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

A bit like saying an 18 year with A level biology and a first aid certificate can be a doctor

Mrz it's hardly comparable! An unqualified doctor can kill you... And they train for 12 years. Not 4.

Even at primary level, time is needed on subject knowledge. To teach maths effectively to top level year 6s for example, quite a lot of trainees are going to need to top up their maths subject knowledge. You can't rely on this in schools as teachers don't have the time in top of their day job.

Every top performing education system in the world has one thing in common. Teaching is a respected profession and you have to be highly qualified in order to teach - quite often a masters. To teach abroad the vast majority of countries will only accept a degree plus PGCE or a BEd, not GTP or schools direct etc. Teaching is a profession here where it seems to be a bad thing to be experienced, hence no one in the government seems to think it is a problem that most leave after 5 years. This is just a way of trying to solve the teacher recruitment crisis without actually looking at any of the causes.

An unqualified teacher can kill a child future life chances

And to be a GP is 5 year degree with 2 years general training so 7 years

Upper pay range for class room teachers is now £37,871 (higher in London) That is 43% higher than the average UK salary.

I find this comment fascinating, particularly coming from a poster who laments the poor maths education her DC receive.

As pointed out above, the 37k is averaged over those who have SLT responsibilities, with most classroom teachers earning less. And it is unreasonable to compare a graduate salary with the average UK salary, when less than half of UK workers have a graduate degree.

Perhaps more relevantly, the average starting salary for a maths graduate training to be an actuary is around 30k, with the salary after 10 years being 50-100k. Salaries for accountants are similar. Salaries for maths graduates going into finance are much, much higher. It's not hard to figure out the single biggest reason why maths graduates don't become maths teachers. I can count on one hand the number of maths graduates I've taught who've then gone on to become maths teachers.

FruitCider

Health care is more ridged and student are well supported. Most patients are willing to do what is asked and cooperate, not all pupils are.

You are very limited to what you do on your own as a student in the NHS, so a trainee would be allowed in a cath lab or operating theatre but only with someone else there even if the trainee is doing most of the work.

Teachers are alone in their classroom from day one with some observation.

If a trainee in the NHS cocks up - they shouldn't but sometimes thing happen then the consequences can be serious for the patient they are treating, if a teacher cocks up it could be the education of 30+ children.

They are different skill sets that you acquire but the skills needed in the classroom are often learned just by living life.

These children aren't going to leave school ...they are going from one classroom as pupils to another as teacher apprentices

So far, all I'm getting off this thread is a measure of the spectacular level of ignorance from people who have never done it. I wouldn't presume to comment on any career I've never had a crack at, or one I left behind many years before. Also, the lack of basic maths! London weighting and immense SLT salaries really skew the average teacher salary. Also, consider that many female teachers do a 3 day week, so they may well be on a high pay grade but they're not earning the full whack.

If current teachers are going to go into it with the wrong attitude,

"Wrong" attitude? Why should we have a shit idea imposed upon us, that would dramatically increase our workload (for no material gain) and be happy about it?

Yet another thing to add to the growing list of reasons to leave the profession. Although it's not going to be a profession much longer by the sounds of it.

Not sure of the relevance of mentioning the holiday allowance. That's all teachers get, paid. The endless sneers about 13 weeks holiday a year neglects to point out that most of them are unpaid.

Not complaining about that, mind, but just setting the record straight.

Currently older people train in the classroom don't they?

Older people, with a degree train in the classroom, and both those things are important.

An 18 year old, fresh out of school themselves is going to find it hard to make an instant transition to authority figure to teenagers not that far off the same age as them.
Teenagers will also not take them seriously. It's not fair to pretend that wouldn't be an issue, on top of what is already a very demanding environment.

Presumably learning from a teacher actually in a classroom in front of real students would allow the apprentice to learn other skills not actually taught during a one year PGCE which might actually be beneficial.

PGCEs aren't spent in university watching videos of Waterloo Road you know. We learn from a teacher in a real classroom in front of real kids too.

What's stupid is that we have a teacher shortage and yet these kids will be put in a school with the expectation that teachers train them. This will take them away from their actual job of teaching kids.

This is why many schools direct trainees are left teaching GCSE maths to disruptive classes from day 1. At least they have some maturity and subject knowledge to help them.

It's just the fact that you've gone to uni rather than learn entirely in the classroom.

But there is stuff of value taught in the university part. Maybe we should just have surgeons taught by watching surgery then having a go themselves? No theory needed?

I think it is a fine way for a teacher to qualify, I can't really see what the problem is.

That's because you don't know what you're talking about. When people who do know what they are talking about all disagree, that really should make you pause for thought.

As noble says a big chunk of the PGCE is spent on placement in a school observing and then delivering lessons. The difference being that they are post grads and a few years older.
I'm intrigued as to how this would actually work - is the classroom teacher expected to supervise the apprentice, alongside their existing timetable and workload - presumably with no extra pay ???? If they are 'support' then there goes the role of the TA and at which point do they take on a teaching role ? How would they be assessed ? I doubt any teacher would be willing to hand over a KS4 class to someone just a couple of years older.