Unqualified teachers

[morethanpotatoprints]

Who, apart from some qualified teachers are really mad about this. I do think there seems to be a lot of sensationalist reporting going on in the press.
I heard an advert on the radio today for unqualified teachers posts and apparentely they need a degree to be able to teach and in any subject. How is this any different than today with people with degrees in Textiles teaching in primary schools.
However, according to some QTs on here children will suffer as a consequence and anybody is allowed to teach without so much as a GCSE let alone a degree

Still reeling in shock at the thought that anyone believes that an unqualified pilot is ever allowed to fly commercial aircraft worth millions of pounds, with hundreds of paying passengers in them.

CumbernauldMathsTutor you asked the same questions on the other thread (which people answered) but you never bothered to acknowledge

germyrabbit do you think the National Curriculum is teaching by numbers?
It tells teachers what they must teach but not how to do it.

Jabed, I too wanted these things for my dcs. Call me old fashioned but I tend to think schools are where dcs go to be educated not managed. To educate any age as my experience goes to show, teacher training means nothing, its subject knowledge thats important. I have never struggled with any aspect of teaching or assessment, planning, classroom management etc at any level I taught. However, I have struggled trying to teach subjects that weren't my own. So because state education is so poor and any Tom, Dick, or Harry have been allowed to teach any subject for so long now, my dd is not going to school.

Rabitstew. I care to differ on your pilot opinion. The trainee was a woman to boot which really pleased me. However, unlike many ITT courses she was monitored and guided well by a fully qualified pilot.

an unqualified pilot is NOT allowed to fly a commercial aircraft. Even the second officer on a comercial aircraft is a fully qualified pilot with the correct license for that particular aircraft with the correct level of flying hours.
On occasions you may get a pilot who is familiarising himself with a new aircraft with an experienced flightdeck crew.
Also while a pilot is training he/she may be alongside the experienced & qualified crew but never in sole charge of the aircraft.

"Call me old fashioned but I tend to think schools are where dcs go to be educated ... its subject knowledge thats important. I have never struggled with any aspect of teaching or assessment, planning, classroom management etc at any level I taught."

yes apparently you possess subject knowledge of A level maths when you managed to achieve a GCSE in the subject

@morethan you claim (and I'm not disputing this) that you have struggled teaching subjects that are not your own. Yet you also claim that you are HE your DD. Are you teaching her an incredibly limited curriculum then?

It doesn't matter how brilliant your subject knowledge is, you could have a double first from Oxford in English or Maths. As an teacher you have to know how to break it down to teach children who

a. have emotional, social and behavioural difficulties and get easily distracted
b. children who do not speak English as a first language
c. children with learning difficulties

To name but a few.

The subject specialist area is the teacher's responsiblity. We have to learn the subject to the appropriate level that we teach. We are constantly improving our knowledge hence continual professional development.

When children are not engaged in the learning, they will begin to do off tasks activities such as talking amongst themselves, throwing things around etc. There will be no learning taking place unless you learn how to create engaging lessons and have brilliant classroom management skills. Children these days can't listen for more than 3-5 minutes, and most learning, is task and independent learning based. You have to plan effective tasks to lead to a learning objective. You are assessed on how well your children are learning. There is nothing easy about it. It is totally different to how I was taught at school and takes years to master.

If you do not know the subject well enough, you would do well to either avoid teaching it or use up all your spare time to learn it. I have a Masters in my subject specialism and there are still aspects I do not know because all subjects are broad and all degree curriculums vary. I am not a history teacher but you could have studied Modern European History for your BA. You may be expected to teach perhaps The American Slave Trade, The Tudors, The Vikings etc. You have to find the resource and learn it to the level required. If you have a degree in the subject, this is easy but still time consuming.

Primary teachers have to teach subjects to around a Level 4 which is equivalent to GSCE Grade D. They always have qualifications beyond this, i.e. GSCEs, A levels and a degree. They have to learn their subjects to around GSCE level and then break it down to whatever age group they teach. Again, they can do this, but it is time consuming.

These are some of the skills the primary and secondary training gives i.e. how to break it down to the appropriate age group and a structure for developing subject knowledge. Many teachers spend their holidays learning a new topics. It is ongoing.

Being a teacher is being a perpetual learner. You have to really enjoy learning to teach.

Primary teachers have to teach subjects to around a Level 4

Level 6, QT.

Other than that I agree with everything you've said.

When I said, level 4 I was thinking of Level 2 SATs average. Of course you are right, all primary teachers need at least a Level 6 subject knowledge and of course you all have GSCE Maths and English and are tested AGAIN in the QTS skills tests (along with ICT) which are appropriately at Level 6. Yes have to acheive a Level 6 understanding in ALL the subjects you teach which I am sure many of you get beyond.

We have to do a week in primary when training to do secondary PGCE and the Y6 class teacher was a whizz in Maths. Very clever teachers in there who know so much about everything.

In secondary, we have to be an undergraduate level especially to teach at A level. Hence, I am now developing undergraduate skills in a new area of my specialism.

In primary I was told you have subject specialist coordinators who keep up to date and inform all teachers in their subject. So the Y6 class teacher was a Maths graduate and acted as the Maths coordinator for KS2 and I assume the Textiles graduate in the primary schools may act as the arts coordinator or D&T coordinator. Your subject specialist degree if you have one, will come in useful in primary and most primary teachers have one or two or maybe loads.

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

in dds' schools, none. Dd1 had an ineffectual history teacher for a short period last year after the usual one was unwell, and some have been less inspiring, or less well liked, than others, but I haven't considered any of them 'bad'

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

yes, dd and some others went to head of department and said they were confused and the teacher wasn't managing the group well: she's not there now, anyway

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?

is it really that binary? As a short term fix, if you had a mathematician who'd give it a bash for a few weeks, maybe ok, but wouldn't be happy with it as a long term strategy

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?

if they're unqualified, I wouldn't deem them to have 'appropriate skills' so the question doesn't make sense to me

Qualified teacher.
I think all your points a,b,c, I picked up pretty quickly without much training. However, all of these skills mean nothing if you don't have a GCSE in Maths and are forced to teach A level Maths.

I also agree with your point about learning to manage a classroom. This obviously can't be taught through ITT.

Since my dd has finished school end of last term, I have assessed levels and believe I'm on track. Her last school will send her levels in Sept, but I'm confident they will be the same as mine. I also did ds's at KS1/2/3 its not rocket science.

Metabilis
Both my dh and I will be teaching dd as we feel we can do a better job. In terms of English I believe she will surpass the standard her primary teacher had at around y6. So yes I believe we can do a much better job. No I won't necessarily be following the nc. The subjects will all be pretty much academic. So far she has chosen. Music, Maths, English, Italian, French, Science, History, Geography, Mixed dancing (5 types).

MTPP

First you still haven't answered this
What would you like those that teach "textiles, woodwork, Drama, P.E etc." too have in the way of qualifications?

second

My QTS qualifies me for all of secondary including 6th form, It was why I took the course that I did.
Several are only for KS3 + 4
Some are for EYS, others for EYS+ KS1
some for KS1 and 2
others for Ks2 and 3
All of the teachers in these areas have a primary and secondary subject to teach, some even have a tertiary subject.

From what I can assertain from your posts you made a mistake when you applied for the job in a sixth form. they don't have the number of students to support a dedicated teacher in a subject that was always going to have less than a full timetable. You where always going to have to teach in other areas, and it is up to you to get you rknowledge up to speed, being one page ahead is not enough and that (finally getting to my point) is what worries me about unqualififed people teaching. It is not enough to know the subject you also have to know the sylabus.

@morethan I don't think dancing is a particularly academic subject nor is it one that lends itself to HE surely?

BBJ Yes the syllabus specifics. You may have taught Edxcel before but now you're teaching AQA and they assess differently in this topic, or they include this, or if you do that it does give you extra marks etc.

And the syllabus specifications are ALWAYS changing, and our Gove wants to change them again because he thinks they are way too easy, wants to make them more rigourous. Changing them to what in each of our specialist subjects we do not know.

He has comissioned some of his mates to do a review of many subjects, have you read what has been proposed about yours, if it exists? I've read mine and all I can say is that it's not the sort of stuff most KS3 kids will be willing to get into.

Then the glamorous coursework, which has to be done a certain way and by a certain time, I could go on, but won't. It's the holidays, thank God!

Metabilis. No not part of HE per se, but she will be doing this during what would have been school hours. Also not academic but good exercise and part of P.E. Well our curriculum anyway.

BoneyBack.
I'm sure I did answer your question way back or possibly other thread.
Those that teach the subjects you name imo should have a degree or the highest level available if not offered at degree level.

There was no mistake in my application as 6th form is Post Compulsory. It took me no time to learn the syllabus and I was employed teaching a subject that wasn't my own. I didn't do anything wrong, they employed me and quite legally too.
It was fine as I was qualified to teach at this level. However I draw the line at teaching in the high school as I wasn't qualified to do this. I had no problem as I stated before, its not rocket science. However, had I been qualified in the subjects I was expected to teach, I would still be there along with my peers. As far as GCSE are concerned I was qualified to teach my own subject at this level in a Post Compulsory setting, not a high school.

So finally, I have not heard any argument that proves that a teaching qualification is needed to teach. It doesn't seem to be worth the paper its written on, as from my experience in employment the terms are not adhered to, there are so many different courses and the standards aren't consistent. So the PGCE can't really be measured against a set of circumstances really.
The same can be said for QTS.

Really morethanpotatopronts you are very good at making sweeping statements that quite often prove to be inaccurate

*MTPP"

You haven't said what these qualifications are?

To say the highest level is not a complete answer.
What you are showing is a complete lack of knowledge of any subject that isn't your own or that you haven't taught.

Incidently you have never stated what your background is or what you teach, trained or otherwise.

"As far as GCSE are concerned I was qualified to teach my own subject at this level in a Post Compulsory setting, not a high school."

is this an admittance that it requires different skills?

BBJ, quoting MTTP
"As far as GCSE are concerned I was qualified to teach my own subject at this level in a Post Compulsory setting, not a high school."

is this an admittance that it requires different skills?

I Agree.

I am extremely confused MTTP, are you proposing to home tutor your child at KS4 and if so, will you be independently entering your child for GSCEs?

BBJ to MTPP
'Incidently you have never stated what your background is or what you teach, trained or otherwise.'

I think MTPP stated she trained to teach Travel and Tourism (T&T) am I right MTPP or am I confusing you with someone else?

Regarding the teaching training qualification, I too am confused, I recollect you said you did FE teacher training and also a PGCE in 2009. T&T, if I am right is only available at KS4 and 5, like Business Studies so you probably wouldn't have covered KS3 which is closely related to KS2.

Goodness me.

QT.
Yes thats right my degree is Leisure, Travel and Tourism Management. I also have a PGC level qual in Management with the CMI. My PgCE was 2008/9 Post Compulsory. No I didn't cover ks3 at all, well not in training. But once in employment I was expected to cover/ move dept willy nilly. Some of my peers were teaching ks3 yrs 7/8/9. None of us have QTS as not a requirement in F.E.
It is all wrong, the rules should be followed and my point is because they so obviously aren't, the teaching quals and QTS are not worth the paper they are written on. If all was fair then I would say yes, perhaps it is worth training teachers but personally I don't see any point.

@morethan how then can you possibly consider yourself qualified to teach your DD English, Maths, music, geog, history and science? I'm assuming you are a native Italian and/or French speaker.

As someone pointed out if you have QTLS then you can teach in a maintained school and should be paid as a qualified teacher

Since 1 April 2012, further education teachers who have been awarded QTLS by the Institute for Learning (IfL) and are members of the IfL are recognised as qualified teachers in schools. This will allow them to be appointed to permanent posts in state maintained schools in England and they will be paid on the qualified teachers? pay scale. They will continue to be recognised as qualified school teachers providing they remain a member of the IfL.

perhaps you should join the IfL if you aren't a member

morethan You don't mention if the non-QTS teachers were actually teaching subjects at KS3 competently. In fact, you imply that they weren't.

Are you now arguing in favour of QTS?