To be fed up that my child is being taught Biology, History, English etc by PE teachers?

[apricotdanish]

I have a child in a grammar school, can't mention name for obvious reasons but an increasingly large amount of subjects are being taught by teachers with no experience at all in the subjects they are teaching and I'm not exaggerating when I say P.E teachers are teaching all of the subjects above, there are also some specialist teachers but clearly not enough. I'm really concerned about how this will affect my child's education long term.
This is not anti teacher at all, quite the opposite, and I'm not underestimating the intelligence of the PE teachers but I don't think it's acceptable for them to be teaching subjects like Physics and Biology that are so specialised when they haven't trained in that specialism. I feel as though I've been sold a bit of lie about how wonderful this school is when this practice is so widespread.
Just wanted some opinions on what others felt about this?

IME, PE teachers usually have a second subject, so they may well be qualified in the subjects the OP mentions.

I am teaching GCSE Biology, having dropped it when I was 13. I am a Science teacher, so qualified to teach it. A PE teacher would be more experienced than me.

How can anyone deliver a foreign language they can't speak? You'd actually do better to stick the kids in front of a tablet with an app like duolingo, at least they would learn correct language and pronunciation.

Actually, having a master degree in science and being bilingual, I, on paper, could teach quite a lot with subjects.

However, having tried to teach my own dcs my own language, I can tell you that it doesn't make me a teacher. Even if I know the subject inside out.

Knowing things and knowing a lot doesn't mean you can handle a class of 30 teenagers. Nor does it mean you can explain things the right way, differenciate your teaching between the ones at the bottom who are struggling to the very able that knows more than you.

To be a good teacher you need both.

I once witnessed dd's primary school teacher "teaching" French. It was a horrible experience. I think they now just sit them in front of a whiteboard lesson.

Foreign language teaching in secondary schools is a huge pile of steaming shit. I have weakly asked at parents' evenings over the last few years why exactly they are not taught any grammar and never received a satisfactory answer. I did a GCSE last year in a language and found you could do reasonably well by just learning set pieces off by heart. You'd not get an A* (or 9 or whatever now) but definitely you could do fairly well. I know I'm a dinosaur, but what a contrast from my day when you had to do unseen passages of translation.

Mistigirl

I totally agree. At my dd school the teachers of Languages all speak the Language perfectly and expect the children to speak in the language if they ever meet outside the classroom. Only basic vocabulary but it's good practice.
I'm not sure if they are both qualified teachers, they may well be, but it doesn't matter to me if they are excellent at the subject and can teach. They each teach their own language too, and never each others.
I'd much prefer this than a qualified teacher who knows nothing of the subjects.

Balia - I agree that the current government is not making education pleasant right now. But you really can't blame all of this situation of this government. It's been going on for years under other governments too including under Labour. Infact I left teaching after it becoming so depressingly bad under a labour government, having already not been great under previous governments too.

IME no government has done much to help education over the past 20 years that I've been qualified.

It really isn't just down to this current government and it is somewhat ignorant of facts to think that is the case. It isn't just anecdotal evidence either - there are many stats out there to show the decline has been long reaching.

is it legal for teachers in the uk to teach without teaching qualifications?

Yes, it is now in state schools and always has been in private. But 'unqualified' doesn't always mean 'untrained' or 'no good'.

Unqualified teachers include those on 'teach first', those who do not have a degree, and before anyone says how can you teach without a degree then think about subjects like hairdressing and beauty therapy where there are no degree courses.

It also includes people like me, I trained in FE so originally I was only qualified to teach 14+ in an FE setting, this has been widened to teaching in schools but as I have been supply for several years I have not been able to get QTS status - I need to be employed permanently or have a school willing to pay my fees (for the QTS assessment only route you need to be in a school).

It also includes teachers trained abroad, so if your child is being taught by someone with a Kiwi or Oz accent they may well be qualified in their own country but are treated and unqualified here.

And then there are 'instructors' who often teach just one very specific aspect such as first aid possibly for a single session, so a St John's ambulance trainer would come under this term.

People need to stop saying UK when they mean England.

It has been a requirement for nigh on 100 years that Scottish teachers must have a degree and be trained to teach.

My headteacher father didn't have a teaching qualification! And yes, many of the current problems flowering now took root under Labour.

Both governments have created huge problems in schools and a lot of it started when Tony decided 50% of the population would get a degree. Well done, Tony.

Of course now the situation is almost comical as half of the teachers don't understand what they are teaching! Well done, Michael. by the way I don't actually disagree with where he was going but it really needed to be a marathon and not a sprint

Now Nicky has decided academies will be the Thing. It's been happening in secondaries for years but now it's a problem and everyone is shrieking about it loudly and doing absolutely nothing - well done, Nicky! Again some warning might not have gone amiss.

The problem is a rapidly growing population, schools that aren't fit for purpose and budget restraints. Bad combination.

twentiethcenturybitch, I always thought that +1 rule applied. I'm not a teacher but alot of my school friends went into teaching, 40 years ago, and I have definitely heard that rule somewhere. I agree that it seems realistic to use that.

I'm fairly confident that most qualified language teachers could teach a foreign language they are not fluent in better than duolingo could!

I'm not trying to rewrite history or claim that teaching under a Labour government was some kind of paradise. I'm saying the sheer scale of the problems now is vastly different, and that is due to the policies of the current government. Even Michael Wilshaw says we are the 'world's biggest exporter of teaching talent'.

Teacher training targets haven't been met for the last 4 years (all this government, I believe?) and the numbers of people going into ITT between 2010/11 and 2014/15 fell by 14%. The most recent statistics show that 50,000 teachers left the state sector in the previous 12 months. That's 10% of the workforce.

There are 20, 000 unqualified teachers but this does not include Teach First teachers, who are trainee teachers in their first year and are considered Newly Qualified Teachers in their 2nd year. (Confusion arises from pay scales as they are paid on the unqualified scale while they are training.) And the teachers we do manage to recruit from abroad (many of whom have QTS) will have to go home under the new immigration rules, as it is highly unlikely that they will be earning £35,000+. Interestingly, this won't apply to Maths, Physics and Chemistry teachers, because they are on a 'shortage occupation list' despite the government adamantly denying there is a teacher shortage.

Anecdotally, when I applied for my first teaching 15+ years ago, there were 25+ applicants. The most recent vacancy (same subject, in the same school) attracted only 1 applicant.

I wouldn't blame the current government for the situation. We are in this shit because if countless decisions from this one and the previous etc...
What I'm blaming them for us to refuse to address the issue abs say there are no issues, which no shortage of teachers, no issue to be taught by unqualified teachers (as in people who don't know the subject) etc...

Rhoda The "learning set pieces off by heart" nonsense has now been changed, starting with children entering Year 10 this coming September, thank goodness. It was all a result of the ridiculous idea that you could learn a language via a process resembling "immersion" in two hours a week. Unfortunately there are a lot of people in influential positions in education (not teachers, for the most part) who built their careers on such notions, despite having no evidence to support them. And that doesn't just apply to language learning.

Surprised some people think I'm dreaming.

I know some " instructors" who are working in the school I work at and also some my child's secondary school. This is FACT. They have instructor status, just not Qualified Teacher status.

We've sometimes had Artists and Authors come and work over several weeks with the children. They don't have QTS either, but they are considered to have expertise in their area which can be imparted thus fulfilling parts of the curriculum.

Perhaps they don't do that around your area.

What was an occasional necessity has become the norm and forced academisation - which allows schools to recruit unqualified teachers without restriction - means that there is no real need for the current government to address the recruitment or retention crises.

In some parts of England, there are no applicants even for primary jobs. Teachers are being taken on who are not yet qualified because they have failed their maths skills test so many times they can't resit for a period of time. These people do not have the skills to teach KS2 maths (the test itself is a little above KS2 level, but without that understanding, teaching year 5 or 6 maths is very difficult). If children move from a poor KS2 teacher to a series of poorly qualified KS3 teachers, they will really struggle without extra help.

Unfortunately, teaching in England is a deeply unattractive profession at the moment. It is not family friendly, not well paid (compared with other graduate level entry professions or even some A-level entry schemes) and while immensely rewarding, the dire quality of leadership from government and in many, many schools means that it is also massively stressful.

There is no political will to change. We are in the zone of disruption at the moment. Within a few years, it will be irretrievably broken and there will be no resistance to computer-led, minimal human contact learning in very large groups. Low cost, low quality, no unions and an even wider gulf between the privately educated and the rest.

I taught MFL back in the early 1990s and I did PGCE in the nonsense that was trying to teach a bottom set Y9 entirely in the target language.

I'm a linguistic dinosaur as well (I love a bit of French grammar )

I now teach English overseas, but will come back to the UK in 2018 when DHs contract is up.
Can anyone tell me, will I be considered unqualified as even though I did PGCE in 1992, I have not taught in the UK since 1996. Also my languages are so rusty I consider myself a non-speaker.
I consider myself an English teacher now and could (and do) teach literature (from my MFL literature based degree), as I am pretty well read in English even though I don't have an English degree.

Would I be considered "qualified" to teach secondary English?
Or would I end up teaching French

Or would I end up Head of Maths based on my 1985 O-level grade A?

fatowl - I think as long as you did your probationary year and have a "teachers number" you are still considered qualified. You can apply for any teaching job, teaching any subject you like even if it is not the one you trained in - it is up to the school to decide if they feel you have the right skills and experience. A lot of English teachers at my DD school have media studies degrees and the school has recently formed a "humanities dept" so Geography, history and RS teachers all have to share subjects which has led to some great teachers leaving.

Where I live there are very few vacancies but I have a teacher friend in Kent - his school has permanent teacher vacancies in most core subjects. He taught PE but was going to be made redundant so moved into Maths to stay at the school - 2 years in he has been offered Head of Maths! (He has GCSE grade B maths but is a good teacher) luckily his school is 11-16. He is worried that the new GCSE grade 9is beyond his knowledge and is getting some private tutoring for himself.

He is worried that the new GCSE grade 9is beyond his knowledge and is getting some private tutoring for himself.

While it's laudable that he's taking tuition, and it's not his fault that he's doing a job he is unqualified for in every sense but the legal one, this really is the sort of information that should be known to parents. I find it quite shocking.

It's very likely that a top set of able 15/16 year olds will contain students capable of far deeper mathematical reasoning than a teacher with a semi-decent GCSE grade from 20 years ago. My Y13-equivalent daughter sometimes brings home maths homework that makes me go hmmm (and I write statistical computer models for a living!).

My friend is only 28 - he did a sports education BEd and worked for a few years as a PE teacher before the Maths switch - simply no PE jobs around. At first he only taught yr 7 and 8 but does now have GCSE groups - you are right Mistigirl top sets would pose a challenge. He is a very good communicator though but at a very low performing school (his results are actually very good).

Most parents would be surprised at how few younger maths teachers actually have Maths degrees - most have numerate degrees - engineering, economics, business etc but not straight maths. Things are further complicated by the fact that some unis now offer a 2 year PGCE's that grant you a PGCE and a BA in maths for students without a maths degree (but a degree in another subject) .

Finding teachers to teach A level Maths, especially with a mechanics (rather than a statistics ) option and Further Maths is becoming difficult.I recently watched a teacher who was really up against the limits of her own knowledge teaching an A level group . Few parents ask about qualifications.

I'm a primary teacher in lreland l would be capable of teaching a lot of subjects up to age 16 here including English maths Irish history geography religion but l wouldn't be allowed. If l was l would be fine. I wouldn't do other languages or science. But l think if you can handle a class and are well educated all round and have a love of learning you could teach subjects you haven't specialised in. So l wouldn't be worried about the qualification but the work done. My dc have been taught by highly qualified people who hadn't a clue how to teach and only turned them off the subject.