So if teachers are leaving in droves

[BlastedPimples]

and recruitment is very low, what is going to happen? It can't continue like this surely and education levels will suffer enormously.

Massive classes for the teachers that remain?

Huge recruitment drive to entice more people into the profession?

Entice teachers out of retirement?

Recruitment from abroad?

North East has fewer recruitment issues. Primary also has fewer recruitment issues.

At secondary history and PE have too many teachers and so trainees in those subjects often end up not getting jobs or teaching other subjects (PE to maths is more common than you'd expect).

The situation in other subjects varies from really bad to utterly dire.

So was it better prior to Ofsted? When (I assume) Local Authorities did inspections, provided support etc from a central point?
I was never too sure about schools becoming Academies but I don't really know enough about it to say all good one way/all bad the other way.

The majority of kids from under privileged backgrounds didn’t benefit from the fundraising, which although brought a talented and gifted programme, was later shown to have mostly benefited the children who came from wealthy backgrounds. It was considered that the T&G’s withdrew funds and teaching staff from the underprivileged children (who scored very few places contextually) and favoured, for example, a French languages course, when a majority of the children at the school were fluent Spanish speakers. You should definitely give the podcast a listen, and have the objectivity to hear both sides of the debate.

Yes, I agree this is a very good podcast. However this issue will always arise where there is state vs private - and the US is the most extreme example of this - but is far less of a problem where private education isn’t an option. In that case it is in everyone’s interests to make sure that the state/ public education system is excellent. It’s common sense really. It has to be systematic to make a difference.

I work in Belgium and we use the local school. Maternal (nursery school) intakes on a rolling basis so when my daughter joined there were 7 in a class, -1 teacher and an assistant. The teacher oversaw their recreation and after each one went through a mood board with them. She oversaw Garderie up to 5pm.
My tax would give you a heart attack. But schools are fully staffed, open at 7.30 and close at 6 or 6.30.

It is my unscientific theory that bon jour and kissing on cheek or shaking hand of even casual acquaintances sets you up for the day.

and someone else pointed out that countries with higher levels of private education also do very well, meaning maybe the performance of the broader educational sector has nothing to do with the existence of a private alternative. At only 6-7% of students in private in the uk the sector is pretty small already- certainly too small to bare responsibility for fixing all of the challenges in the state sector.

you might be surprised to know that most private school parents care deeply about the state of education in this country beyond our own schools, and are deeply concerned with the current trajectory. I have sought refuge for my dc in a private school (wasn’t our plan a), and fully understand how lucky I am to be able to insulate my children from many (but not all) of the issues with the system. I just don’t see how undermining the system we have found refuge in will make any positive difference to the students and teachers that are struggling.

I don’t have an agenda beyond a desire to see some of the dysfunction alleviated - I don’t have any party affiliation and don’t even get a vote! It would be lovely if there were good state secondary alternatives for my dc when they get to that point, but I don’t see any real commitment from either political party to truly tackle the underlying challenges, so not especially hopeful.

I looked into training as a teacher when I was still at university around 2007 and you had to have minimum 2:1 and when I went to a school to shadow a teacher for a day every teacher I was introduced to said to me “don’t do it, you’ll regret it”.

In the end I got a 2:2 so I couldn’t do it anyway, now I believe they’ll take even a 3rd to train and after speaking to some mums at baby groups who are teachers I’m glad I didn’t do it!

The US isn’t particularly extreme in its % of privately educated- about 9%. Most of that is driven by a preference for religious education (state schools are rigidly non-sectarian), and about 2/3 to 3/4 of private schools are religiously affiliated.

As in the UK, the greatest source of inequity in the US resides within the state system, which is what that podcast largely covered.

I trained before 2007 and have a third. It meant that although I could get QTS I couldn’t get a PGCE.

It’s the same in private education too. Year 1 being run by a TA.

also the flaw in your plan is with Keir planning on putting VAT on school fees, you’ll have hundreds of children entering the state system and need even more teachers. Can you tell I’ve left the education system. 😂

Do most people realise that in England classes can now be "taught" by TAs?

I found out last night that when I leave, the timetable is being redone and KS3 will essentially be fully run on cover in my subject, to protect exam classes. We've had zero applicants and my place have advertised for my job (and that of my colleagues, who are also leaving or have already left) since February.

It shouldn't bother me, but it happens so often it's actually frustrating. They will lose the enthusiasm of the students who are currently ploughing on, then run into greater issues next year when those kids will be expected to suddenly cope with having a specialist again, having spent an entire term or half-term doing nothing in cover lessons. Our cover supervisors and external supply are usually hopeless, often not even attempting to get the kids to work (I walked into a lesson recently where I provided detailed cover and they watched Finding Nemo instead - NOT an exception).

I'm not convinced online learning will ever be feasible for the masses, though I do think it will be attempted again. We're being told time and time again about the importance of building good relationships with our students in order to get them to work in our subject. No "academic support" in the world will be able to do that if they sit behind a screen and occasionally check in.

Its dispiriting that ‘experienced’
teachers seem only to come on these threads to try to bully others rather than stick to the topic under discussion.
The system is no longer fit for purpose.
Why should ‘Jayden’ (now there’s a patronising and snobby implication) being motivated by learning algebra and calculus when he most likely will never need it. No wonder he can’t see the point of getting off FIFA. He must be bored out of his wits sitting through a Maths class. I have a Maths A level and have never needed any of it in any job /I did it because I enjoyed it.
The system needs to be overhauled to make use of technology that wasn’t available in Victorian times when kids had to sit in rows of a teacher, and a wholly different curriculum devised for more vocational training. The system should not be set up to provide jobs for life for people who happen to like maths and who then moan endlessly that the kids don’t, and that’s the ‘Tories’ fault, oh and gimme, gimme, gimme more money.

Why is it that all knowledge and education has to be of "use", to be used in every day life?

If that is the only priority of education then how are knowledge boundaries explored and pushed?

I have never understood this "I don't use it every day so it's useless" argument.

How limiting.

I agree with you on that

Absolutely agree with you. And stop victimising teachers by giving them ' pay rises" taken out of school budgets then villifying them when they go on strike for funded pay rises, so that they don't have to spend their own money on resources that have had to be cut because the schools don't have the money to pay for them.

I completely agree. Some children are far better suited to learning practical skills. However the system we are stuck with doesn’t allow for that.

One issue with this is the time you decide children are more suited to learning practical skills. 11? 14? 7?
The problem with the grammar/secondary modern system was that 80% of children were not given adequate education. Girls were barely taught anything apart from typing, home ec etc. We need to have an entire societal attitude change to vocational education. In this country, vocational education is great for other people's children. "They" should all be doing it, leaving the Universities free for the children of the sharp elbowed middle class. Children develop at different stages.They should all be given a decent broad education I think up to the age of 14. I think in Germany they choose academic or technical education at 11, which I think is too early, but at least vocational education is well funded and given equal status. I think we need to properly fund FE colleges where people would get vocational education and training, often part time while learning g on the job. This doesn't solve the problem of teacher shortages, because we need people to teach these skills. There are not enough people who want to do it. By the time you get out of your lucrative £100 an hour plumbing job, you are nearing retirement age. Maybe there should be a recruitment campaign to bring these people into teaching. But again, the salary is not lucrative. The apprenticeship system may work, but at the moment, it's so beaurocratic it puts people off. People have been saying this for decades, and nothing has worked. We are falling behind as a result. I don't know why we are so awful at this, but I do think it is partly as a result of a cultural disdain for education, educators and learning.

The system is no longer fit for purpose. Why should ‘Jayden’ (now there’s a patronising and snobby implication) being motivated by learning algebra and calculus when he most likely will never need it. No wonder he can’t see the point of getting off FIFA. He must be bored out of his wits sitting through a Maths class.

@Bewareofthisonetoo FIFA-obsessed “Jayden” is a real kid I attempted to teach in lockdown but obviously I couldn’t use his real name so I selected a fairly generic boys’ name. I’ve taught lots of Jaydens. I’ve had classes with more than one Jayden. And now I know you look down on them all.

Maths and English GCSE are seen as a proxy for being literate and numerate. Jayden needs to be able to prove to employers that he is numerate, so maths GCSE will benefit him in that way.

The country economically needs people to be better skilled at maths than they are, so we actually need more people doing more maths qualifications, not fewer.

Everyone wants state education to be better, even those who opt-out and therefore self-fund, the middle classes being an example of those who make large sacrifices to make these choices. There is no research or evidence to underpin the assumption that adding private school children, to an already broken and over-stretched UK state system (which currently doesn’t have enough teachers), will reap the social and academic benefits that Labour has outlined. The white paper that Labour based its frankly wild assumptions on, has already been widely disproved. The numbers it claimed were later found to be incorrect and the funding it would receive from the additional places would therefore be inadequate to afford new buildings, staff and classrooms. In some built-up cities like London, there simply won’t be the affordable space to relocate and rebuild. No one wants to accept this as they are desperate for this to be a solution to decades upon decades of underfunding. Ultimately, successive UK governments have failed to fix the issue, which was exacerbated when Labour oversaw the acadamisation of many failing UK schools. This saw responsibility for schools and their academic success removed from local authorities, and sold off to Tory Donors like Lord Harris (Mr Carpetright) - who owns the Harris Academies in London.

There is however evidence to support the fact that systems without a divided private/state school, or indeed health etc., system creates a lot less inequality in society. Lots of it.

So maybe if parents actually took control of children and instilled discipline and respect wouldn’t have this problem. Sadly the children’s rights no smacking brigade have ruined this Country and now we have gang culture and knife crime running wild. My school days you had the cane not advocating that but a slap didn’t hurt me or my children who are decent respectful members of society.

You are theoretically outlining a system that doesn’t exist in the UK and won’t because of legacy institutions, and the central government funding they receive. Labour cannot deliver this plan, the numbers don’t stack up, which means they would need to tax each and every one of us in a style similar to Scandinavian countries. This seems highly unlikely in the current financial climate, so leaves a giant funding-shaped hole in the balance sheet, whilst the previously self-funded kids are given places at state schools, which would need to expand rapidly to keep up with demand. That’s before we look to the well established research that this will not level up local state schools, it’s more likely to precipitate the beginning of talented and gifted programmes, which would be likely offered on basis of ability, therefore offering fewer opportunities to those from disadvantaged backgrounds.

Treating private schools as charities is NEVER going to be good for society, only individuals. Of course if Labour had any balls at all they'd ban them, but they don't. We'll have to agree to disagree - my extensive research on inequality in education over the years into this mean I'm never going to agree that well off people should be allowed to pay to get their unexceptional children better educated than the rest of us. So like I say we'll have to agree to disagree on that.

You no longer need any qualifications to teach. See below.
This is so worrying.