[hHwJ229h]

I think this is the dumbest saying who ever came up with it. Its just dumb and untrue.

If you can do it then you can teach it. If you cant do it, then you wont be able to teach it.


Unless the saying was meant as a sarcastic joke among drunk friends.

[Mabeavyledlib]

I think it's a comment reserved for 22 year olds who say they are going to school to become teachers.

[FourEsters]

You can do it, then you probably are- you can play pro football then chances are you are playing it and don't have time to teach it.

You can't do it but know how (just unable to) then you teach it- you are too old to play pro football so you coach.

[VIAGRA-]

Teaching others is arguably the most difficult and frustrating profession on Earth, largely because people are stupid.

[PilotJargon]

Teaching others is arguably the most difficult and frustrating profession on Earth, largely because people are stupid.

this statement is true

however, working in a support role for the an educational institute here, i realise that not only does the stupidness apply to students, it seems the teachers are trying to beat them at their own game sometimes

[hHwJ229h]

I was on my way from work today and the saying just kept repeating in my head over and over. And i just couldnt make sense out of it.

Sure there are some examples where you can teach something to some one cause you used to do it, but cant, cause you are just not physically capable, foot ball for example. But there are many things that you need to show how to do something in order to teach.

If you are a teacher, a math teacher, and in order to teach some one math, then you must be mentally and physically capable to teach math to students. But, at the same time, if you are capable, then perhaps you chose to teach instead of do/solve math problems.

I had few cold once, so some of it might not makes sense, i appalogise for that.


And not all people are stupid, for some it takes longer then others to "click", or understand. And some, they are simply stupid.

[FourEsters]

And not all people are stupid, for some it takes longer then others to "click", or understand. And some, they are simply stupid.

Now's that's a quote.

[Catalogov]

The ability to teach is totally different, even if you are proficient at what you are supposed to teach. I've personally know some experts in their field but they couldn't teach for nuts.

[RogHammon]

I think it was an Oscar Wilde quote, and if i remember it was something to do with having a pop at people who sit back and go on about when they used to do x,y and z and now teach instead.
Bottom line is if you got it use it, and to be frank the saying is very true in the art world.

[TineSeign]

I do think there is some truth in it, after all financially teachers are prob better off working in their field of choice rather than teaching it, unless it's a university / college level. I think high school teachers in the uk get around £25k, which isn't the greatest wage. However, what the expression doesn't mention is the satisfaction of passing on knowledge.

At the end of the day it's just an expression, much like a statistic it's largely bullshit.

[zdoppiklonikaa]

I think this is the dumbest saying who ever came up with it. Its just dumb and untrue.

If you can do it then you can teach it. If you cant do it, then you wont be able to teach it.

Unless the saying was meant as a sarcastic joke among drunk friends.

I used to hear that a lot as teacher. The argument being was if you were genuinely good at, say, physics, you'd be working in that field; if you were only average or mediocre, the next best thing to being a professional physicist, is to teach it.

However, I have to say, now that I'm well out of the profession, that there is a good element of truth in it - especially in the UK today. I know of a lot of people who teach physics up to GCSE level (and, worryingly, to A-level in some cases) who have little formal physics training, beyond what they received as part of their teacher training. There is a reasonable shortage of people willing to become physics teachers so the UK government offered a financial incentive to get more people to switch subjects during their teacher training - one could start off with history, take a 6 month brush-up course, and then finish as a "qualified" physics teacher.

To answer some of UglyChild's queries, teaching is a skill and one that is not linked to the subject being taught; obviously having an in-depth and broad knowledge of the topics being covered is very important but it only helps you if you had the actual ability to communicate this understanding down to the level at which people, who are just starting out in their learning, will be able to pick it up. And that's merely a single element in the job, time management, social skills, planning ability, emotional control and so on, all play an important part. If you lack these, then your teaching capability will be severely reduced, no matter how intelligence or knowledgeable you are.

[yazetaw]

I think Dewey Finn ( School of Rock) said it best!

Those that can't do, teach, and those that can't teach... teach gym. [rofl]

[alecaf]

Those who can, teach. Those who can't, teach P.E.

I think the expression is more aimed at people who don't know what to do with their degree, so they think the easy route is becoming a teacher. "I know Science! Therefore I can teach it!". Though as Neeyik pointed out, there is more to teaching than simply understanding the subject you are teaching and if you think that knowledge alone will allow you to coast, then you're probably in for a shock. I met one guy on my PGCE course who was clearly there for the financial benefits that teacher training brings you. That, and some people just enjoy the university life. He dropped out of the course after the first teaching practice.

[yazetaw]

core subjects like sciense maths get £9000 bursary through out the PGCE year then £5000 golden hello when you've done a whole year of teaching.

[hHwJ229h]

I used to hear that a lot as teacher. The argument being was if you were genuinely good at, say, physics, you'd be working in that field; if you were only average or mediocre, the next best thing to being a professional physicist, is to teach it.

However, I have to say, now that I'm well out of the profession, that there is a good element of truth in it - especially in the UK today. I know of a lot of people who teach physics up to GCSE level (and, worryingly, to A-level in some cases) who have little formal physics training, beyond what they received as part of their teacher training. There is a reasonable shortage of people willing to become physics teachers so the UK government offered a financial incentive to get more people to switch subjects during their teacher training - one could start off with history, take a 6 month brush-up course, and then finish as a "qualified" physics teacher.

To answer some of UglyChild's queries, teaching is a skill and one that is not linked to the subject being taught; obviously having an in-depth and broad knowledge of the topics being covered is very important but it only helps you if you had the actual ability to communicate this understanding down to the level at which people, who are just starting out in their learning, will be able to pick it up. And that's merely a single element in the job, time management, social skills, planning ability, emotional control and so on, all play an important part. If you lack these, then your teaching capability will be severely reduced, no matter how intelligence or knowledgeable you are.

Ill have to reread this a few more times in the noon times after a drink to fully absorb this info. But, regardless of my mind state ill add this so i can better can understand it.

I guess, it comes down to a subject/profession and personal reasons?

What i mean is; even if you can do it, some people just simply chose to teach it instead of doing it?

[pongeystrhjst]

What i mean is; even if you can do it, some people just simply chose to teach it instead of doing it?

There are some people that teach simply because they enjoy teaching, and they are good at it. They don't have a desire to go in to the field and do, because they want to teach what they enjoy. These are what you call "good" teachers.

But like Neeyik said, there most certainly is an element of truth to it. Perhaps you are simply unable to perform the task which you like to do. I'll use a football coach as an example. Say you played football for 20 years, now your too old to keep playing but you love the game. What do you do? Coach. You have the experience, the knowledge, but not the ability to play, so you teach.

A music teacher. Maybe they'd love to be in a band or orchestra or whatever, but they simply are not very good. They enjoy music however, and understand the basics of how to play, so they teach others.