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.

Spot on @cardibach and @BelgianBeers

I would be very surprised to find a school where there weren’t teachers having to teach outside their specialism on a long term basis. The recruitment crisis isn’t exactly new, how else do people think maths and science lessons are being covered? Schools are not exactly going to be shouting about it.
I had to cover a year 9 geography lesson once, I didn’t have a clue as I dropped geography in year 9 myself. 😂
Most secondaries have a few teachers off on long term sick at any one time and lots of key stage 3 lessons are taught by non specialists on a permanent basis due to staffing issues.

Not the poster you quoted but in my case teaching out of subject specialism I came up with my own lesson plans with just a basic outline.
You also said something about anyone can teach PSHE with basic common sense- in my (considerable) experience it’s the one subject where you really need to have the desire and passion to teach it to do it well. Especially now that the curriculum includes relationship and sex education. It’s not so much about specialist subject knowledge (though that is still considerable) it’s about feeling comfortable teaching about things like puberty, consent and fgm. It’s not something all teachers feel like they can do but many have it added to their timetable.

In the quote above, you said your children didn’t have teachers without qualifications in the subject- respectfully- how do you know? I bet many might be.

I’ve also worked as a HLTA in a primary school- used for PPA and management cover and hd to plan, teach and assess multiple subjects including Y6 spag and Y2 phonics with no subject training at all. I managed to pick it up as I went along!

Exactly...she wants to make an "informed decision"

Hope the teachers on here don't get so narked when their pupils ask for clarification!!

When I was asked to teach other subjects, the guidance I was given was some like. "Year 8 History. We're doing castles up until Christmas.' If I was lucky there was a textbook. You do get by though with lots of prep and a structure (starter, new learning and activities, plenary).

And yes. It's for me it was for whole academic years.

I teach MFL and had to do a four year languages degree, including spending a year living and working in the countries where my languages are spoken. I certainly don’t need to learn anything before teaching it to the children! 😂

After reading all of your replies and seeing how fulfilled you felt when a pupil made progress I'd say you should go for it. We need teachers with a passion for the job. It's certainly not a job you can do halfhearted. I think you've heard all the aspects and the downsides of the job so at least you would be going into it with your eyes wide open..
NB. you'll learn about the key subjects like English and Maths during your training but obviously these are open to change. I'd advise that you look at doing school based training with a PGCE. This ideally will allow you to observe experienced teachers and see which teaching strategies work best.

This is definitely news to me, and shocking for most parents I imagine. I disagree that being taught how to teach (as a pp said) is enough. I can totally appreciate that an experienced languages teacher who speaks French and Italian might then be able to teach basic Spanish (say year 7, possibly 8), both because of muscle memory of teaching languages but also because of the similarities between the romantic languages. But the idea that, say, a history teacher could possibly crib enough deep knowledge, overnight or even over a few weekend of reading, to teach GCSE physics, is madness in my opinion.

i am glad this has come up as I suspect very few parents knew this and it probably needs to be known.

primary is different. I am still surprised that teachers don’t get taught that detailed spag or the latest maths methods when training, but the level of detail required at primary for topics like science or geography is the level of normal understanding for an adult. I get how you could read about Bronze Age houses and then teach about it the next day. I’d actually love that bit as I still love to learn new stuff myself. But that’s quite different from GCSE physics.

Languages at primary is a bit different - it was patently obvious that the teacher at my kids’ primary school who taught French to all the classes could not speak French (we are fluent so easy to tell). But colouring in sheets with basic words and phrases was pretty easily cobbled together. They learned no French really but it was fine and at least exposure to another language.

my kids’ secondary school - it’s obvious from parents evenings and schools visits (a lot of open evenings, concerts, plays, events) that at least my children’s teachers are experts in what they are teaching. You’re right though, I don’t really know about the wider picture in the school. However, like many good schools, they have a great majority of teachers who have been there for 20+ years. Perhaps that staves off the recruitment crisis effect locally.

hats off to you all - there’s no way I’d be willing or able to teach a subject I’m not trained in. I would find that inordinately stressful. So I absolutely accept that I couldn’t and wouldn’t be able to teach at secondary level.

i completely agree! Except if you were teaching physics?!

Oh, so that goes against what other people were saying about being taught no content on the PGCE - could you possibly explain more please?

I need to research myself but it sounds like there are various ways of doing ‘in school’ training, which I would love. I will research this but I’m guessing that those spaces are pretty hard fought by the best candidates as they are paid, so you avoid both PGCE fees and also get a moderate salary.

Is the only way of doing this via an accredited method like SCITT, or can you be ‘sponsored’ by an individual school/Trust?

any views on the best route for training? Is the classroom based element of the PGCE ‘better’ or in some ways preferable to the classroom based method?

i really value all this input and advice, thank you.

My friend trained this way so she didn’t need to take a year off to do a PGCE. She worked as an unqualified teacher for three years and had to produce a portfolio and have assessments. Then she qualified and has to stay with her school for two more years. I think she earned 25k ish when she was unqualified and then it went up to 32k ish.

She been a teacher assistant for about 15 years before that and also studied for a degree in education at the same time.

it sounds like she was already highly qualified before she formally qualified. Do you know which ‘method’ she used, ie SCITT, Teach First etc?

I wish there were a single place where you could read about all the available avenues to teaching, but if there is then I haven’t found it.

I’ll ask her.

I know she want to quit in July 2026 (when she isn’t tied to the school) as she’s so stressed and overworked.

My daughter had been working as a TA when she left uni (my DH had just died, so she wasn't in the mindset for researching and getting her first professional job just yet). Her teacher and SLT encouraged her to teach and offered to sponsor her to do the on the job training.

I don't know how much competition there was, but she got on it straight away. So I'd maybe have a chat with the school you're volunteering at? At the very least they'll have info about it, and best case they might help you get on the course.

ETA I used the word sponsor in a general way. I don't know exactly what the procedure was. They might just have helped her fill in the forms/put a word in for her and given her a sparkling reference. And this was at least a decade ago.

oh no, that almost looked like a positive story for a minute. I’m so sorry to hear that.

but I would love to know her route to tesching, just for information, so thank you.

I would still say that even in your children's wonderful school there will be teachers teaching out of subject. You wouldn't know as every day teachers put on an act and that is a big part of teaching. On the outside it all looks wonderful and you look in control but under the surface you are scrambling around trying to keep it together and be on top of everything. No one sees that though and you would be under the impression that the teachers are specialists in their subject and know what they are talking about.

I did a SCITT years ago so can't really advise as I am sure it has all changed. You spend longer in school than the traditional university PGCE route and more is expected of you in starting teaching. Not sure what happened and whether it is due to falling numbers or if it's not seen as a good route, but a few near me have stopped running.

I do suggest you go to different schools to volunteer in some more deprived areas as from the sounds of your own children's school it is well resourced and the same with the primary school you are basing your experience on (the fact you mention all the TAs). This is not realistic and may be why so many people don't think you are taking on board any negative comments.

Thanks so much for this. Could you possibly ask her whether she went down an ‘official’ training route like SCITT, or whether it was the school’s independent choice?

I did in school training (the old Graduate Teacher Programme). My following remarks should be viewed in the context that the training provider weren't great (Ofsted later made rude remarks about them).

Pros: while teacher training was general (very general), I was already doing the job so knew there would be a job for me
Getting paid; not going into debt
I had a lot of say in the placements as I was basically left to organise them myself
There was encouragement to start a Masters in Education, which I enjoyed (although finishing it with no support was more challenging - but I ended up qualified to PGDE level which I was happy about as I did feel it was lesser that the course didn't offer PGCE otherwise).
It was fairly quick. I was allowed to do two terms instead of three as I'd already taught for two terms when I started.
No employer since has cared in the slightest where or how I trained, just that I have the magic letters QTS.

Cons: doing the training on top of teaching yourself to teach was a lot of work and it wasn't always obvious how the training related to my specific needs or environment (as it didn't and wasn't intended to)
The professional tutors were a bit on the odd side, none were specialists in my subject and one was a bully and decided it was her role to give me lectures on motherhood! (I was pregnant)
I spent a lot of time planning and teaching not very good lessons on subjects I had no intention of ever teaching again (because my subject is a mostly KS5 one yet teacher training is based on National Curriculum subjects)
The "subject enhancement course" I was made to do was entirely useless
I didn't meet anyone else training to teach my subject (or not through the course, anyway)
There was almost nothing about behaviour management or SEN although that was probably true of most ITT 15 years ago)
There was no acknowledgement at all that I brought any skills from my previous years of work - they treat you like a complete tabula rasa, but I've drawn really heavily on those skills
I got a bit of flak (and still do) from teachers who trained in more conventional ways

I’m so sorry about your DH, that must have been very tough for you all.

Just as a point of clarity, schools have to have a contract with an ITT provider (including independent schools). There's no such thing as standalone training.

Completely accept that assessment. I clearly don’t know what’s going on behind closed doors.

I volunteer in a deprived area. The resourcing is due to the very extreme levels of need. No idea how it is financed, and obviously I am a free extra body.

you’re right, my children’s school is in a much less deprived area, though as with most state schools, it has a very varied catchment and a lot of need.

It is a piecemeal and complex system and difficult to get a straight answer (continual government fiddling about hasn't helped).

It's not your imagination!!

It was definitely an official route. I don't think it's possible to do on the job training unofficially. And she didn't do the training at the school where she was a TA, as they weren't part of the scheme. She did go back there to teach after she qualified though.

I think what she did is what is now called SCITT. I can't remember what it was called back then. My school was never involved in this kind of training, so it was as new to me as it was to her.

I will say it again. Contact Now Teach. A charity co founded by Lucy Kellaway to help people into teaching as a second career. Through the various different routes. They were invaluable to my DH when he made the move in 2022..and are still a support network for him.