Primary or Secondary? (1 Viewer)

[$hiftyIceQueen]

I don't know if anyone has asked this before, but whats better teaching at a primary school or secondary school? How do you choose between Primary and Secondary?

 

[uhawww]

Main reason I'm choosing secondary is because in my opinion the job would be a lot more fun being able to get along with students to a certain level and also not having to look at the same kids for a whole year. If you don't like a class in secondary school at least you only have them for certain periods.
Plus generally most primary school students won't remember the difference you are making in their lives, high school students will appreciate you much more.

This opinion only applies if you actually care though, some people just do the job for the money and holidays.


EDIT: By "get along with the students" I mean somewhat make friends with them on a more mature level, being able to share interests and being able to treat them like adults.

 

[Captain Gh3y]

EDIT: By "get along with the students" I mean somewhat make friends with them on a more mature level, being able to share interests and being able to treat them like adults.

Year 11 and 12 students, maybe, but I reckon it'd be easier to get along with primary school kids than 7 - 10s. Still less baby-sitting-ish, though.

 

[ianc]

yeah, 7-10s would suck; but the better thing with secondary is you have less responsibility, and also you dont have to deal with primary school parents.....

unless you really, really like working with small kids, go with secondary.

that's just my opinion anyway....

 

[Captain Gh3y]

I like the idea of doing secondary because it allows you to work with a subject area you really have a love of, and can hence explain it really well. Like, I find it easy to think of ways to explain high school level maths to kids, but I couldn't do that with english or the social sciences.

 

[uhawww]

I like the idea of doing secondary because it allows you to work with a subject area you really have a love of, and can hence explain it really well. Like, I find it easy to think of ways to explain high school level maths to kids, but I couldn't do that with english or the social sciences.

I can't believe I forgot to mention that point. That's exactly my view other than what I stated earlier.

 

[luscious-llama]

Secondary.
I don't have many reasons for it other than the ability to nurture someone to the best of their ability by the time they graduate... so they the best possible chance for a happy and successful future... etc etc etc .....................

^_^

 

[rific]

Secondary, roughly same reasons as above.

There really is no 'better' because both areas have huge pros and some cons, depending on who you are and where you're passions lie. If you can't really decide on where you wish to teach, I recommend middle school, which can be seen as the best of both worlds. Oh, and it's very easy to retrain later on too, if you want a change of students/areas,

You develop relationships with students at both levels, and the workload is commensurate between secondary and primary, just of differing natures. It all comes down to what you wish to do.

 

[PrincessSJ]

This seems to be dominated by secondary peoples, so I'll throw a few points about how good primary is......

I think the main reason that I chose primary is because I feel that children are more responsive and less obnoxious at this stage... less likely to backchat and most importantly not as influenced by popular culture (although I realise in some demographics this is not the case)

You can still develop meaningful relationships with children at a primary school age.. especially the older ones, but the younger ones too... I think the key to being a great teacher is to make sure you are the students' friend.... even at a preschool level (where I am currently working) you have to be friends with the kids, otherwise, what's the point??

I think I would essentially like to work in an early childhood or infants school environment becuase this is where I feel my skills will be most useful. I am not so concerned with what the curriculum prescribes me to teach, but with developing a lifelong love of learning in children.... where children will WANT to learn, regardless of the subject matter.. that's what I think is most important.. to me anyway, and that's where I think I will function best as a teacher.


As rific says, it depends on what you want to do, and where you feel you will be best suited and get the most job satisfaction... and that's a personal preference...

 

[cro_angel]

I'm doing primary because:
- Don't have enough passion for one specific subject so I wouldn't mind teaching everything
- It is great to have a class for a whole year and you build relationships with them all
- Having a classroom to decorate however you would like
- Having parents that are always willing to help (walkathons, canteen, bringing resources into class, making costumes etc)
- With younger grades, having the kids think you are the best because you sing and dance like an idiot
- With older grades, being able to do more complex research assignments and going into more depth on topics.
- I have nephews and a niece, I love kids =)

 

[SweetSeasons]

I chose secondary because you get to specialise on the areas you really love.. my area hehe being timber and metal.. subjects you can't really teach in primary school.
But yeah.. the best teachers where the ones that where passionate about what they where teaching, and knew how to teach it.. I dont think I could stay a passionate person or a very good teacher for very long being a primary school teacher.

 

[melhoneybee]

secondary for me.
I love my subject and enjoy developing a love of it in my students.
Most of my friends are primary teachers and there are some definite positives.
-classroom management is much less challenging (a bunch of 10yr olds are much less difficult than a group of 16 yr old boys who have spent lunchtime ingesting sugar and caffeine).
-primary you develop close relationships with 25-30 students. In high school you can teach up to 300 students in a year, and don't necessarily develop a strong rapport as you don't know them well.
-high school students can be ruthless.
-in high school you can genuinely see your good work in students results, interest, and by watching how many of them choose your subject because they love it too thanks to your sharing your passion with them.

 

[BlackDragon]

i'll probably end up as a secondary teacher primarily because i can do a degree that throroughly interests me and then add a dip ed on the end. whereas for b ed primary i'll have to spend 4 years of my life doing a degree that would not be my number one choice.
and the being able to relate to your students thing is v true. 6 - 10 are absolutely immature. you cannot relate to the m very easily at all. whereas 10 - 11 you can and 1 - 5 you are able to form tight bonds and have fun with your students.
in this way, primary is very tempting to me because its more about being a friend to your students, having fun, and teaching them through your life experience and guiding them into being good people with a love for life.

so in the end i'm not sure which i actually want more. primary i spose. and if you choose secondary, you'll probably end up with 7 - 10 a fair bit and at this ages, kids are very rude, disrespectful and have a general disregard for learning.

 

[uhawww]

By the way, people should be aware if you are doing a diploma of education there's certain requirements, for example you need to have a major area it lists as well as a minor in one of them (except for certain subjects). Make sure you look into it before locking in your subjects if you plan to do a DipEd.

 

[PrincessSJ]

and the being able to relate to your students thing is v true. 6 - 10 are absolutely immature. you cannot relate to the m very easily at all. whereas 10 - 11 you can and 1 - 5 you are able to form tight bonds and have fun with your students.

This is totally dependent on the relationship you forge with your students. f you expect them to be immature and rude, they will be.. if you expect mature adult behaviour, model it yourself, and reward those who display it, you will be more likely to behave in such a way that is considered acceptable. It is unfair on the vast majority of students to put them under the generalisation of being immature and rude!

 

[melhoneybee]

and the being able to relate to your students thing is v true. 6 - 10 are absolutely immature. you cannot relate to the m very easily at all. whereas 10 - 11 you can and 1 - 5 you are able to form tight bonds and have fun with your students.

so in the end i'm not sure which i actually want more. primary i spose. and if you choose secondary, you'll probably end up with 7 - 10 a fair bit and at this ages, kids are very rude, disrespectful and have a general disregard for learning.

That is not my experience at all. By year 11/12 a lot of students are not interested in learning for learnings sake but rather in achieving the highest possible marks regardless of interest.
In year 7-10 they are much more free to explore their interests and less marks driven. Some students are immature, but I get a lot more satisfaction out of teaching an actively engaged year 7 class than a results driven year 11 class.
I would say out of the 250 students I taught last year in year 7-10 that 90% of them were very polite, respectful, and enjoyed learning, at least in my classes. They will make you work hard for recognition but if you engage them in learning the classroom problems disappear.

 

[PrincessSJ]

Totally agreed!

Engagement = less behavioural problems

 

[rific]

I've always had a preference for Stage 6. You'll always get stages and students that respond well and respond poorly to you, you just have to ensure you work towards their education and don't get drawn too much into personality clashes. It helps if a student, regardless of stage or motivation, likes you, but you can also succeed with those that don't.

Someone mentioned the Dip Ed. earlier? The winds, atm, suggest that, in its current form, it'll be scrapped within 3-5 years.

 

[Sprinkles~]

I used to want to be a secondary english teacher, just because it would allow me to specialise in my favourite subject

 

[uhawww]

Someone mentioned the Dip Ed. earlier? The winds, atm, suggest that, in its current form, it'll be scrapped within 3-5 years.

As someone stated, I doubt this would happen any time soon considering the demand of teachers, especially ones that actually know what they're doing. From where I stand I can't see much of a problem with it? If they scrapped the dip ed it would really hurt a lot of people doing Arts with the prospect of teaching, and I know of a few people who plan to do it after Comp/sci and Maths degrees. These people specialise in these areas, how can it be so bad?