Mike Hanson writes

Perhaps a more important consideration for schools (universities are
different) is how well qualified the teachers are to teach. It goes
without saying that one needs to be all over the coursework and to
have enough background to answer commonly raised questions (and enough
honesty to say: "I don't know, but I'll find out by next lesson.").

Maybe. However there are (more like ought to be) questions that are
testing for the best A level students. A teacher without adequate
grounding will not be able to answer these.

Furthermore syllabus's change over time, although admittedly from the
conceptual and mathematical to the descriptive as far as the UK is
concerned.

However, teaching is an art: higher knowledge of a subject is no
guarantee that a person will have the requisite skills to impart basic
knowledge (perhaps even enthusiasm!) to schoolchildren and make it
stick.

Of course. However it's likely that those teaching A-level without
actually getting that far themselves are unlikely to be enthusiastic and
unlikely to have the basic knowledge. In many schools (state and
independent alike) an ignorant teacher is likely to get crucified by
smarter kids. Frankly it's pretty obvious when a teacher is bullsh*tting
due to ignorance, and doesn't build confidence if they can't immediately
answer quite simple questions.

Sacrificing higher knowledge for better teaching skills is a
good trade at school level.

Of course.
None the less good teaching skills and good knowledge is required. If
you are short on one or the other you are letting the kids down.

What's even worse is that numbers of kids doing sciences/maths is
steadily declining. At university it's even more pronounced.



--
Oz
This post is worth absolutely nothing and is probably fallacious.
Note: soon (maybe already) only posts via despammed.com will be accepted.