AIBU for thinking the DfE have got this one wrong?

[herculepoirot2]

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7242631/Maths-spelling-tests-trainee-teachers-scrapped-attempt-boost-staff-numbers.html

Trainee teachers hated these tests, because they meant they could invest in a PGCE or on-the-job teacher training route, but be asked to leave because of limitations in their ability to spell or do basic calculations.

Then the Government cancelled the cap on the number of times you could take the test before being disqualified from teaching, because it was affecting recruitment numbers. Now the Government are abolishing the test altogether, because of the several thousands of potential teachers who have failed to qualify every year as a result of failing them.

Aren’t they mopping the decks on the Titanic? If teaching has become so undesirable as a profession that they can only plug the gap by recruiting people who struggle to spell twenty middle-order words, or to calculate a simple percentage value given pen and paper, shouldn’t they be dealing with the very obvious workload and behaviour issues affecting the numbers of people applying to teacher training, rather than lowering the standard of education required to do it?

I have a small child. Although I sympathise with those colleagues who have signed up to teacher training and had to leave because they couldn’t pass these tests, some of whom have been absolutely lovely, I do not want my child taught by someone whose ability to spell and do simple maths has never been tested in any robust way.

AIBU?

I just feel that someone extremely good at maths with no empathy or patience would find it hard to develop into a good teacher as these skills are not easily taught or learnt. A person with empathy and patience (for example) who needs to brush up on maths skills (again for example) can probably do so relatively easily.

It’s not always about brushing up. Some people can’t do it. Same with empathy. Some people don’t have any. And I agree that a person without empathy can’t be a good teacher. I just think the same of a person who can’t do basic maths.

@herculepoirot2 In that case, we actually agree. If you simply can't do it then teaching is definitely not going to be the right path for you!

@HappyDinosaur really?? Would you like to explain that further??

I’m just thinking creativity is a great trait for a teacher to have but it’s fairly useless if they have no knowledge in the first place or any idea how to explain in the right way what they are doing.

Compassion is also another great trait but again useless if they cannot speak in a coherent manner to a child and use suitable vocabulary.

Organisational skills are a fantastic trait but fairly pointless if you can’t do basics like divide a class or find the area of your classroom etc etc

And that’s just me thinking on the spot...

Youngandfree

You need it all, Young, don’t you?

But if I had to choose between an English teacher with little empathy and an English teacher who couldn’t spell, well, I’d probably choose the one who couldn’t spell. Empathy is bloody important.

But the point is, we shouldn’t have to choose.

The company I work for deals with primary school teachers, the spelling and grammar mistakes in the emails we receive from many of them are truly shocking.

@Youngandfree Of course, I completely agree with you. I have not said knowledge is unimportant, but that I think in many cases it can be learnt. No knowledge would of course be ridiculous, but needing to brush up or learn something new in terms of subject knowledge is quite a different matter. I think the test gave me a chance to do this and I passed easily, however the university running the PGCE course have said all this will be covered anyway. I

Having just read the test linked to, I don't think that anyone who cannot pass that test should be teaching. It's pretty basic. But perhaps that explains why so many people can't seem to grasp basic spelling and grammar.

I think the test gave me a chance to do this and I passed easily, however the university running the PGCE course have said all this will be covered anyway

Would they bother if the skills test was scrapped?

If someone is keen and has not got a degree therre should be a way into teaching for them.

There is, my cousin started as a volunteer helper when her eldest started school.

She went on to become a TA, then did a part time foundation degree, topped that up to a BEd and is now, after many years a deputy head. All in the same school.

There is a wider issues here in my opinion. The issue pertains to our education system in general.

I have supported people who need a little tuition in preparation for the literacy assessment. The majority of people, simply need a little advice about the assessment itself and perhaps some reassurance because they are experiencing test anxiety.

However, some people have been through the school system and the university system and still struggle with issues such as how to use an apostrophe or when to double a consonant with respect to spelling.

Furthermore, some of the individuals are already working in schools as TAs or unqualified teachers, for example.

So, how can it be that individuals can pass through eleven years of formal education, three years of a university course and perhaps work in a school and still struggle with some of the 'basic' elements of literacy (and perhaps numeracy)?

Furthermore, does a screening test such as the QTS literacy/numeracy assessment, rectify the problem or does it just mean individuals keep hammering away at the test until they manage (somehow) to get through, or remember a few rules, then promptly 'forget' them once they have got through the test?

I do agree that we need teachers to have basic skills in literacy and numeracy, but I think the tests do not ensure this and do not 'screen out' people who struggle with these skills.

I am enjoying reading how people want teachers to be brainy, personally I think other traits are equally, if not more, important
It's not either or, and expecting a basic standard of literacy and numeracy isn't focusing on being 'brainy'. It's a sad state of affairs if we've become so anti-academic that asking teachers to do basic addition and reading a data table and know their subject well is too academically elitist.

There are a range of qualities required to make a good teacher and shouldn't be saying Candidate A may not be literate and numerate and they may not know much about their subject, but we'll employ them because they are nice. There are many nice people with buckets of empathy, but that doesn't make a good teacher.

At some of the schools I've worked at the students are very quick to work out who has good subject knowledge and who hasn't. Their behaviour and attitude towards staff who they (rightly most of the time) identify as not knowing their stuff isn't good. I will never accept poor attitude or behaviour, but if you're having your basic subject knowledge, literacy and numeracy picked up on regularly by 14 year olds then you probably don't know enough to be teaching.

I am enjoying reading how people want teachers to be brainy, personally I think other traits are equally, if not more, important

I want my children’s teachers to all be brainy. I would say that was a bare minimum expectation.

This idea of teachers not needing intelligence must be connected to the fanciful idea (especially at primary) that we are here to provide childcare and must always be rays of sunshine, unquestioning and submissive.

I supposedly all comes down to what brainy means to you. I have very good GCSEs and A levels, I also have a good degree and a Masters. Does that make me brainy? I wouldn't say so, to me brainy is a word reserved for the super intelligent. Spelling is being used as an example here, however being able to spell does not mean you are brainy. I think teachers should be able to spell, but it's not necessary for them to have rocket scientist levels of intelligence.

But you offered that word in the context of the skills tests, which most certainly are not rocket science.

You can be amazing at maths or science, but if you are unable to communicate and share your knowledge with children you may as well have no knowledge at all in relation to becoming a teacher.

No, I said I was enjoying other posts about teachers being brainy.

@Piggywaspushed yes I was thinking that!! Yet another difference I see between the uk and Ireland! Here teachers actually teach, we are not dictated to by the parents and we are not childcare!!we don’t do Afterschool clubs until all hours as we are mostly gone by half 3!!the school my daughter we is in has choir practice one day after school (they finish school at 2.20)and choir finishes at 3.15, the also have an external Irish dance teacher who dies Irish dance one day until 3.30.
In my school (finish time is 2.40) one teacher does piano lessons until 3.15/3.30 but only because it’s easier for her and she is paid by the pupils
We do a homework club but only because we are a city school and a deprived school where some of the children don’t get homework completed at home (we have funding for that until 3.15

@Youngandfree

In Irish schools, can I ask if the funding is better?

In schools locally, heads are completely stuffed with budgets, so if you have a couple of (or more) teachers at the top of the pay scale, they quite literally can only pay an NQT to fill any other posts.

Heads are desperate for older teachers to retire as they are so expensive. These are sometimes teachers in their 40s, who could conceivably still be teaching in 20/25 years time!

Of course. As lots of teachers have said, it's not enough by itself. Subject knowledge is essential, but the intellectual challenge in teaching is not limited to that. In my cuurent job I teach really very simple content, but I teach it to children who are hugely disaffected, have very poor communication skills themselves, plus issues related to trauma. It isn't just about empathy, I have to think hard about how to teach. It is far more of a challenge than teaching the IB in my last job.

I actually know quite a few teachers who are a) brainy (even by your definition and b) definitely somewhere on the ASD spectrum. Because of their braininess and passion for their subjects the kids are often very fond of them. There is definitely a place for those sort of teachers. All personality types can teach. If everyone was a mother hen (excuse stereotype) then learning would present few challenges. Lack of empathy AND lack of brain, now there's an issue.

And as a PP said , it is perfectly possible to be both highly intelligent and warm and empathic. I'd actually like it if more SLT were actually both!

You sure you don't have imposter syndrome happy ? You sound brainy to me!although I'd tell my students not to use the word braining because it's informal English

Strikethrough fail. Duh.

Excuse my autocorrects!! 😂 I was typing in a rush. May I also add, perhaps the reason Irish teachers remain in their jobs is because we are paid accordingly. Pay here starts at over 36k and goes up automatically every year. I have colleagues on 60k+ who have no extra responsibilities.

I want reasonably brainy. I went to a good university myself, and got good A Levels and GCSEs. So what? I don’t believe the many, many excellent teachers I have worked with are any less capable of doing their jobs because they got their degree from universities less high up the “list”. Generally, though, the good teachers I have worked with have been bright people. They could spell. They could do arithmetic without too much trouble. They had good A Levels. They had good subject knowledge. So no, we’re not talking rocket scientists, but being able to choose the correct ten spellings from a multiple choice list before you get to teach children spelling isn’t that.

@fedup21 we are paid directly from the department of education. Teacher pay is not a part of the “school budget” per se. We are given classroom budgets yearly.