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

rAK, they've cut the SEN budget in schools by 20%. The schools were asking, 'How are we going to provide for our SEN children?'

Solution found.

I actually read the SEN Green Paper. I know I'm sad and in it Gove said that the problem with SEN was that their teaching was usually placed in the hands of unqualified teachers. The SEN Green paper suggested that more SEN children would benefit from being instructed from qualified teachers.

I'm confused.

I think I'd make a pretty good teacher of English. I have a first class hons degree and an MSc and have been working full time with vulnerable children and young people since 1996 and have a professional qualification to do so. I have seen some shocking teaching in state schools. Shocking. I can see no reason I shouldn't have the opportunity to have a punt at an interview including preparing and delivering a class just because I haven't done a PGCE.

Why not do a fricking PGCE then? Fgs.

I know QT - our TAs have been decimated. I wouldn't send a child with SEN to us now...they just wouldn't get consistent support. It's crap.

Why not? I really don't see what benefit it would be and it would involve cost and substantial loss of income during training. As it stands, I advise teachers on how to alter the curriculum from P6 through to Level 4 across a range of abilities, I have content knowledge and I have two degrees, a Masters and a PGDip in a programme that is accepted as CPD for teachers. I'm happy enough in my own job which is pretty specialist but I do have to commute a long way for it and would like to have the opportunity to work in one location with school holidays. A PGCE seems a pretty unnecessary hoop to jump through when you have a broad range of skills that would be of benefit to students. I'm dubious that some 23 year old who has completed a one year PGCE because they couldn't think of anything better to do would be better equipped to teach than an experienced person with a broad range of relevant knowledge and skills.

Great thunks - I'm sure you can get a place on the GTP programme.

I'm sure you could 'have a punt at an interview including preparing and delivering a class'.

It's the 'having a punt at preparing and delivering classes to 8-20 different teaching groups every week for a year' that I wouldn't want you let loose on until you'd done a tad more than one interview lesson, & I'd want some evidence you were OK at assessment & reporting, too.

Good luck with it though - your attitude is very much mine when I began my PGCE 14 years ago .

rAK, well Gove has the solution. He's cut the SEN funding in mainstream but he wants to establish special academy schools. Get it?

All PGCE students will have to undertake a placement in a special school. He wants more qualified teachers in special schools.

Now you see why I'm confused.

I advise teachers on how to alter the curriculum from P6 through to Level 4 across a range of abilities

Don't you think secondary might go a little beyond level 4?

I consider myself qualified to teach up to level 6, but wouldn't have the supreme arrogance to assume I could competently teach any higher with no training at all, even after 20 years of primary school teaching.

I do assessment and reporting already, individual and group (Pivats, bSquared etc). I prepare, develop and deliver group and individual programmes for children and young people from 3 to 19 based on differentiated curricula working in conjunction with specialist teachers. I work with groups of young people in class situations who have extreme challenging behaviours and liaise with a range of professionals. I observe and advise teachers on how to differentiate their classroom delivery. I train teachers at primary and secondary.

I think I could manage.

rAK, I remember when I sat observing my first mentor thinking, this look so easy and then the day came when I took over a class. Ouch! Was glad to be observing again.

It aint 'as easy as it seems.

I didn't know that QT, but I'd suggest off the top of my head it's because it's harder to turn a special school into a profitable business (smaller, higher staff/student ratios, clued-up parents who take less shit).

Whereas if you get students with SEN out of mainstream, it makes it slightly easier for weaker, cheaper unqualified teachers to cope with the classes that are left?

thunk, Gove is going to be putting PGCE students in special schools as part of their training so I don't know if that's going to impact on your employability. Better get sorted and get a GTP under your belt for security whilst you can.

Do you think most secondary teachers can sufficiently differentiate at P levels, Feenie? How about differentiating for a Y7 group in a mainstream school where the highest level is a 1c?

I think that my MSc in English lit might help with the higher levels. I can read an APP grid and marking criteria. I understand how to seek supervision and the process of moderation.

Really, you think the PGCE differentiates the skills required to be a good teacher adequately?

Gove wants schools and headteachers to do whatever they want, including go against the advice to have more specialist teachers for SEN children. And particularly to go against that advice if they can't afford to follow it. Actually, you don't need teachers or facilities to produce outstanding results for everyone. You just need a competitive spirit - that's the reason why there aren't enough state educated Olympians, don't you know?

Well, I'd argue that you might be fabulous, thunks, but it's not unreasonable for you to do the on the job GTP.

You'd probably be at the higher end of the pay scale, & if it's a salary dip for you, that's how it works when you change careers because you like the look of the holidays & the easier commute.

If I decided I fancied being an architect or a police officer next year, I'd expect it to involve some sort of training & a drop in income whilst I proved my competency.

I linked to this article in the other thread but I think it's worth repeating as he talks o much sense.

Thought it might also be useful to link to the new framework for Professional Standards for teachers, effective from 2012, here. Every teacher will have to prove they are meeting these standards, which replace QTS.

Would someone like thinksheadontable feel confident they could 'have a punt' in teaching and meeting all of these standards? Or would they feel that a teaching qualification might well help them in support towards meeting these standards and therefore worth 9 months of their lives?

Most good heads won't employ unqualified teachers in the majority of posts. But some will go for cheaper options, unfortunately.

I do find it that teaching was being touted as a Masters profession a couple of years ago. The main thing for me is that it further adds to the chipping way f teaching as a worthy and respected profession. I truly think the Government's next teaching recruitment campaign will have the slogan "Teaching - really, how hard can it be?"

Yes Rabbitstew... THAT is the bigger issue. The issue of whether people have a qualification at the level of PGCE is actually a moot point. The core issue here is how Gove wishes to undermine the rights of individuals to access an appropriate education delivered by individuals who have the relevant skills, knowledge and experience.

It will be about warm bodies not attracting individuals of high calibre with relevant experience. I've no interest in being a teacher really. I would like the perks of the job but realistically I command a lot more money in my current role and it is more varied etc. Gove couldn't afford me as an unqualified teacher.

I just am making the point that the qualification itself is a very small part of being equipped to be a professional in any given area.. which of course you've all just confirmed

The issue is as it always is: money.

I think you'd need training to teach the 40 odd % which work at a level 5 or above on entry to Y7, yes. And I think that secondary teachers would have some clue on how to teach the 17% working below level 4.

You might be great, yes - with some training to teach past level 4 at secondary.

I can't understand anyone who thinks they can just walk into a job and teach levels they are not experienced at.

'I've no interest in being a teacher really. I would like the perks of the job but realistically I command a lot more money in my current role and it is more varied etc. Gove couldn't afford me as an unqualified teacher.'

Quite right too, & I really don't blame you. But if you lost your current job, you might wash up in teaching under these proposals, & I suspect you wouldn't be quite as much of an asset as you assume.

I agree it's not the qualification. I've said several times on this & the other thread: it doesn't matter precisely how someone gains QTS (could be PGCE or GTP). What is important is that it's awarded when you've demonstrated you can actually do the job.

Oh you mean like the training the "specialist teacher" in one of the units I work in who had been teaching exam classes for the majority of her career got when she switched into working solely with individuals with complex communication disorders?

That sort of training?

I suppose I can see why it might be useful to have some clue of what you are doing when you are in a role that requires specific type of teaching or knowledge.

It's just a shame no one in the school agreed and no training was given, isn't it?

(Her qualification and experience as a teacher didn't prove as much of an asset as she had assumed and she was asked to resign by the middle of the Spring term, having been rated outstanding in her previous role).

I agree with that article, Itchyandscratchy. And there's no point entering the teaching profession at the moment, because nobody has the foggiest what being a teacher is actually going to mean in a few years time.

Tbh daughter's qualified P1 teacher was unaware of the capital of France. Unqualified teachers are the least of our worries

I think you have just proved my point, thunk.

rAK said, 'But if you lost your current job, you might wash up in teaching under these proposals, & I suspect you wouldn't be quite as much of an asset as you assume.'

The problem is, I have no idea where you will stand in the SEN academies plan. Loads of mainstream teachers will be heading your way with Gove's vision and you not having QTS, and thinking you don't need it .......

Gove wants SEN academies to have league tables.

He plans a MAJOR shake up of SEN.