I agree with Ellen (below). It's not the level of education that makes a
good teacher, but his or her own interest in the subject and the students.
And I have to disagree with an earlier post, you do not need a phd to be
able to read a scientific article or research a topic. If that were true,
two of my major papers this semester wouldn't have been written, as I'm
only an undergrad, and couldn't possibly understand the current research
on my topic for my molecular biology and genetics of development course.
What's really needed, just to repeat myself, in all teachers, is a love
of teaching! I'm quite confident that with a undergrad degree I would be
capable of teaching science at a high school level, and of helping
students with more advanced questions find the information they covet.
Ellen M Klann (emklann at titan.oit.umass.edu) wrote:
: Yep, if he got is training in the '60s and hasn't read a medical journal
: since then _I_ would most certainly stay away. He probably hasn't even
: heard of AIDS! I will restate my previous comments-- it is not the final
: degree of training that is important in a high school teacher, but their
: desire to be a good and up to date teacher. If they got their degree in
: the 1960's and haven't brought themselves up to date since then they are a
: poor biology teacher.
: Michaela Samek (msamek at cc.umanitoba.ca) wrote:
: : I guess we should not go to see a physician, who studied in 1960"s. He
: : is out of date! Ruther, what about some biology college graduate?
: : In article <4icrmn$556 at nic.umass.edu>, emklann at titan.oit.umass.edu says...
: : >
: : >Ellen