Active discussions

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Secondary education

Connect with other parents whose children are starting secondary school on this forum.

Original poster

Only 32 Troops to Teachers

138 replies

noblegiraffe · 22/01/2016 20:46

There were 180 places in the first round of recruitment, only 41 places were taken up and only 32 teachers have emerged at the end.

www.tes.com.c.tes.ent.platform.sh/news/school-news/breaking-news/troops-teachers-scheme-misses-target

What a stupid waste of money.

Still, teacher recruitment crisis, what crisis? Eh, Nick Gibb?

OP posts:
Bolognese · 22/01/2016 23:22

So a 78% success rate? sounds pretty good. Apart from hot air and bluster, what money has been wasted?

"...could have been spent on retaining current proven teachers" - why do you need to retrain teachers who are already teachers? The whole point is to get something different into teaching!

KarenLong · 22/01/2016 21:34

I've taught with one. he was absolutely first class at delegating, issuing orders , demanding blind obedience.... he lasted less than 6 weeks.

Original poster
noblegiraffe · 22/01/2016 21:29

There has always been a teacher shortage in areas like maths and physics, not just recent years.

OP posts:
BrianButterfield · 22/01/2016 21:22

Also, ex-troops were perfectly able to apply for and go through teacher training at any point before the programme if they chose, so it's not about them deserving the chance,

carltonscroop · 22/01/2016 21:19

"But all the money that went on advertising, recruitment, setting up the training....that could have been spent on retaining current proven teachers."

When this was set up (and funded) in 2010/11, if MN threads are anything to go by, there was no retention problem. Indeed the threads were all about the difficulty if securing a post at all and the number of people who could only work supply.

pieceofpurplesky · 22/01/2016 21:18

IT is a waste of money as 180 were supposed to complete the course. 32 did.

Scarydinosaurs · 22/01/2016 21:17

bolognese the money spent targeting them hasn't paid off though, has it? I wonder how these numbers compare to a typical ITT cohort? Every year ex military join teaching- I bet it made no difference.

Bolognese · 22/01/2016 21:14

Yes I get its low numbers but that doesn't mean the scheme was a failure. New startups often have that issue. I was referring to the comment "What a stupid waste of money", why is it a waste of money? Soldiers earn less than teachers, work longer and put their lives on the line, I think they deserve a chance at a civilian job.

Original poster
noblegiraffe · 22/01/2016 21:09

A quarter dropping out from the course doesn't indicate great staying power though, does it?

But all the money that went on advertising, recruitment, setting up the training....that could have been spent on retaining current proven teachers.

OP posts:
meditrina · 22/01/2016 21:07

Troops to Teachers was like a subset of Teach Second.

Is that producing the numbers expected, or does it have a shortfall too?

SuburbanRhonda · 22/01/2016 21:04

I think the OP was about the low numbers compared with the target, rather than the merit of the scheme itself, bolognese.

I thought that was obvious but clearly not.

Bolognese · 22/01/2016 20:57

Its possible that their military training means they have more staying power than civilians going into teaching.

Either way it sounds like a good attempt to retrain soldiers, why the negative comment about it? dont you think the military deserve to be teachers? I bet they have a LOT to offer children?

rosebiggs · 22/01/2016 20:48

So 32 finished their course...how many of the 32 will still be teaching in 5 years I wonder?