I know from your profile that you are a teacher, but regardless, you are taking this WAY too personally. I said I couldn't take him seriously, not that he is an idiot. What he said was not a simplification, it was in no way simplified, and the rest of the work we were doing in that same lesson with him was of a high enough level that the people listening would know what he was talking about. He kept details, plenty of them, but they were just WRONG. To teach a grade 10 science class[footnote]grade 10, 11 and 12 form what is essentially one advanced course for most of our subjects here, we do a good amount of final-year work now that is not revisited in later years.[/footnote] something that is blatantly incorrect is just... terrible.Dastardly said:Sure, because there's no chance they might come back to it later in more depth, or anything like that. Why not leave the professional curriculum decisions to the curriculum professionals (ie, teachers)? You're just too quick to pass ultimate judgment on someone whose proven qualifications far, far exceed yours because he happened to have what you judge to be a bad day.
Sorry, mate, you're just not qualified to make that judgment. He has already proven his capability to his teachers from first year up through university. He has proven it to whatever licensing boards govern education in your area. He has proven it to the administration with whom he interviewed. And they'll continue to measure him, as well. These are people with likely hundreds of combined years of experience and thousands of hours of training.
That carries a lot more weight than some kids looking for any excuse not to listen to a teacher because they have a case of the "teenage know-it-all"s.
He also mentioned something else that lesson that made me die a little inside: "Some birds are able to navigate using the Earth's magnetic field, it is in their blood. Why do I say it is in their blood? Haemoglobin. What does that contain? Iron, and Iron is magnetic." That same lesson. I did not want to get off on a bad foot with him so I said nothing, but damn... two strikes in one lesson.
See the footnote: We don't come back to a lot of it, and we are doing most of it in good depth now.
And this was not in the curriculum, he told the class this out of his own knowledge, as fact, as a science teacher, and we added it to the curriculum information. Being a teacher does not give you the right to teach whatever you like. And people believe him as he is a science teacher, I know because I spoke to many of the people about it afterwards. Also, the people who make decisions about the curriculum are the Heads of Department and the Department of Education in my school, no single teacher has the choice to change that.
He is not qualified yet, he still needs to go through his final evaluations. And every day he has some trouble balancing the equations (Basic ones) and understanding what he has to teach us.
For your second paragraph, see "not yet qualified".
I can still say he is not a great science teacher and that I cannot take him seriously, why can I not say that? What law is in place that prevents me from saying it? Free speech, and this is not hate speech.
I listen to him, that is the problem. I am a good student to most teachers, and I allow him to teach his class without disrupting it, although I don't like a lot of what he teaches or how he teaches it. I, as a student, can still recognise that he is not a good teacher. I can compare him to other teachers, see how well he imparts the knowledge necessary to his students, myself included, measure how well he understands his subject among others. All these things lead me to the conclusion that he is not great teaching material, or at least he shouldn't be a science teacher, maybe a different subject would work perfectly for him and the students, but science does not.