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?

Yup. YABU. See last 100 messages for all the reasons.

Your reply to Pirate on the first page makes you sound quite ridiculous tbh. It's not what was said at all - difficult to know if you were being deliberately obtuse to provoke a reaction or if you really are that challenged yourself.

I am a teacher, I got outstanding at my last ofsted. I graduated with a 2:2 in a less that salubrious subject.. But from a good uni. I sort of wormed my way into teaching... But I have given it my all, put my heart and soul into my career (for little thanks or monetary recognition). I always have an open door and I can't remember the last time I actually got to go for a wee between 7 and 4.30... Now teaching three pretty massive subjects. For no extra money and no recognition. ESP as I am the sole teacher who has set one of the subjects up.... I love the kids and I love teaching, but when it gets to the point that I resent teaching as it gets in the way of all the other crap I have to do... Well. Anyone got any alternate career suggestions??

Ps I managed to get a class that no-one else would teach, through sheer willpower, blood, sweat and tears - 2 a*s, and a, 2 b's, 2 c's and the rest d's. I challenge anyone else in the world to get a class like that, who barely spoke english, in an essay writing subject to do that. And it wasn't the subject I qualified in.

Last point: these kids still come and visit me, over two years later. I wasn't a specialist in that subject but I made damn sure I knew exactly what I was talking about, tried to plan lessons that I knew would appeal to their learning style, and showed them that I cared, and was there to help them. For gods sake, I was answering emails whilst I was supposed to be on holiday. Sorry, I'll shut up now.

Whether they have top grades is not the important thing to teach! Of course you've got to have some academic qualifications behind you! As you wouldn't get onto teaching course without them.... But what is most important is an ability to engage students! Personality! Enthusiasm! Once you engage students.... They are willing to learn! You could have got the highest marks in your year... But you could be as dull as ditchwater! I've watched many a student teacher speak in a monotone, unable to "read" the atmosphere in the , not realising that they have completely lost the attention of the class!
So... It's all very well be an A* graduate! But if you haven't got the chutzpah!.....

A lot of people believe that teaching is something that anyone can do. It really isn't!

Oh dear, a goady thread, written by yet another person who feels they can have a valid opinion on teaching because they have been to school. I'm sorry but this does not make your opinion valid, and quite frankly it isn't.

Every teacher out there will have a degree, which although doesn't mean they are "clever" means that they have achieved something that a majority of the population has not. Actually only 34.4% of the working population (16-64) has a degree or equivilent qualification. So teachers will have evidence that they are more qualified, and by imp;ication able to prove that they are more intelligent than the majority of the population. So to answer your question, yes all secondary school teacher are clever, they can prove it. Also for the last 5 years a basic entry requirement has been a 2:1 from a university, meaning that more recently qualified teachers can prove it even further!

So is having "top grades" a requirement, no, because teachers have already proved that they are in the minority in the country in achieving a high educational standard.

In further counter to your flawed argument ( classic argument from fallacy) there are the many points made on here about non subject expert teachers providing excellent levels of education. I would, if you will allow me, like to ellucidate my experience with reference to specifics.

I am a Russell Group qualified teacher with many years experience and several "outstanding" ratings by OFSTED under my belt, the most recent being during a 2013 inspection. This last rating was very pleasing because, dear heart, it was a lesson delivered in a subject I have not studied since I was in the 3rd year of secondary school!

How was it then that a teacher without even an O level or GCSE was able to deliver such a good lesson? Well it would be because I am good at planning lessons, thinking of activities that facilitate learning, I'm clever and can read up on my subject to a sufficient depth that I can answer almost all questions, and I can communicate what I want, and what outcomes I want to the students clearly. All of this makes a successful lesson.

The group that I took for that lesson achieved excellent results, and make no bones about it for a mixed ability group (A-G) in a non-selective comp, 76% A to C is extremely good. To drill down on the data further 85% of those students achieved their target grade or higher. Again following lessons planned and delivered by someone without a direct qualification in that subject.

Here's where my experience gets better, I then took over the operation of this qualifications A Level, and with my first cohort of year 13's through this year (again in a non-selective comp) we recieved an ALPS level 2, which means we are in the top 10% of schools in the country for this subject. Planned and delivered by a non expert.

Many, many subjects are delivered to excellent standards in schools by non expert teachers who may not have been the best students at high school.

Ridiculous posts like yours, and many others on here, the constant judging, critiquing by the general population who feel they can because they went to school, is one oif the reasons that "good" people are leaving in droves.

Now tell me, should posters have to fully work out their arguments so that they don't ge ttheir arse handed to them in public like you just have?

I never said I was. But I reckon I have the 'chutzpah' otherwise I wouldn't still be what I am doing. And I never said they got top grades. Thing is, somehow, I managed to get a disillusioned, rather special set of kids through a gcse, not through grooming them for the exam, but by making them excited and making them care. One of my kids actually got into a rather elite sporting profession on the back of the grade we worked for, having failed another rather crucial subject. Anyway, I am proud of what my kids have achieved. And it disheartens me that there are so many people out there who doubt our ability to enthuse, to do our job, to put in the flipping hours we do. Trust me, after 9 years in the job, no-one would be a teacher if they thought It was an easy ride. Or they were in it for the holidays. I worked in another field before I became a teacher (among other things in London, actually, high pressure, etc,)and I have never experienced stress quite like teaching. Ever.

longtime I salute you

I'd rather any teacher showed enthusiasm for the subject. It's got to be far more important that what grade they got at gcse/a-level.

My god, have you any idea how hard it is to recruit people to train to be teachers. Gove sarted off saying he would insist people had a First or 2.1 or possibly a 2.2. Then they had to lower their standards - now any old degree will do and it does not even have to relate to the subject and they will pay them £35000 lump sum tax free to train to be a Physics or Maths teacher and they still can't attract them. So you can have a degree in Geography 2.1 and get £35,000 tax freen from Sept to train as a Maths teacher and then just walk away with the money.

It is madness. Why don't they improve teacher's work life balance- then they might get some decent people.

lulu I respectfully disagree. Not sure where you got your figures from but they are absolute bull. No-one I know, least of all me, has walked off with £35000. Parents Eh? And they wonder why good and outstanding teachers walk away, sigh.

I graduated with an undergraduate Desmond. Luckily my experience & passion got me accepted into a very highly regarded TT college. I'm a consistently good teacher and I love teaching my pupils. I taught out of my specialism for a number of years (my choice) and discovered a real love of my adopted subject.

I've now moved into the primary sector and am still doing very well despite my less than perfect degree classification.

Oh yes, the lovely ads that tell you how much a "teacher makes", I don't know one classroom teacher who makes the £65k or whatever they say up to now.

I make a good whack, but bloody hell do I work for it, so far this week I have managed 43 hours in school and another 6 or so at home, if you were to include Sunday I'd already be on a 50 + hour week and its only Thursday!

Again longtime I feel your pain. I get into work at 7, work til 5.30 and can't remember the last time I had more than 5 mins to eat lunch. Why do we do it??? We clearly aren't appreciated.

OP's disappeared has she?

What a surprise.

I keep seeing those lovely well-resourced classrooms and thinking 'how many of those items were bought by the teacher out of their salary'

And 'Are they teaching in a performing arts school in a stage-managed classroom of costumed-up kids?'

Nah, we bought all of that sparkly stuff. Still waiting to be reimbursed for border paper that cost about £50...

Excellent subject knowledge is not the only qualification that a teacher should have but it is certainly one essential condition.

Countries which get the best educational results invariably insist on very high academic standards from those aspiring to be teachers.

I think most secondary teachers do have good grades in their particular subjects, though....?

Well not necessarily top grades as you don't know why they may not have got those top grades. They could have gone to pieces in the exam or had things going on.
But I obviously think they should be experts in their field.
If that makes sense

Countries which get the best educational results invariably insist on very high academic standards from those aspiring to be teachers

Don't such countries pay their teachers well, ensure their workload isn't massive and pointless and treat them with respect as well though?

Honestly - given the amount of teachers who are leaving the profession, in droves it seems. and the fact that the Dept of Ed is now recruiting for teachers using tv ads. added to that, the 30% shortfall in teaching staff, i'd say we're lucky to have any teachers left at all.

"Excellent subject knowledge is not the only qualification that a teacher should have but it is certainly one essential condition."

No, sufficient subject knowledge in order to deliver the course to the standard required is an essential condition. One which, being more qualified than the majority of the population, most teachers will be able to achieve, even in topics that they are not expert in with some preperation.

I have a 2:1 and a teaching qualification (both rg uni etc). My subject is extremely diverse in potential content. The most useful thing I did in preparation for teaching my subject to teach it was sit a GCSE in it (I never had the opportunity at school).
In fact revisiting that GCSE gave me an excellent refresher in what is expected of students. I don't teach now.
When I did I also taught other subjects in which I did not have a specialism. Often to A level students. I did swell thanks, because the main thing I took from school was how i (ought to) have learned.

I haven't read the entire thread, but frankly the worst teachers in my school were the ones who had top degrees in their subject. Knowing something and knowing how to teach it are two different things.

And personally I have always been better at explaining something that I myself found hard to master.