Licenses and Certification Aren't Necessary

[fifthpaw]

So in the thread 'Ask a Teacher things!' I asked "Does it make sense if someone with a Doctorate in Mathematics isn't allow to teach math b\c no teaching degree/licence" and things got heated. So I'm creating this thread because asking a teacher why a license is necessary when teachers are the main ones pushing for teachers to be certified is a no no and is off topic because it's a problem of the system that a teacher has no control over and other reasons (aren't teachers the ones pushing for certification????) Anyways, while we're at it, why not discuss licencing of other occupations, more specifically the most popular in favor of licencing... doctors.

So the argument that a teaching license is needed is because it provides a standard, quality, legal requirement, etc. But none of that is true. The source I cited in the other thread, which only 1 person even bother to look at, was about the outcome of students teaching themselves. Admittedly that study did have problems but it is something to consider when put next another study that shows Teach For America "teachers" perform about the same and sometimes even better in some areas than certified ones.

Photo Finish - Education Next

I hesitated to put forth the Thomas J. Kane study because politics, and not because that there's anything wrong with this study or anything other. But I'm putting it out now. (This is comparing american school with american school apple to apple comparison supported by facts)

Many people who want certification like to argue, "do you want doctors to be unlicensed." (apparently comparing doctors to teachers isn't an apple to oranges comparison like compare foreign schools to us schools for some reason but I'll take on that challenge)

Again the standard argument of setting standard, quality, legal requirement etc for doctors. But only the legal requirement is true. The legal requirement =/= practicality as demonstrated by the Teach For America "teachers" and is the same for doctor. Although there aren't many studies comparing the effectiveness of non license medical practitioners because the AMA made it increasing difficult, but there are a few (admittedly still with problems such as sample size when comparing urgent cares that mostly use nurses and PAs) But when comparing other non licensed plumbers, engineers, and so on, the result are to be expected.

So the reasons why I think doctors don't need a licence and is really a scam
1. The doctor license is really meant to control supply and money. If you look at the history, it's all about controlling supply as many people are getting wise to now.

1. Any alternatives are flatly reject because reasons despite evidence to the contrary such as when DOs first came on the scene. When the American Osteopathic Association clashed with the American Medical Association in the beginning of the 1900s, the same arguments again just like with teaching. M.D. are "better" than D.O. because training, time, etc.

2. New age medicine which is snake oil are protected by licences. What happened to standards and quality?

[SleepingPoppy]

aren't teachers the ones pushing for certification????

Are they? I genuinely don't know who decides that, but I never thought it was teachers. Seems more like administration/politics?

Also thank you for the article you linked. It's interesting so far.

[GesuGesu]

I applied for a teaching license in Canada after dropping out of teacher's college. I didn't get it. It is legally required to have a teacher's license to work in any public or private school here, so even if I am qualified and have all my training sans license, legally I still cannot be hired.

So yes, a license is required. This is proof of your ability like a lawyer's badge here.

My plan is to reapply again next year.

[fifthpaw]

I should really specify it's the teacher's union that's doing most of the pushing.

[AceRagz]

New age medicine is a mess. Those that sell it get around regulations and restrictions traditional medicine has by labeling it "alternative medicine" or "natural" and "holistic". And a lot of them are not licensed at all. Some that do hide behind licenses have gotten their license through traditional medicine and then later start hawking industrial bleach as a cure all. And some try to hide behind nothing more than doctorates. I would suggest checking out Jeff Holiday on Youtube the dude talks about this stuff all the time.

The system isn't perfect but why throw the baby out with the bathwater? If we went to letting anyone practice medicine then you open the door to people like Jilian Epperly who pushes her Jilly Juice as the cure all that heals cancer, cures Autism, cures homosexuality and can regrow limbs. What is this miracle cure? Fermented cabbage juice with enough salt to give you explosive diarrhea you shed the lining of your intestines.

[fifthpaw]

Good luck, in the United States some private school don't require a license like https://www.thalesacademy.org. If Canada doesn't see you as qualified maybe try there?

[GesuGesu]

Canada is stricter and the requirements is to produce good teachers, not just people who like to teach. So no thanks. I heard enough issues with American school system that I would not work there.

[fifthpaw]

I'll check out Holiday's content. As for the system isn't perfect, you're right. However, licensing as you said didn't stop Epperly, but it does stop capable teachers from teaching. My argument isn't getting rid of licenses. It's that it's not necessary to do the job. In fact, people without them often do a better job than those who have. If licensing becomes less of a political tool and actually work as attended then I'm all for licensing.

[fifthpaw]

Yeah, you don't want to work for the school-to-prison pipeline so I understand.

[AceRagz]

I don't really have an opinion on the teaching licenses since that is something that isn't a part of my usual interests. I keep up on new age medicine scams and quackery because for some reason the stuff fascinates me.

[WriterLinXiaolong]

In my country, the formal teaching qualification (license and certification) is regulated by the government. If you don't have at least a degree in education, you need to apply for the teaching qualification where you are then tested and interviewed. The conditions are very strict.

The reason for this is because, being a teacher is not as easy as it is simply being able to teach. They needed to have that certain skill set in order to teach their students. Especially younger students that need constant guidance. It is also to weed those people who knows a lot but is unable to impart that knowledge due to several reasons (which the formal teaching qualification tests them on).

I think it is also the same as to why an accountant needs to have certification in order to get a job here even though they already have a degree on it (at least in my country).

A simple way as I see it, a license/certificate is simply something you show other to say you are qualified at what you do and so that they can allow you to do what you do because the risk is lower.

[fifthpaw]

Well, I don't know of any studies of other countries' comparison of license to non license but I do agree that

a license/certificate is simply something you show other to say you are qualified at what you do and so that they can allow you to do what you do because the risk is lower.

as you said to a certain extent. But studies and experiments have shown licenses are merely an illusion like america's TSA for airport security. But I will look up how licenses work for other countries.

[DiegoPalacios]

Licences and certificates were created to prove the person is capable of doing certain jobs that require certain skills and deep knowledge on certain subjects.

How well it fulfills this goal can be discussed.

If you want to be an employee, you need to prove your potential boss you are capable.
Some skills can be proven in other ways (like an artist`s portfolio), but others are not easily verifiable under normal circumstances(ex: a lawyer), that is why employers look at certificates as a simple way to check on the capabilities of the potential employee. (they will also check your psychological profile because they want people the team can work well with)

If you are self employed, is up to you if you perform certain tasks, but in some cases you need to prove you can do a job. (ex: an independent doctor). And if you need someone with a skill you want, you will appreciate they can prove it to you.....and you don`t get cheated in the proccess.

Of course, there are licenced people who are incompetent at their job for other reasons, which is a valid concern to question the efficacy of licences. Also, the fact that someone can forge licences.

[DiegoPalacios]

About the teacher licence specifically:

teachers require more abilities that many people think:

1-knowledge of the subject

2-capability to explain the subject

3-emphaty and people skills to motivate the students to learn

4-ability to handle a crowd

5-ability to speak in public

6-being a trustworthy person, after all, the education of the future generations is in their hands.

7-not hating their target demographic (if a school teacher hates kids, why did they even chose that carreer path?.....money???, really, i dont understand.)

I admire great teachers and despise the incompetent ones, because of the difference on how they handle the fundamental task of educating people.

[TJSchongar]

Also, a background check and registration with whatever government entity that controls education in your state/province/country, so that the teacher can be properly protected and/or sanctioned.

[DiegoPalacios]

how did i forgot to add that?????!!!!! XD, thanks for adding that point!

[fifthpaw]

you need to prove your potential boss you are capable ... but others are not easily verifiable under normal circumstances(ex: a lawyer), that is why employers look at certificates as a simple way to check

That's really misleading. So to take your example of lawyers, there have been many law suits of where people graduated from law school, pass the bar, but no job. They sue because they were fed lies about employment, salary information, and so on. According to the BLS, there have been more law graduated than job growth for years. It's a known fact the bar license (like the medical license) is really about supply control rather than capabilities. So much so there is a push to change the requirements to work in law such as with California's CBA accreditation rather than the ABA accreditation.

There are also engineering licenses like the IEEE, PE, ASCE, and so on, which engineers really don't care about. I know, because I'm a retired self taught software engineer who worked at Northrop Grumman with no engineering license. I worked with mechanical, electrical and many other types of engineers who also didn't have degrees or licenses. We all know having those certifications doesn't mean anything and is the reason why companies test people if they know their stuff because those certification don't mean anything other than limiting government contracts recipients. The law only requires those license only if working in government and even then sometimes you just need 1 person in the group to have it.

So teacher license specifically, those things you mentioned, again nothing to do with teaching licenses. Yes, they have to do with teachers but not licenses.

Show me a study that shows those with licenses do better than those without than school children as well as I will conceded that licenses are important.

[fifthpaw]

but a background check is a separate thing from a license.

[AceRagz]

Just adding a thought to this. If you hire Joe Nobody without an electrical license or certification and your house burns down due to faulty wiring in some jurisdictions the insurance company may be off the hook for the costs as it will be seen as your fault.

[fifthpaw]

Yes, that is true. Insurance companies will find all sorts of excuses to not pay out. But that doesn't negate that non license people are just as good or just as bad as those who are licensed. Licenses are a liability protection and a political tool and not what everybody think it is. So I am all for hiring licensed electricians to protect yourself form the insurance companies if something went wrong.

As a side note, in the other thread I mentioned a school hiring a murder as a unlicensed teaching assistant but that was as far as the argument got. Nothing on how people would react if something went wrong or the schools result.