Should secondary teachers have to pass a subject knowledge exam before being allowed to teach that subject?

That might depend on the middle school. The changeover can be more gradual but sometimes tha's because they start using subject specialists earlier rather than later.

Come to Scotland. All graduates here. I can be asked to cover with work set and marked by a specialist but only for a short time. We are expected to have a degree and be registered to teach our subject.

I get, by the way, that a secondary school teacher trained in one subject does not want to teach another. I get that if you'd wanted to teach across the curriculum as a primary teacher does, then you would have trained as a primary teacher. I get that ideally it SHOULDN'T happen, and that if an excellent teacher who is also a subject specialist is available for every subject, that is the optimal solution.

However, I also don't see that, at Y7 level (where in September the majority of children are no older than many in Y6), it isn't POSSIBLE between subjects that are not too far apart in content and where the staff will tend to have at least A-level in one or more of the other subjects, given that it is possible at Y6 level (and in Middle Schools, even those that go up to Y9, the swapover between class teachers and subject teachers is more gradual without huge disadvantage)

I'm not sure the humanities as one subject holds up. There might be overlapping skills between history and human geography at a stretch but a lot of the content is closer to science than history.

In scotland you do. You are registered as a history teacher or a geography teacher or maths etc and that is all you can teach unless you apply for a second specialisation. to be registered in a subject you have to display that your degree contained enough of the subject or otherwise demonstrate subject knowledge.

As far as I remember, the fairly small amount of Physics in Y7 Science doesn't have particularly challenging practicals.

I know that a Maths teacher isn't likely to be available to teach Physics, but they would have the subject knowledge (in general) to teach Y7 Physics, if they did A-level - and tbh if a Y6 teacher can run Y6 Science practicals, a secondary teacher running Y7 practicals isn't hugely different. It isn't an exam year - I wouldn't expect it higher up in the school, as I say.

Yes the science classes I teach are shared with a ‘real’ science teacher who does all the practicals.

And there is some overlap between maths and physics with the mechanics in A level but not loads.

I think it depends on the origin of the teacher, and their quality, rather than the subject being covered.

So given a stable of good teachers I would say that History, Geography, RE could probably be taught, in Y7, by a teacher of any of the others.

Pretty much any DT subject by a teacher of any of the others. Art / Textiles also probably interchangeable.

English teacher teaching Drama - probably OK.

Any Science teacher could teach Science, whatever their subject specialism.

Maths teachers could also possibly teach the Physics element of science, and a strong Physics graduate could probably also teach Maths.

A PE teacher with an A-level in Biology could also probably teach Biology, especially the human aspects.

An MFL teacher with a specialism in 1 language but an A-level or higher in another could teach their alternate language.

However, even though I feel that one Humanity could be covered by another humanity's teachers, it doesn't follow that e.g. a PE teacher could teach history, or an Art teacher RE. It matters what the background of the teacher is, as well as the subject they are required to teach.

I'm trained as an English and Drama teacher, but have taught art (never done past ks3 myself, but only taught to year 7 so no real harm), geography (I have A level), ICT (ha!) In the past. This year I'll be teaching year 9 history (due to budget cuts and a mat leave) and am running a small media department (for no pay) in addition to English.

It's a shame that some of us end up placed elsewhere, but with budget cuts then it is bound to happen. I'm comfortable teaching history, art and drama as English has a background in these subjects contextually, but many others struggle. We have PE teaching maths and science at my place and I honestly wouldn't trust their lessons to be amazing. Ofsted are due and it is going to be bad....

I am not shrugging and saying 'welcome to my world' - I am thinking about whether the point between Y6 and Y7 is the only possible 'break point' between being taught all subjects by a generalist and being taught each subject by a specialist.

I agree that for GCSE - perhaps even for Y9+ - every subject should be taught by a specialist, who is either qualified in that subject or qualified to teach that subject (taking the point about e.g. Media, or about Politics, which is predominantly taught by historians IME).

I agree that for some subjects which are skills-based - Maths, Music, PE, Art, probably MFL - then from y7 it is sensible to be taught by a subject specialist, because it is one thing to 'impart knowledge', and quite another thing to teach skills and coach people to apply them to a problem or task in front of them.

However, there is a grey area between Y7 and Y9 for some subjects, where I think it can be argued that a good Humanities teacher teaching RE or History or even Geography, or perhaps a DT teacher qualified in one of the areas teaching across any of the subjects that fall under the 'Tech' umbrella is not actively harmful, and may be better than a poor teacher who does have a qualification in the subject. Equally, i don't think it is actively harmful for a Y7 / Y8 to be taught the biology components of 'Science' by a chemist.

I’m a Maths teacher. One of my previous schools asked me if I could fill a gap in A level geography. I don’t even have a geography GCSE! I was pretty horrified about that. I said no.

On the other hand, this year I’m teaching a few KS3 Science lessons on top of my Maths timetable and I am really enjoying it! I feel like I have enough basic subject knowledge to teach at this level, and the different style of teaching for science is reinvigorating my practice. It’s been great fun and while I was a bit at first I’m really enjoying it. I think that with enough time teachers can adapt to other subjects and someone who has enough teaching practice should be able to pick up another subject, but not above KS3. Of course time is what we don’t have enough of...

Ha! Are you joking? More obstacles to being a teacher? We can’t recruit anyone in my children’s schools in inner London never mind the optimally qualified. It’ll be a breathing body soon.

No I get that point. Maths I'd be horrified and refuse to do it!

I would find that insulting tbh. I have a 2.1 in English Literature and language from Oxford.

I was going to get indignant until I saw who started this thread - yeah, I know where you’re coming from. I’ve seen absolutely shocking subject knowledge especially from new teachers - English teachers who’ve somehow never read Shakespeare, for example. I observed a trainee confuse adjectives and adverbs in a lesson, and it was clearly because he didn’t know, not observation flusteredness. I’ve known schools give English teachers y7 Spanish to teach on the grounds they lived in Latin America for a couple of months. However, we all know this would lead to basically no teachers left. Also, in my subject (Media) hardly anyone is qualified in the actual subject. We’ve all (willingly!) migrated from other areas and picked it up as we went along. I love it and do have great subject knowledge but that’s more by accident than design.

Yes, his father was initially called Schicklgruber but he changed it to Hitler (his step-father's name - his step-father is thought to be his other father although that is not certain) over a decade before Adolf was born.

Adolf was christened Adolphus Hitler.

There is no justification for saying Adolf Hitler's real name was Schicklgruber as this teacher did. That implies that he was, or should have been, called Adolf Schicklgruber at birth which is not true. His real name was Adolphus Hitler. That is the name in the baptismal record. If Austria had introduced birth certificates when he was born, that would have been the name on his birth certificate.

But Hitlers father was called Schicjlegruber and changed it. Why is that wrong?

At the moment I don't think there's anything stopping schools from doing this.

I don't think there ever has been.

As cantkeepawayforever says, primary school teachers are expected to cover pretty much the entire syllabus regardless of any formal qualifications. They don't need deep knowledge of the subject, just enough to teach at the appropriate level. When I was at primary school (over 50 years ago!) I distinctly remember one teacher telling the class two things that were wrong, one of which I knew at the time was wrong because I'd seen a schools programme on tv about it. Given the range of subjects primary school teachers have to cover it wouldn't surprise me if that still goes on.

Secondary school teachers specialise but I can remember being taught some subjects by teachers for whom it was not their speciality. It didn't happen often but it did happen.

Speaking personally, I want a teacher to be enthusiastic about their subject and able to communicate that enthusiasm to their pupils. I want them to teach the curriculum effectively (not like the qualified history teacher I came across a few years ago who taught their class that Hitler's real name was Schicklgruber). I would normally expect them to have some kind of qualification in the subject but I would rather have someone who is keeping one page ahead of the class and meets the above criteria than someone who holds a masters degree in the subject but is unable to communicate any enthusiasm for it.

So I think on balance you can put me down as a definite maybe

That's interesting noble
I would want them to be able to write grammatically and spell and punctuate properly (though tbh I want that from all secondary teachers).
I would expect them to be widely read, have knowledge of Shakespeare, Austin, Dickens but also modern authors, poets, a wide variety of genres.
I'd expect them to know all the stuff I don't about analysing texts etc.

I would be shocked if an English teacher didn't know R&J, Macbeth, P&P, Oliver Twist, Harry Potter.