AIBU to think getting into teaching should be easier?

[LavenderFields7]

My friend has a PhD in stem, is trying to get into teaching A-levels at local school but everywhere wants PGCE. AIBU to think it’s ridiculous to want someone so qualified to have to study another year, fork out £10,000 and work unpaid for a year? She has a Level 3 teaching qualification and has taught uni level students.

Only LA maintained state schools require teachers to have a PGCE, by the way.

Private schools and academy schools (i.e. most secondary schools in England) can legally hire and pay people as teachers without them having a teaching qualification.

The reality is that this is increasingly rare, and usually only done in academy chains as a cost-cutting measure (you can pay unqualified teachers much less). Private schools need to be able to sell a well-qualified teaching staff to parents to justify the fees in an increasingly squeezed market, so anyone with a PhD in a private school would, 99% of the time, have a PGCE too. I've worked in independent schools for over a decade and never come across a colleague without a PGCE. The 'private schools can hire anyone they like' line that gets trotted out on mumsnet all the time is a myth.

PhDs do not train you to teach, they train you to research. They also give you a very narrow subject specialism that is largely useless in the secondary school classroom, so it's not really a passport to a teaching job. It's not surprising to me that the OP's friend hasn't found a school willing to take her on, as she'd need someone to mentor her and train her.

However, as others have said, she'll very easily get onto a graduate teacher training programme, which is pretty well remunerated these days. After that first year, she will be able to pick and choose jobs, as science teachers are as rare as hen's teeth these days (unless she's Biology). It's short term pain for long term gain.

What I will say though, as someone who has been teaching for a long time, is that the PGCE is not really worth the paper it's written on. The benefit of a teacher training year is the learning on the job from experienced teachers, who guide you through the process of how to plan and teach effectively. The academic side of a PGCE is a load of bollocks - pedagogy is a pseudoscience, after all - as are MA degrees in Education and Education Management and so on - teaching is instinctive and relational, and strategies that work for one child don't for another. Teaching can't be learnt from books and writing essays - good teaching is a mixture of natural talent and experience. It can be done very well by people without a teaching qualification - having a teaching qualification doesn't mean you're any good at the job!

I know two people who did PGCE (after degrees in ceramics and drama) who are struggling with the ‘people’ side of teaching. I suspect the kids in their classes aren’t having the best experience either.

They don't require the PGCE but the Qualified Teacher Status (QTS) part. That's the only bit you need. Some Uni's offer the PGCE without QTS - but that wouldn't allow you to teach as a qualified teacher as you wouldn't have the QTS part.

As others have said, if your friend is thinking of training to teach a STEM subject, they should receive a bursary, which will cover fees and give them some left over for the year.

I like teaching A level, it's a very different skill to teaching 11/12 year olds though. Your friend would need to be able to do both, unless they chose to teach, for example, in a 6th form college.

Teaching is a skill.

You can have all the subject knowledge in the world, but that won't help you manage the demands and behaviour of up to 30 16-18yos.
Yes, they've chosen to be there, but they're still teenagers with everything that "being a teenager" entails.

You’re equating the ability to achieve a PhD with the ability to teach. They aren’t the same and secondary schools are looking for skilled teachers across the age range, not someone who fancies teaching A level.

The worst teacher I ever saw, was the most qualified. He had a PhD but was unable to manage a year 7 class and quite unable to teach in a way that the children understood.

Knowing a subject and being able to teach it are two entirely different things. There are a ridiculous amount of hopeless teachers around these days so if anything it should be more difficult for people to get into the job.

YABU.

Of course teachers need to have actual training in how to teach.

I don’t know why the teaching profession is so undervalued in this country, but it speaks volumes that even people who want to do it think it’s not with training for

Exactly!

OP hasn't been back I see.

There are bursaries for Science, which OP's friend would know had they done any research at all.

I think it's appalling that someone with no experience in teaching children thinks they can rock up at a school with an academic qualification only and think they'll be welcomed with open arms. Everyone wants to teach A level, because the children are there through choice and they tend to be the more academic sort. Mind-boggling that someone with a PhD has no common sense really.

This.... you wouldn't work as a doctor without being qualified as a doctor..it's insulting to teachers to suggest that anyone can do it just because they have the subject knowledge. There is more to it than that.

Having a pHD in an academic subject doesn't mean you can teach it. It's a particular skill and everyone teaching should have training in child development and an understanding of pedagogy.
The worse teachers are those who know a subject well but have no idea about either child development or how to explain their subject to others or understand why other people may find it difficult.

also schools don’t generally want somebody just to teach A levels. There wouldn’t be enough teaching hours to fill their timetable unless several classes per year and other staff would also be teaching A level. Just wouldn’t work unless it’s a subject just offered at A level.
If they want to just teach A level they will need to work at a FE college or 6th form college.

Why just KS5?
Does she think it'll be easier and she won't need to use behaviour or learning strategies?
Does she think she'll just be going through past papers or text books?
Does she think the students will do the required reading to prepare for each session?
Does she think she won't have to chivvy them on if they fall behind?
Does she think she won't have to explain why they aren't meeting their targets at every data capture?
Has she got the emotional intelligence to support members of her tutor group when they are going through a break up or dealing with a bereavement?
Does she know where to direct her students if they require additional help for what ever reason?

If she's STEM her pgce will be paid for.

YABVVVU.
The PGCE teaches you how to teach! I've an Early Years PGCE and do you think I learned my colours, the days of the week, numbers to 20, how to add, what 'taking away' means or that ice melts when it warn, or how yo sound out the letters in the word 'cat'? No, I learned the pedagogical frameworks and theories on how children learn, how to pace a lesson, how to break learning into chunks, from minute to minute, week by week, term by term. I learned how to manage behavior and motivate students. Literally ever early years teacher knows the stuff they are teaching before the did a PGCE but how come not everyone could do a good job of teaching in an early years setting?

Exactly, because they haven't been trained in TEACHING!

I wish people would get their head around the fact that subject knowledge is only a small portion of what makes a good teacher and that, oftentimes, experts in the field with no teacher training tend to struggle hugely and often fail abysmally.

I'm a retired secondary head. In my career, some of the worst teachers were those with the best degrees and some of the best had qualified in the days when you could do a 3 year teaching certificate that wasn't a degree.

It'll be piss-easy for her to get into teaching. She'll get a massive tax free bursary and everything. Very hard to fail a PGCE too.

Thinking she can waltz into a local school and only teach A-level will be a bigger challenge.

If she does do a PGCE, she'll have to teach KS3 and 4 on teaching practice, too.

However genius she may be, she needs to learn how to pass that knowledge on to the required standard.

She may be “so qualified” with her PhD in STEM,
but she’s not qualified to be a teacher is she? And that’s the job she is going for.
Some people think just because they are clever, they can teach. And it’s not always the way. No matter what other qualifications she has, if she is going for a job as a teacher, then she needs a proper teaching qualification. I don’t know why that’s hard for you to grasp.

I used to mentor PGCE students. We failed a couple. And a few more had to do extended placement due to not meeting the standards with evidence.

I agree with pp. It's certainly not "piss easy". It's challenging and demanding and I have failed more than one student. Last year we put one on extended supervision. They didn't meet the criteria.

How long ago was that?

Because there are certainly ECTs in the system now who should have not got through a PGCE.

That's been my experience, funnily enough. Our 2 worst teachers at the moment have Science PhDs.

This. It's not enough to be good at your subject you have to learn to teach it.