To wonder why on earth Troops to Teachers is considered to be a great idea?

[ballinacup]

Before we start, I'm not armed forces bashing, I'm sure there are some troops out there who would make excellent teachers. But why on earth offer a fast track course to troops without a degree?!

It seems like sheer madness, why not offer the fast track course to anyone? Am I missing some glaringly obvious fact that makes it all make sense? Or has Gove got a vision in his head of classrooms running with military precision if he has soldiers at the helm?

Can someone please explain it to me, because I'm genuinely puzzled.

I agree with LaQueen.

Magratgarlik that's ridiculous! I'm also a scientist and would hate to have my own child taught chemistry by a geography graduate. Kids today are getting a raw deal I think.

But surely Laqueen the answer is to raise the standards for teachers not to let them fall through the floor.

At A'level though - I observed lots of A level teaching in my previous job, because the university wanted to get a better understanding of what students were coming to us with. So much was being taught wrongly (but wrongly with confidence) - if someone doesn't have the fundamental understanding of the subject, they will impose their own errors and misconceptions onto those of the pupils and we would get students with A'grade biology coming to our RG university and telling us that 'DNA is a protein' for goodness sake (it is not, just in case anyone is wondering)

LaQueen I teach in a comprehensive and so teach the total ability spectrum, I use my degree constantly , whether teaching GCSE or A Level.

I think its important to have a relevant degree or at least serious professional knowledge of the subject you're going to teach.

You can have brilliant skills at management and motivation, but if you don't have the background knowledge of your subject then as soon as you stray outside of fixed texts then you'll be in trouble.

Sure, someone could pick up a book and then pass on the information in a chapter, but if you don't have the depth of knowledge behind what is in the text then you can't expand on the subject to the class or perhaps extend and challenge the people you are teaching in the same way.

as the ARTIST TAXI DRIVER aptly put it today in his bbc sucks o cock news

we want trained killers to be in the classroom REAAAAAAAAAAAAALLLY, REAAAAAAAAAAAAAAALLLY

He's right.

its bullshit spin bullshit from the tory twats AGAIN,

if they want discipline in the classroom GIVE THE SCHOOLS MORE FUCKING RESOURCES, STOP FORCING TEACHERS TO TEACH BULLSHIT GOVT AGENDAS

fucking tories make me want to sick up a leg

Can relate the DNA is a protein comment. I'm also in an RG university and some of our first year undergrads have some huge misconceptions when it comes to biology.

When I did my PGCE, no one was accepted onto the course without a relevant degree. If anything the applications process is going to become harder with the QTS tests happening before someone can even start their course and with competition between schools with School Direct. I don't agree with fast tracking people without degrees, no matter what their background.

My friend works in a dodgy failing academy. If they advertise for a maths teacher and someone applies, then they'll probably get the job, no matter how dreadful they are, because no other bugger will do it.

I work in a leafy middle-class outstanding school. Even we struggle to recruit decent maths teachers.

If the plan is for RAF aircraft engineers and suchlike being fast tracked into maths teaching, to fill a gap, that might not be terrible. If it's squaddies into PE or whatever, where there's no shortage, then that's harder to justify.

Schools and HT are to blame here. I teach the subject I have a degree in. I could also teach English, as I did joint honours. If my HT told me to teach something else, I would argue but wouldn't be able to refuse as I am contracted to teach in that school, not to teach a specific subject in that school. I have a number of colleagues who teach outside of their specialism- some very successfully. However, others don't. One of the problems is that we have a new deputy. One of his responsibilities is next year's timetable. He seems to be starting with the assumption that everyone is teaching the subject the should be at present, which is untrue and highly frustrating. The other teacher in scjool who is qualified to teach my subject (drama) currently teaches some drama, some English (also qualified to do so) and some Business Studies. Next year, she will only be teaching English & Business (not her specialism) whilst the rest of the drama is picked up by someone who is not a specialist. Highly frustrating. Problem is, though, whilst school budgets continue to be squeezed, staffing a timetable has become a gap-filling exercise, at least in small schools like mine. As I said up thread, I believe subject knowledge is very important.

MagratGarlik.

I taught A level in a subject I had only vaguely covered in one unit of my degree (level 2) I really was one step ahead of my students.
Although I don't agree, it was fine because its teaching from a text book like most A levels. Even with my little knowledge I would have loved to go deeper, even disagree with the text at times. If I had done this my students wouldn't have passed. On top of this are the constraints on your time which can't be avoided, bloody bureaucracy.
The answer I feel is to give the teacher greater autonomy, allow for opinion if it can be backed up. Not to reject an idea because its not in the textbook, or list of approved resources.

I am a top graduate with great people skills and I was tempted. I work in a school packed with people like that.

Are you telling me that I am mediocre LaQueen? I have a first , from Cambridge, in the subject I teach, an MA, a previous highly successful career and relevant post graduate qualification in that career. I am no Einstein but I am not mediocre and I would describe very few people that I work with as that.

There are top graduates being tempted into teaching. One of the most brilliant men I know - with a 1st and a PhD in Pure Mathematics is now a brilliant teacher. There's extra incentive now as there are now salaried routes into the profession for the top candidates, especially those in shortage subjects.

Teaching is a mixture of good subject knowledge, the love of sharing that knowledge, the skill to be able to do it and the ability to put up with the ever shifting sands of government directives and people who think they could do it better .

I have children in my top sets who will be going to Oxbridge, they may go on to be academics in my subject. I would be failing them if I just taught to the test. They would also be bored.

Possibly, morethan, there are lots of errors in the texts at A level and the syllabi and these also need to be addressed. As a university though, we got seriously annoyed at having to re-teach students basics that we expected them to already know.

Aris - that's my experience as well. There are a huge number of very good and very dedicated teachers. Not mediocre in any way at all.

I as tempted by:
Wanting to do something other than earn someone else money
Long holidays
Not having to travel away from home all the time
Time with my family
I love my subject

I am paid quite well as I progressed to management quite quickly, certainly in excess of 40k. A fraction of what I used to earn , but I only work 40 weeks a year.