To think if you cannot add one half to one quarter you really should not be in teaching

[mrgrouper]

I am starting teacher training in September and so have joined some teacher training Facebook groups. We all have to pass professional skills tests in literacy and numeracy. The tests are pretty easy but there is a mental arithmetic test that a lot of trainees are panicking on. A woman has posted that she is doing the mock test and it claims one half plus one quarter is three quarters and she has no idea how the examiners had worked this out. She is not training to be a maths teacher but surely all teachers should know basic maths. I knew this stuff aged 7.

I think GCSE level maths for primary is fine honestly. This is way way lower than GCSE maths! This is the level even my four year old could fathom!

I don't think it matters at all unless they are teaching maths.
I just scraped my level 2, I didn't need Maths to teach my subject.

She is now a brilliant primary school teacher precisely because she knows what it's like to feel scared of sums and numbers

This, I think a massive issue is that if you are good at something, you might not really appreciate how hard it can be for some people.

When a child can't add Units to Units and you've tried loads of strategies, it can be hard.

My 8yr old DS had the word "guard" corrected to "gaurd"

I wasn't impressed.

I knew we would soon get to 'only people who have STRUGGLED should teach...'

I think when you are teaching a mixed ability class it is useful to have insight into why some things are hard for some people.

Alternatively I suppse you could supervise Ph.D students.

It can be useful, but that's not the same as staying it is essential.

I am sure it is a very good thing to have teachers who have struggled with learning and overcome their difficulties. But what we have in the OP is somebody who hasn't struggled hard enough to master even very basic maths and doesn't seem to realise that she should.

I've got qualifications coming out of my ears but... teaching is a skill. Fractions/decimals and percentages are very difficult for many pupils to understand and you have to have a wide range of teaching tools including manipulatives to get them across. The ability of the teacher to explain clearly is the most important factor.

Perhaps then we should reconsider making it a graduate profession.

The ability of the teacher to explain clearly is the most important factor

And to understand that their explanation might fall on deaf ears so alternative strategies are needed.

When a child says 'I don't get it', a good teacher needs to have different strategies rather than give up.

But what we have in the OP is somebody who hasn't struggled hard enough to master even very basic maths and doesn't seem to realise that she should.

They have at least a grade C maths GCSE. In all likelihood they have been able to understand fractions at some point in their life. They've asked for help from other people who want to be teachers.

Has no one ever forgotten how to do something really trivial then felt silly when someone reminds them? I'm not sure why so many people seem determined to believe this woman must be terminally stupid.

I don't think people necessarily are in some cases. I do think it raises some interesting questions about what basic standards should be expected from those in some professions.

When a child says 'I don't get it', a good teacher needs to have different strategies rather than give up. I explained that above.

jeez i am the worst at maths but even i can work that out

wont matter anyway if academies can hire unqualified people they'll all be like that

What does a qualification matter, if clear explanations are the most important thing?

But they ARE teaching maths!

I do think it raises some interesting questions about what basic standards should be expected from those in some professions.

Absolutely. But here is someone practising tests and finding they can't do something, asking for help and bring massively judged as having a "low IQ" and being "too thick to be a teacher".

If she revises and reaches the required standard to pass the test before she starts the course, that's fine. I cannot understand all the hate.

There's a middle ground between being the crap teacher with a PhD from Oxford and a real thicko but great with the kids - and this type of discussion always veers between the two bloody stereotypes in an incredibly irritating manner. Well put.

What does a qualification matter, if clear explanations are the most important thing? Oh stop it!

Genuine question!

Are you 100% certain they were being serious?!

I wouldn't have been able to restrain myself in replying, 'please tell me you're not serious!' in reply

www.rbkc.gov.uk/cpd-schools/teachers/newly-qualified-teachers/nqt-induction-hand-book/professional-standards
You have to meet these standards. Do you think anyone who can explain clearly can be a teacher?

That was what YOU said!