to ask about Gove allowing schools to employ unqualified teachers?(70 Posts)
I heard it was on the cards but didn't know he'd already implemented it (has he?).
So a "teacher" doesn't need Qualified Teacher Status to teach in a school any more? Is this primary and secondary?
Does that mean that DS's Head Teacher could let the TAs take over the class permanently?
Is this really happening or are HT's being ethical about it and only employing teachers with QTS?
Unqualified teachers have been teaching in schools for years
I thought it was more common in Academies and Free Schools, but I could be wrong.
It's in free schools and academies. LEA schools have unqualified (well, they have a different qualification) cover supervisors.
It is because Gove is a twat.
Not all state schools -but it s a growing number; it applies to academies and free schools only in the state sector.
It's to give them the same freedom as schools in the private sector. And although it become possible to employ anyone in any role, in practice teaching posts remain filled by qualified teachers.
BTW, there has always been a proportions of state schoo, teachers who aren't fully qualified to current benchmarks. Although I can see why this policy is presentationally awful, it's not trampling on some Golden Age.
I'm torn on the whole issue.
I know some not great teachers with QTS.
And some people who either are great teachers (in private schools) without QTS, or who would be great teachers but can't get teaching jobs because they don't have QTS - I'm thinking of several EYPs I know 'teaching' in private pre schools without teachers pay and conditions, or musicians who have a lot of experience teaching groups/running youth orchestras etc. Or who have foreign teaching qualifications which aren't counted...
BUT I understand that somekind of safeguard/benchmark needs to be in place saying 'yes, this person can teach' and QTS is the one we've got.
I think there would be some fantastic teachers out there, there are some people who are not very academic no matter how hard they try.
University is for clever people, and not every one is clever but are very knowledgable.
There's nothing wrong with unqualified teachers.
3 of my colleagues (private school) are unqualified and 2 of them are among the best teachers I've ever had the privilege to work with. The other one is fine. Nothing special but nothing wrong either.
My PGCE isn't worth the paper it's written on. I came out of it with a whole 12 weeks worth of teaching experience and the ability to teach with a 2 page lesson plan practically glued to my nose. They also taught us a whole host of eyewatering 'theories' such as dyslexia not existing and it being unnecessary to teach us how to teach reading because we were a 5-11 course and the 3-5 course taught reading!
Everything useful I know about teaching comes from actually doing it, not being supposedly taught how to do it.
There's nothing wrong with unqualified teachers
Let's do away with qualifications then. Anyone fancy being operated on by an unqualified doctor, treated by an unqualified dentist?
Free schools and academies can employ people who have no teaching qualification as teachers.
Independent schools have always had this option.
Other state schools do not have this option, although they can employ people to teach as "instructors".
University is for clever people, and not every one is clever but are very knowledgable.
I think this is nonsensical.
So, no PGCE is needed then? Some of you think this is a waste of time? Is a degree a waste of time as well? What's to stop 18 year olds leaving school with A levels (or no a levels-are they a waste of time, too?), and teaching, then? Good idea?
People moan all the time about crap teachers. Do you really think that removing entry requirements to the job will improve matters??
The Muslim free school that has failed its OFSTED used under trained staff. Expect more of the same under Gove.
To do my job properly I need the subject knowledge of my degree and the experience of the PGCE (even if mine was a dreadful experience)
All children deserve to have the right to be taught by a qualified teacher. If someone cannot be bothered to train/learn for what equates to about 9 months and complete basic tests in literacy and numeracy, then I do not want them teaching my DD. No matter how 'nice' they might be, it isn't worth the risk finding out too late, that they are not very good teachers. Look at the Al-Madinah school and Pimlico free school for evidence.
The fact that Gove announced that Academies and Free Schools could hire non-qualified teachers on the first day of the Olympic Games last summer, means that he knew it would be unpopular but needed to please his cronies (Lord Nash and Lord Harris anyone?).
Unqualified teachers in schools? Been happening for years. But in the schools I've taught in, such teachers have been working towards their qualification because they are overseas trained and have gone through a conversion course. I know some very talented teachers who taught in UK schools through this route.
But what we now have us a very different situation. It is possible for a teacher to hold no qualifications in teaching whatsoever and have no intention of undertaking any course which would result in QTS. A Headteacher is no longer required to have a teaching qualification.
In my LA, we have a headteacher of a primary school who has never taught a lesson in his life. He doesn't have a business management background. He is a school bursar. That's right, he has been appointed because he can manage a budget. It is the deputy head actually running the school, trying to do her job and his. I have sat through various meetings with this headteacher and his lack of knowledge regarding anything to do with safeguarding children is shocking.
So, YANBU to ask. It's already there. It's not going away. It should be a major concern for all parents.
That sent shivers down my spine, Finola1step, you couldn't make it up! I too have plenty of shocking stories about unqualified teachers and SLT but all have been kept quiet from parents.
doctors and dentists are completely different Elpuz - you need specific skills, training and knowledge that you couldn't get without an intensive qualification course.
The same is not true of teaching. I believe a teacher needs to be intelligent (and should therefore have a good degree) but I don't see the need to specifically teaching 'teaching'. You can either do it (or very quickly learn to do it on the job) or you can't. So many people take a PGCE because they can't think what else to do after their degrees. It doesn't make them good teachers.
If the issue is with TA's having blanket freedom to teach classes then I agree; many TAs do not have sufficient academic intelligence or qualifications for this (many do but to generalise and assume that all do is dangerous). But if people have a problem with degree educated people with a gift for teaching and a love of children teaching then I would really wonder why.
You can either do it (or very quickly learn to do it on the job) or you can't. So many people take a PGCE because they can't think what else to do after their degrees. It doesn't make them good teachers. . What is your evidence for all of this?
doctors and dentists are completely different Elpuz - you need specific skills, training and knowledge that you couldn't get without an intensive qualification course. The same is not true of teaching.
What makes you believe that?
Blissx - no statistical evidence, just opinion and experience. As I said 3 of my colleagues are unqualified and 2 of them are among the best teachers I've ever met. Int he 7 years I've been at the school there ave been 5 other unqualifieds who've since moved on and 3 of them were outstanding too. The other 2 were also fine. My PGCE course had about 120 people on it. I didn't know them all very well but, even from those I did know well enough to keep up with (maybe 40-50) 14 have since left teaching as being 'not for them'. They just didn't know what else to do with their degrees. I also know people who drift into teaching after university after other graduate employment opps let them down. I really don't think any of these experiences are uncommon, I thought they were fairly accepted.
vivacia - how else are you going to know about and practise all the detailed medical knowledge and procedures required??
If parents wish to pay to send their children to private schools where they will be taught by unqualified teachers, then that is entirely their prerogative. However, I would expect the state to maintain certain minimum standards within publicly funded schools, and employing appropriately qualified staff is one of them.
Your argument is so illogical manic I don't know where to begin.
I think LaFataMalvagia has written the best post on this so far. There are many great unqualified teachers out there, just as there are some awful QTS ones.
I think what's happening in teaching is pretty symptomatic of many fields TBH. It became necessary to have specific qualifications in order to perform a role. No problem with that, except that it can often result in a work force that are good at getting qualifications rather than good at the role they become qualified in. At the same time, it excludes those who are unable to study full time for whatever reason. IMO there should be more than one route into many careers, rather than one standardised approach. I think the old system of QTS worked well because it allowed the unqualified to learn on the job.
I think it's a mistake to now allow unqualified teachers to teach without having to work towards QTS because using the law of unintended consequences the fallout will be a preference for unqualified teachers because it will keep costs down. This could easily lead to a lowering of standards if there is no incentive for the unqualified to keep improving and formalising their skills.
Join the discussion
Please login first.