DC’s teacher didn’t go to university.

[RabbitWedge]

Two of my DC’s are at the same secondary private school. It’s a small private school, not a well known name, but costs a small fortune nonetheless. An interaction with one of my DC’s English teachers at the end of term has made me feel uncomfortable.

‘Mrs Jones’ has worked at the school for a number of years. She is a very well liked English teacher; the children love her and she’s given high praise on the parents WhatsApp group. At the end of term, I was having a casual chit chat with ‘Mrs Jones’ and the topic of university came up. I asked ‘Mrs Jones’ where she went to university, and she stated that she had not gone and didn’t have a degree. I must have looked very taken aback, as she quickly added that she had an impeccable educational record (apparently all A’s and A*’s), she’d been tutoring for a number of years and working as a TA, at which point the school promoted her to teach English. I didn’t ask for this explanation, but she perhaps felt the need to justify her teaching.

I was under the impression that all teachers had to have degrees at the very least, and whilst I don’t doubt her popularity and delivery of her English lessons, I am concerned. I was aware that teachers in the private system didn’t need to be qualified teachers, but to not even have attended university seems unsuitable.

Would you raise this with the school in my position?

We had a few older teachers who retired recently. They didn't have a degree nor had they been to university.
They had a diploma in education from a teacher training college.

Where as in the past a qualified nurse had been to college and spent time on the wards and working in different departments so when they became a fully qualified they knew exactly what was expected of them as a qualified nursing professional and it didn’t come as a total surprise they had to empty bed pans and make cups of tea as well as everything else

Nursing degree students also have to spend significant time on wards. To be fully qualified via a nursing degree student nurses have to complete 2300 placement hours - which is about 1 and a third years of full time work - on top of their degree. It's unlikley that they are less aware of what is expected of them.

Medicine has become more and more complex over time. The level of intellectual prowess required to be a successful nurse has increased with it. That includes understanding the intricacies of different treatments, but also the ability to balance and prioritize needs in resource scarce environments and to learn new requirements quickly.

I agree. So what if someone has a degree in comparative linguistics or medieval history? How is that going to make a blind boy of difference to how they teach GCSE history or English.

The teacher's track record is excellent. I would be happy with that.

Having a PhD doesn't mean you'll be a good teacher though. In fact there is no connection between having a PhD and having the skills to teach. Some of my dc worst teachers were the ones that held phds. They were very knowledgeable on the subject but had zero ability to teach or even communicate well. Especially the science teachers.

It must vary enormously as the private s hoops around me (Surrey) pay way more than state. The holidays are many weeks longer too. Days are longer tbf but most people would rather that and have the extra 7-8 weeks of holiday a year

Surely having a PhD and a great ability to teach is the ideal?

@AvrielFinch
We don't live with ideals though. We live with reality. In an ideal scenario someone would hold a PhD in how to teach maths to GCSE students and would be a naturally gifted communicator with great empathy with young people

But in reality we get a random cocktail and it is rare that people who are as academically focused as one needs to be to go through the process of obtaining a PhD are also good at the other stuff.

Added to which, a PhD is a very specific area of study that undoubtedly has no relevance to teaching gcse

Many of the math PhDs I have come across are frankly terrible communicators in life let alone in the classroom. Cool interesting brains but not the greatest communicators.

Died this mean no one with a PhD is going to be a great teacher? Of course it doesn't. But neither does it mean they will likely be one

Of course but that's rare. In my experience (teacher) sometimes it's actually a positive to have a teacher who isn't an absolute whizz at the subject because they can understand why the bottom end aren't getting it. If they've had to work hard to gain the understanding and weren't naturally gifted at, say, maths, they are more likely to have patience and understanding of someone with dyscalculia. Don't forget teaching isn't just about stretching the top set but supporting the slower learners too. Not all private schools are selective, Oxbridge focused hothouses. I don't mean to say noone with a PhD can do that, but it's not a simple equation of more degrees = best teacher for all kids.

I have.

Don't forget some subjects you can't do a degree in. I worked at one that actually had hairdressing and beauty therapy options. I never asked but I don't think the teachers had degrees because, well hairdressing isn't a degree subject.

Quite a few practical subjects you can't do a degree in that subject.

Teachers in FE don't need degrees, most have come from industry and take a part time teaching qualification.

I suppose the question is, do you want Mrs Jones to teach your child to achieve top marks at GCSE (something she probably excels at) or Mrs X to explore a deeper understanding and passion for the subject with perhaps poorer GCSE marks?

I'm a qualified teacher, I learnt fuck all doing my undergrad degree. Good teaching comes from learning from outstanding practitioners and having excellent subject knowledge in the subject you teach- sounds like she has both. This is what makes me laugh about private education, you really are just paying for the crowd your kids are mixing with,

I agree, I am the best teacher when teaching things I struggled with myself

And of course PhDs are not without value, but you need to be mindful of the cohort that has them. It will be mostly men, in a course that requires actual attendance on campus (science, tech,) etc, although not fro a course that can be organised around family life (English lit etc)

Women with PhDs are less likely to have children, precisely because the PhD is done in your 20s, and is incompatible with pregnancy and childbirth in many cases.

And of course, it is done by people who can fund themselves for an extra 3 years study.

So yes, it is of value, but if your child is being taught by someone with a doctorate, they are statistically more likely to be being taught by someone who is male, or a female who is not a mother, and has access to private finance.

if you want your children taught by a more normal person, with a more normal experience of life, and a mother, then you are more likely to get that with non PhD.

Of course you also have to be very clever, and work hard, I am not saying that, but you also have to be lucky in many ways too.

How many of us have had the opportunity to get funded for a PhD? Vert few, I would imagine.

When I look at those of my peers with PhDs, they all come from the richest quarter of the population. When I look at those peers of my children studying PhDs now, yes, they are hugely clever and dedicated, but also no one who has had to support a parent with cancer, or is ready to settle down with their partner and look at mortgages and start to raise a family, etc.

that's what you often get with private schools though academies aren't much better. They make money and it's cheaper to employ non-qualifies staff. Private schools do well because they are selective, not because the teaching is great. it really is that simple. I am really shocked you weren't aware of the fact that you fork out £££ to get your DC taught he folks who haven't seen a university from the inside. How can you possibly not have known???

It is so weird that you are indicating that academies are not good schools. Academies vary hugely, many are truly excellent. A degree is not an indicator of a good teacher.

How original..another inaccurate post about private schools. No they are not all selective, far from it. The ones that aren't do comparatively well because of small class sizes, great pastoral care, bespoke curriculum choices where appropriate, generally engaged and supportive parents and good teachers. You are right that they are businesses (though not profit making) and need to keep costs down but as with all businesses it's a balancing act and a school that had actually crap teachers would not attract customers and fail. If this school has faith in this teacher and her results are solid there is no reason for the OP to kick up a fuss. She is if course entitled to remove her DD if she thinks it's right to do so.

But bragging rights can count for a lot in some private schools.

I am sure we all know from our own school days that not all teachers are equal. Not all were inspiring, not all were good at classroom control. Most of them were similarly qualified, but you still knew which classes you could muck about in and which you couldn't, which ones you felt you learnt well in and understood the subject in.

I expect formal qualifications to give teachers initial classroom experience (they have to do a certain amount of TP,) and knowledge about teaching practices. But there are other ways of gaining experience, such as being a TA, and the syllabuses change and practices change if someone is still teaching in exactly the same way as when they started out a couple of decades ago, that would worry me more.

My experience of teaching is very limited - swimming and TEFL - but the one thing I do know is qualifications are irrelevant if you can't build rapport and engagement and adapt to the needs of your students- they don't all learn in the same way, and you need to adapt to that. A qualification can tell you the theory of doing it, but experience is what gets you there. If a teacher is good at that and is getting results, that's more important than the pieces of paper they hold. (And I say that as some one who's got a ton of qualifications in various fields.)

No they are not all selective

They are selective by income, if not by ability.

But even state schools are selective in some ways, be it catchment area, siblings already in school, church attendance, 11+ success...

so what are you saying there then? The kids are wealthier so.....what? As we keep being told, wealth is no indicator of intelligence in children. If a private school is non selective on entrance exams then the only admissions factor is ability to pay, just like the leafy comp with the best reputation in my town that you need to live within half a mile of which means a 500k+ house. Not sure what that has to do with anything?

Ok. So what makes her A levels not good enough to teach GCSEs? Is a degree good enough or why stop there; surely a doctorate is what you're paying for?

One one hand, yes I believe teachers should have degrees. On the other, I have worked in a school for several years and some of the TAs are genuinely better than the newly qualified young teachers (and definitely better than a good number of the supply teachers we've had in). But by your metric, you're more interested in the paper than the ability to teach.

By all means, raise it with the school. You don't sound as if you're going to be happy until you do.

Why can't we have teachers with degrees and training and who have the skills to be a good teacher?

@AvrielFinch because as a career path, teaching is less attractive financially, with less status and fewer options for progression than other options for the kind of graduates you describe. I love teaching, am pretty good at it and have two degrees from Russell Group unis. I'd probably fit your description but I'm not ambitious, I like the holidays and I'm an academic at heart. I love my subjects so this is the right job for me. But many of my contemporaries at uni are now earning far more in more prestigious careers and are seen as "more successful". Unless we change the culture around teaching that won't change.

My children were earning more on their first day out of university than I am earning after 35 years in teaching