is seen as less, relies on the need for humans to do what we are best designed to do: create. In that creation, in that critical thinking of others' processes and storylines helps us define the scientific method more than the analysis of data (which many science teachers have started to focus almost solely on). The humanities offers humans a world to explore the big questions instead of simply finding a sterile answer like science gets distilled into.

    Science and the Humanities are both essential to the human condition. Why do we think that an economic incentive for one over the other is going to give us a education system or society that is best for all?

  21. Why should this only apply to science? We should insist on training every kind of teacher as well as possible; I would rather have an art teacher with an MA or a doctorate, as much as a well trained science teacher; to undervalue any subject area is to under-appreciate how much there truly is to be learned; or how interlinked subject areas can be; or how many different ways there are of thinking and learning about the world. So perhaps they should be paid by their level of training, rather than their subject area.

  22. Teachers should get pay the more for what they do. They should get paid same amount they would get another professional career. All of the subject are important and they all should have best teachers. However at the same time this will never happen in the public school system, unless we switch charter school system or child credit system, were parents are free to find best school for their kids. Teachers should reward for doing a good job and teachers should be let go if they are doing a bad job. Teachers need to proper training in college but also need to be associate teacher first before running their own class.

  23. My math teacher is an electrical engineer. One day after the lesson, I asked her, "What are you doing in this classroom? Don't you make more as an engineer?" and she answered me, "Totally. I would make over 30,000 dollars more per year than teaching in college, but I feel the need of helping others." She is truly passionate about calculus and she love to show us the countless examples where calculus, statistics and all that is used and that help massively our learning. We really need to motivate our teachers.

  24. he has very good point that asking questions and learning how to answer/address a question is important. not the answer itself. cuz if teachers just tell you answers, that doesnt tell you how to think or solve a problem when you don't have the answer. its also the same fault of creationism. if teachers tell us only answers, it would make kids think thats how education and learning works. so if a pastor tells kids the earth was made 6000 years ago, it therefore must be the answer. rather then questioning the age of the earth and thinking about it, they just accept the answer and abide to it

  25. Yeah! Pay science teachers closer to engineers so those thrilled with science will choose to teach. Teaching is the hardest job I ever loved- but quit.

  26. Hell yes! if Hell is your goal.
    If understanding is your goal. the opposite of hell btw. One would use the humanities with science to bring limit systems of understanding to triangulate effort toward a common goal. This is the efficient way to generate power to effect large changes in spacial position. Distance is only relative to the emotions associated with the direction of the distance. So, to navigate properly. Any System. Define a strong origin and know where would like to end up and when you would like to arrive. Then set up a potential for gravity ahead of you on a straight path and travel in 45 degree angels to maximize your kinetics by efficient use of the potential you established first so that you can let the gravity of it pull you half way. That will give you momentum to harness you can maximize momentum potential by moving as slowly as possible. Take advantage of your angels. oops Angles. That was a socratic slip. The kind Jesus learn from plato during his time in Greece. Or so I imagine. And that's not Real until is can be realized.
    We need to have a closed math system. The division by zero problem leads to more complex systems than are necessary. You can't use your time wisely if you spend it jumping trough hoops unties you can orient a hoop such that you can collapse it in a way that will force the mass to contract and unite into a more focused force. More sin wave than sin field which is clouded in the heat of friction. Uniform motion is synchronized motion like a rowing teams actions. Timing is everything to maximize change per energy unit expended.

    How can you understand that if you don't understand your history. Yes. the Humanities are important. Very much so. They give you efforts goals. Which are worthy directions to travel.

  27. Isn't it a shame though, that science teachers need to be paid better to come and teach? Isn't it about the joy of teaching? Maybe that's what Lawrence should do, teach about the joy of teaching to scientists so that they choose lower salaries.

    Because no one's going to pay them more. What'll happen to all the other teachers that think their studies are just as important, and students can learn just as important tools of life from their subject? Don't they deserve a raise? Anyway, money is a bad incentive, it'll only attract people who want more money, not those who would teach better.

    I think our best bet is helping people, in general, including science teachers, choose their career based on more than the money they would earn.

  28. I stopped after 1:00 and will watch the rest.

    Seriously; the ability to obtain knowledge is exponentially more important than the possession of knowledge in itself. It always has been, and always will be. No one has gotten far in life by explaining a simple event – they were recognized for their ability to pick out abnormality.

    It's a "teach a man to fish" mentality. Answers are useless without the question that begs for their existence.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *