Plan for 18 year olds to become teachers with on the job training

[noblegiraffe]

So the government's bright idea to solve teacher shortages is not to make any effort to retain the teachers who are leaving in droves, but to allow people to train as teachers on the job with only A-levels.

Because acquiring a solid expertise in your subject first is totally overrated.

www.tes.com/news/school-news/breaking-news/exclusive-first-teaching-apprenticeship-planned

I suspect they will train on the job, being directed by a teacher, replacing TAs with only-just adults on apprenticeship wages.

I don't see why this is a bad idea to try. On the job experience, still doing degree. Why is this such a bad idea?

Do you want an 18 year old with no degree teaching your DC maths?

Can anyone explain to me why I should significantly increase my already heavy workload training teachers on the job, for no extra pay, just in order to save the Government money?

Clam

That is an easy one. (comedy response)

Its because we teachers have it sssssooooooooo easy and we have so much extra time and holidays.

On a serious note

A lot of people don't/won't understand what goes in to teaching a class.

I am not going to talk about my DC specifically but if an 18 who just got an A* at A-level, was assisting in Y7, 8 or 9 under the supervision of a teacher then I wouldn't have a problem with it. If they have just aced the exam then surely they have an intimate knowledge of the curriculum?

clam Only speculating here, but having an extra assistant could reduce your workload. FYI your not saving the government money, you are saving us money, which could be spent on the NHS or Schools!

Why the bloody hell would an 18 year old who just got an A* at A-level be starting a teaching apprenticeship? They'd be off to a top university.

I've been trying to think why on earth schools would be wanting this, and the only thing I can think of is that they've got some teaching assistants who want to be teachers, who haven't got degrees so can't do Schools Direct.

Agree with PP that 18 is far too young and there is a big difference between that and being 22 ( the age at which I started teaching). I mentor younger / NQT teachers as part of my management role and spend a lot of my time wiping up tears and comforting the twenty-somethings who have faced a day of teenage derision, boredom, rudeness and boundless energy. I don't think most 18 year olds have the emotional resilience or life experience to deal with disruptive behaviour, safe-guarding concerns, irate parents, micro-managing SLT etc and they certainly would not have the subject knowledge to take a lead teaching role. I worked with many older teachers who had started at age 20 via the two year Cert Ed course when I began my career and all had relished the opportunity to take degrees when the opportunity arose as a result of teaching becoming a graduate profession in the 1970s- many councils provided sabbaticals for teachers in this category. Being in your twenties, probably having lived independently, having a degree, perhaps having travelled, having experience of working with young people and hopefully having had a number of jobs in non-education settings would, in my view, make you vastly more capable of dealing with the challenges of working in schools.

Only speculating here, but having an extra assistant could reduce your workload.
No. I've had students before, and there's a significant amount of additional work, supporting planning, liaising, observing lessons, writing up reports, mopping up behaviour issues.

FYI your not saving the government money, you are saving us money, which could be spent on the NHS or Schools!

Not particularly interested in that either. Not my problem to solve, frankly. I have enough responsibility helping "Society" as it is.

An 18 year old who got an A star at A level would struggle to teach years 7,8 and 9 because maths comes easily to those who get A stars at A level; it's very hard for them to understand what weaker students don't get and to figure out how to break things into small steps students can understand. (Many strong mathematicians implicitly take multiple steps simultaneously without realising they are doing so, as it is so obvious to them.) Subject knowledge alone is a small part of teaching: how would any raw 18 year old know how to prepare a lesson, differentiate for different groups of pupils, write up reports, administer grades, deal with SEN pupils etc etc.

Quite sad that some posters do not see the need for subject knowledge beyond the curriculum, training in teaching and maturity. And really hard to believe that any headteachers could be in favour of this.

It's too ludicrous to even discuss.

Why not employ year 7 to lead primary schools. Ffs.

Why the bloody hell would an 18 year old who just got an A at A-level be starting a teaching apprenticeship?* Maybe because they think they would love teaching and dont want to spend 50k going to university?

I have no idea if schools want this, but I do like choice!

Wouldn't it be better for undergrads and schools to find out if they are suited to education before they invest several years and 50k training to be one?

clam, you might not be interested in saving the country money but I am, it is badly needed.

haybott, interesting to hear you think subject knowledge is such a small part of teaching, because in other threads teachers are definite that it is a large part!

I have no idea if schools want this, but I do like choice!

You get "choice" when you go to the local takeaway. This is a tad more important.

clam, you might not be interested in saving the country money but I am, it is badly needed.

Then you go right ahead and start making sacrifices how you like. But don't be thinking meddling even further with the next generation's education is the place to start. We're suffering enough with funding cuts in schools as it is.

You said you were "only speculating." How about taking the word of people who know what they're talking about?

mathsmum that's why most teachers do a degree that they can use to get a different job if they don't like teaching. A PGCE is one year only, and if it's in a shortage subject, they can get a bursary of up to £30k to do it.

A teaching apprenticeship would be an insane route to take into teaching for an academic student.

This is utterly ridiculous. Of course a school leaver can't just lurch into a classroom??!!!

Imagine it anywhere else?
Good evening ladies and gentlemen and welcome to this BA flight to New York. My name is Alfie Smith, I'm 16 and I will be your pilot this evening. Joining me on the flight deck is first officer Eddie. We both just got B in Maths GCSE. But we prefer to think of it as a B+. Both of us really like planes and we've spent a lot of time on call of duty, so we're in a good position to get you to JFK safely. The cabin crew today is led by Lacey and some of her year 9 friends.

Loving clam's responses especially about saving money.

mathsmum314

why should teachers be interested in saving money when it is effectively more work for less money?

This is going to be balls. I have two degrees in my subject and teach for the love of it. I've already been disillusioned by poor heads and probably will find another career soon. I teach a few very shortage subjects, and I'm damn good at it. The money is shite and the workload is even worse. A level, or worse, qualified teachers are already the norm but this is a level below. Feck.

NoblegiraffeI've been trying to think why on earth schools would be wanting this, and the only thing I can think of is that they've got some teaching assistants who want to be teachers, who haven't got degrees so can't do Schools Direct.

Agree.

I think this could work IF the apprentice age is NOT 18. They'd have to be minimum of 25 or so surely?

The problem is with teaching, whilst learning, and studying for a degree, is bloody hard work, time consuming (4-6 years) and long hours.

I'm not sure that your average a level, nondegree, apprentice applicant would cope tbh.

I they're looking at a way of getting TAs with L3 qualifications up though the ranks, thats slightly different. The TES are starting this with their own scheme, but you do need a 300pt basic degree minimum in that

Isn't this what happened in the 'olden days?' I am thinking about Anne of Green Gables and Governesses. Well if was good enough for them etc.......

And Laura Ingalls Wilder

TBF, I found that paucity of training shocking even when I was 7

"the only thing I can think of is that they've got some teaching assistants who want to be teachers"

It would certainly make more sense but it seems to be aimed at 18 year olds.

Reason - quick solution teacher shortages
( and if feeling cynical - cheap)

Teachers have never been valued ever through history and thus us another example.

The 22yr old graduates often struggle. With classroom management.

My late dad was aways narked that he trained at college in the 50s whereas his mate came out of the forces after national service straight into a school. At least then there was an expectation that kids would behave and parents supported this ( and an ex Sargent major was allowed to treat the kids like troops and yell at them !)

Now ? Year 9 would eat an 18yr old for breakfast !

Saving the country money by paying the public sector less (which is what this plan is really about, cheap teachers to undermine teachers' salaries) is not economically sound. Decreasing pay for the public sector (ostensibly to pay down the country's debt) has slowed the economy and caused the national debt to increase more.

And for those who like the plan so much: would you really be happy with an 18 year old teaching your top set children (for whom you would want knowledge beyond the curriculum) or bottom set/SEN children (which requires experience with varied teaching methods, strategies to help those who are struggling)? Would you also be happy with an 18 year old trainee doctor, straight from school, looking after you? Would you let an 18 year old trainee dentist into your mouth?