To ask if you think secondary teachers should have achieved top grades in their subject area

[Teachersshouldbeclever]

I genuinely wonder how, if a secondary teacher was unable to achieve the top grades when they sat their subject, if they are able to teach their students the skills needed.

Or is it a case of the cleverest students actually surpassing their teachers' knowledge and expertise?

I got top grades in my subject at O and A Level, but I didn't get a first in my degree. The ones who did went into different professions.

However, whilst employed as a teacher, as well as my specialist subject, I have been required to teach other subjects which I have no qualifications in because there was a gap on the timetable - it was a matter of swotting up the night before - more blemming work!!

I think that teachers with good grades who probably never struggled at school are great with the most able, however I find that they aren't always able to relate to the less able and SEND children.

Nope, exam results just mean you can recall data and put it down on paper, you need passion, interestb and an engaging nature as well as top results.
Add in that every subject changes hugely year to year those top grades are pointless.

I teach GCSEs and A levels (quite successfully thank you) in a subject I did not do at school, in fact 2 subjects as they didn't really exist! I do however have a 2:1 (Hons) degree and a post-grad. I also do exam marking for three exam boards, so not bad for someone who pissed about in school and left sixth form under a very grey cloud with no A levels at all!!

Teaching is not all about subject knowledge, it's about skills and abilities to pass the knowledge on i.e. people skills as much as theoretical knowledge.

Also, passing at A level in my main subject is as much about analysis and evaluation skills, and jumping through the hoops to answer the question in a way that the examiners like, and you can achieve some success, albeit not a top grade, with quite a limited subject knowledge.

Exactly what Fuckinnamechange said - I also had all As at A level (before the A* grade was invented) and a first class degree in my subject as well as a Masters with Distinction, and worked as a secondary school teacher, teaching my degree subject, for 6 years. Before that I had worked abroad and in project admin in London - I took a massive pay cut to teach, naively thinking the job satisfaction would make up for it.

It was the most hideous job - the actual teaching was not really the issue, bar a couple of very difficult classes, but senior management had no people skills or empathy for their staff in either of the schools I worked in, and 60+ % of the workload seemed utterly pointless and unrelated to helping students achieve and love the subject, and not towing the party line on the brilliance of every new initiative that would come and, inevitably, go meant you were not a team player... Parents also have the most ridiculous expectations in some cases (you teach hundreds of children as a core subject teacher but it is your fault if a teenager who you have been teaching 3 or 4 weeks has a reading age of 7, or a child of average intelligence and below average work ethic is not predicted an A*, or if a 15 year old has lost his expensive new pen/ cheap plastic ruler/ random item of clothing and decided to divert Daddy's wrath from himself to you by claiming somebody took it during your class...)

The pay is rubbish not good enough to put up with the amount of rubbish teachers are expected to take, there is no pay-off of being massively respected and fawned to as some other professionals are, and the long holidays (the only saving grace) are massively infringed on by the amount of work done at home during them, the revision clubs etc. run in the holidays, and the fact that in term time you work half the night and weekend.

I think that teachers with good grades who probably never struggled at school are great with the most able, however I find that they aren't always able to relate to the less able and SEND children.

And this...

Not really, no. I'd rather they were good teachers. I couldn't successfully teach the subjects I got top grades in- skilled teachers who got Bs and even Cs would make a much better job of it than me.

The ability to teach a subject effectively is much more important than being the A grade student.

We had a maths teacher at school who was an absolute genius. Problem was no one understood him!

Most straight A kids and studious types I have come across in life are not great at the art of communication.

I have a first in history but really struggled to help ds with his gcse history. I think it was because the skills you needed to do well at gcse are different to those at university level. I found it hard to get down to that level. On the other hand I wasn't very good at science at school but have provided learning support to secondary school pupils in science. I think I am more able to anticipate what they will find difficult.

I would be happy with teachers that actually know the subjects as have studied it at Uni tbh.

Since the start of the year, dc1 has had quite a few supply teachers. Some of them are known by the children to cover several subjects (something like science and French ). And sometimes they haven't a clue (not good when a Y7 knows more than the teacher)

We have a real shortage of teachers where we are. So I would happily concentrate on getting enough teachers and then see if they have had the right grades (even though as pp had said does it matters if they then carried on to have a degree in that subject anyway?)

I've got a masters in maths and am good at teaching, even less able kids. The two are not mutually exclusive.

However, at the moment you are lucky if your kid's maths teacher has a pulse let alone top grades.

Why have you name changed for this, OP?

Pinotblush,

Blimey.

Some of the best teachers and lecturers I have ever met had Autism.

I've got an axe you can grind as well, OP.
img4.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20120612181733/elderscrolls/images/8/84/Oblivion_IronWarAxe.png

Yes, all teachers should be very clever and achieve top grades and be fabulous at communicating their love of the subject to inspire a new generation. Just like in the films.
However, back in the real world...

Putting aside for the moment the fact that so many schools are lucky to have a sentient being to put at the front of a class....

If I had my druthers, I'd have top achievers who are also good teachers. Why not? The teaching is the thing though, and a teacher is rarely on top of their game until a good three years in, so I can see how, in the present climate, even very good ones sometimes don't make it, or find work where they are more valued.

I still think all teachers should have excellent written and spoken English, though that is anathema to many on these boards.

OP you need to define what top marks are in a subject. I know someone that got a 2:1 in their degree so NOT a first class then was accepted to do Masters in the subject and is now doing a Doctorate and an Associate Lecturer..my point is he is deemed good enough to teach in his degree level subject specialism at undergraduate level despite having not got the "top" classification.

So to answer your question IF you are talking about NOT having a 1st at undergraduate level in their subject but maybe a 2:1 then yes I would be perfectly happy to for them to teach the subject.

Teachers don't just take their degree and then their PGCe and suddenly stop learning about their subject. I think the real issue in schools nowadays are more to do with the issues of being forced to teach across disciplines

I have a first from Oxford in Atmospheric Physics. I worked in Industry for many years. I moved into teaching as a mature person. I teach remedial math in a high school in the States, I have an 85% pass rate. It's totally out if my subject, shall I quit now to suit the OP.

OP that's frankly bollocks. Speaking for myself, I have a first class Masters and am a decent teacher (or was, I've left now.). But three of the best teachers I know have third class degrees, and many of the worst I have known have had PhDs from Oxbridge. The ability to teach is not reliant on your ability to score highly in exams. And actually most teachers are teaching subject matter very different to what they were taught because the syllabus changes so quickly...

[https://www.tes.com/news/school-news/breaking-news/teacher-shortage-fears-deepen-almost-one-five-secondary-trainee? Link]

This just popped up on my Facebook page.

It's all very well having ideals- I'd love there to be no waiting times for referrals on the NHS and no queues in A+E but without a massive influx of cash, it will never happen. Same goes for your ideal.

Teaching skills and academic skills are 2 very separate things. And you dont need one to be good at the other. Some of the best and most inspirational teachers at my school struggled at school themselves and they don't all have great spelling / grammar. They get outstanding results. Some very academic people on my PGCE course couldnt get the hang of classroom skills at all and dropped out.

Teaching doesn't pay nearly enough to recruit the top graduates in their field. If you had a top degree in physics from an RG university, you'd want a lucrative graduate programme for BAE or something, not Year 9 bottom set four times per week.

Agree that you don't need to have a degree in a subject to be able to teach it well. You do need good subject knowledge above what you expect of the students, but this doesn't have to be university taught.

All of my teachers back in the late 70s and early 80s in Ireland had achieved top academic honours in their teaching subject. I know this because a cousin of mine applied for a job there and was turned down because he only had a 2:2. He got a job teaching and coaching rowing in England...

The expectation of excellent degrees worked out really well for science subjects, English, Irish, French, German, business related courses, art, music, etc. Some of them are still teaching, and are owners/teachers in successful grind schools in Dublin.

In the case of my maths teachers academic results did not translate into ability to teach maths to students who weren't capable of understanding maths at a speedy pace. In fact, I think it put the teachers at a disadvantage and thus many students were left fending for themselves or going to grind schools. High flyers don't just achieve, regardless. Many students will find ploughing through calculus difficult on their own. In the Irish system, students must do core subjects plus optionals, but those heading to university must have sciences, mfl, and humanities subjects in addition to maths, English and Irish. So it behoves teachers to be able to actually teach if maths is their subject. Students must take it, and pass it.

To be fair, there were maths teachers in my school who had excellent degrees and were able to teach too.

Also, to be fair, I have no direct experience of teachers who did not achieve great academic results.

The teachers I had all had excellent written and spoken English too. There were two published authors/poets among them, one went on to head a national arts organisation in Ireland, and one had been a leader in the Irish feminist movement and went on after teaching to lead a government commission. I agree with Echt that this makes a huge difference.

I am a teacher; I have a top grade at A-level and a degree and a Masters. I've been teaching over 18 years. I don't see teaching as a filling your students with your knowledge. I see it as enabling them to have the skills to surpass you if that's their level. Why wouldn't it be ok? What a strange backward idea of teaching if you think that you have to be 'cleverer' than all of your students: no you just have to be able to teach. Sometimes academic ability and teaching ability do not correspond at all.

I'm also sick of these goady threads baiting teacher bashing to be honest. What's your actual point?

I'm on the fence about this one. I have straight A's at GCSE and A'level (before the days of A*'s) and a decent degree, but not a first. I'm a Maths teacher. Our head of faculty only gives A'level classes to people who either got at least a B at A'level or got a good degree in an Maths based subject. I hope I am a decent teacher, a lot of people tell me I am :)

However, academic ability isn't the only thing it takes to make a good teacher. Lots of people have mentioned people with 1st from Oxbridge and PHDs being crap teachers, probably because they just haven't got the right temperament.

Some of the people who didn't get high grades are still decent teachers. It makes me sad that teaching isn't considered a good job, despite it being a graduate profession. I'm sure I could have made a lot more money doing something else, but I love my job (when we're actually allowed to teach rather than doing all the paper work and other crap imposed on us by the government) !

*I know that my first secondary school maths teacher was actively seeking employment in third level maths teaching as my dad interviewed her for a job in a regional technical college. She eventually got a third level lecturing position, and I think that would have suited her far better than teaching a group of 15 year olds with varying levels of motivation.