to think that would be teachers need to have good Maths and English

[therealimposter]

Woe betide me that I make a grammatical error in this post.

Somebody was telling me that they would like to train as a teacher but they have failed the essential Maths and English skills tests three times each. They want to teach Science in a Secondary School. I cant help but think that they should find another job that they want to do as their Maths and English just isn't up to scratch.

BoneyBackJefferson

You're cherry picking bits now. What I actually said was that I think the more physical DT subjects probably require a lower level of English skills than actual English.

I'm not trying to pass on any knowledge of other subject requirements. I've repeatedly stated that I don't have a scooby do.

I'd love to come teach at your school where all the teachers have English and Maths degrees as well their own subject, but they wouldn't let me in. I only have one, and only GCSE maths and English. Guess what, I don't even have a full Physics A level! And yet, I still flew through the skills tests, what do you think that says about people who need unlimited resits?

YANBU. One of my housemates at uni was a girl doing a primary teacher course. She couldn't spell for the life of her. Terrible. And she actually passed.

RomanyRoots
I'm afraid I think being able to basic numeracy is a reasonable part of the job.

X% of students in the class got Y grade or above isn't an unreasonable level of numeracy (in fact it's essentially the same maths as working out what % a student has in a mock exam).

More complex data analysis, fair enough for TLR holders to do, but I think class teachers should be able to give a student's average grade, talk about their 9-4/9-5 pass rate, work out percentages on mock papers, work out costings for a trip etc.

LadyLance

I don't disagree with you. I'm not sure which bit of what I've said your 'but' is aimed at.

I actually found the spotting mistakes bit tricky, I felt it was more about style. A couple of the syntax type ones I felt all the options were poor English, and sort of had to learn what they wanted through practice.

Maisy

I think I could manage that, perhaps I'd struggle on 9-4 but i've only taught post compulsory and A level when they were still post compulsory.

Frlrlrubert

What I actually said was that I think the more physical DT subjects probably require a lower level of English skills than actual English.

Descriptive English language is used through out the curriculum. A top grade requires extensive knowledge of the technical language used in industry. Much of which is not covered in English.

I'm not trying to pass on any knowledge of other subject requirements. I've repeatedly stated that I don't have a scooby do.

Everytime you claim that a subject doesn't need something or a reduced requirement of you are trying to put forward that you know something that you don't. You posted that you shouldn't have mentioned other subjects. This is something that we agree on.

I'd love to come teach at your school where all the teachers have English and Maths degrees as well their own subject, but they wouldn't let me in.

As you are a scientist I would expect you to base your points in facts and research, not just stuff that you have made up.

Guess what, I don't even have a full Physics A level! And yet, I still flew through the skills tests

Yet you struggle with teaching the maths content. Is this because you found it easy and haven't had to work through the issues that those that didn't find it so easy had to cope with.

what do you think that says about people who need unlimited resits?

What does it say about those that need unlimited resits. No idea people are different. I don't particularly want to deal in stereotypes or generalised statements.

Woe betide me that I make a grammatical error in this post.

Well, word four. It'd be 'woe betide me if'.

So, yep, you sound pretty silly.

I do worry about teachers with unacceptably poor levels of education/skill, but I've seen an awful lot of teachers who pass the tests just fine, and fall down because they don't realise that it's important to instil confidence in children and to accept that we all make mistakes. Some of them don't even realise there may not be one single 'right' answer. IMO that is far more dangerous that someone who can make a mistake and cheerfully acknowledge and correct it.

RomanyRoots
Whereas I can think of 11-16/11-18 teachers who struggle to do basic data.

I don't expect everyone to do all the targets vs actual vs national averages stuff, but do think people should be able to say x % of the class will pass, y% are on merits, z% are on distinctions.
I find it hard to hear people argue that averages and percentages are somehow an unrealistic standard for teachers to have.

I think the three resit rule was fair- the test centers are quite intimidating and the timed element can cause people to panic a bit.

However, I'm not actually sure how many people fail three times and go on to pass- it must be a tiny number?

I know someone training to be a teacher who really cannot spell. I’ve known her since primary where she struggled but putting things like ‘yay I finished college’ and ‘hay everyone’ shows she still struggles. I despair of the quality of her teaching.

If we have no teachers that have dyslexia, and struggle with elements of education, then how are people who have always found learning straightforward and 'not hard' (as some have said in this thread) supposed to understand the difficulties some children face? All of my kids have dyslexia, except the one who has Autism. Teachers have been useless and lacking in empathy or even a basic understanding of the difficulties the kids faced. I stepped in with summer schools for two of them because their reading and writing was diabolical and teachers were doing absolutely nothing other than berate the children for struggling. Seems like little has changed.

All uni graduates or uni students now.

@Frlrlrubert Sorry, re-reading I think I mistook a post you quoted for something you said.

I felt a bit like that with the comprehension- you just had to learn the sort of answers they wanted. My grammar section on the actual test was very black and white, but some on the practice tests were less so.

@MitchDash I did link upthread the access arrangements available for the tests including extra time for those with dyslexia. I do know people with dyslexia who got through the tests, so it's not barring everyone with dyslexia from the profession.

Personally, I did not find these tests hard, but did struggle with A-level Maths at times and I do think I have the ability to empathise with a child who is struggling- I have taught a skill in an extra-curricular setting for a few years and I have a reputation for being patient with clients who struggle or are nervous. I hope I am able to take that into classroom teaching with me.

However, I do not think students with weak literacy or numeracy skills will benefit from being taught by teachers who are also weak in these areas. Students who have weak spelling or grammar may be more likely to pick up/copy errors from a teacher and students who are weak in maths need a teacher with a good grasp of the subject who can explain it to them in a variety of ways.

I don't think the most skilled people are always the best teachers but I think a strong grasp of the basics is important.

*BoneyBackJefferson
*
Yet you struggle with teaching the maths content. Is this because you found it easy and haven't had to work through the issues that those that didn't find it so easy had to cope.

No, it's because the skills test is much easier than the maths in GCSE physics.

I find teaching complex equations challenging because the content is actually harder now, I got away with cheating with triangles before, and literally had to be taught the proper method of rearranging equations by my mentor in first placement.

Yes, my school was shit. I dropped Physics because my teacher used to give us a textbook and leave us to it.
I only have double award at GCSE, and my courses were modular.

I'm teaching stuff I never learned.

I'm not sure why only having Physics at AS would mean I would find it easy?

Do you think the death of the more physical DT subjects could be because finding someone with the required standard of English and Maths skills, industry vocabulary and knowledge, and relevant degree, willing to work for a teaching salary is hard? Go on, speculate a bit, I'm genuinely interested in your opinion.

(In textiles at school we made cushions and children's dresses, please forgive my naivety, I'm really glad I found this thread, I've learned loads)

I'm a Primary Teacher in lreland. System is a bit different. But when l went to teacher training many years ago teaching was seen as a good attractive career so my fellow students were academically very strong. Older teachers here were amazingly competent in a host of areas at that stage.
Recently however most of the really bright kids are going into IT/ Accountancy etc and teaching is no longer seen as a " good job". If we want bright teachers we need to have it up there as a career to be aspired to.
I met a teacher lately at a geography course where we were hearing ideas on teaching young children how to work out scale . She turned to me and said whats all this? She had no idea of the concept of drawning to scale.
I can't imagine the good old school teachers of the past not knowing something as basic as that.

YABU. I’m a Science teacher and Maths doesn’t come easily to me, never has done. It just means I work very hard when I’m teaching Physics units that are Maths heavy. I can do the Maths that comes up in Science, I can do the Maths that comes up in my job, and I can work through complex problems given a reasonable amount of time and a calculator. But I did struggle with Maths when I was in school, and the skills test when I did my PGCE!

I can, however, control a class bloody well, explain tricky concepts to bottom sets (I am probably one of the few teachers that has experience of being in a bottom set and finding something really tricky - Maths!) and differentiate really well for EAL students. But clearly I shouldn’t be allowed to teach because I find one aspect of the job challenging...

@ ProfessorMoody
Want a lozenge, Nanny0gg?

That, or a wall to bang my head against.

Do you think the death of the more physical DT subjects could be because finding someone with the required standard of English and Maths skills, industry vocabulary and knowledge, and relevant degree, willing to work for a teaching salary is hard? Go on, speculate a bit, I'm genuinely interested in your opinion.

Finding teachers is currently difficult across all subject areas, DT is no different and it suffers from the same malady, workload, pay, behaviour, public perception, better pay in other areas for the same qualifications etc. etc. that is a huge reason

Others are that gove decided to rebuild the education system, and put pressure on schools with progress 8 and the Ebacc to go down a more academic route. Progress 8 encouraged schools to restrict the pupils that could take the subject as it sits in the bottom bucket and Ebacc encourages schools to prioritise more academic subjects.
gove then made the "vocational" subjects more academic.

He also reduced the different subject areas, RM, graphics, electronics, textiles, systems and control, engineering, food and and other associated "vocational" subjects to three areas. Technology, Engineering and Food and nutrition. Technology now encompasses everything except engineering (systems and control) and food and nutrition.

Technologies et al. are expensive subjects to run, schools budgets are reducing, and various schools are either removing the subject completely or running it as a 7 week module including drama, art, and music. then not running it as a Ks4 option.

Then you have those with the attitude that tech, art, music, drama, etc. are of little worth and encourage pupils that struggle academically in to a poor fitting subject where schools get poor results so they put less priority on getting pupils in to the subject area.

Not a huge amount of speculation in that.

I had a student teacher in my class a few years ago who consistently spelt 'Tuesday' as 'Teusday'. She struggled to teach the Year 5 maths curriculum and taught apostrophes to the top group incorrectly, even though I had been through them with her before the lesson. Fortunately, the kids were bright enough to realise and came and told me that she had taught them incorrectly. I suggested to the college tutor that this student teacher was not fit to teach (having many other examples of poor spelling and trouble grasping the maths she needed to teach). In the end, the college gave her the qualification, but restricted her to teaching Year 3 and below. I though this was especially bad, as the younger children would not realise when she was making mistakes.

In the end, the college gave her the qualification, but restricted her to teaching Year 3 and below.

How does that work? Doesn’t QTS mean QTS?

That's interesting.

Anecdotally, trainees doing DT (they seemed to be mostly doing food and nutrition with a side of textiles) on my course found it difficult to find jobs, as did trainees for RE and PE (to the extent that next years course will be 'PE and ...' because they need a second subject to be competitive). So I never really thought about there being a shortage.

My new school has a two 'tech' rooms they aren't using at all which used to be for RM/systems and control but it isn't offered anymore. They only do food and textiles now.

I realise now that teaching a subject that is valued under P8 has blinkered me until now. Thank you.

Love all the posts implying maths doesn't really matter unless you're teaching a subject with some maths content.

Teachers need to be able to interpret the data for their schools and their subject to monitor progress, They also need to be able to add up marks and calculate percentages. I've taught arts graduates who can't do this (I taught remedial maths prior to students starting accountancy training) and the level of maths literacy was poor 20 years ago. We're not going to improve things if everyone dismisses basic numeracy as a specialist subject

YANBU.

Somebody so far below a basic level of competence should not be responsible for teaching others to be competent, that much is obvious.

Less obvious but possibly even more important, someone who can take and fail 6 tests required for their dream job without having got their shit together and made sure they pass, is probably not a person who is ready to shape young people in their attitude to learning, self improvement and work ethic.

But clearly I shouldn’t be allowed to teach because I find one aspect of the job challenging...

You passed the skills tests though didn't you ? We are talking about somebody who has done each test three times and failed which is quite different.

Here in NSW, Australia, teaching has, for the last decade or two, been the degree people tend to go into when they're complete dopes and didn't get the marks required to get into anything else. Thankfully, they are finally reviewing this system and making it more difficult for people to not only get into teaching, but to get a job afterwards.

I know several primary school teachers who I would not want teaching my children. Not because they're not lovely people, but because they were absolutely useless academically themselves, so why would I believe that they could teach someone else?

A friend of mine sat one of the tests many times and failed by one or two marks each time. Eventually, she approached a company that provided online tuition for the tests and, after a few sessions of tuition, she passed the test.

Would you say my friend should not really teach because she struggled so much to pass the assessment, or do you think that, perhaps, her experience may have made her a 'better' teacher in some way e.g. more empathetic and more determined to help struggling students to achieve?