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

Interesting that mostly the posts revolve around teachers pay,so as I said previously, this petition should be re-worded more honestly - teachers are scared of the harsh rays of sunlight coming in on their 'magic' and revealing that you do not need a 'tick-in-the-box' pgce to be an inspiring and effective teacher - dishonest to pretend this petition is about children's education.

That's utterly NOT what my post said MrsGuy, which leads me to think that you ALSO have an agenda (of course you do, every one does - mine, as I said, is the quality of the profession and the care offered to the kids) I think it would be fair to ask what your agenda is?

Do you know anything about PGCEs, mrsguy?

Not really a fair accusation given the content of posts, MrsGuy - I don't think anyone reading the full thread will agree. Your position and axe to grind was clear from your very first post.

I have worked as a teacher as it happens, but then chose a different career. I have been a pupil in state schools and have DC in state and Independent schools, and I am passionately interested in learning, not just 'getting qualifications'.
I was offered a place on a PGCE course at a presitigious institute. I turned it down. During my interview (for a languages speciality) they honed in with great excitement on the fact that I had a maths A level, and tried to convince me I should be a maths teacher. I explained that did not feel I could confidently teach able children, I enjoy maths, but do not have the spark and passion for maths that children deserve in a teacher. They told me airily (and not joking) that it was only necessary to stay once chapter ahead of the children to get them through their maths gcses. I found that profoundly cynical and depressing - So much for 'professionalism' in PGCE training...children deserve better

'teachers are scared of the harsh rays of sunlight coming in on their 'magic' '

What an utterly bizarre take on this whole thing MrsG.

If people want to teach, they should train to teach.

If people are good enough to teach then they should be paid as teachers.

The notion that this is a good thing and that somehow it will bring in better teachers by allowing in people who are unqualified and paying them less than qualified teachers for doing the same job is utterly bizarre.

"they honed in with great excitement on the fact that I had a maths A level, and tried to convince me I should be a maths teacher. I explained that did not feel I could confidently teach able children, I enjoy maths, but do not have the spark and passion for maths that children deserve in a teacher."

I agree, being good at a subject doesn't always translate into being good at teaching that subject to others, which is the flaw in the idea that anyone can teach. Subject knowledge is important but it is only half the picture.

and lol re 'axe to grind' - I'd like all children to be fired with enthusiasm by teachers who really care about learning, not just ticking boxes until the pension kicks in. Someone further down said teacher need maths gcses because of the number crunching in data driven schools - would be good to see teachers agitating against that - but sadly it is only the pay issue that gets petitons generated...

Really? You were offered a place on a maths PGCE at a 'prestigious institution' without a maths degree?

It was a pcge, I applied as a language specialist, at the interview they tried to 'turn' me... - presumably they didn't have a glut of maths specialists applying.

knitknack a colleague was offered a place on a secondary maths pgce at a "prestigious" university without a degree of any sort

Mrs Guy, if you wanted to train to be a Maths teachers now, you would probably have to have a Maths degree. The bursaries also have changed, before it was £9,000 for studying a for a PGCE in Maths, now it's £9,000 if you have a 1st, £6,000 if you have a 2.1 etc.

The flexibility of allowing teachers with Engineering degrees to train as Maths or Physics teachers in the past is changing. There was such a shortage of Maths teachers that the government offered courses to non-Maths graduates to train for a year to gain a undergraduate level in Maths and then do their PGCE in Maths. Such schemes have stopped.

Regardless of your opinions of teachers and the motives of the epetition, which I did not write and I did state that I felt some parents would percieve it as just a teachers' pay issue, having unqualified teachers who will be earning around £11,000 p.a. teaching children will not be a good thing. As a parent, I have to make concessions for that because this is NOW the government policy and we have little time to affect this change.

Schools already prefer to take on younger, newly qualified teachers because they are cheaper than older ones and those of you who believe they are going to take on unqualified teachers that cost the same as more experienced ones, better have a reality check. Schools in the leafty areas will continue to recruit the best i.e. most qualified, best trained etc. Schools in the deprived areas may be forced to consider getting burly CSs and and TAs to 'manage' lower ability classes. I went to a training seminar for TAs and CSs and they were recommending some of them do specialist training for conflict resolution in schools as this becoming popular i.e. learning how to restrain children within the government guidelines. And these guys could not be working as unqualified teachers and managing whole classes.

And 50% of all schools are academies and the numbers are set to rise. Some academies still have the word 'school' in their title, but they are academies.

As someone said earlier, unqualified teachers could work in Tesco, or for the council, earn more and come home in the evenings and not do anything i.e. relax, watch TV, go out for a drink etc., and not have to mark or prepare lessons until 3.00am and then get up at 7.00am to start again.

If anything can be gained from this post, let is just be an awareness of what is going on in schools and parents ask head teachers, 'Is this person a qualified teacher?', 'Does he/she have QTS?', if not, 'Are they graduates?', if not, 'Do they have GSCE English and Maths?' You may not get the answers but will be able to 'read' a lot my the head teachers reaction.

Sorry, so many typos today, I'm not feeling my best.

The burly CSs etc with the conflict resolution training will be able to become unqualified teachers under this new policy and manage whole classes and there are already unqualified teachers without GSCE Maths and English working in schools and covering classes. There will just be more.

another long post all about money...£9,000 this, £6,000 that.
and what's with the scaremongering about 'burly' staff [puzzled] - are teachers supposed to be weedy/tweedy/besectacled cliches?

I really wish we might discuss this without all the dogma. I can see both sides - we all want excellent teaching in our schools, and teacher training plays a huge part in this. I certainly wouldn't want to see the majority of our teachers in primary schools without some specific teacher training.

However, there is a situation with certain subjects - particularly modern languages from primary through to secondary where there simply are not enough teachers able to do this. Why not let someone without a QTA teach our DC's French, Spanish, Mandarin etc?

Also, high level ICT, Maths, Physics, Music, Art at secondary school - these are specialist subjects. Is there not a case for getting some actual practitioners in to teach the subject?

Genuine question - can anyone explain why this might be a bad idea?

QT this from DfE says bursaries for graduates training as maths teachers with a first is £20,000, 2:1 is £15,000 and 2:2 is £12,000.

Well i did look into teaching recently, but was under the impression i couldn't set foot on a PGCE course without Maths. (I have an English degree)
I have a bit of a phobia about Maths, was completely crap at it, and can't even face the thought of a class so would have to probably pay for a private tutor.

I thought Maths and English O Level/GCSE were indisputable before training.

I have A* GCSEs in English, Maths and Science, a double first from Oxford in English and 2 masters degrees.
I've worked in communications for 4 years, decided to move into education and have been a TA for five months. Numerous colleagues from my school have told me they think I'll be a good teacher.

Qualified Teacher- would you let me teach your kids English without QTS?

bowerbird (lovely name) you will hear a resounding silence in answer to your question, because it is self-evidently not a bad thing, but is not in the financial interests of the existing teaching establishment,and so it will be ignored.
I think diversity ought to be celebrated - burly children of burly parents would beneift from seeing people like them represented in teaching. And if more people come in from industry and commerce that also has to be a good thing. Why not part-tme specialist teachers of specific subjects? There are many semi-retired people who could usefully be employed to widen the perspective of children and their parents (and indeed teachers...)

Esker do you think you are above teacher training? Genuine question.

Bowerbird, there is no longer a teacher shortage it is a myth. There are over 50,000 unemployed teachers and 20% of teachers are doing supply i.e. not in a permanent contract.

Juules, training options vary. What is stated on the webpage may be for in school, i.e. a graduate training scheme. What is not mentioned is that the student may have to pay £9,000 for their training fees (some in school schemes require the teacher takes a PGCE and attends university some days), which when deducted from the £20,000 isn't so grand. Pre 2007, trainee teachers did not have to pay for PGCEs, after that it was about £3,400 in fees now it's £9,000 and there are less training places available although the government is still training twice as many teachers as is needed every year and the number of teachers who qualify and do not get a teaching post is rising every year.

So with a surplus of qualified teachers who the government has trained via tax payers money i.e. bursaries of up to £9,000, maintainence grants of up to approximately £3,000, council tax exemptions and more funding if disabled or parents etc, the government is suggesting bringing in unqualified teachers to undermine the chances of those state funded and trained qualified teachers getting jobs.

Will the state ever get a return on the investment they made in training these qualified teachers?

A question I ask is why do they bother to train us in the first place? There are so many newly qualified teacher yet to start their first teaching post THREE years after graduation. Because of the problems with teacher recruitment, the government has now extended the length of time a teacher can do induction to FIVE years because so many still haven't started.

I think diversity ought to be celebrated - burly children of burly parents would beneift from seeing people like them represented in teaching. And if more people come in from industry and commerce that also has to be a good thing. Why not part-tme specialist teachers of specific subjects? There are many semi-retired people who could usefully be employed to widen the perspective of children and their parents (and indeed teachers...)

They are all very welcome - with the requisite training, which is necessary to do a good job, just like most careers.

Esker`8 you imply that QT* is either going to say 'yes, teach my kids because you're so well qualified', or 'no, I don't want you to teach my kids because you haven't got QTS'. A bit of an empty argument, really.

I think people are assuming that teaching is just a matter of standing in front of the class and imparting knowledge in an inspiring way. In fact, the main part of teaching is the continuous assessment of children's progress (so you always know the next steps, for lesson planning and each child) and a continuous evaluation of the success of your lessons as regards the children's learning. In order to do this, you have to have a very good idea of how children's skills progress and how to move the children on from one 'level' to the next.

In a PGCE year, or during a BEd course, or during GTP training in a school, the trainee teacher starts to understand the progression they need to achieve in the classroom. They start to realise that they need to move these children from A to B, and, as all children's As and Bs are different, how to differentiate accordingly. The subsequent NQT induction year embedded the teaching awareness (and classroom management skills) through LEA courses and peer mentoring. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think the NQT support is now defunct.

Perhaps an unqualified Latin expert could go to teach 6 keen A level students successfully, but, having had HLTAs do my ppa for the last 4 years, I don't think that it will work in the primary classroom (no offence to HLTAs there - it was just that they weren't qualified to take weekly lessons).

I don't. However I cant afford a year of no income, plus tuition fees to do PGCE, so my plan has been to do employment based training such as GTP/ school direct.
Maybe I will still take that route, if I get a place, but if I don't I'd welcome the opportunity to teach without getting QTS. I'm not saying it will be easy, I'm sure it will be extremely challenging, but I have done challenging things before and based on my experience I think I am up to this.

Good. Get the training it really is invaluable.