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

I did my PGCE in 2009 and then the final year (which was really the final 4 months) as the whole course only lasted a year was marked as Masters level. We did a research project and several units/essays at this level. It was considered as the first year of a Masters in education and allowed direct access into the second year if anybody chose to. Most wanted to gain employment but a couple went onto the course.

Most PGCEs have what's called Masters Credits which can be used towards MEd, MTeach or other Masters degrees. The whole thing can be marked at H level which is undergraduate level or M level which is Masters level.

If marked at H level and you pass you are awarded a PgCE with no Masters credits, if marked at M level and you pass it is called a PGCE with Masters credits.

The PGCE I did had Masters credits and was a very intensive course plus all the teaching hours too. I think they are mostly the same amount of work. The Cert Ed did the same amount but obviously at a lower level as they didn't have the degree and hence didn't qualify for Masters credit.

I still don't think this prepared me for the work I did as a teacher. Anybody can sit in lectures and learn theory, for me the realisation dawned when I had my own classes. This will be exactly the same for those entering the profession without a PGCE. I guarantee most of the level 1 students I taught couldn't care less if their teacher was qualified or not. The tables and chairs would still be hurled until mutual respect existed.
Also what about the qualified teachers like me who are being forced into teaching subjects they have no knowledge in? Are we suitable because we are teachers?

Special note to Abra1d

The G is in lowercase in one and uppercase in the other on purpose because that is how it is written out i.e. PgCE and PGCE. It notes whether it was awarded at undergraduate or Masters level.

So please don't mark that down as yet another qualified teacher with QTS' typo.

Thanking you in advance.

Some questions to qualified teachers:

1. Roughly what percentage of qualified teachers currently teaching would you consider to be 'bad' teachers?

1. Does the system allow for these 'bad' teachers to be removed easily?

1. In the case of shortages of qualified English and Maths teachers, would you prefer to seek qualified teachers from overseas or would you prefer to let unqualified people in this country with appropriate skills do the job?

1. In the case of temporary absences, would you prefer a class to miss a lesson or would you prefer to let unqualified people with appropriate skills do the job?

1 it really depends on what you mean by "bad" teachers. I've personally met 3 who I wouldn't want near my own children. One had already resigned to start a new career as a prison officer, a second was removed from teaching and the third was given lots of support by his school and is worshipped in his current position (by parents)

2 as number 1 it depends in the definition of "bad" from v easy to v difficult.

3 I'd like to see people with relevant backgrounds trained on the job not just thrown in at the deep end to sink or swim and posibly fail children in the process. Some will be natural teachers but others will find it more difficult to transfer their knowledge into lessons.

4 I would prefer the school finds someone with the skills to teach rather than employ a cover supervisor with GCSE maths to teach A levels for half a term simply because its cheaper(and they can pocket the insurance)

In which industries are "bad" employees of graduate level and above easy to get rid of?

I just don't think questions 3 and 4 are relevant cumber. There is not a shortage of teachers and if there were then THAT is what should be addressed (by recruitment, pay, incentives etc).

There is no other profession where such questions would be asked. Can you ever envisage asking whether we could use orderlies or people off the streets to complete the work of doctors, nurses or the armed forces?

Is the message that our children's education is less important and our teachers are less important than other areas of their lives then?

And when you employ unqualified people to do the job of qualfied people then you undercut both the qualified people and the value of their qualifications as well as exploitin the unqualified people. That is fundamentally wrong. In no other sphere would it be considered acceptable.

I would strongly object to having either my pupils or my own children taught by people who are not qualified to do so (and who have not actually chosen to teach). I would strongly defend any support staff who were being exploited in this way.

We pay our taxes on the understanding that our children will be educated by teachers don't we? Just as we pay our taxes on the understanding that we will be treated by appropriate health professionals if we visit the hospital or our GP. TBH, I cannot believe that any parent or employee in state education wouldn't see these proposals as an absolute betrayal.

And don't be fooled. It's unlikely to be the children of middle class parents in top sets in good schools who are assigned unqualified teachers. It will inevitably be the kids who are already disadvantaged and most need expert tuition.

On 'bad' teachers I'd also remind you that teaching can be a long, long career. It would be quite possible to begin that career as a pretty bad teacher (or end it in that way especially since you're now expected to teach until you're 68). I've known colleagues to have blips for example after a bereavement or where they've landed in a school which isn't right for them for whatever reason. But you're talking about human beings here and you cannot simply 'get rid' of them. Good schools and good departments should be able to support teachers in such a way that they are all enabled to do a great job.

Again, I think the wording and the implications here show a lack of respect for teachers and education which is typical but which isn't typically demonstrated for other professions. On the one hand, there is an assumption that anyone (qualified or not) can walk into a classroom and be a good teacher and on the other hand an assumption that there are these people who are 'bad teachers' (almost as if this is what they set out to be) who should be 'got rid of'. It doesn't square.

It is, indeed, ironic, that some people complain that their child's individual needs aren't adequately catered for, that teachers are doing a bad job, that teachers can't even spell or punctuate, and then ask why such people are paid so much to produce so little, and then go on to conclude that we should pay the going rate for people who can't spell or punctuate and don't know how to teach. One wonders why these people bother to complain about the teaching in the first place, when they are apparently getting what they want, but just think their taxes are paying too much for it.

In my experience, the vast majority of teachers want and are capable of doing a really amazing job. Their lives are not made easy by the Govt's conflicting demands and constant initiatives and the lack of respect with which they are treated in society as a whole. Some of the attitudes on this thread demonstrate that perfectly. I'd say more parental support is one of the top 3 things which would improve pupils' education and outcomes and by that I mean sticking up and respecting teachers but also accepting that we are all responsible for educating children. Respecting teachers means valuing the job they do and understanding how difficult it is. Rather than taking away training, teachers need to be better trained (one of my bugbears is that INSET days are often used to roll out the latest Govt initiative which might well be the undoing of the previous one instead of really working with individual and groups of teachers on what they do need) and this is just one area where we should supporting teachers.

Teachers would perhaps be more respected if we didn't see the annual disgraceful shower at the NUT conference, where speakers are bood, ignored (teachers sitting reading newspapers during sessions), heckled, slow handclapped etc. 'Professionals' show respect to others.
There is also a hysterical rant every time any suggestion is made to change the school year ('teachers need the long holiday!') regardless of evidence relating to pupils educational benefit, or pensions ('teachers can't be expected to work any longer!') - because of course teaching is uniquely tough job .
And that's even without the pronouncements of the ridiculous Christine Blower 'independent schools should be abolished because they get better results' - some logic in that...

Now, I wonder whether independent schools, with their vastly superior results, would like to give up their longer-than-state-schools' holidays???? I think the supposed "educational benefit" of shorter holidays is that they give parents less of a role in their children's upbringing.

A couple more posts from Mrs G and I will have teacher stereotype bingo.

Working in a school environment, I know I wouldn't want to do a teachers job for a pension. So many needs to be met at one time, so many 'customers' to satisfy and so many levels of management/standards of behaviour to conform to. I couldn't do it. Wouldn't want to do it.

I have loved my TA job to date, working in small groups and one to one with the children who are struggling to keep up with their peers. I have never classed what I do as a career, because I didn't want to progress and was more than happy to do what I was doing. I have had great results, which has bought me more pleasure than any high powered job I held previously and I have had some excellent results with 'my' kids.

I flippantly referred to getting a job in Tescos earlier in this thread and was told that I was whingey, self righteous, and how dare I assume I would get a job there. They want good customer service, something that it was intimated I wouldn't be able to provide. I am actually from a customer service background, but that's irrelevant to the argument in hand. The point I was trying to make was that the level of pay I receive for the job I do is insanely low, which is fine, but the amount of responsibility I am expected to take on is becoming increasingly onerous.

For the past few years I have worked above my job level, done my own planning, put in many hours outside of my paid hours, to make the job I do is as professional as I can make it with the skills I have. This, all at a level of pay that most people would find untenable. I have never worried about the pay. I loved the work BUT I am now looking for alternative employment. I don't want even more responsibility. Working with those kids who have emotional and behavioural difficulties hasn't been a problem. Working with the kids who are on the autistic spectrum has been a delight. Juggling a class of 30? Not within my skill range.

There are a lot of people who have read this thread and have interpreted that unqualified means people who are educated to degree or masters standard but don't have teaching qualifications. I am living through this as a person who isn't educated to degree standard and has specific knowledge of the education system relating to the small groups I work with. Putting people like me in front of a class for up to 5 days is farcical. I see no alternative but to leave the field of education and find alternative work.

flapper

I wrote to David Clarke, the gentleman who wrote the epetition that MN had to take down and said that since many teachers (I read 40% on website) are applying for HLTAs, TAs etc positions and whoever is working as a TA whether they are a qualified teacher (QT) or not, is being exploited and hadn't he look at the issue of contacting the TAs' unions like Unison etc. and looking to ensure that they had better terms and conditions.

I read an interesting post on another site where a teacher said something to the effect of, 'there are so many teachers happily going along on the permanent long term contracts with perks gravy train that are totally oblivious to what is going on.' I can't help but agree.

TAs are exploited and it is not right and giving them our jobs to do, at peanut salaries whether they feel up to it or not, whether they have degrees and GSCEs in English and Maths is appalling. We as QTs are already complaining of having too much to do and getting too little pay and shifting that burden on to the TAs is unacceptable.

The TAs who are willing to work as QTs with no training have no idea what they are getting themselves into. But the TAs, like you and others who can see this for exactly what it is, I am grateful.

I would not want to do my job for a TAs salary or voluntarily. I believe that teachers deserve to be paid a decent salary and that expecting that and only that in no way indicates that they are unsuitable to teach.

A HT said to a friend of mine who she did not offer a job that my friend would be 'welcomed to work voluntarily at her school.' Working voluntarily as a QT is now being considered 'a sign of commitment,' when many QTs may have children, disabilities etc and can not met the financial needs of doing it.

:( @ flapper feeling she has no alternative but to leave education and even :( er that so many good TAs will feel the same.

Just out of curiosity do most TAs tend to work with low ability/sen pupils? Ime TAs work with a range of abilities

Could you imagine how many weekly TAs' salaries could be paid if a HT worked voluntarily for just one day, or for just one week?

I have asked this question on many sites, if you know of any HT or SMT that has agreed to take a pay cut in order to maintain staff in schools (any type support, teaching etc) I would really like to know.

I know of several CEOs of charities that have done so.

In my school the majority of TA time is low ability/SEN oriented. I personally don't mind this, though some of the more qualified TAs aren't happy about it. I feel it gives me the ability to actually make a difference, the reasoning behind me taking the job in the first place. I have also found that the children with SEN and behavioural difficulties are the most interesting and most rewarding kids to work with.

If I do get another job I have at least one child I'll have to pop in to see every so often at school as he's become like one of my own. He and his mum are just inspirational.

I also have a child who has been moved off my roster as he's now working at the expected level, who I am deeply worried about. He has ADHD and some home difficulties and I have seen him blossom with just a couple of hours of support every week. He is just starting to believe in himself and now his support has been removed. It's a real worry and the only reason why I'm second guessing whether I should go.

QT our DH has agreed to work 1/3 of her management days to allow a colleague to go part time. This will save 1 x day@ UPS2 +ppa.

Qualified teacher. You say that QTs are complaining of too much to do and that the TA's are taking the burden. Whom do you propose should take this burden then?

Why are teachers complaining so much? What is this heavy burden?

Perhaps if you were happy for TA's to do some of your work, you wouldn't have such a burden.

I don't think many TA's go around with their eyes shut and re quite aware of the work of the teacher. So would be quite knowledgable about what they were getting involved with.

From my experience its the TA's that do most of the teaching anyway. Mostly 1 to 1 but without them half the kids in the class wouldn't get the subject matter being taught by the teacher.

TAs, not TA's.

Sorry, it's getting on my nerves.

That must be where I'm going wrongmorethanpotatoprints I don't have a TA