Something EVERY parent of a child in a UK State school should know about

[QualifiedTeacher]

The UK Government has new proposals to allow non qualified teachers to teach in UK schools. This means our children?s education may be placed in the hands of teachers without basic qualifications such as English and Maths GSCE let alone a Bachelors degree. This policy will mainly be affecting children from the lower economic backgrounds and the reasoning behind employing unqualified teachers is simply because it costs less.

I have attached an epetition which gives more information and is asking for signatures to oppose the use of unqualified teachers in UK State schools. If the numbers signing this petition is large enough, we can get the debate discussed in the UK Parliament. Please help and protect the education of all UK children in State schools.

Thanks

Sorry, don't understand why you think this will disporoprtionately affect children from low economic backgrounds? Schools in deprived areas have a higher per capita funding, so it will surely be those in more affluent areas that will be affected, if the idea is to save costs.. In any case, surely the proposal is not to provide useless teachers, but simply not require them to go through eight months of theoretical 'training' that delivers no benefit to the classroom?
Often on here we are told that independent schools are a Bad Thing because they can employ unqualified teachers, but somehow people are still prepared to pay for them - if the teaching is already rubbish in independent schools as a result, why would they do that? If teh teaching is not rubbish, then a good thing for state schools to have the same freedom to hire whomever they want.

Not UK schools. Won't apply in Scotland as Education is a devolved area. Just didn't want your petition to be factually incorrect

Oh, have just noticed your user name
so actually your last sentence

Please help and protect the education of all UK children in State schools.
should actaully read:

Please help to keep a closed shope for 'qualified' teachers

I would want to know the criteria thes "unqualified" teachers would have to meet in order to be employed before I signed a petition.

I find it hard to believe someone with no maths and english gcses would be teaching as nowadays you need that basic level for jobs such as waitressing/cleaning etc.

This seems very like a mountain out of molehill situation.

Dear Mrs Guy

Thanks for being the first to respond. I only wish that the government would ensure that only teachers with GSCE Maths and English and a degree in a relevant subject was allowed to teach, like they mainly do in private schools but this has not and is not the case.

In the academic year ending 2011, the number of qualfiied teachers in our schools decreased by 10,000 and in the same period the number of Teaching Assistants and Higher Level Teaching Assistants, TAs and HLTAs and Cover Supervisors, CSs, increased by 5,000 and 5,000 in total (i.e. 10,000). TA, HLTAs and CSs are taking over qualified teachers posts, especially PPA time in primary schools and now some of them are actually doing senior posts such as Head of Year i.e. a job that involves supervising teachers. This is placing many experienced teachers, who cost more to lose their jobs and threatening the education of State school children.

Just to put you better in the picture, in London a HLTA post may be advertised as £19,000 a year but as it usually pro rata therefore at 43 weeks and at 27.5 hours a week, the take home pay will be reduced to around £11,000. A qualified teachers' salaries in Inner London is around £27,000, a teacher with more than 5 years teaching experience costs around £37,000 and there are those on even higher salaries. More experienced teachers are being replaced by HLTAs, who earn MUCH higher than TAs and CSs.

I hope this helps clarifies the picture and helps you understand that the proposals will allow schools to compromise certain students' learning and attainment.

the only people who believe a person can do that job with no training have never been in a school. It is HARD WORK

So, do children in independent schools get a worse teaching deal now?

In an independent school, you might get a failed academic allowed to teach, who would be fine with a small group of motivated children. Might not, to be fair, but might well pootle along ok.

In a state school, this won't work so well with larger classes and more diverse needs in the classroom. I also think they're thinking more along the lines of ex army, ex industrialists etc rather than people who know lots about a subject.

As a state school parent, this would already be something which would put me off independent schools, and I certainly don't want it for my children.

I have to admit, I felt that the response would be like it this, i.e. it's all about qualified teachers losing their jobs therefore it is insignificant.

I personally would like to have measures put in place to ensure that all teachers in schools had at least GSCE Maths and English and a degree in a relevant subject, but this is not always the case.

In Scotland, fortunately only qualified teachers with QTS will be allowed to teach in State schools. Sorry if stating UK was misleading.

QY your 'clarification' is all about teachers' salaries which does indeed clarify your position on this initiative, and the motive behind the petition.

Sorry QT, not QY

I agree with you, op

Last I heard, all the research pointed to teachers with masters producing better results (based on international research)

Of course, in this country many of the ruling elite will have been taught by unqualified staff but I don't think we need to think terribly hard to see that factors other than teaching qualifications or lack of might have something to do with the successful academic record of private schools.

Our country faces a choice and it is the ruling elite making that choice. When there are not enough jobs for everyone, do we want the best people for the job to get it (in which case we need to educate everyone well) or do we want the children of the ruling elite to have those jobs (in which case, how can we make sure everyone else is badly educated and so not a threat). Guess what they are choosing?

I agree with you, op

Last I heard, all the research pointed to teachers with masters producing better results (based on international research)

Of course, in this country many of the ruling elite will have been taught by unqualified staff but I don't think we need to think terribly hard to see that factors other than teaching qualifications or lack of might have something to do with the successful academic record of private schools.

Our country faces a choice and it is the ruling elite making that choice. When there are not enough jobs for everyone, do we want the best people for the job to get it (in which case we need to educate everyone well) or do we want the children of the ruling elite to have those jobs (in which case, how can we make sure everyone else is badly educated and so not a threat). Guess what they are choosing?

Dear JuliaScurr and Theoriginalsteamingnit,

I hope you and others sign the petition to help get this issue properly debated in the House of Commons. If you notice, the government announced it on Friday 27th July, the opening day of the Olympics and when Parliament and the schools had closed for the summer.

I think your post is disingenuous. The issue is whether they will be allowed to teach without having done post-grad teacher training, nobody is suggesting a 16 yr old without basic qualifications will be allowed to be in charge of a class.

Teachers with masters, yes. Because this would suggest someone capable of intellectual rigor and actually able to spell/ rationalize an argument. And someone who actually wanted to teach, as they were willing to accept the pay and conditions even with a higher level qualification. It isn't exactly indicative of teaching qualifications being superior though, is it?

Some of the apparently 'qualified' teachers can barely manage primary level knowledge and standards. I suspect they aren't the ones going on to masters. Minority, much?

I was offered a raft of places for teaching training if I managed to scrape two e's at a level.

'qualified' leaves a lot to be desired, in my honest opinion.

I can see that it looks like a cost savings measure, which I'm never keen on, per se. But I'm equally unhappy about the standards of 'qualified' teachers, so can't see that unqualified ones would be any worse. They may even be better. I suspect it will attract graduates who have had a better all round education to get on degrees that you actually need decent results for, but that can't be doing with a teaching qualification. It's no different to GTP in that sense. They aren't going to drag in the cheapest joes they can find in the UBO line, and chuck me in front of a class. To suggest they are is just attempting to whip up hysteria.

And disingenuous is right. I was going to use that myself, but decided it was one of the non-U words on MN these days. but happy to echo

Dear Mrs Guy

Yes, every State school teachers' post in the UK (excluding Scotland) is at risk from this. I don't know if you are aware that it is now possible for Head Teachers to be recruited who do not have a teaching qualification. Mercibucket understands the situation and thank you for your response. Of course the kids in the so called better schools are going to get properly qualified teachers to support them who are paid proper salaries. Some experienced qualified teachers with Masters degree like myself may be willing to work voluntarily or as TAs, HLTAs, or CSs, for £11,000 or less but others like me won't and will be leaving the profession.

As well as being a qualified teacher, I am also a parent and fortunately am able to make up for the decencies in my own children?s education. This a parental issue first and foremost and one that every parent need to think about.

What I understand is that the DfE has given the go ahead for academies to employ unqualified staff which puts them in line with independent and free schools.

It's all part of going back to the old days - my mother taught in a primary school for a year post A-levels whilst waiting to be old enough to do nursing. No training whatsoever. She also marked a few O-level exam papers....

If schools can't do a good job with trained teachers, are they really going to do better using people so uncommitted to the idea of teaching that they don't want to do any training? I thought they'd already introduced a teacher training scheme where teachers trained on the job? Isn't that supposed to get around the issue of people with experience in other fields not wanting to spend time studying the theory before they are allowed any real experience? So what's this extra thing? Permanent jobs for people without having to spend any money on training them???? Jobs for people without the contamination of training on the law around child protection, etc? Jobs for people who haven't had their skills contaminated by political indoctrination by biased teacher training providers?

OP, I will, but your link doesn't work yet!

as i don't imagine there will be floods of people with no PGCE and no relevant experience going into teaching, please highlight what you anticipate will happen?

might this end the situation that a teacher with years of independent sector experience but no PGCE couldn't teach in a state school?

As it only applies to academies they still won't be able to teach in most state schools EdgarOlymPic