Help
A group of highly acclaimed bridge teachers and I are increasingly concerned that everyone and his/her grandmother can now present themselves as bridge teachers. Let me first say that I do NOT claim to be an expert but after 11 years of teaching online, with accreditation by the ACBL (if that matters or not), I am confident about teaching novices/low intermediates with whom I love to work with. I am also proud that teachers with Bridge Forum (www.bridge-forum.com) are picked not only by me, but by my colleagues. Each has his/her own area of expertise, whether it be Larry Mori (larrymori) John Gowdy (Gowdy) or George Mittelman (mittmouse), all truly World Class players who can teach any level of bridge. But what about those who claim to be what they are not and lead students astray? How does the student know this? And does being a World Class player automatically make you a good teacher? Should there be some accreditation process? I raise these questions, hoping for a fruitful discussion.
Caitlin
Teaching Online Online Teachers' Accreditation?
#2
- Group: Full Members
- Posts: 638
- Joined: 2008-November-06
- Location:asia at present time now HK time
- Interests:Bridge- scuba-natural sex,no porn:)<br> Associate member I.B.P.A. workaholic
Posted 2009-March-03, 01:14
Agree with your post--there shld be some form of Creditation-in the UK one has to gain a certificate to teach live/or internet,also attend courses to be a TD
Not knocking Top class players (They seem to forget)what it was like to start out in the world of card Games,and it is very difficult,if you have not played any card games before u stumble on Bridge.
I know of many persons that have paid loads of money to learn,but they cannot hack it because they have no card sense, or gut instincts
regards, only been ply card games since i was 7 years old,"THANKS GRANDMA",i think of her weekly,she sits on my shoulder when im ply:))))))))))))))))))
Not knocking Top class players (They seem to forget)what it was like to start out in the world of card Games,and it is very difficult,if you have not played any card games before u stumble on Bridge.
I know of many persons that have paid loads of money to learn,but they cannot hack it because they have no card sense, or gut instincts
regards, only been ply card games since i was 7 years old,"THANKS GRANDMA",i think of her weekly,she sits on my shoulder when im ply:))))))))))))))))))
#3
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 4,599
- Joined: 2003-February-11
- Gender:Male
- Location:Las Vegas, USA
Posted 2009-March-03, 09:10
By and large we are not exactly happy with the way the bridge-teaching business operates on BBO either. Some of the problems I see:
1) I agree with Ellen that it is likely that many of the BBO members who advertise their teaching services are not qualified.
2) There is no easy way for a student to find which alleged teacher(s) rate to be best for his/her purposes.
3) What I hope is only a small % of these self-proclaimed bridge teachers are not very honest when it comes to dealing with money. Occasionally we get e-mails from upset students who claim they paid out some $ for teaching services and got essentially nothing in return. To make matters worse, some of these students think it should be BBO's responsibility to set things right.
4) What I hope is only a small % of online students are not very honest either. They agree to pay teacher(s) for a series of lessons and never actually pay. To make matters worse, sometimes the teachers think it should be BBO's responsibility to set things right.
5) I have no doubt that if you added up all the dollars that all the teachers make every year on BBO, the number would be at least 7 digits in size. BBO receives none of this money and that doesn't seem right to me. It should be noted that we have never made any real effort to impose a tax on the teachers. It should also be noted that (very) occasionally a teacher who makes his/her living on our site will do something nice to try to show their appreciation (like take us out to a fancy restaurant for dinner when we bump into each other at a bridge tournament).
6) Many teachers are unusually needy when it comes to technical support. Some can be quite rude when we refuse to spend unreasonable amounts of time helping them or (believe it or not) altering the software to suit their needs without them offering us anything in return.
All of that being said, of course we recognize that teachers and teaching are very important to the future of our game. That is one of the reason that we have made BBO so rich in educational facilities compared to other sites. It is also one of the main reasons we have been recently pouring a great deal of time and effort to improving what we have to offer to teachers and students in our web-based client (the next version that contains these enhancements will be released soon). It is also the main reason that we have been willing to put up with teachers on BBO making $millions each year without any of this money coming back to us (at least not directly).
We have long considered implementing some kind of program that would attempt to address problems like 1 through 6 above. Roughly how I would see this working is as follows:
1) BBO would certify qualified teachers
2) Such teachers would agree to pay BBO a % of the revenue they generate and agree to operate their businesses according to some kind of "code of conduct" that we specify.
3) In return, BBO would do things like this for certified teachers:
- A new symbol would appear in their profiles that would let potential students know that, as far as BBO is concerned, these teachers are both qualified and honest.
- BBO would handle and guarantee all the money for certified teachers so that they would no longer have to worry about getting paid.
- We would create some kind of automated facility within the software where certified teachers could advertise their services and potential students could sign up for classes.
- Certified teachers would be entitled to a higher level of technical support than the average BBO member.
- BBO would create a standard "ciriculum" (prepared hands on various subjects and at various levels) that certified teachers could use in their classes.
- Creating some new teaching facilities in the software that would be accessable only for certified teachers.
- Create a system whereby certified teachers could earn a "sales commission" when their students purchase our educational CD-ROMs.
This would obviously be an ambitious and expensive project both in terms of getting it started and running it once it got started. If it happens at all, it is not going to happen soon.
Feedback is welcome. I would be especially interested in knowing what % of the money that various teachers take in would they be willing to give up in order to participate in a program like this. Feel free to send me e-mail (fred@bridgebase.com) if you do not feel comfortable about discussing such things in a public forum.
Fred Gitelman
Bridge Base Inc.
www.bridgebase.com
1) I agree with Ellen that it is likely that many of the BBO members who advertise their teaching services are not qualified.
2) There is no easy way for a student to find which alleged teacher(s) rate to be best for his/her purposes.
3) What I hope is only a small % of these self-proclaimed bridge teachers are not very honest when it comes to dealing with money. Occasionally we get e-mails from upset students who claim they paid out some $ for teaching services and got essentially nothing in return. To make matters worse, some of these students think it should be BBO's responsibility to set things right.
4) What I hope is only a small % of online students are not very honest either. They agree to pay teacher(s) for a series of lessons and never actually pay. To make matters worse, sometimes the teachers think it should be BBO's responsibility to set things right.
5) I have no doubt that if you added up all the dollars that all the teachers make every year on BBO, the number would be at least 7 digits in size. BBO receives none of this money and that doesn't seem right to me. It should be noted that we have never made any real effort to impose a tax on the teachers. It should also be noted that (very) occasionally a teacher who makes his/her living on our site will do something nice to try to show their appreciation (like take us out to a fancy restaurant for dinner when we bump into each other at a bridge tournament).
6) Many teachers are unusually needy when it comes to technical support. Some can be quite rude when we refuse to spend unreasonable amounts of time helping them or (believe it or not) altering the software to suit their needs without them offering us anything in return.
All of that being said, of course we recognize that teachers and teaching are very important to the future of our game. That is one of the reason that we have made BBO so rich in educational facilities compared to other sites. It is also one of the main reasons we have been recently pouring a great deal of time and effort to improving what we have to offer to teachers and students in our web-based client (the next version that contains these enhancements will be released soon). It is also the main reason that we have been willing to put up with teachers on BBO making $millions each year without any of this money coming back to us (at least not directly).
We have long considered implementing some kind of program that would attempt to address problems like 1 through 6 above. Roughly how I would see this working is as follows:
1) BBO would certify qualified teachers
2) Such teachers would agree to pay BBO a % of the revenue they generate and agree to operate their businesses according to some kind of "code of conduct" that we specify.
3) In return, BBO would do things like this for certified teachers:
- A new symbol would appear in their profiles that would let potential students know that, as far as BBO is concerned, these teachers are both qualified and honest.
- BBO would handle and guarantee all the money for certified teachers so that they would no longer have to worry about getting paid.
- We would create some kind of automated facility within the software where certified teachers could advertise their services and potential students could sign up for classes.
- Certified teachers would be entitled to a higher level of technical support than the average BBO member.
- BBO would create a standard "ciriculum" (prepared hands on various subjects and at various levels) that certified teachers could use in their classes.
- Creating some new teaching facilities in the software that would be accessable only for certified teachers.
- Create a system whereby certified teachers could earn a "sales commission" when their students purchase our educational CD-ROMs.
This would obviously be an ambitious and expensive project both in terms of getting it started and running it once it got started. If it happens at all, it is not going to happen soon.
Feedback is welcome. I would be especially interested in knowing what % of the money that various teachers take in would they be willing to give up in order to participate in a program like this. Feel free to send me e-mail (fred@bridgebase.com) if you do not feel comfortable about discussing such things in a public forum.
Fred Gitelman
Bridge Base Inc.
www.bridgebase.com
#4
- World International Master without a clue
-
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 17,404
- Joined: 2003-November-13
- Gender:Male
- Location:madrid
Posted 2009-March-03, 10:06
There are awful teachers everywhere, not only online.
I don't have any online classes atm, but I wouldn't be willing to give you more than 5% of what I get for a start. But if the thing grew, at some point I would have to be in, if I would also benefit from getting that symbol, I think I would grow the % up to 15% (If I get problems because students don't liek that I do not have the symbol, I could be bullied to pay a bit more).
What I don't know is how would you know that I am telling you all the classes I am giving, or the true ammounts I am being paid.
I don't have any online classes atm, but I wouldn't be willing to give you more than 5% of what I get for a start. But if the thing grew, at some point I would have to be in, if I would also benefit from getting that symbol, I think I would grow the % up to 15% (If I get problems because students don't liek that I do not have the symbol, I could be bullied to pay a bit more).
What I don't know is how would you know that I am telling you all the classes I am giving, or the true ammounts I am being paid.
#5
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 10,092
- Joined: 2008-December-11
- Gender:Male
- Location:North Texas, USA
- Interests:Mountain Biking
Posted 2009-March-03, 10:12
Wow, great ideas here Fred.
I teach online, although this time of year most of my sessions are real-life. In the summers, I tend to teach online more, since a lot of my students are 'snowbirds'.
1. BBO-Certified Teachers would have a "T" next to their name, and there would be an easy link prospective students could follow to get my resume, qualifications and rates. Frankly, if BBO wanted to refer pro clients for online play, that would also be something worth 'taxing'. I sometimes pay other pros a spiff that refer me business, and I gladly do so as long as the client has direct knowledge of the relationship.
2. BBO would collect all the money in advance of a session, and remit it to the teacher on a weekly basis. In my experience, I have about a 5% non-payment rate when I choose to 'bill' students after the fact. Usually they attend a session, and its way over (or under) their head, and they ignore the bill when its sent.
3. As you mentioned, I think it would be great if there were some teaching resources available for sessions provided by BBO. If BBO has any access to 'canned' teaching hands it would be great, and I would be willing to 'pool' some hands I have prepared with other teachers. Perhaps if teachers are willing to contribute hands, this could offset their tax a little.
4. If BBO is going to certify teachers, I think that there should be a rigorous process to get this certification. My oldest son is embarking upon becoming a PGA Professional, and the plebes are put through the ringer. The last thing I would want to see is BBO accrediting a teacher simply because he/she has agreed to pay a 'tax'. If someone claims to be a great teacher, but can't play worth beans, I would no doubt take issue with their ability to teach, except perhaps to rank beginners.
5. There are a few things that I want to discuss with you privately, and I will send you an EM.
All this being said, teaching and playing pro is typically a, *ahem*, cash business. By institutionalizing a tax, you create a paper trail. Still, it would be worth it if my business would grow.
What's a fair rate? 10% seems about right to me, but I'm interested to see what others think.
In the end, you'll still get black-market teaching on BBO. There will be some teachers that simply don't want to pay the tax, or don't think they need the resources. Frankly, in the User Agreement, I think that a reason someone could be barred is teaching outside the program. Golf Courses have such restrictions, because such business should be going to the PGA professionals that work there, and not to some driving range hack.
I teach online, although this time of year most of my sessions are real-life. In the summers, I tend to teach online more, since a lot of my students are 'snowbirds'.
1. BBO-Certified Teachers would have a "T" next to their name, and there would be an easy link prospective students could follow to get my resume, qualifications and rates. Frankly, if BBO wanted to refer pro clients for online play, that would also be something worth 'taxing'. I sometimes pay other pros a spiff that refer me business, and I gladly do so as long as the client has direct knowledge of the relationship.
2. BBO would collect all the money in advance of a session, and remit it to the teacher on a weekly basis. In my experience, I have about a 5% non-payment rate when I choose to 'bill' students after the fact. Usually they attend a session, and its way over (or under) their head, and they ignore the bill when its sent.
3. As you mentioned, I think it would be great if there were some teaching resources available for sessions provided by BBO. If BBO has any access to 'canned' teaching hands it would be great, and I would be willing to 'pool' some hands I have prepared with other teachers. Perhaps if teachers are willing to contribute hands, this could offset their tax a little.
4. If BBO is going to certify teachers, I think that there should be a rigorous process to get this certification. My oldest son is embarking upon becoming a PGA Professional, and the plebes are put through the ringer. The last thing I would want to see is BBO accrediting a teacher simply because he/she has agreed to pay a 'tax'. If someone claims to be a great teacher, but can't play worth beans, I would no doubt take issue with their ability to teach, except perhaps to rank beginners.
5. There are a few things that I want to discuss with you privately, and I will send you an EM.
All this being said, teaching and playing pro is typically a, *ahem*, cash business. By institutionalizing a tax, you create a paper trail. Still, it would be worth it if my business would grow.
What's a fair rate? 10% seems about right to me, but I'm interested to see what others think.
In the end, you'll still get black-market teaching on BBO. There will be some teachers that simply don't want to pay the tax, or don't think they need the resources. Frankly, in the User Agreement, I think that a reason someone could be barred is teaching outside the program. Golf Courses have such restrictions, because such business should be going to the PGA professionals that work there, and not to some driving range hack.
Hi y'all!
Winner - BBO Challenge bracket #6 - February, 2017.
Winner - BBO Challenge bracket #6 - February, 2017.
#6
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 4,082
- Joined: 2006-August-31
- Gender:Male
- Location:Santiago, Chile
- Interests:Bridge, Video Games, Languages, Travelling.
Posted 2009-March-03, 10:17
From what I understand students would pay BBO which in turn would pay you (the teacher). I think it should be easy to allw or disallow whoever from watching or taking part in a class.
I think this would be a wonderful idea and we'd have a new place in BBO for teaching and/or taking lessons. I believe 10% is a good amount (from the teacher's perspective).
I think this would be a wonderful idea and we'd have a new place in BBO for teaching and/or taking lessons. I believe 10% is a good amount (from the teacher's perspective).
wyman, on 2012-May-04, 09:48, said:
Also, he rates to not have a heart void when he leads the ♥3.
rbforster, on 2012-May-20, 21:04, said:
Besides playing for fun, most people also like to play bridge to win
My YouTube Channel
#7
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 6,496
- Joined: 2006-February-24
Posted 2009-March-03, 10:18
Provide world class facilities and support services for teaching bridge online? Good idea.
Charge "for profit" teachers for using these facilities and services? Good idea.
Define a bridge curriculum? Don't do it!
Accredit bridge teachers? Don't do it!
I worry that BBO will damage its brand if it gets into the bridge education business, in the same way that Marriott Hotels would damage its brand if it got into the professional sex services business. Sorry if that offends sex professionals but thats how I feel about the state of bridge education today.
Charge "for profit" teachers for using these facilities and services? Good idea.
Define a bridge curriculum? Don't do it!
Accredit bridge teachers? Don't do it!
I worry that BBO will damage its brand if it gets into the bridge education business, in the same way that Marriott Hotels would damage its brand if it got into the professional sex services business. Sorry if that offends sex professionals but thats how I feel about the state of bridge education today.
If you lose all hope, you can always find it again -- Richard Ford in The Sportswriter
#8
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 15,475
- Joined: 2003-February-13
- Gender:Male
- Location:Natick, MA
-
Interests:Travel
Cooking
Brewing
Hiking
Posted 2009-March-03, 10:28
fred, on Mar 3 2009, 06:10 PM, said:
By and large we are not exactly happy with the way the bridge-teaching business operates on BBO either. Some of the problems I see:
1) I agree with Ellen that it is likely that many of the BBO members who advertise their teaching services are not qualified.
2) There is no easy way for a student to find which alleged teacher(s) rate to be best for his/her purposes.
3) What I hope is only a small % of these self-proclaimed bridge teachers are not very honest when it comes to dealing with money. Occasionally we get e-mails from upset students who claim they paid out some $ for teaching services and got essentially nothing in return. To make matters worse, some of these students think it should be BBO's responsibility to set things right.
4) What I hope is only a small % of online students are not very honest either. They agree to pay teacher(s) for a series of lessons and never actually pay. To make matters worse, sometimes the teachers think it should be BBO's responsibility to set things right.
5) I have no doubt that if you added up all the dollars that all the teachers make every year on BBO, the number would be at least 7 digits in size. BBO receives none of this money and that doesn't seem right to me. It should be noted that we have never made any real effort to impose a tax on the teachers. It should also be noted that (very) occasionally a teacher who makes his/her living on our site will do something nice to try to show their appreciation (like take us out to a fancy restaurant for dinner when we bump into each other at a bridge tournament).
6) Many teachers are unusually needy when it comes to technical support. Some can be quite rude when we refuse to spend unreasonable amounts of time helping them or (believe it or not) altering the software to suit their needs without them offering us anything in return.
All of that being said, of course we recognize that teachers and teaching are very important to the future of our game. That is one of the reason that we have made BBO so rich in educational facilities compared to other sites. It is also one of the main reasons we have been recently pouring a great deal of time and effort to improving what we have to offer to teachers and students in our web-based client (the next version that contains these enhancements will be released soon). It is also the main reason that we have been willing to put up with teachers on BBO making $millions each year without any of this money coming back to us (at least not directly).
We have long considered implementing some kind of program that would attempt to address problems like 1 through 6 above. Roughly how I would see this working is as follows:
1) BBO would certify qualified teachers
2) Such teachers would agree to pay BBO a % of the revenue they generate and agree to operate their businesses according to some kind of "code of conduct" that we specify.
3) In return, BBO would do things like this for certified teachers:
- A new symbol would appear in their profiles that would let potential students know that, as far as BBO is concerned, these teachers are both qualified and honest.
- BBO would handle and guarantee all the money for certified teachers so that they would no longer have to worry about getting paid.
- We would create some kind of automated facility within the software where certified teachers could advertise their services and potential students could sign up for classes.
- Certified teachers would be entitled to a higher level of technical support than the average BBO member.
- BBO would create a standard "ciriculum" (prepared hands on various subjects and at various levels) that certified teachers could use in their classes.
- Creating some new teaching facilities in the software that would be accessable only for certified teachers.
- Create a system whereby certified teachers could earn a "sales commission" when their students purchase our educational CD-ROMs.
This would obviously be an ambitious and expensive project both in terms of getting it started and running it once it got started. If it happens at all, it is not going to happen soon.
Feedback is welcome. I would be especially interested in knowing what % of the money that various teachers take in would they be willing to give up in order to participate in a program like this. Feel free to send me e-mail (fred@bridgebase.com) if you do not feel comfortable about discussing such things in a public forum.
Fred Gitelman
Bridge Base Inc.
www.bridgebase.com
1) I agree with Ellen that it is likely that many of the BBO members who advertise their teaching services are not qualified.
2) There is no easy way for a student to find which alleged teacher(s) rate to be best for his/her purposes.
3) What I hope is only a small % of these self-proclaimed bridge teachers are not very honest when it comes to dealing with money. Occasionally we get e-mails from upset students who claim they paid out some $ for teaching services and got essentially nothing in return. To make matters worse, some of these students think it should be BBO's responsibility to set things right.
4) What I hope is only a small % of online students are not very honest either. They agree to pay teacher(s) for a series of lessons and never actually pay. To make matters worse, sometimes the teachers think it should be BBO's responsibility to set things right.
5) I have no doubt that if you added up all the dollars that all the teachers make every year on BBO, the number would be at least 7 digits in size. BBO receives none of this money and that doesn't seem right to me. It should be noted that we have never made any real effort to impose a tax on the teachers. It should also be noted that (very) occasionally a teacher who makes his/her living on our site will do something nice to try to show their appreciation (like take us out to a fancy restaurant for dinner when we bump into each other at a bridge tournament).
6) Many teachers are unusually needy when it comes to technical support. Some can be quite rude when we refuse to spend unreasonable amounts of time helping them or (believe it or not) altering the software to suit their needs without them offering us anything in return.
All of that being said, of course we recognize that teachers and teaching are very important to the future of our game. That is one of the reason that we have made BBO so rich in educational facilities compared to other sites. It is also one of the main reasons we have been recently pouring a great deal of time and effort to improving what we have to offer to teachers and students in our web-based client (the next version that contains these enhancements will be released soon). It is also the main reason that we have been willing to put up with teachers on BBO making $millions each year without any of this money coming back to us (at least not directly).
We have long considered implementing some kind of program that would attempt to address problems like 1 through 6 above. Roughly how I would see this working is as follows:
1) BBO would certify qualified teachers
2) Such teachers would agree to pay BBO a % of the revenue they generate and agree to operate their businesses according to some kind of "code of conduct" that we specify.
3) In return, BBO would do things like this for certified teachers:
- A new symbol would appear in their profiles that would let potential students know that, as far as BBO is concerned, these teachers are both qualified and honest.
- BBO would handle and guarantee all the money for certified teachers so that they would no longer have to worry about getting paid.
- We would create some kind of automated facility within the software where certified teachers could advertise their services and potential students could sign up for classes.
- Certified teachers would be entitled to a higher level of technical support than the average BBO member.
- BBO would create a standard "ciriculum" (prepared hands on various subjects and at various levels) that certified teachers could use in their classes.
- Creating some new teaching facilities in the software that would be accessable only for certified teachers.
- Create a system whereby certified teachers could earn a "sales commission" when their students purchase our educational CD-ROMs.
This would obviously be an ambitious and expensive project both in terms of getting it started and running it once it got started. If it happens at all, it is not going to happen soon.
Feedback is welcome. I would be especially interested in knowing what % of the money that various teachers take in would they be willing to give up in order to participate in a program like this. Feel free to send me e-mail (fred@bridgebase.com) if you do not feel comfortable about discussing such things in a public forum.
Fred Gitelman
Bridge Base Inc.
www.bridgebase.com
Hi Fred
Few quick thoughts:
1. I appreciate the the problem that your users are encountering. For the most part, I think that your recommended solution is a good one.
2. I recommend that you stay very far away from providing any kind of standard curriculeum be it a set of hands, lesson plans, what have you. In my own experience, this is an area where people are going to want to customize their offerings. Moreover, if teachers can't great good examples they really might want to rethink whether they should be teaching.
3. As an alternative, you might want to consider offerering some kind of tests for the students. Consider the following proposition:
If you have completed the ACBL's "Hippogriff" class, you should be able to complete the following set of Bridge Master deals.
The primary purpose of the test is as a tool for students to evaluate their teachers. Lets assume that I finish the Hippogriff class. I go an take the exit exam. I encounter a deal that requires executing an end play. My teacher never mentioned that end plays exist, let alone how to execute one...
This is a pretty good indication that either
1. I wasn't paying attention or
2. My teacher didn't do a very good job
4. I think that your biggest problem is going to be related to quality control. If you decide to operate as the "banker", you'll have a lot of power to make sure that students pay their teachers. Making sure that teachers deliver a quality product is much more difficult. There are a lot of ways to skin this cat:
Require that teachers post bonds
With hold payment until students complete the course
The big problem is that as soon as you enter this arena, you're going to become a principal. All sorts of people are going to start bitching about all sorts of real and imagined issue.
Whatever you're thinking of charging, double it...
Alderaan delenda est
#9
- Group: Full Members
- Posts: 115
- Joined: 2007-August-07
Posted 2009-March-03, 10:32
Saw a teacher the other day that yelled at me for upgrading and amazing 4 10s 19pt 2nt(wasn't even a close one I would 2nt it in my sleep).
Then on the very next hand overcalled my 1♦, 1♥ with three ♦ to the QJx 9 points and a ♥ suit like JXXXX. I was so happy when his P led a ♥ in our spade game the only lead allowing us to make.
Then on the very next hand overcalled my 1♦, 1♥ with three ♦ to the QJx 9 points and a ♥ suit like JXXXX. I was so happy when his P led a ♥ in our spade game the only lead allowing us to make.
All IMO. Junior wanting to soak up all the knowledge he can.
#10
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 10,092
- Joined: 2008-December-11
- Gender:Male
- Location:North Texas, USA
- Interests:Mountain Biking
Posted 2009-March-03, 11:07
Disagree so far with the comments about not using prepared hands or a standard curriculum.
1. Preparing hands is, by far, the most time-intensive activity of a bridge teacher, although preparing lesson plans is also a lot of work. Having prepared hands makes lessons a lot easier.
2. Standardized Bridge Curricula. While courses don't have to be 'cookie-cutter', accreditation would serve to improve quality control. For instance, if I were to teach an accredited intermediate course on "Responding to 1N", I would expect that, depending on the level, I would need to include such aspects such as:
Stayman and Continuations
Jacoby Transfers and Continuations
Uses of 2♠, 2N and 3 level calls
Smolen
Gerber (blecch)
Texas
Lebensohl and handling interference
If a teacher wanted to strike out Stayman and Jacoby and institute "Gladiator" and "Relay GF Stayman", he is free to do so, but these courses should not be accredited.
There is a teacher on BBO that runs group classes and teaches such things as transfer preempts to intermediates. While he is free to do so, I would personally be hesitant to put a BBO Seal of Approval on such a product.
1. Preparing hands is, by far, the most time-intensive activity of a bridge teacher, although preparing lesson plans is also a lot of work. Having prepared hands makes lessons a lot easier.
2. Standardized Bridge Curricula. While courses don't have to be 'cookie-cutter', accreditation would serve to improve quality control. For instance, if I were to teach an accredited intermediate course on "Responding to 1N", I would expect that, depending on the level, I would need to include such aspects such as:
Stayman and Continuations
Jacoby Transfers and Continuations
Uses of 2♠, 2N and 3 level calls
Smolen
Gerber (blecch)
Texas
Lebensohl and handling interference
If a teacher wanted to strike out Stayman and Jacoby and institute "Gladiator" and "Relay GF Stayman", he is free to do so, but these courses should not be accredited.
There is a teacher on BBO that runs group classes and teaches such things as transfer preempts to intermediates. While he is free to do so, I would personally be hesitant to put a BBO Seal of Approval on such a product.
Hi y'all!
Winner - BBO Challenge bracket #6 - February, 2017.
Winner - BBO Challenge bracket #6 - February, 2017.
#11
- Limit bidder
-
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 8,482
- Joined: 2004-November-02
- Gender:Female
- Location:England
- Interests:Bridge, classical music, skiing... but I spend more time earning a living than doing any of those
Posted 2009-March-03, 11:15
As I neither teach, nor pay people to teach me, you can take my opinion as either irrelevant or helpfully objective.
I think there are three separate issues here that are getting confused, or at the least conflated. In summary, I would put this as integrity, ability and definition.
1. Integrity
--------------
Your (Fred's) problems 3, 4 and 6 are about the mechanics of teaching in the BBO environment and not about the teaching itself, or choice of teachers, at all. If you chose to put in place an 'accredited partner' program of some sort which ensured that....
- the student paid in advance to BBO, who held the money until after the classes
- as long as the classes were delivered, the tutor received the money
- you confirmed that a teacher who claimed a particular qualification has it ("played for my country", "qualified ACBL director", "EBU approved teacher" or whatever)
- the teachers got enhanced technical support (or whatever) and/or access to additional materials
- you ran a complaints service (like abuse) to help mediate if a student claimed they didn't get what was promised (but only to the extent of not being on the topic offered, or not taking the time promised - stuff that should be indisputable)
...in return for a payment of some form
then I think you would be doing the community a service. In F2F terms this is what the local adult education service, or U3A, or whatever umbrella organisation that provides the infrastructure is providing (I don't know what the US equivalent is).
(this is most of your "what we would offer" point 3)
What this isn't doing is validating how good the teaching is.
2. Ability
------------
Problems 1 & 2 - how do I find a good teacher, how do a find a certified teacher - I think you probably want to stay out of unless you are prepared to put a huge amount of time and effort into it. And even then I'm not convinced you would get very far. To start with:
a) To be a good teacher of beginners, you need to be a good teacher and know a bit about bridge
To be a good teacher of better players, you need to be good at bridge and know a bit about teaching
A proper teacher certification covers both of these things. My parents both used to teach, and they had to pass tests both on their classroom management (teaching ability) and on their bridge knowledge. I would have thought that many people who already have teaching qualifications or accreditation might not want to go through all that again to be able to teach on BBO. If you didn't enforce that, you would have to go round the world and investigate what local qualifications covered and whether you were happy to 'passport' them, which I bet you don't want to do.
Also, it's not just a matter of being a 'good' teacher or not. I wouldn't be able to teach a group of Argentinian beginners how to play SAYC, because I don't speak Spanish and I don't know SAYC. But I would probably be OK at teaching English beginners how to play Acol. I would be an even better teacher to rather better players trying to improve further. So are you going to give 'qualified' accreditation (based on language and level)? Person A can only teach up to basic club duplicate, person B can coach the US Bermuda Bowl team but shouldn't be let near a beginner?
I suppose in essence, I just disagree totally with...
"4. If BBO is going to certify teachers, I think that there should be a rigorous process to get this certification. My oldest son is embarking upon becoming a PGA Professional, and the plebes are put through the ringer. The last thing I would want to see is BBO accrediting a teacher simply because he/she has agreed to pay a 'tax'. If someone claims to be a great teacher, but can't play worth beans, I would no doubt take issue with their ability to teach, except perhaps to rank beginners. "
...Not with the sentiment, but with the implementation, and in particular with the idea that this should be BBO's problem. On top of the 'horribly difficult' part of this, I think it's a good way to make enemies.
3. Definition
------------------
What do you mean by 'teaching' and 'teachers'?
i) Formal classes with someone in charge who talks, asks questions, gives explanations and then possibly gives exercises (typical 'classroom teaching')
ii) Supervised play, with prepared hands and advice during the game
iii) Supervised 'random' play but with the teacher watching and helping as appropriate
iv) Playing with a paying client.
I assume (i) and (ii) are included in your tax. (iii) is unclear.
For (iv) I don't think it makes sense for you to charge someone a fee just because they are playing with a client online. This is certainly not what real life clubs do, and it would be impossible to police. But I would have thought that some pros (particularly those playing with learner players as teachers, rather than those trading on their own bridge successes in world championships) might be prepared to pay an annual affiliation fee of some form, rather than a % tax, to get the 'integrity' benefits described above.
p.s. the word is CURRICULUM
I think there are three separate issues here that are getting confused, or at the least conflated. In summary, I would put this as integrity, ability and definition.
1. Integrity
--------------
Your (Fred's) problems 3, 4 and 6 are about the mechanics of teaching in the BBO environment and not about the teaching itself, or choice of teachers, at all. If you chose to put in place an 'accredited partner' program of some sort which ensured that....
- the student paid in advance to BBO, who held the money until after the classes
- as long as the classes were delivered, the tutor received the money
- you confirmed that a teacher who claimed a particular qualification has it ("played for my country", "qualified ACBL director", "EBU approved teacher" or whatever)
- the teachers got enhanced technical support (or whatever) and/or access to additional materials
- you ran a complaints service (like abuse) to help mediate if a student claimed they didn't get what was promised (but only to the extent of not being on the topic offered, or not taking the time promised - stuff that should be indisputable)
...in return for a payment of some form
then I think you would be doing the community a service. In F2F terms this is what the local adult education service, or U3A, or whatever umbrella organisation that provides the infrastructure is providing (I don't know what the US equivalent is).
(this is most of your "what we would offer" point 3)
What this isn't doing is validating how good the teaching is.
2. Ability
------------
Problems 1 & 2 - how do I find a good teacher, how do a find a certified teacher - I think you probably want to stay out of unless you are prepared to put a huge amount of time and effort into it. And even then I'm not convinced you would get very far. To start with:
a) To be a good teacher of beginners, you need to be a good teacher and know a bit about bridge
To be a good teacher of better players, you need to be good at bridge and know a bit about teaching A proper teacher certification covers both of these things. My parents both used to teach, and they had to pass tests both on their classroom management (teaching ability) and on their bridge knowledge. I would have thought that many people who already have teaching qualifications or accreditation might not want to go through all that again to be able to teach on BBO. If you didn't enforce that, you would have to go round the world and investigate what local qualifications covered and whether you were happy to 'passport' them, which I bet you don't want to do.
Also, it's not just a matter of being a 'good' teacher or not. I wouldn't be able to teach a group of Argentinian beginners how to play SAYC, because I don't speak Spanish and I don't know SAYC. But I would probably be OK at teaching English beginners how to play Acol. I would be an even better teacher to rather better players trying to improve further. So are you going to give 'qualified' accreditation (based on language and level)? Person A can only teach up to basic club duplicate, person B can coach the US Bermuda Bowl team but shouldn't be let near a beginner?
I suppose in essence, I just disagree totally with...
"4. If BBO is going to certify teachers, I think that there should be a rigorous process to get this certification. My oldest son is embarking upon becoming a PGA Professional, and the plebes are put through the ringer. The last thing I would want to see is BBO accrediting a teacher simply because he/she has agreed to pay a 'tax'. If someone claims to be a great teacher, but can't play worth beans, I would no doubt take issue with their ability to teach, except perhaps to rank beginners. "
...Not with the sentiment, but with the implementation, and in particular with the idea that this should be BBO's problem. On top of the 'horribly difficult' part of this, I think it's a good way to make enemies.
3. Definition
------------------
What do you mean by 'teaching' and 'teachers'?
i) Formal classes with someone in charge who talks, asks questions, gives explanations and then possibly gives exercises (typical 'classroom teaching')
ii) Supervised play, with prepared hands and advice during the game
iii) Supervised 'random' play but with the teacher watching and helping as appropriate
iv) Playing with a paying client.
I assume (i) and (ii) are included in your tax. (iii) is unclear.
For (iv) I don't think it makes sense for you to charge someone a fee just because they are playing with a client online. This is certainly not what real life clubs do, and it would be impossible to police. But I would have thought that some pros (particularly those playing with learner players as teachers, rather than those trading on their own bridge successes in world championships) might be prepared to pay an annual affiliation fee of some form, rather than a % tax, to get the 'integrity' benefits described above.
p.s. the word is CURRICULUM
#12
- Limit bidder
-
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 8,482
- Joined: 2004-November-02
- Gender:Female
- Location:England
- Interests:Bridge, classical music, skiing... but I spend more time earning a living than doing any of those
Posted 2009-March-03, 11:20
Phil, on Mar 3 2009, 05:07 PM, said:
2. Standardized Bridge Curricula. While courses don't have to be 'cookie-cutter', accreditation would serve to improve quality control. For instance, if I were to teach an accredited intermediate course on "Responding to 1N", I would expect that, depending on the level, I would need to include such aspects such as:
Stayman and Continuations
Jacoby Transfers and Continuations
Uses of 2♠, 2N and 3 level calls
Smolen
Gerber (blecch)
Texas
Lebensohl and handling interference
If a teacher wanted to strike out Stayman and Jacoby and institute "Gladiator" and "Relay GF Stayman", he is free to do so, but these courses should not be accredited.
Stayman and Continuations
Jacoby Transfers and Continuations
Uses of 2♠, 2N and 3 level calls
Smolen
Gerber (blecch)
Texas
Lebensohl and handling interference
If a teacher wanted to strike out Stayman and Jacoby and institute "Gladiator" and "Relay GF Stayman", he is free to do so, but these courses should not be accredited.
Now you are running into the global problem of BBO.
If you are teaching people online to play online then (possibly) you should concentrate on common US conventions.
But what if I wanted to start a class for people who are interested in playing in England? Smolen and Texas are basically unknown here: I have NEVER played anyone in f2f bridge who (to my knowledge) plays Smolen. I don't want to be given the options of
- teach a set of conventions that the students will never come across in real life
or
- be told that my course "should not" be accredited.
So I agree with hrothgar on the 'curricula' point.
Providing sets of sample hands may well be a useful service, whether for play or bidding. But perhaps it's worth pointing out that such things are already available for those who want to pay for them... e.g. you can buy lessons from Richard Pavlicek online (I've never looked at them so this isn't a recommendation).
#13
- Limit bidder
-
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 8,482
- Joined: 2004-November-02
- Gender:Female
- Location:England
- Interests:Bridge, classical music, skiing... but I spend more time earning a living than doing any of those
Posted 2009-March-03, 11:22
pirate22, on Mar 3 2009, 07:14 AM, said:
in the UK one has to gain a certificate to teach live/or internet,also attend courses to be a TD
Sadly, this isn't true.
Anyone can call themselves a teacher.
Anyone can call themselves a TD.
There are qualifications available for both, but there is no penalty for not having them.
#14
- Group: Full Members
- Posts: 749
- Joined: 2005-July-17
- Gender:Male
- Location:Melbourne, Australia
Posted 2009-March-03, 11:38
I agree with Frances in that there is a huge difference between 'content knowledge' and 'pedagogical content knowledge', i.e. knowing what a backwash squeeze is, and knowing the best way to teach it. A good teacher needs to have both.
The former is easier to determine (how many big events has someone won), but the latter is almost impossible for BBO to determine.
The former is easier to determine (how many big events has someone won), but the latter is almost impossible for BBO to determine.
#15
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 10,092
- Joined: 2008-December-11
- Gender:Male
- Location:North Texas, USA
- Interests:Mountain Biking
Posted 2009-March-03, 11:43
FrancesHinden, on Mar 3 2009, 12:20 PM, said:
Phil, on Mar 3 2009, 05:07 PM, said:
2. Standardized Bridge Curricula. While courses don't have to be 'cookie-cutter', accreditation would serve to improve quality control. For instance, if I were to teach an accredited intermediate course on "Responding to 1N", I would expect that, depending on the level, I would need to include such aspects such as:
Stayman and Continuations
Jacoby Transfers and Continuations
Uses of 2♠, 2N and 3 level calls
Smolen
Gerber (blecch)
Texas
Lebensohl and handling interference
If a teacher wanted to strike out Stayman and Jacoby and institute "Gladiator" and "Relay GF Stayman", he is free to do so, but these courses should not be accredited.
Stayman and Continuations
Jacoby Transfers and Continuations
Uses of 2♠, 2N and 3 level calls
Smolen
Gerber (blecch)
Texas
Lebensohl and handling interference
If a teacher wanted to strike out Stayman and Jacoby and institute "Gladiator" and "Relay GF Stayman", he is free to do so, but these courses should not be accredited.
Now you are running into the global problem of BBO.
If you are teaching people online to play online then (possibly) you should concentrate on common US conventions.
But what if I wanted to start a class for people who are interested in playing in England? Smolen and Texas are basically unknown here: I have NEVER played anyone in f2f bridge who (to my knowledge) plays Smolen. I don't want to be given the options of
- teach a set of conventions that the students will never come across in real life
or
- be told that my course "should not" be accredited.
So I agree with hrothgar on the 'curricula' point.
Providing sets of sample hands may well be a useful service, whether for play or bidding. But perhaps it's worth pointing out that such things are already available for those who want to pay for them... e.g. you can buy lessons from Richard Pavlicek online (I've never looked at them so this isn't a recommendation).
Frances:
If I am teaching an Acol or UK version of responding to 1N, obviously there would be a different set of responses, just like if I were teaching an Italian method of slam bidding or a Polish method of a 1♣ opening. BBO can, and should, accredit courses for these different structures.
If I am teaching an American version of responding to 1N, then all of those responses are fairly standard. Sure, you can argue what should be used, but if I were to fill out a cc in 15 minutes with an unknown American expert I would expect my listed treatments to be included. For an American student, this is the 'product' they want to buy.
Quote
I suppose in essence, I just disagree totally with...
"4. If BBO is going to certify teachers, I think that there should be a rigorous process to get this certification. My oldest son is embarking upon becoming a PGA Professional, and the plebes are put through the ringer. The last thing I would want to see is BBO accrediting a teacher simply because he/she has agreed to pay a 'tax'. If someone claims to be a great teacher, but can't play worth beans, I would no doubt take issue with their ability to teach, except perhaps to rank beginners. "
...Not with the sentiment, but with the implementation, and in particular with the idea that this should be BBO's problem. On top of the 'horribly difficult' part of this, I think it's a good way to make enemies.
"4. If BBO is going to certify teachers, I think that there should be a rigorous process to get this certification. My oldest son is embarking upon becoming a PGA Professional, and the plebes are put through the ringer. The last thing I would want to see is BBO accrediting a teacher simply because he/she has agreed to pay a 'tax'. If someone claims to be a great teacher, but can't play worth beans, I would no doubt take issue with their ability to teach, except perhaps to rank beginners. "
...Not with the sentiment, but with the implementation, and in particular with the idea that this should be BBO's problem. On top of the 'horribly difficult' part of this, I think it's a good way to make enemies.
Then how would you certify teachers? Maybe you aren't familiar with the process, but the PGA does a pretty good job....
Hi y'all!
Winner - BBO Challenge bracket #6 - February, 2017.
Winner - BBO Challenge bracket #6 - February, 2017.
#16
- Deipnosophist
-
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 4,386
- Joined: 2005-March-22
Posted 2009-March-03, 12:01
A lot of interesting ideas afloat. I have a couple of disparate points to make on the ideas above.
1. In general, I agree with Frances' view on accreditation. If you think about how the education system works in the U.S., you need a teaching certification if you teach in a public school at the mandatory-schooling age level. If you teach in a private school or at a university (public or private), then you do not need any such certification. Mind you that the institution will have its own criteria and there is a general accreditation for the university, but not for any particular job. In particular, if you have a Ph.D. then you do not need, nor are you expected to get, a teaching credential. In the UK, university professors are required to either earn a teaching credential or get an exemption. Anyway, my point is, once we are talking about adult education, there is no such standard about what is the exact qualification for teaching. You can teach at community colleges with Master's degrees or even with Bachelor's. You can teach non-degree courses with no qualification at all. And really, this is what bridge is.
2. As per ACBL, EBU, whatever accreditation, it is basically a means of differentiating your product. It is only a signal, but not a guarantee. I don't think it's highly controversial to state that there are some accredited bridge teachers that are horrible and some non-credentialed bridge teachers that are great. As an example, when I was still in academia, I taught bridge lessons to our university bridge club. I have no bridge credential. However, I was also teaching university level classes without a teaching credential. (I do, however, have a Ph.D.) So I had a lot of experience teaching people in this age range. I also had superb facilities to use for my teaching. I prepared powerpoint slides with discussion points and deals. I had a classroom in which to teach and a whiteboard in which to draw up hands or suit combinations or whatever I fancied. I also have no way of knowing whether being credentialed would have made me an even better teacher. I suspect that I would learn something from the process, but I also suspect that I would reject some of the ideas as well and feel in a position to make such a judgment. So all that being said, I cannot understand why BBO would want to get into the business of making such a determination. (Note: I have never taught a paid bridge lesson.)
3. I think it would be a great idea if BBO supported and facilitated teaching on its site. I think it currently offers a few great tools pro bono. Ideally, I think it would be good if BBO still allowed pro bono teaching facilities, however this opens up a lot of issues in itself. For example, one way for BBO to enforce a fee for teaching, would be restrict the use of teaching tables to paying teachers. However, if BBO also believed in allowing pro bono teaching, then how does BBO identify a teacher using a pro bono table, but then secretly charging students? I don't have a good answer to this, so can understand if BBO decides not to allow use for pro bono work.
4. BBO does have a great service it can offer to both teachers and students. BBO can facilitate payment and provide support. As such a fee for such a service is completely understandable and would hopefully provide a welcome income stream for BBO, well at the same time it would help bridge teachers secure payments.
5. As an alternative to accreditation, why not just create and store feedback? Just like ebay a user can decide whether to use a teacher based on a short description provided by the teacher, hours of availability posted by the teacher, and reviews from past students. Maybe BBO can even the search process for students? I am envisioning something like a "Looking for a teacher?" page. There students can look through the descriptions, read reviews of the teachers, maybe there is a short description of curricula, and the students can pay for their lesson. I think it would be perfectly reasonable to charge a finder's fee for each student that enrolls this way (maybe 1/2 of the first lesson?). Lots of possibilities here.
6. As per the supporting the teachers themselves, I think this will be an area that can grow over time. Having sets of deals and tools built-in to the teaching environment could be very useful for the online teacher. For example, why not cross over the bidding practice area with the teaching area, so that teachers could quickly arrange parameters around hands? So if I wanted to have a lesson about 1NT openings and Stayman responses, I could set up the deals without a lot of advanced preparation. I basically think this whole area of development would be a way to distinguish BBO from any rivals. BBO has already better teaching tools than other sites, but why not make it the best place for teaching? That helps not only teachers, but students. It also helps the bottom line for the teachers, since they won't have to spend as much time prepping and can spend more time teaching.
1. In general, I agree with Frances' view on accreditation. If you think about how the education system works in the U.S., you need a teaching certification if you teach in a public school at the mandatory-schooling age level. If you teach in a private school or at a university (public or private), then you do not need any such certification. Mind you that the institution will have its own criteria and there is a general accreditation for the university, but not for any particular job. In particular, if you have a Ph.D. then you do not need, nor are you expected to get, a teaching credential. In the UK, university professors are required to either earn a teaching credential or get an exemption. Anyway, my point is, once we are talking about adult education, there is no such standard about what is the exact qualification for teaching. You can teach at community colleges with Master's degrees or even with Bachelor's. You can teach non-degree courses with no qualification at all. And really, this is what bridge is.
2. As per ACBL, EBU, whatever accreditation, it is basically a means of differentiating your product. It is only a signal, but not a guarantee. I don't think it's highly controversial to state that there are some accredited bridge teachers that are horrible and some non-credentialed bridge teachers that are great. As an example, when I was still in academia, I taught bridge lessons to our university bridge club. I have no bridge credential. However, I was also teaching university level classes without a teaching credential. (I do, however, have a Ph.D.) So I had a lot of experience teaching people in this age range. I also had superb facilities to use for my teaching. I prepared powerpoint slides with discussion points and deals. I had a classroom in which to teach and a whiteboard in which to draw up hands or suit combinations or whatever I fancied. I also have no way of knowing whether being credentialed would have made me an even better teacher. I suspect that I would learn something from the process, but I also suspect that I would reject some of the ideas as well and feel in a position to make such a judgment. So all that being said, I cannot understand why BBO would want to get into the business of making such a determination. (Note: I have never taught a paid bridge lesson.)
3. I think it would be a great idea if BBO supported and facilitated teaching on its site. I think it currently offers a few great tools pro bono. Ideally, I think it would be good if BBO still allowed pro bono teaching facilities, however this opens up a lot of issues in itself. For example, one way for BBO to enforce a fee for teaching, would be restrict the use of teaching tables to paying teachers. However, if BBO also believed in allowing pro bono teaching, then how does BBO identify a teacher using a pro bono table, but then secretly charging students? I don't have a good answer to this, so can understand if BBO decides not to allow use for pro bono work.
4. BBO does have a great service it can offer to both teachers and students. BBO can facilitate payment and provide support. As such a fee for such a service is completely understandable and would hopefully provide a welcome income stream for BBO, well at the same time it would help bridge teachers secure payments.
5. As an alternative to accreditation, why not just create and store feedback? Just like ebay a user can decide whether to use a teacher based on a short description provided by the teacher, hours of availability posted by the teacher, and reviews from past students. Maybe BBO can even the search process for students? I am envisioning something like a "Looking for a teacher?" page. There students can look through the descriptions, read reviews of the teachers, maybe there is a short description of curricula, and the students can pay for their lesson. I think it would be perfectly reasonable to charge a finder's fee for each student that enrolls this way (maybe 1/2 of the first lesson?). Lots of possibilities here.
6. As per the supporting the teachers themselves, I think this will be an area that can grow over time. Having sets of deals and tools built-in to the teaching environment could be very useful for the online teacher. For example, why not cross over the bidding practice area with the teaching area, so that teachers could quickly arrange parameters around hands? So if I wanted to have a lesson about 1NT openings and Stayman responses, I could set up the deals without a lot of advanced preparation. I basically think this whole area of development would be a way to distinguish BBO from any rivals. BBO has already better teaching tools than other sites, but why not make it the best place for teaching? That helps not only teachers, but students. It also helps the bottom line for the teachers, since they won't have to spend as much time prepping and can spend more time teaching.
"Half the people you know are below average." - Steven Wright
#17
- Group: Full Members
- Posts: 973
- Joined: 2006-March-17
- Gender:Male
Posted 2009-March-03, 12:05
What are the rewards ?
More autonomy to instructional assistants?
The instructor's job should be to give perspective and insight to th field rather than to regurgitate mebbe are already in th readings.
Teaching & learning online can change anyone's mind ? Worths to try a semester. Then let's see th statistics convince or not.
I value team projects, especially when they are realistic. There's a need to establish regularity of contact. Moreover there should be a challenge of developing packages that serve a variety of teaching & learning styles.
More autonomy to instructional assistants?
The instructor's job should be to give perspective and insight to th field rather than to regurgitate mebbe are already in th readings.
Teaching & learning online can change anyone's mind ? Worths to try a semester. Then let's see th statistics convince or not.
I value team projects, especially when they are realistic. There's a need to establish regularity of contact. Moreover there should be a challenge of developing packages that serve a variety of teaching & learning styles.
We all know that light travels faster than sound. That's why certain people appear bright until you hear them speak. Quoted by Albert Einstein.
#18
- Group: Full Members
- Posts: 737
- Joined: 2006-January-31
Posted 2009-March-03, 12:18
Of course everyone who knows me will know what I'm about to say, but I'll say it anyway 
, and with the caveat that I've never taken a bridge lesson and haven't taught one since before the internet was available.
Certification is one of those "cures" that is far worse than the "disease." Ditto for required curricula. Particularly when we're talking about the internet, we have available a much better (and easier and cheaper) solution than certification - provide a forum for people to comment on their teachers. Sure, you'll get some comments that are foolish, but by and large people looking for teachers will be able to sort out which comments are fake (both the "puff" pieces and the meaningless rants) and tell from the comments whether they want to learn from the particular teacher. Not every teacher is right for every student. Not every curriculum is right for every student. On Netflix, you can rate movies and then search for information on movies from people who liked the same things you did. That's a lot more useful than recommendations from, say, a newspaper critic. I'm sure the same is true for bridge teachers.
When you look at what it would be good to have BBO do, I think it's worth considering cost vs benefit. I'd guess that collecting & distributing money is an area where it would be relatively easy for BBO to provide the service and that the service would be of more value to both teachers and students than its cost.
Pre-dealt hands and lesson plans? It seems likely to me that providing a framework for creating pre-dealt hands that could then be played on BBO would be something that BBO could do efficiently, but why should BBO also create the hands? Why not let teachers who are interested in setting up hands do it and then sell them to other teachers who don't want to spend the time and effort on that part of teaching? I don't think choosing the hands is something that BBO can do better or more efficiently than anyone else (and I say that despite the fact that I love Bridgemaster). And I certainly don't think it makes sense for BBO to include pre-dealt hands in a "tax" on teachers - let the teachers decide whether they want the pre-dealt hands and how much they're willing to pay for them.
I'm not so sure about lesson plans - it feels to me as if you can't prepare tomorrow's plan until you see how your students do today, but maybe I'm wrong and it would be useful to have at least broad outlines of what comes after what. But there again, I wouldn't make it mandatory. Let those who think they have worked out a good way to teach things offer to sell their lesson plans to others, but don't force people to teach in a certain way. I certainly don't think that someone who thought it was more important to teach things in one order or to leave something out entirely is necessarily "wrong." Provide potential students with a lot of information, maybe even including the fact that it is "standard" to teach a then b then c, but don't force all teachers to teach that way - maybe it will work better, at least for some students, to start with c.
, and with the caveat that I've never taken a bridge lesson and haven't taught one since before the internet was available.Certification is one of those "cures" that is far worse than the "disease." Ditto for required curricula. Particularly when we're talking about the internet, we have available a much better (and easier and cheaper) solution than certification - provide a forum for people to comment on their teachers. Sure, you'll get some comments that are foolish, but by and large people looking for teachers will be able to sort out which comments are fake (both the "puff" pieces and the meaningless rants) and tell from the comments whether they want to learn from the particular teacher. Not every teacher is right for every student. Not every curriculum is right for every student. On Netflix, you can rate movies and then search for information on movies from people who liked the same things you did. That's a lot more useful than recommendations from, say, a newspaper critic. I'm sure the same is true for bridge teachers.
When you look at what it would be good to have BBO do, I think it's worth considering cost vs benefit. I'd guess that collecting & distributing money is an area where it would be relatively easy for BBO to provide the service and that the service would be of more value to both teachers and students than its cost.
Pre-dealt hands and lesson plans? It seems likely to me that providing a framework for creating pre-dealt hands that could then be played on BBO would be something that BBO could do efficiently, but why should BBO also create the hands? Why not let teachers who are interested in setting up hands do it and then sell them to other teachers who don't want to spend the time and effort on that part of teaching? I don't think choosing the hands is something that BBO can do better or more efficiently than anyone else (and I say that despite the fact that I love Bridgemaster
). And I certainly don't think it makes sense for BBO to include pre-dealt hands in a "tax" on teachers - let the teachers decide whether they want the pre-dealt hands and how much they're willing to pay for them.I'm not so sure about lesson plans - it feels to me as if you can't prepare tomorrow's plan until you see how your students do today, but maybe I'm wrong and it would be useful to have at least broad outlines of what comes after what. But there again, I wouldn't make it mandatory. Let those who think they have worked out a good way to teach things offer to sell their lesson plans to others, but don't force people to teach in a certain way. I certainly don't think that someone who thought it was more important to teach things in one order or to leave something out entirely is necessarily "wrong." Provide potential students with a lot of information, maybe even including the fact that it is "standard" to teach a then b then c, but don't force all teachers to teach that way - maybe it will work better, at least for some students, to start with c.
Jan Martel, who should probably state that she is not speaking on behalf of the USBF, the ACBL, the WBF Systems Committee, or any member of any Systems Committee or Laws Commission.
#19
- Limit bidder
-
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 8,482
- Joined: 2004-November-02
- Gender:Female
- Location:England
- Interests:Bridge, classical music, skiing... but I spend more time earning a living than doing any of those
Posted 2009-March-03, 13:01
Phil, on Mar 3 2009, 05:43 PM, said:
If I am teaching an Acol or UK version of responding to 1N, obviously there would be a different set of responses, just like if I were teaching an Italian method of slam bidding or a Polish method of a 1♣ opening. BBO can, and should, accredit courses for these different structures.
In that case we don't disagree on fundamentals, but I don't think BBO should accredit courses for bidding structures. The main reason is that I think it's just too much work, there are almost unlimited possible structures available. And I don't like the idea that just because "SA 1NT responses" have been accredited, but no-one has got round to "Dutch Acol 1NT responses" yet, that somehow the former looks better to prospective students than the latter. And who is going to decide if the suggested structure should be accredited or not? I doubt there's any one, or even five people, in BBO's employment who could validate everything.
What I think would be better conceptually is that if someone says they are teaching Standard American, or WJ2005, or SEF, that there is some way to tell if they really are teaching that and not their own bizarre approach to bidding. But again, who is actually going to check that? If you need to have someone look through and approve every set of lesson plans that feels like an enormous amount of work.
#20
- Limit bidder
-
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 8,482
- Joined: 2004-November-02
- Gender:Female
- Location:England
- Interests:Bridge, classical music, skiing... but I spend more time earning a living than doing any of those
Posted 2009-March-03, 13:09
Phil, on Mar 3 2009, 05:43 PM, said:
Quote
...Not with the sentiment, but with the implementation, and in particular with the idea that this should be BBO's problem. On top of the 'horribly difficult' part of this, I think it's a good way to make enemies.
Then how would you certify teachers? Maybe you aren't familiar with the process, but the PGA does a pretty good job....
My point is that, if I were BBO, I wouldn't. I don't think it should be their place to do so. The PGA is the equivalent of the ACBL, while BBO is the equivalent of a group of golf courses (this analogy is getting a bit strained, but I think you will get the point).
Or to put it a different way:
- If I want to teach skiing at a French resort, I have to have one of a list of ski instructor qualifications with the French agree makes me good enough to teach.
- The qualifications cover both teaching ability (and theory) and skiing prowess (the 'speed test' has a reputation of being the hardest part to pass)
- You can train to become an instructor at a resort. These courses are run by private companies; the exams are run by various national bodies.
- But the resorts themselves do not run the qualification process. They merely check that you have it and confiscate your lift pass if they catch someone teaching without it.
BBO is the equivalent of the resort, not the instruction program.
Providing a good certification program is difficult, and expensive, and requires serious investment. It would also be treading on the toes of the various national bodies.