Private schools use unqualified teachers - but are they really any good?

[Talkinpeace]

One of the justifications for Free Schools etc being allowed to use non qualified teachers is that Private schools do so and get great results.

However, are the great results because those non qualified people are really better?
or is it because they are handed heavily selected cohorts to teach?

This can be tested.

Take two schools of similar size and age range, one that is fee paying and the other that is fully comprehensive
say Eton and Wallingford school in Oxfordshire (fast search for 11-18 leafy)
and swap the whole of the teaching staff for a fortnight - to run a whole timetable cycle.
TAs and support staff would stay put so the places kept going
but the whole staff from each school would teach the other's timetable.

How would they cope?

My hypothesis
The state school teachers would be pleasantly surprised that a lot of the private school kids were pretty normal.
The state school teachers would get some good ideas about how to make extension work more useful
Some of the private school teachers would rise to the challenge and come up with new ideas
most would be eaten alive by lower ability kids.

So, could a TV company make it happen?
What are your hypotheses?

[straggle]

There have been bullying allegations at academy chains that employ unqualified teachers, too.

You would have very little protection if you didn't have QTS or had completed a probationary year in a state school and couldn't get a job elsewhere.

[grovel]

Missbopeep, that's exactly right.

[cory]

Established private schools can build on a tradition of expertise in evaluating and supporting the very occasional teacher with an unusual CV.

This is different from a handful of parents getting together and suddenly deciding they are going to start a free school. They are not accountable to the state because they are free schools but they are not subject to market forces either because they are state funded. Sounds like the worst of both worlds.

[Norudeshitrequired]

I've heard stories of teachers resigning en masse over bullying accusations, and it is often linked to the fact that family members have been given jobs

That isn't restricted to private schools. Whalley Range high school for girls in Manchester (a state school) had to sack its headmistress who had 'turned the school from failing woefully into something slightly better' due to employing various members of her family to carry out roles within the school, both full time and as contract workers. I'm not sure that any of the teachers resigned or were bullied, but the idea that only private school head teachers employ family members is incorrect.

[straggle]

That does sound terrible, although I can only find an article that mentions bullying among pupils. None of that should be tolerated, and if the head also appointed family members, perhaps Manchester city council wasn't supervising closely enough. But at least parents and staff could complain to the council rather than as is the case with free schools - to the governors implicated in cronyist appointments or the DfE which is a faceless central bureaucracy relying on occasional Ofsted visits to do the monitoring on its behalf, and which allowed a husband and wife team to set up a free school that failed very quickly

The story I heard in a private school was about bullying of a staff member by other teachers which was badly handled, and involved discrimination which shoukdn't be tolerated under the equalities legislation. But the teacher involved presumably just wanted to resign from a stressful situation quickly.

[straggle]

Really interesting account of the culture shock for Wellington College head Anthony Seldon giving his first assembly at Wellington Academy. Dealing with unruly behaviour is a real challenge in a state school:

www.theguardian.com/education/2013/oct/22/private-school-head-runs-state-school

[Talkinpeace]

straggle
Nothing in that article surprises me in the least.
Any head of any school that had had unexpected changes in the SLT over the summer would probably have been reduced to shouting.
Good on him to step into the breach.
But I still say there should be wholesale swaps of staff between the two schools so that ideas exchange can take place.

And I genuinely think that it would not be car crash TV because

• experienced private school teachers may well have some great ideas
• state school teachers handed more maleable groups might get new ideas
• weak teachers from both sides would be highlighted (which is a real issue anyway)

[KiplingBag]

Home educators teach their own children, many without anthing more than GCSE's themselves, and they teach right up to A Level.

I think it is the way the person teaches, and instills an interest in the subject to the child, not necessarily the qualification as a teacher that can get great results.

[Missbopeep]

It's not something that is unique to private schools actually!
An extremely good local comprehensive school employed ' unqualified' maths teachers ( or did at one point)- someone with a maths degree with no PGCE because they thought they were good at their subject and there was a shortage of maths graduates.

I have found tbh that often teaching ability is in inverse proportion to number of and level of qualifications. Some very academically able teachers cannot handle unruly teens or communicate at the level required. It's about personality not just paper qualifications.

But remember that private schools are businesses. They are under pressure from parents and won't tolerate teachers who can't teach. There is much more accountability, and which ironically is only possible by the lack of red tape and control and interference by teaching unions etc.

[straggle]

Talkinpeace I'd like to see that programme too, and I also think it s brave of Seldon to try because there is a high risk of failure. You are right that the private sector has a completely different intake, so what might be effective for them will not translate to free schools which have to operated within state budgets without selection by ability (supposedly). I doubt very much that private schools are successful because they employ unqualified inexperienced teachers appointed and managed by their wife/uncle, rather that they attract subject specialists who find it easier and more enjoyable to teach smaller groups of high ability pupils with no behavioural problems, deprivation or otherwise dysfunctional family life.

But it would make good TV and there could be some surprising insights.

[Missbopeep]

who find it easier and more enjoyable to teach smaller groups of high ability pupils with no behavioural problems, deprivation or otherwise dysfunctional family life.

LOL- can tell you have never taught in a private school!

Kids are kids. I found just as many dysfunctional families in the private sector- some use schools as a dumping ground while they pursue their careers overseas, or as any easy option for step children, or difficult children.

Also- behavioural problems do exist. Kids whose parents have 'too much money' often come with as much baggage as kids from poorer homes.

Ok- I accept that overall parents are usually more supportive if they are paying. BUT it's a huge misconception to think that private schools have no problems with their pupils - on the whole their pastoral care is better so maybe they deal with the issues better, but don't believe that it's a doddle teaching in one because it isn't- and the hours tend to be much longer too.

[Missbopeep]

Oh and not all private schools are selective- many are not and have the whole ability range. That's another reason why some parents choose a smaller private school for their average or low average ability child rather than a huge state school.

[Talkinpeace]

Missbopeep

ALL AND EVERY PRIVATE SCHOOL IS SELECTIVE
because they have fees - which rules out around 80% of the population.
and among them, most have entrance tests of the academic or face fits variety

the only non selective schools are those that accept every child regardless of means or brains that can get in the gate

[Chubfuddler]

There aren't any of those then. In the private or state sector.

[straggle]

'don't believe that it's a doddle teaching in one because it isn't'

I don't, and I'm not a teacher anyway - just as a parent I wouldn't trust a school that didn't employ qualified experienced teachers and hired and fired in a discriminatory or cronyist way. Very happy for teachers to have excellent subject expertise - or have a good graduate degree, language ability and sports/drama prowess if a general primary teacher - and to be employed while gaining accreditation on the job.

A friend of mine found it very challenging to teach in a private school because it was non-selective but without SEN support, and the technical support and layout of the building was also really deficient compared to her children's state school. Again, as a parent and taxpayer I don't want to see those conditions replicated in state schools. Prep schools do not sit SATs so it's even hard to compare academic results.

[Talkinpeace]

chubfuddler
Yes there are, lots and lots.
My local school takes any kid who applies. Its still half empty though.
DCs school takes every kid in the catchment (6 miles across) and hundreds from outside as well.
Where there is only one local secondary - common in the shires - it takes every single kid who wants to apply within the catchment. Those over the boundary go to the next school along.

[straggle]

And Talkinpeace the non-selective prep school I was thinking of selected on exit rather than entry by suggesting to families with behavioural or learning difficulties that they should leave. That was probably after pressure from other parents who kept hearing tales of the naughty boy who kept taking up teacher's time. A state school cannot do that.

[Talkinpeace]

straggle
State schools can and do transfer disturbed/disruptive kids to specialist units, be they PRU or targeted schools
but indeed, probably not as quick as a private school,
but state schools use TAs etc - see early posts on thread about the Benenden head.

However the most disruptive kids with the most disorganised parents are never ever going to darken the door of a school costing nearly as much as the median wage in fees.

[PatPig]

This whole thread is very silly.

Eton pays its staff very well, and they are noted for being some of the best in the business, thanks to Eton having pots of money and a world-renowned reputation. There is no reason to believe that they use unqualified staff.

So what relevance has this to free schools using unqualified teachers?

[Talkinpeace]

Patpig
Are you sure that every member of the Eton faculty has a teaching qualification?
What about other private schools?

As the whole hypothesis is that Gove says teaching qualifications are irrelevant and I suspect that in a state school situation they are not.

[PatPig]

"Where there is only one local secondary - common in the shires - it takes every single kid who wants to apply within the catchment. Those over the boundary go to the next school along."

You just described selection. If you are rejecting pupils on the basis of boundaries, then you are selecting.

Also some 'shires' are very middle class. The physical situation of being in somewhere leafy and green with few 'problem' kids is very different from being in say the middle of Liverpool.

There really isn't such a thing as non-selective school.

The school you describe that is half-empty is half-empty (I assume) because the middle class kids have been 'selected' by other, more desirable, schools. That is a selective intake, because it is skewed towards the bottom end.

[Talkinpeace]

www.education.gov.uk/cgi-bin/schools/performance/school.pl?urn=116463
www.education.gov.uk/cgi-bin/schools/performance/school.pl?urn=113520
www.education.gov.uk/cgi-bin/schools/performance/school.pl?urn=136849

if you are going to take geography as a selection, then yes, schools in Devon will tend not to admit kids from Cumbria.
But
all private schools select from within their locality
state schools do not