To retrain as a teacher at (just turned) 50?

[MyPearlCrow]

Just that really. I was a solicitor/partner in a law firm for my first career but burned out /got bored and cynical, so gave it up. luckily we can afford for me not to work which I realise is such a privilege.

I volunteer in a primary school now several days a week and essentially do an unpaid TA role. Here, TAs here are essentially teachers without all the planning/prep/responsibility, as in they actively teach the curriculum to small groups of children. They are highly skilled.

I have considered being a TA. I have been offered a paid role at my current school. But I’m still considering my options and it’s desperately badly paid. And all the TAs here are technically over qualified (all degree educated, or ex teachers, but don’t want the ridiculous workload of a teacher; entry requirement for TA role in England is just passes in gcse English maths and science) but they are paid peanuts. But it’s such a rewarding role and I love it. I think I could really add value.

Complete honesty here: I also realise that I’m used to running the show, in my old job. I suspect that in time I would want to make my own decisions on how to deal with my class, rather than carry out someone else’s instructions. I can already see ways I would want change up the teaching/approach for some children who are struggling. I am acutely aware that teachers just don’t have time to individualise the curriculum for 30 kids though, so I’m aware I might be looking at this from the 6-8 kids I currently take responsibility for in lessons and the ability to do this with a whole class might be much more limited.

i really love being with kids, I value education, I’m a good ‘teacher’ - as in I love to explain things simply and differently to children (or in my old role, to adults too).

Teachers - am I mad? I know too well how hard the job is these days. The primary curriculum here is crazy complicated. The breadth of ability and need is jaw dropping. But I truly believe in state education being a passport to a better life and would love to be part of that.

or do I just take the TA role, qualify up as much as I can in TA courses and accept I’ll be minimum wage forever but trying to make a difference?

important point: I have kids, so want to work part time. And train part time too. I know there are options for this but it will be competitive (I have top grades academically which I think might help). If I do a part time pgce, could I do my first year as a newly qualified teacher part time or is that not an option?

I don’t underestimate what a massive, difficult, demanding and at times (currently) desperately frustrating role teaching is. Am I too old for such a huge challenge? I’d love some wisdom from teachers and ex teachers please.

You might be discussing things you see as "barriers" to you entering the profession - I'm just patiently explaining how it is and if you see that as a "barrier" for you, there you go.

As pp have pointed out, some of the things you've mentioned not understanding just need a quick Google... Before the internet existed, teachers still had to research topics. It's a LOT easier now than it was then. You can even ask AI to give you a summary of what things like fronted adverbials are.

More non-contact time. But that's offset by things like having to teach a lot more children, adapting each lesson to the needs of an entirely different group lesson by lesson.

When the new curriculum came in in 2015, there were absolutely no resources for it. I had to learn about the stone age, bronze age and iron age then plan a Y3 unit on it. I'm also Scottish so any aspect of 'British history' in tbe curriculum which is actually 'English history' I had to teach myself as we didn't cover it at school.

I now lead Computing and Music, which I've not even taught at school since age 14. I had to plan a 7 year progressive curriculum for each and be grilled on it by Ofsted. I have to check my colleagues are doing a good job teaching it. 90% of that has been done in my own time, generally sitting down at 4 or 5pm when you're not at your best for starting a big project. I think this is what non-teachers sometimes don't understand about 'planning' - it's not just planning the following day's 15 minute phonics session.

Don't know if this has been mentioned. Lucy Kellaway a journalist who had a column in the Financial Times famously left at about your age to become a teacher. She wrote about it, possibly a book and maybe set up an organisation or something to do with teaching. I think there was something in her background that made her want to do it - possibly to do with her mother - and maybe it was for her a vocation.

I think do the TA role then decide. At the end of the day, if you do the PGCE and don't like it you can then quit. You're financially fine, so it's worth a punt. I have little kids, I want them to have great teachers!

I'm in a secondary school and whilst I wouldn't choose this job now, it's not that bad.

Teachers have no choice but to teach to the curriculum. Of course it is bollocks that those things make a good piece of writing, but if you don't teach children to include them then your writing pass rate will be 0. Teachers, like any profession, are accountable to their line manager and would be managed out for results of 0. Most adults would struggle to produce a portfolio of Y6 writing without working through a checklist of what needs to be included, simply because a lot of it isn't what good writers use!

Sorry not read whole thread but I know someone who did this and he's very happy. He was managing director at a company I worked at and was maybe slightly younger but not much.

That was about 8 years ago he's the head at a lovely primary school now and claims to regret nothing.

Being a t.a is massively different from being a teacher . I’ve been both . As a t.a I went home and didn’t have any paperwork . My weekends were my own and I simply supported in ways that was directed by the class teacher . As a teacher I worked evenings , weekends , stressed even when I wasn’t working . Spent hours of my own time planning , report writing and figuring how to manage certain behaviors and parents .
The two jobs are miles apart in terms of stress / working hours.
having said that I did enjoy being a teacher and being my own boss within my classroom and being able to plan activities how I wanted rather than how I was told to do things .
I’m now a supply teacher which has been the best of both worlds apart from when I’ve taken on long term supply which is teaching without the benefits .

You are mistaken. Teachers are redirected all the time to teach outside of their specialism and this is getting worse as the recruitment crisis worsens. Usually they try to keep to related areas, so science teachers teaching maths, history teachers teaching english, geography and RS for example.
I’m secondary history trained and in my very long career have taught history, english, RS, maths, PSHE, philosophy, games at secondary and all subjects at primary from reception to year 6.

A friend did this around age 46 - not a solicitor but partner level responsibility and pay in another sector up to that point. She retrained as a primary school teacher (after a brief spell working as a TA) and within a few years was deputy head : her decades of running the show in her former industry and natural high intelligence and resilience meant she took to the teaching profession like a rock star. She doesn’t need the money she does it for the intrinsic reward and loves it.

No they don’t. That’s a myth. Primary teachers hear talk of ‘frees’ and assume it’s extra. I had no more than statutory PPA time for at least the last decade of my career, probably more. It’s just spread out in hour chunks instead of all at one time.
I couldn’t teach primary, I freely admit. But that’s because I’m not personally suited to it, not because it’s ’much tougher’. It really isn’t. Setting teachers against each other like this is nonsense.

I'm an advisory teacher who visits many different settings and I often wish I had trained in primary rather than secondary as the vibe feels so much 'nicer'!

Haven’t RTFT but OP- don’t do it. If you say you don’t need to work financially, don’t put yourself under the stress that a teaching qualification and then working as a teacher will put upon you as you head into your 50s. Teaching is brutal at the moment.

Take the paid TA role, work part time and make an impact on as many children’s lives as you can. TAs can have the most impact.

I have done both jobs, FWIW.

That’s actually a really unpleasant attitude to teachers you have there. Obviously some blow-in will be better than all of them 🙄
The fact someone can rise to senior leadership so quickly is one of the problems. As my dad, a primary head in the 60s and 70s, would have said ‘she doesn’t even know where the chalk is yet’. You can’t effectively lead teachers without being a very experienced teacher in my opinion - an opinion based on watching people try.

Being a deputy head can mean anything though. I know of a small school and the deputy was on M4. None of the teachers in the entire school had taught more than a couple of years!

@notnorman
I was thinking exactly the same thing! @MyPearlCrow you are coming across as a confident woman who won’t tolerate bullshit. Whilst this is a great attribute it can be a hinderance in schools. SLT tend to like ‘yes people’ who won’t question their ridiculous initiatives. This is something else to consider.

I've just seen this thread, read all the OP's responses but not all the other comments. From what you've said, primary certainly sounds like the better option but I'd train full-time rather than part-time so you can start teaching sooner. Be prepared to work late on the days you're in and be prepared to work on your so-called 'days off' if you do go part-time. Don't expect every school to have planning that's as organised as your school's.

Oh sweet summer child.

I know a PE teacher who got recruited into a new school to teach PE. Only, he ended up teaching only 3 lessons of PE a week; the rest was Science.

I know a Child Development teacher recruited to do that and Psychology. Only she ended up with 50% Science.

I know a Science teacher who had 20% Maths on her timetable, and one who had 20% PSHE.

An English teacher who now also teaches Maths and History.

History teachers who teach almost exclusively Geography.

I, myself (Science teacher with Physics specialism), have taught all 3 Sciences to Separate GCSE standard (bearing in mind all 3 need different skills sets and subject knowledge, but no one cares), Maths, PSHE, Citizenship, Computing, History and one glorious term of Food Tech. And an awful lot of Art (on cover) because the Art teacher had disappeared and the lessons happened to fall into my student-free time that was supposed to be earmarked for Faculty development, but ended up weekly cover with no resources.

That’s supporting my point about the issues in education thoigh. How terrible to have school with no experienced teachers. A Deputy should be on the leadership spine though, or the contract doesn’t work.

From my point of view as a Primary teacher... streamed classes based on ability, subject specific teachers only teaching one subject each (sometimes more but mostly), doing their teaching in classrooms that are built for the purpose (biggest one is science in a science lab with am actual technician. I'd kill for that in primary), much of the leg work planning wise done for you, TLRs for subject leads, more frees depending on cohorts (one year my sister had 6 frees a week, I was shook lol). She is even paid to run the school council in her lunchtime once a week. We do that for free in Primary.

I'm sure there's some that work the other way around but you know what they say, the grass is always greener.

Very mistaken! For example, maths and science teachers are extremely difficult to find. There was an interview at the last school I worked at where they were interviewing for 2 science teachers. There were 4 being interviewed, two were science specialists, one had a sports science degree and the other was a PE teacher. The latter 2 were much cheaper than the first two, guess which ones were appointed? This is going to become more prevalent in the future and is only going to have a negative impact on standards. I worked with a sports science NQT who had done a PGCE in one science but was employed to teach another science which they accepted to improve their job prospects. They were constantly knocking on my door asking me to explain the most basic of concepts. 20 years ago this person wouldn’t have got a place on a PGCE let alone a teaching job.

I've been a secondary teacher for 25 years. There have only been 2 or 3 years where I haven't taught at least one other subject.

Hmm. I think maybe you are seeing it through a primary lens (understandably).

Not all secondary school classes are streamed/setted, most usually (in my experience) not at all before KS4 and only core subjects after that (and many primary teachers set for maths/english).
Teaching only one subject is a weird thing to call a perk when it’s literally a basic difference and you could have chosen it.
I guess science labs etc are a perk for those teachers, but then they are teaching science which requires them and the equipment they contain. Primary science doesn’t need that level of specialist equipment.
What on earth makes you think the leg work of planning is done for secondary teachers? Not in my experience it isn’t - and even if there were a lot of pre planned stuff it would need adapting (and has usually been built up by the department anyway).
Frees - most unusual for at least 15 years to have more than basic PPA. Sometimes a 2 week timetable will put all that in one week so it would be 5 or 6 depending on lesson length - but then nothing the next week. On the odd occasion there might be one non PPA free you would be on cover every single time. Increasingly schools violate PPA with ‘emergency’ cover in a fairly routine way so you actually get less.
TLRs for subject leads - well, yes. And extra management time. But remember core SLs will be managing a team the size of a primary staff as well as coordinating the curriculum. They’ll be involved in appointments, performance management, disciplinaries etc etc. It’s not an easy job or just about supporting planning. Many small departments don’t have TLRs for the lead.
I’ve never heard of anyone paid to ‘run the school council’ or similar. Maybe what you perceive as ‘perks of secondary’ are just one school with an unaccountably large budget?
And I could list perks of primary like never having a set of GCSe coursework of 30 essays of 5-10 pages each to mark, annotate and justify the mark for the exam board.
Please don’t suggest one set of teachers has an easier job than another set. The job is different in different phases. It’s not easier.

@MyPearlCrow Have you looked down the SCITT route? I don't know how realistic it is to get onto a course part time but your current school might be interested in helping you pursue it.

I've been teaching for over ten years in three different schools. I went part-time this year after the birth of my first child.

The workload is high, especially when you first qualify, but it does get easier. A lot depends on your individual school though. The expectations that some posters have listed do not match my school at all, nor the others I've taught in.

When I was full time, I worked in school 7:30-5:30 each day which meant I did not do any work on the weekends until it was report writing time. Now I'm part time, I work 7:45-5:00 three days per week and do a couple of hours on my days off but I don't have to do this every week.

In my experience, some teachers do a 'competitive workload' thing and either choose not to take shortcuts or are in schools where this is not possible.

Wanting to be part-time from the start will be very difficult I think. Most headteachers are generally not keen on part-time and there is an element of needing to prove yourself first before being able to work reduced hours.