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.

You are talking rubbish MBT1987. Would you apply the same standard to men that served in WW2? Because if you had, male teachers would be very short on the ground in the 40s-60s.

Statistics please, and data from the last 12 months.
How many T to T are there, actively teaching in classrooms right now?
How many on the training schemes 2013-14?
Because I've not come across a single one.
Has it been a complete flop, non-event Smoke and Mirrors act from the government yet again?

There have been 4,000 Senior Nurses axed since the coalition came into government, 10 London Firestations closed in January of this year, London Ambulance Service cut 890 posts in April. This doesn't include the massive cuts by local authorities which have cost many people whose work means this country keeps running smoothly. They don't get this benefit, meanwhile the Army website says....

"We believe that life in the Army simply cannot by matched by a civilian role. The training is second to none and because you’re living and working in close proximity with your workmates, you’ll become such good friends that the social life is pretty hard to beat too.

But the benefits run deeper than that. Alongside a competitive salary and pension, subsidised accommodation and generous holiday you’ll have plenty of opportunities for travel, training and making valuable contributions to humanitarian projects worldwide."

MTB1987 - nature gave you the equipment to be a prostitute, doesn't mean you are one though! Every one of us has the capability to be a killer, given the right motivation and circumstances. It's the ability to suppress the criminal desire that seperates the good from the bad.

It baffles me that on the DFE website they publicise Premier Plus saying they want the best qualified subject specialsts with a First or Second class subject specific honours degree to teach subjects at Secondary level, alongside Troops into Teaching where they say 'You don't need to be a graduate'.

I have no issue with any suitable candidate trainng to be a teacher. But why are academic subject specific qualifications at graduate level considered vital for some and can be bypassed by ex- armed services personnel? Why should there be less stringent entry requirements for them?

Perhaps in a two year period they can train to be doctors. Presumably the same arguments would apply to their transferable skills and they can fill in any academic gaps training on the job and come out with Qualified Dr Status

I'd like to be a teacher. But have been told i dont have the right qualifications or experience. I have two degrees and am currently doing a masters. None of which are in curriculum subjects so don't count.

I work as an educator so spend all my working life teaching health care professionals. I've been told I'm a really good teacher by those I'm teaching and I have a passion for it.

Maybe I ought to join the army for a year so I can become a teacher?

I'm of the opinion that someone who signed up to be trained to kill shouldn't be allowed within 100 metres of a teaching position at a school. There are a plethora of people who've spent a couple of weeks in prison for trivial matters who are disqualified from approaching employment with children. Why is there no big push to get those people cushy white-collar jobs with golden handshakes?

You're seriously equating every member of the Armed Forces with people who are convicted of criminal offences? Really??

FFS

exforcestraineeteacher I know you're retraining, and that's great, I wish you all the luck in the world. BUT it's paid for, others aren't that lucky.

Viva... You can't join the Army for just a year.

Words fail me Lulu - please read the whole programme process.

I have no doubt that some ex military people could train to be doctors - they would probably get credit for previous learning for their first year of study, oh, just like I have for this programme!

No requirement to be a good graduate??

I disagree with that then!

mrsBW. No, I thought that after I typed it. . The sentiment remains though.

I assure you, TucsonGirl, I'm talking absolute sense. Contrary to what you may have read in the Daily Mail, at no point have we been invaded by Afghan military forces (which would have been the situation in WW2). At no point during WW2 were there numerous scandals about the abuse and torture of Nazi prisoners (see www.theguardian.com/world/2004/may/01/iraq.usa1 for just one example - the Wikileaks cables provide quite a few more). And at no point post-WW2 did the stupidest bloody Education Minister in the history of Parliament come out and say, "Let's give a huge boost to education standards by taking jobs away from actual qualified applicants with degrees and give them to people whose career path in life was murder".

Piper Rose - yes it's paid, not a great deal above national minimum wage by the way, but so are many other routes into teaching. Schools Direct and TeachFirst both pay more than I am on, perhaps that's because at the moment I am an Unqualified Teacher in training though.

When will people realise that we jump through the same hoops as every other trainee teacher out there?

You should probably stop posting now MBT1987.

Let me ask you one thing, if it was a Labour education secretary who'd come up with this, would you be as vehemently against it as you are? Or is your hatred of Gove coloring your opinion?

I assure you, TucsonGirl, I'm talking absolute sense. Contrary to what you may have read in the Daily Mail, at no point have we been invaded by Afghan military forces (which would have been the situation in WW2). At no point during WW2 were there numerous scandals about the abuse and torture of Nazi prisoners (see www.theguardian.com/world/2004/may/01/iraq.usa1 for just one example - the Wikileaks cables provide quite a few more). And at no point post-WW2 did the stupidest bloody Education Minister in the history of Parliament come out and say, "Let's give a huge boost to education standards by taking jobs away from actual qualified applicants with degrees and give them to people whose career path in life was murder".

The lack of a balanced view of some people on this site horrifies me sometimes.

I think it could work really well. Ex-soldiers will have knowledge and experience that most teachers just couldn't have if they've gone straight from university into the classroom.
It's probably already been said but in secondary schools there aren't enough maths teachers - we need more teachers there.

I have no issue with your hoopjumping, I KNOW it's the same that everyone else goes through. What I take exception to is the fact that this route into teaching which includes training being paid for and lower entry requiremnts is a benefit to ex-troops and no-one else.

MTB1987, your attempt to politicize the argument to deflect from your ignorance is laughable. Are you seriously suggesting that no war crimes were committed by allied forces during 1914-1918 and 1939-1945?

Are you also suggesting that every member of the military is a criminal? If you have access to the PNC please pm me abd I will give you all my details and you can check my criminal record. I may have a conviction for speeding somewhere along the line that I cannot quite remember from the 20-odd years I have been driving but I am sure I would remember standing in court at The Hague.

Change the record please, yours seems to be a little distorted!

They'll either pass the training and be teachers, or not.
Then they will have to put up with the constant scrutiny, observations and evaluations as the rest of us. So if their teaching skills and their paperwork and their professionalism isn't up to the mark, they will fall at one of the many obstacles in the way and be declared incompetent and face disciplinary sanctions.
Or drop out of the profession. Just like the thousands that leave teaching within 5 years who entered by traditional routes.
I don't have a problem with this scheme, I was just wondering if it had begun to make any impact at all.

MrsBW, I'm saying the military trains people to kill, with training coming from people who were trained to kill. I'm not saying "all military personnel are criminals", but I'm saying the mild-mannered bloke nicked for theft because he forgot to ring the bag of sugar through the self-checkout gets no opportunities, while the squaddie gets a fast-track in to a position of responsibility, without a thought to the fact that he was trained to kill and is now being fast-tracked to be put in charge of children.

Fund an education-related degree. Monitor their development. Treat them as you would ANY other teacher trainee.

TusonGirl Do you support Michael Gove?

Actually scrap that question ....Are you Michael Gove?

the military is something unlike other careers. What other career requires you to sign up for 4 years with no way of (legally) getting out besides buying your way out if you come into money etc?

Goblinchild - thanks for your support! I've been married to a teacher for a number of years so I have some knowledge of what I am getting in to (for the record, she thinks I am mental but supports me all the same!)

I do think Gove is doing a good job, yes. I think education declined alarmingly under Labour. Schools became obsessed with stats and PC and then we end up with massive youth unemployment (and not down to the recession, it was massive prior to 2008, too). The teaching unions need to be broken and teachers need to realise that they work for the public, not the other way round.