Ten Common Myths Regarding Teachers

Teaching is one of the most misunderstood professions. Many people do not understand the dedication and hard work that it takes to be a good teacher. The truth is that it is often a thankless profession. A significant portion of the parents and students that we work with on a regular basis do not respect or appreciate what we are trying to do for them. Teachers deserve to be respected more, but there is a stigma associated with the profession that will not go away any time soon. The following myths drive this stigma making this job even more difficult than it already is. Myth #1 – Teachers work from 8:00 a.m. – 3:00 p.m. The fact that people believe that teachers only work Monday-Friday from 8-3 is laughable. Most teachers arrive early, stay late, and often spend a few hours on the weekend working in their classrooms. Throughout the school year, they also sacrifice time at home for activities such as grading papers and preparing for the next day. They are always on the job. A recent article published by BBC news in England highlighted a survey asking their teachers how many hours they spend on the job. This survey compares favorably to the amount of time teachers in the United States spend working each week. The survey evaluated the time spent in the classroom and the time spent working at home. According to the survey, teachers worked between 55-63 hours per week depending on the level that they teach. Myth #2 – Teachers have the entire summer off work. Yearly teaching contracts typically range from 175-190 days depending on the number of professional development days required by the state. Teachers generally receive about 2 ½ months for summer vacation. This does not mean they are not working. Most teachers will attend at least one professional development workshop during the summer, and many attend more. They utilize the summer to plan for the next year, read up on the latest educational literature, and pour through new curriculum that they will be teaching when the New Year begins. Most teachers also start showing up weeks in advance of the required reporting time to start preparing for the new year. They may be away from their students, but much of the summer is dedicated to improving in the next year. Myth #3 – Teachers complain too often about their pay. Teachers feel underpaid because they are. According to the National Education Association, the average teacher salary in 2012-2013, in the United States, was $36,141. According to Forbes Magazine, 2013 graduates earning a bachelor’s degree would make an average of $45,000. Teachers with all ranges of experience make $9000 less a year on average than those beginning their career in another field. Many teachers have been forced to find part-time jobs in the evenings, on the weekends, and throughout the summer to supplement their income. Many states have beginning teacher salaries below the poverty level forcing those who have mouths to feed to get government assistance to survive. Myth #4 – Teachers want to eliminate standardized testing. Most teachers do not have an issue with standardized testing itself. Students have been taking standardized tests every year for several decades. Teachers have utilized testing data to drive classroom and individual instruction for years. Teachers appreciate having the data and apply it to their classroom. The high stakes testing era has changed a lot of the perception of standardized testing. Teacher evaluations, high school graduation, and student retention are just a few of the things that are now tied to these tests. Teachers have been forced to sacrifice creativity and to ignore teachable moments to ensure that they cover everything their students will see on these tests. They waste weeks and sometimes months of class time doing comprehension test prep activities to prepare their students. Teachers are not afraid of standardized testing itself, they are afraid of how the results are now used. Myth #5 – Teachers are opposed to the Common Core State Standards. Standards have been around for years. They will always exist in some form. They are blueprints for teachers based on grade level and subject matter. Teachers value standards because it gives them a central path to follow as they move from point A to point B. The Common Core State Standards are no different. They are another blueprint for teachers to follow. There are some subtle changes that many teachers would like to make, but they truly are not much different than what most states have been using for years. So what are teachers opposed to? They are opposed to the testing tied the Common Core. They already loathe the overemphasis on standardized testing and believe the Common Core will increase that emphasis even more. Myth #6 – Teachers only teach, because they cannot do anything else. Teachers are some of the smartest people I know. It is frustrating that there are people in the world that actually believe that teaching is an easy profession full of people that are incapable of doing anything else. Most become teachers because they love working with young people and want to make an impact. It takes an exceptional person and those who consider it glorified â€Å"babysitting† would be shocked if they shadowed a teacher for a few days. Many teachers could pursue other career paths with less stress and more money, but choose to stay in the profession because they want to be a difference maker. Myth #7 – Teachers are out to get my child. Most teachers are there because they genuinely care for their students. For the most part, they are not out to get a child. They have a certain set of rules and expectations that every student is expected to follow. The chances are decent that the child is the issue if you think the teacher is out to get them. No teacher is perfect. There may be times that we come down too hard on a student. This often results out of frustration when a student refuses to respect the rules of the classroom. However, this does not mean we are out to get them. It means that we care enough about them to correct the behavior before it becomes uncorrectable. Myth #8 – Teachers are responsible for my child’s education. Parents are any child’s greatest teacher. Teachers only spend a few hours each day over the course of a year with a child, but parents spend a lifetime. In reality, it takes a partnership between parents and teachers to maximize a student’s learning potential. Neither parents nor teachers can do it alone. Teachers want a healthy partnership with parents. They understand the value that parents bring. They are frustrated by parents who believe they have little to no role in their child’s education other than making them go to school. Parents should understand that they are limiting their child’s education when they do not get involved. Myth #9 – Teachers are continuously opposed to change. Most teachers embrace change when it is for the better. Education is a continuously changing field. Trends, technology, and new research are continuously evolving and teachers do a decent job of keeping up with those changes. What they fight against is bureaucratic policy that forces them to do more with less. In recent years, class sizes have increased, and school funding has decreased, but teachers are expected to produce greater results than at any time. Teachers want more than the status quo, but they want to be properly equipped to fight their battles successfully. Myth #10 – Teachers are not like real people. Students get used to seeing their teachers in â€Å"teacher mode† day in and day out. It is hard sometimes to think of them as real people who have lives outside of school. Teachers are often held to a higher moral standard. We are expected to behave a certain way at all times. However, we are very much real people. We have families. We have hobbies and interests. We have lives outside of school. We make mistakes. We laugh and tell jokes. We like to do the same things everyone else likes to do. We are teachers, but we are people too.

ARTS 125 Week 5 Assignment Art And Culture Paper - 858 Words

Art and Culture Liliana Gonzalez ART/125 May 11, 2015 Joseph Blomer University of Phoenix Abstract Art has evolved in ways only one can imagine, however; their imagination does not have to go far because all one has to do is turn on the computer and connect to the World Wide Web to get information on everything. Architecture, sculpture, and painting has been around for ages, then photography made its way on to the art scene in the 1820’s and has taken leaps and bounds to establish itself as fine art The evolutions of styles are also examined. The role of diversity in the development of the arts and how it changed throughout the 20th century is examined. The role of women and their influence on the various arts is†¦show more content†¦Minorities began to share their culture through various art forms. Though Black American artist existed before the 20th century, it was not until then they began to become bolder with their works. In the modern period Black American artist began to show abstract styles, mixed media, and political commentary, and his or her artwork wa s celebrated by both Black and White Americans alike. The artist in the 20th century certainly made them known and was not afraid to share their differences with the rest of the world. Popular Culture and Art Pop Culture or Popular Culture consists of arts, entertainment, fads, values, and beliefs currently shared by a large portion of society (Defining Popular Culture, n.d.). Pop Culture is often referred to as Low Art. It can consist of food, advertising, clothing, music, and much more tangible and not tangible items. Pop Culture emerged in the 1950s and lasted for two decades (Andy WarholS Marilyn Prints, n.d.). Art can be defined in many ways. According to Definition For Art (n.d.), Art can be defined as â€Å"the expression or application of human creative skill and imagination, typically in a visual form such as painting or sculpture, producing works to be appreciated primarily for their beauty or emotional power.† Art can be in many forms, such as music, painting, sculpture, dance, and photography. Popular culture has influenced the arts by taking popular items, whether it be aShow MoreRelatedEssay on ART 305 Syllabus 1 2559 Words   |  11 Pagesï » ¿ART 305: ART MASS CULTURE Class Syllabus Professor Eve Wood Fall 2014 Office hours: Thu 3PM by appt. Office: Sagebrush 224 Office phone: (818) 677-6454 - no messages E-mail: wood_eve@csun.edu Meeting time: ONLINE COURSE DESCRIPTION: Prerequisite: Completion of the lower division writing requirement. An introduction for the non-art major to the relationships between art and mass culture. Illustrated lectures explore the development, techniques, and ideas underlying theRead MoreCourse Syllabi- History of Graphic Design2614 Words   |  11 PagesCourse Title: History of Graphic Design Course Number: AH315 Department: Liberal Arts Term: FALL 2013 Room Number and Time: 125 / Fridays 3:15-6:00pm Credit Hours: 3 Prerequisites: LA 1210122, LA 125-126, and AH 210211 or consent of instructor Instructor Name: Paul Mazzucca Instructor Contact Info: pmazzucca@pnca.edu Instructor Office Hours: TBD Course Description History of Graphic Design is a critical contextual research and survey study of the intents, influences, practicesRead MoreImplementing Comprehensive Classroom Technology Plan5766 Words   |  24 Pageskeep the website updated. The most complex class websites allow communication between parents, students, and teachers using a variety of resources such as discussion questions and interactive calendars to remind parents and students of upcoming assignments (Dunn, 2011, pg. 60-62). While the most complicated websites require the most updating by teachers, they are proven to increase learning among students (Dunn, 2011, pg.60-62). Therefore, creating a class website that allows for two-way communicationRead MoreFactors Affecting Literature Teaching and Learning in Secondary Schools in Uganda19646 Words   |  79 PagesDECLARATION ii APPROVAL iii DEDICATION iv ACKNOWLEDGMENTS v CHAPTER ONE 1 INTRODUCTION 1 1.0 Introduction 1 1.1 Background of the Study 1 1.1.1 Historical Perspective 1 1.1.2 Theoretical Perspective 4 1.1.3 Conceptual Perspective 5 1.1.4 Contextual Perspective 6 1.2 Statement of the Problem 6 1.3 Purpose of the Study 7 1.4 Objectives of the Study 7 1.5 Research Questions 7 1.6 Scope of the Study 8 1.6.1 Content Scope 8 1.6.2 Geographical Scope 8 1.6.3Read MoreStudents Role in National Development9194 Words   |  37 PagesIn order for educators to create a significant difference in the lives of their students, their schools, and their communities, the unit believes that these educators must be able to make responsible decisions that are based on a substantial liberal arts and professional knowledge base and reflect a strong commitment to their profession. Additionally, Christian teachers who seek to be agents of change cannot be content with merely replicating traditional practice but must accept the ethical responsibilityRead MoreEssay about Infosys ® Technologies Ltd.7152 Words   |  29 Pagesall aspects of the project in a superior manner. Furthermore, given our CEO‟s drive to cut costs significantly, I urge you to „sharpen your pencils‟ before you quote a price on the project. Let‟s schedule your project proposal presentation for three weeks from today.† And so concluded a one hour briefing that CIO Peters and his colleague, PFS Purchasing Vice President Kay Bryan had given to Infosys Engagement Manager, Rahul Dev, and Account Manager Jaspal Singh. During that briefing Peters and BryanRead MoreMastering Graduate Studies 1e32499 Words   |  130 PagesLIBRARY KNOWLEDGE SKILLS COMMUNICATION EXPECTATIONS CAREER PATH  IMPRINT Title Mastering Graduate Studies EDITION 1 CONTRIBUTORS Editor: Alexis DiVincenzo Consulting Editors: Mark Alexander, Nicole Quow-Thomason Art Direction Senior Art Director: Miranda Hildebrand Art Development and Design: Jo DeSnyder-Rolfe Permissions contact Grand Canyon University 3300 W Camelback Rd Phoenix, AZ 85017 602.639.7500 Copyright Information Grand Canyon University. All rights reserved. No part of thisRead MoreAwards and Recognition3333 Words   |  14 Pageswere not sure how to properly reward their performance. There is a desire on your part to prove the worthiness of the degree and demonstrate to your prospective employers that significant knowledge was gained in the program. The purpose of this paper is to discuss why rewards act as a motivator and what employee rewards should be used for increased employee performance in healthcare organizations. Why Rewards Should Be Used The current environment of rising healthcare costs and fierce globalRead MoreEquity Audit : Notes On Equity4768 Words   |  20 Pagesin access to programs. There are four key program areas that research consistently has shown to be likely sites for inequity. These four are special education, gifted and talented education, bilingual education, and student discipline. The over-assignment of students from certain groups, particularly African American males, to special education has long been recognized as a problem of gross inequity with U.S. schools. The problem of too many students from certain groups receiving placement in specialRead MoreSchool Improvement Plan7953 Words   |  32 PagesManned by 46 teachers, 13 support personnel and headed by one school principal, SHES is still on a great struggle to raise the achievement of pupils through its painstaking efforts. With a class size ranging from 50 to 70 and a pupils to book ratio of 1:5, teachers are compelled to make to do wi th book sharing schemes and teacher-made charts to supplement the insufficient number of books. Despite the established fact that SHES teachers ranked first in some standardized test 9 i.e. Math test for teacher

Hackshaw v. Shaw for Adelaide Chemical - myassignmenthelp.com

Question: Discuss about theHackshaw v. Shawfor Adelaide Chemical and Fertilizer. Answer: Introduction Hackshaw v. Shaw is a case of tort of negligence where the liability of the occupier of a premises towards a trespasser has been discussed. Further the case also discusses about the special obligations that an occupier of a premises owe towards the different types of trespassers. The court in the instant case evaded to recognize the special rules with regard to the liability of an occupier of a premises by putting the law of negligence on top priority. According to the law of tort, negligence means the failure on the part of a person who had duty to take reasonable care to prevent any harm being done to other person from the formers act. The duty that a person owes is a standard duty of care that a reasonable prudent person would have taken in similar circumstances. The basic idea of negligence is that the person who is under a duty to take care should take reasonable care in his actions, keeping in mind the possible consequences that might occur to other person or property and such harm is reasonably foreseeable. This assignment has been prepared to support the arguments given and stand taken by the appellant with regard to the duty of care of a person occupying a premises towards a trespasser the presence of whom is not known to the former. Facts Shaw, the defendant had a farm wherein he had a petrol pump for the purpose of fuelling his automobiles that are used in his farm. The petrol stored in his farm was being stolen. He took various measures to prevent the stealing of petrol but failed in his attempts to do so. He made complaint to the police who asked him for evidences of stealing. The defendant finally decided to confront with the stealer. He came up with a plan and on the night of the alleged incident waited for the thief along with his wife in the farm carrying a rifle and a shotgun with him. Cox, came there in a stolen car with its headlights off along with the plaintiff, Hackshaw, a girl of sixteen year of age. According to the plaintiffs facts, after entering the farm Cox stopped and came out of his car and the plaintiff also came out of the car when the defendant fired a shot which hit her on her arm. Cox then got into the car and ran away after which a number of other shots were fired. On the other hand, accordi ng to the facts of the defendant, when Cox came out of the car he was alone. The latter fired a shot from his gun to warn Cox and at that time probably no one was there in the car. Cox ran towards the car when the defendant fired the second shot which went through the door of the car and might have hit the plaintiff. The later shots made by the shotgun punctured the cars tyre and broke the cars windscreen. The judge at the trial court gave judgment as against the defendant and also held the plaintiff liable for contributory negligence. The defendant made an appeal while the plaintiff made a cross appeal simultaneously to the Full Court. The Court allowed the appeal with majority. Thereafter the plaintiff made a special leave to appeal to the High Court which was thereby granted (Hackshaw v. Shaw (1984) 155 CLR 614). Issues There were three main issues in the case. Firstly, whether the defendant owed a duty of care towards the plaintiff even if the latter was a trespasser on his premises. If there was any such duty on the part of the defendant whether the defendant committed breach of that duty when he fired a shot in the direction of the car. Another issue was whether the plaintiff was partly liable for her injury as she was a trespasser on the defendants premises. Arguments The plaintiff claimed that the shot fired by the defendant was deliberate, or careless or negligent. The defendant contended that on the night of the incident Cox came in a car in the defendants premises and as soon as he reached the gate of the premises he turned off the lights of the car. As per the arguments of the plaintiff, she enquired Cox about what exactly was he doing but he ignored to reply. After entering the premises, Cox stopped the car near the petrol pump and went out of the car. She also got out of the car after which she heard a sound of a gunshot after which she got into the car again. She felt pain in her arm. She contended that the second gunshot made by the defendant entered the door and injured her. On the other hand, the respondent in the instant case, contended that the appellant was a trespasser and if the respondent has any obligation towards her it should be there in the principles that apply in case of relationship of the occupier of a premises and a trespasser to the premises. The respondent referred a case whereby it was laid down by the court that the person who occupies a premises has no obligation towards a trespasser to his premises the presence of whom is not known to the former neither he is under a duty to know the same(Commissioner for Railways v. Quinlan (1964) AC 1054). With regard to the claim for compensation for trespass, the view of court in McHale v. Watson was considered by the court. In this case the court held that the burden of proof that the act of the defendant was not intentional lies on the defendant (McHale v. Watson (1964) 388 CLR 111). Judment The jury was of the view that there was negligence on the part of the defendant while firing the shot thereby injuring the plaintiff. The findings of the court raised two issues. Firstly, that whether there was any duty to take care on the defendant that he owed towards the plaintiff who was a trespasser and the defendant did not knew the fact of the latters presence in his premises. Secondly, whether the finding of the trial judge that there was failure on the part of the defendant to take reasonable care can be uphold. In the court in the instant case held that the plaintiff and the defendant do not fall within the relationship of that of an occupier of a premises and of a trespasser to such premises. The defendant was unknown of the fact of the existence of the plaintiff in his premises as the latter was a trespasser. The defendant owed a duty of care only to Cox as the former knew that the latter was present in his premises. On the other hand, according to the jury, the defendant in this case did not owe a duty of care towards the plaintiff as the defendant could not have reasonably foreseen that the plaintiff might be present in his premises. With regard to the issue of contributory negligence on the part of the plaintiff the jury was doubtful regarding the facts of the plaintiff as she contended that she did not knew that Cox was trying to steal petrol from someone elses property or she was trespassing into the defendants premises. The jury held that irrespective of the refusal made by the plaintiff it can be concluded by the facts presented by her that she was aware that Cox was committing trespass into the defendants premises and therefore she should not have gone in with him. Hence, she was liable for committing contributory negligence. Critical Analysis and Conclusion The essentials that are to be present for constituting the tort of negligence are, first, that there was a duty of care on the part of a person, second, that there was breach of that duty, third, that breach resulted into a legal injury to another person and fourth, that the person owing the duty could have reasonably foreseen the resulting legal injury (Legal services Commission of South Australia, 2012). For the purpose of testing the duty of care neighbours principle was laid down in Donoghue v. Stevenson. The court in this case held that a person who can reasonably foresee that an injury is likely to occur from his act to his neighbour i.e. persons whom the person owing the duty could reasonably foresee is likely to get affected by his act, the person should take reasonable care to avoid such injury to take place in the first instance (Donoghue v. Stevenson (1932) AC 562). This was a general principle laid down regarding the duty of care in cases of negligence. There are two exce ptions to the duty of care principle, firstly, contributory negligence on the part of the plaintiff and secondly, voluntary assumption of risk by the plaintiff. The court is empowered under the Civil Liability Act 2002 to cut off a plaintiffs damages by 100%. The instant case is that of negligence where the defendant took the plea of contributory negligence on the part of the plaintiff. As per the observations made by the court in the instant case it is likely to apply the general principle of the negligence as laid down in Donoghue v. Stevenson instead of any special rule regarding that. The principle of Donoghue v. Stevenson lays down a general obligation on the part of an occupier of a premises. Accordingly, an occupier of a premises owes a duty to take minimum care for any foreseeable injury that may occur to a person who enters that premises. As per the observations made by Murphy J. in the Full Court decision he upheld the decision of the jury regarding the negligence on the part of the defendant on the ground that the defendant did not that the plaintiff was present in the premises. According to him, the cases on which the respondent based his evidence were giving undue advantage to the respondent. The respondent was under a duty to care of a degree higher than that required in cases of negligence ordinarily. Here, the defendant was not protecting himself rather he was firing without even raising an alarm for the trespasser which he considered was of ultra-dangerous nature. The judge referred the observation made my Dixon J. that the due care means the degree of care increases with the increase in the degree of danger (Adelaide Chemical and Fertilizer Co. Ltd. V. Carlyle (1940) 534 CLR 64). Accordingly, higher degree of care is expected in cases involving use of dangerous things like firearms or explosives. In this case also the firing of gunshot made by the defendant attracted a duty of care of higher degree which was not taken by the defendant and therefore he shall be liable for negligence. Also with regard to the issue of contributory negligence, Murphy J. observed that it should be separated from the issue of involvement in commission of an offence. He observed that evidences do not show the presence of contributory negligence on the part of the plaintiff as being accompanying someone in a vehicle does not attracts a risk of getting shot by a firearm even if the person is a trespasser to someones premises who got aggravated due to repeated stealing occurring at his premises. According to an Australian law, which is applicable only in Victoria, a person who occupies a premises is bound by the duty of care to every person and in all conditions that such person does not suffers any injury due to any act performed in his premises (Wrongs Act 1958 s 14B(3)). Further the provision also lays down that while deciding that if the person has taken due care as is required in cases of negligence the ability of the trespasser to foresee the probable injury shall be considered. It is the duty of the person occupying a premises towards the trespasser to prevent any rash or deliberate injury and even if the former knows that the trespasser habitually enters the premises the, he is liable to take due care of his presence. Dean, J., in the instant case held that the occupier owes only an ordinary duty of care towards the persons to which a foreseeable harm may occur and not a special duty. According to the High Court, the judge at the trial failed to recognize that in cases of negligence the burden of proof is on the plaintiff (Civil Liability Act 2002 (NSW) s 5E). But the parties failed to take the misdirection as a ground for appeal. Therefore a person occupying a premises may have a duty to take reasonable care towards a trespasser where it may be proved that any harm to the trespasser is reasonably foreseeable by the negligence on the part of the person occupying the premises. Further it can also be concluded that even if there is an illegal trespass in a persons premises, he owes a duty of care towards the trespasser. Reference List: Adelaide Chemical and Fertilizer Co. Ltd. V. Carlyle (1940) CLR 64. Commissioner for Railways v. Quinlan (1964) AC 1054. Civil Liability Act 2002 (NSW) s 5E. Donoghue v. Stevenson (1932) AC 562. Hackshaw v. Shaw 1984 (Cth) CLR 614. Legal Services Commission of South Australia 2012, Negligence, Available from: https://www.lawhandbook.sa.gov.au/ch01s05.php. [14 September 2017]. McHale v. Watson (1964) CLR 111. Wrongs Act 1958 s 14B(3).