AIBU to think getting into teaching should be easier?

This is funny.
I have watched all of ER at least three times and I have a biology ALEVEL. Why won’t they let me be a dr???? Why??

That is shocking, @GraySILK . Obviously it's a bit close to the actual A levels now, but I would still complain, perhaps to the subject lead, or the Head of KS5.

This!

One of my DC’s teachers is lovely but she can’t seem to teach for toffee. My DC has a target grade of A* but in her mocks she struggled because she’s not sure exactly what’s been asked of her. That’s shocking at this stage. DC won’t let me email the teacher to say DC is struggling (and technically shouldn’t be) so I bame her being a shit teacher. Lovely person when I met her but can’t give a straight answer or examples…. That’s not good

No, I mean that the structure and progression in private schools must be lacking if someone can manage a whole school without even having a teaching qualification!
However. Like I said, a different world.

But surely the fact that he's reached this position shows that he must be very good at his job despite not having a qualification? It's not "poor" if he's the right person for the job.

Aside from everyone debate the PhD aspect, yes I do think it's too hard. I wanted to get into teaching bit couldn't afford to not earn for a year and find the money for the course.

It's the same with educational psychologists. We have such a huge shortage, but training to get in is a nightmare. You take a huge pay cut from being a teacher and when you qualify the salary isn't a great deal more to justify the loss of earnings and time and effort.

It is the same with nursing. They made training an expensive nightmare, the drop out rate is high due to the workload and the wages aren't competitive considering the COL.

I don't get why people are so baffled by staffing issues in these professions.

Your friend would probably get funding of about £20 000+ tax free.

I had years of experience and a DTTLS (qualification to teach in FE) I still found the PGCE hard.

Teaching requires a complex set of skills and aptitudes that not everyone has - many can be learnt but not if you have no idea what the job itself entails. As has been said, subject knowledge is only one small part of the role - knowing how to get that across in a meaningful way, understanding the differing learning needs of the students, knowing how to adopt the right blend of authority and encouragement, understanding the requirements of the actual curriculum (as opposed to a PHD level understanding of a subject) etc etc. Dare I say it, even some qualified teachers aren't good at all aspects.

Your friend is being very arrogant and if they really want to teach, then surely a year spent in learning how to do so is not a big deal (assuming they aren't a child where a year seems like a lifetime). Tell them also that even after that year, you do actually need to continue learning on the job - it's an introduction to the basics.

That's excellent. Good luck to her!

private school or getting an unqualified teacher position?

Dd is doing a PGCE at the moment. Biology, so not quite the same level of bursary as Chemistry/Physics, but still a good years trainee "wage" of £26K tax free. (£9k-ish tuition).

She has her first teaching job starting Sept. Starting £31K-ish.

I think that's quite poor, but of course, it's a different world.

Also-

study another year, fork out £10,000 and work unpaid for a year?

PGCE is a training placement. I had a bursary to do mine and pp say that in STEM you can get a training salary of £28K. You don’t pay if you’re offering a shortage subject.
Finally- NQTs do get paid. You don’t work unpaid! She might even be able to negotiate starting at a higher point on the TPS if they’re willing to take her uni teaching into account (although, things might have changed since I went into teaching).

What behaviour management experience does she have?
Safeguarding training?
Exam board knowledge?
SEND experience or training?

This ⬆️. I'm going to say something which is anecdotal, but I think is relevant. I have been observing lessons for many years. Some of the worst - not all - were people with PhDs. We had a woman with a PhD from Cambridge in Chemistry. She was a disaster, and managed out. To become a classroom teacher, your subject knowledge is important, but not enough on its own.

Yes. Private schools don't require a PGCE.

She might have more luck at private schools, who aren’t bound to hire a qualified teacher.

I had a PhD-qualified teacher when I did a level chemistry 30 years ago. He’d been in academia all his career and thought teaching would be an easy way to spend the last years before retiring. He lasted just one year. Hated teaching anyone under 17, basically.

The PGCE shows that you do at least actually know what you’re getting into- and even then you can get it wrong! But it is unreasonable to assume that a PhD means you would be a good teacher, even A levels are different to teaching in a university, and as pp said, most schools will need to use you at KS3 and 4 as well as 5. They probably couldn’t fill your timetable otherwise.

I've got a PhD in STEM and I couldn't teach for toffee. Plus that the advanced knowledge I have in my subject is completely irrelevant to secondary school students.

A Headteacher with no teaching qualification?

90% of classroom teaching has nothing to do with subject knowledge. Child development, behaviour management, emotional co-regulation, identification and support of learning needs, assessment strategies, pedagogical practices, etc. are vital for a classroom teacher and unlikely to be gained through a PhD.

No. Definitely not. It’s a protected profession.

Firstly, my husband has a PhD so I'm not shitting on people with PhDs. However, showing that you're able to be taught / do independent research isn't the same as showing you can teach.

Secondly, if the person is STEM then they'll get a tax free bursary of nearly £30k a year while they do their PGCE to gain QTS. So yeah, it's mad that they don't seem to know that - and it also says something about how much research they've done into their choices, which suggests something about how much research they'll do into their students' choices.

Thirdly, nothing is stopping them from teaching as an unqualified teacher (i.e. without QTS). I mean, if the school or college have a more suitable candidate who has actual qualifications, then that's a matter of who the employer thinks is better for the job. Generally speaking, as someone with recruitment experience, I'd go with the crazy idea that relevant qualifications + experience = stronger candidate.

So yeah, you are being unreasonable because you can't back your judgement up with any evidence - first rule of teaching.

All of the above. Plus there are ways into teaching with taking a year at uni. Plus some private school will accept unqualified teachers.

Their/your attitude is very entitled.

Yes, private schools are a good idea, because if they aren't bothered about a teaching qualification, then they're just looking for someone to deliver content, which sounds like your friend could do.

Your friend should qualify for a bursary or scholarship to do a PGCE. Some subjects get 10K so it covers the cost but science ones get £28K.
A teaching qualification covers much more than the subject area.