Would you be happy with this?

[susanmt]

Schools in Scotland have just gone back, and someone I know has just taken up a position as the chaplain at a private school in Edinburgh.

He will do assemblies, individual pastoral care etc, BUT, though he has no teaching qualifications or experience, will teach RE as a subject as well as English and History (his degree subjects).

I'm a teacher and it appalls me! How can he teach 3 subjects with no teaching qualification? Do you think the parents know? Would you mind if it was your kid? This can only happen because it is a private school, it wouldn't be allowed in the state sector (this is not a pvt v state school debate, I was just shocked and wondered if I am being silly about it?)

Well thank goodness someone agrees with me. I was starting to feel like I was being silly about it, when I basically knew I had a point. Thanks suedonim. I'm really interested in everyones input.

FWIW, my PGCE (1993-4) was about 1/3 in small group work (only the very occasional lecture, mainly in small groups of 10 or so, and one day a week in my subject class (which was fab and I know I learned an awful lot in that class alone)) and about 2/3 of the time in schools. I was in 3 different schools with different ethos', different clientele (!!??!!) and different teachers, adn all of them were fab. This was a good balance IME. Bloss, you might have degrees galore and a lot of understanding of theory etc, but your average teaching student is right out of University and tbh doesn't actually have that much understanding of HOW to learn (or teach) compared to someone like you. You can't judge the average compared to your high level

I have to admit that my 3 years as a learning mentor, sitting in on ordinary classes with disabled students, gave me a far, far better grounding in the nitty gritty of teaching practise than my PGCE ever did.

Come to think of it, I saw more bad teaching on the PGCE course by the lecturers than I ever did in the classes I sat in on.

Lots of my colleagues don't have teaching qualifications, though in the past few years the college I work in has been systematically sending them off on courses to gain them. I honestly have seen little difference between those of us with the PGCE and those of us without. I'm inclined to agree with bloss (must be a first )good teachers are born, not made.

In all honesty, I thought my PGCE was a waste of time. I could already construct a scheme of work and a lesson plan, they're not that hard to do. All I learnt was some interesting bits on how courses are funded, that was out of date by the next year, a lot of cod psychology that as a psychology graduate made me cringe, and a few bits about timing and pace that I had picked up watching my colleagues anyway.

I think it's great that some MNers are such good teachers and clearly enthused by the profession. However, I do think it's quite shortsighted to rubbish the PGCE due to a poor personal experience - it clearly has its place and has played a vital role in educating would-be teachers over the years. At the time (over 10 years ago) I think I too was quite dismissive of the PGCE but having worked as HOD for a number of years and therefore employed staff in the department, I havce to say that this basic training makes a huge difference to the vast majority of teachers. Sure, there will be some people more able to quickly pick up the ins and outs of teaching but most of us need advice. If you think you know it all, you'll stand still in your work and be overtaken by those who still have a desire to learn how to be a better teacher. Back to the original point - I would be sceptical at first I'm sure of someone teaching with no qualifications. I do believe strongly that teaching is a skilled profession and not any old Tom, Dick or Harry can walk into a classroom and enthuse all pupils all of the time. Incidentally, my understanding is that you also need to have had some sort of educational background to get on to a GTP course as well. We should be proud that we are a trained and skilled proffesion and not rubbish our first steps into our careers. If you think PGCEs are no good, try mentoring new staff at your school - it's not that easy!

Susan, I'm aware that this could offend people but from my time in education research I think some of the skills taught on PGCE courses are, on the whole, more important for staff who will be working in the state sector (I'm thinking particularly of secondary level).

In all honesty, the most "challenging", least "academic" private school is still likely to be a lot easier to work in than an inner city comp. The pupils are more likely to co-operate and contain boredom to sullen silence and staring out of the window whereas from what I've seen in some state schools deliberate disruption (e.g. getting up and walking around) is more likely. Given that teachers in private schools are less likely to need outstanding pupil/classroom management skills I can see why they place less emphasis on professional qualifications.

NB: I'm aware the above is a gross generalisation!

Marialuisa, I think thats why they can get away with it. If this bloke was to try to walk into some of the schools I have taught in, no amount of being enthusiastic would be useful, if they are standing on the desks at the start of the lesson (only did that for a week with me - scarey?? me?? )then it is hard to be enthusiastic. When you are counting the pencils in and out and dealing with the kid that still wets himself and the one that likes to play with himself and the one who has special permission to leave the room to calm down as he has smashed chairs in the past plus the one who is crying at the back cos his dad is getting out of prison today, (this is a breif synopsis of my worst ever lesson), then being enthusiastic about Geography would have been the least important thing. I know for some people the PGCE didn't help with that sort of thing but on that day I was able to draw on a lot of things I had learned in college (how to deal with a child alleging abuse, how to deal with a child behaving in a potentially abusive manner, etc etc) because it was things I had been taught. Yes, all these things should be in a schools handbook, but sometimes you dont have time to look things up. These kind of situations are less likely to occur in the private sector, I'll give you that!

What I am beginning to wonder is if the qualification of PGCE is different in Scotland and England. I certainly seem to have a different experience of it than most of you.

I agree that you lean the majority of your teaching skills in the classroom, that I think is something we can all agree on. But I think that the basic understanding of the profession that a postgrad qualification gives you is essential AS WELL.

The other thing is that this bloke is not unionised, as he is not a teacher, therefore where is his own protection? If he is sacked for any reson, he has no-one to represent him. He is not regulated by the GTC (we've had to start calling it GTC Scotland since England got one too, we've had one for years), so if there are complaints about him that the school does not/will not handle, there is no accountability. He will not come under official appraisal in the formal sense, so how will anyone know how he is performing (I hope the school have some kind of appraisal). I would guess he isn't being paid as much as a teacher either, saving the school money. It just all seems a bit shabby and unprofessional to me, lookinf from the inside out.

I don't know about Scotland, but certainly here you can be in a union without a PGCE. In fact at my school the union rep is without one!

I think it comes down to the individual really - there are some amazing teachers I've come across without PGCEs, and some shockingly bad ones with them! In reality I do think the PGCE is a must if you are starting out to 'be a teacher'. However, certainly in my case, I never really set out with that aim in mind - because my subject is music (spot the nickname!) I am primarily a musician first, and the job I got was primarily as a performing musician, with teaching associated. Because this was the emphasis (and presumably his emphasis is as chaplain) then they didn't insist on a PGCE.

Having had this experience though, I would be slow to condemn someone else taking up a teaching post without one.

In Scotland, except in a private school, you can't be a teacher at all without a PGCE. Its the basic standard, it would be illegal for a state school to employ you without one.

I have been following this thread just now and thought I'd repsond...

No, personally I don't think I would be happy with a teacher who hadn't had any training...if he was on the job training then it would be less of a problem ie. if he was degree qualified, experience of life with a lot of enthusiasm and interest in the welfare of young people, which Chaplains often are...

btw when I was at primary school half the teachers didn't even have O-levels (seriously) as in the 70's didn't have to and luckily my siblings and I have done okay at school...

the doctor thing is different and not comparable as it's just different...as we are taking people's lives here....whereas any person with a good education could be trained whilst in the classroom on and off...but if my children were doing well and they were degree qualified and not teacher trained then I think I would be happy then.

I don't want people to think that I am 'rubbishing' the PGCE, I worked very hard for mine and did get something out of it. That was because my second mentor was excellent. My first mentor was nice but not much use and my tutor wouldn't know a good teacher from her arse in the ground!

My only point is that you can, as a reasonablbly inteligent adult, get the information from a PGCE via concentrated self learning. I have no problem with GTP trained teachers and would be far more worried at people teaching outside their area of expertise re first or subsequent degree.

My tutor taught me nothing, zip, zilch, other than you can never satisfy an OFSTED insepector (she was one of those as well). OTOH, my second mentor was a diamond teacher and I learned more from him in a day than I did in most of my PGCE.

I can churn out the academic guff with the best of them. I have a degree from Oxford and I can bullshit for the first team. I can quote Brunner and Vygotski and Piaget till the cows come home but I was taught to teach by doing it and having an f*ing blinding mentor, which was my good fortune. Most PCCE stidents that I have met cannot say the same.

None of this is to devalue the 'profession'. I'm a good teacher and I love the job. I have got to where I am because of working with good teachers, not the PGCE.

I think we are nasically saying the same thing from different angles, hmb. I think that most of the learning a teacher does is by teaching, but I think the PGCE is a good grounding in many, many aspects of teaching that you cant just 'pick up' as you go along. How will he know his assessment tools are good for example? Presumably he will be working withing a department (though it is a small school and I think he is the only RE teacher, this despite not having degree level training in that subject - like I said, he was a church Youth Worker before this, not a minister, and he certainly has no training outside of Christianity).

But leaving this individual case out of it, the principle that people who are not qualified or intraining shoudl be teaching is one I cannot agree with. If you are so commited to young people, to their education and welfare, to being part of the profession, then why not do a qualification. I think the fact that some people are happy to have unqualified people teach their children is indicative of the general disregard in which the profession is held. THat's partly the fault of teachers and their unions, and partly (mainly ? ) the fault of the governments over the years which have made it seem something less than a profession.

I agree that we are largly agreeing

I think that idealy everyone should aim to get some form of further qualification in teaching, however teaching on the unqualified regester for 2 terms was one of the best moves that I ever made. at the end of 2 tems of an 80% timetabel I was able to go into teaching practice and make the most of it. I knew what I was on about and I knew good practice when I saw it!

I'd like to see teaching practice and training being doen on a term on training, term teaching basis. Student teachers would have a damn sight more understanding of reality and schools and pupils would benefit from having 'young blood' working with them to shake things up. I've not been teaching that long but the depT I work with are far sighted and ask me about htings like self assessment of students as tey know I have more info on it that most of them.

Teaching is a profession but it isn't the PGCE that makes it that , it is the dedication of the staff and the day on day off learing that they undertake within the classroom.

Another thing (sigh!) is that this guy is not on any kind of training scheme, he has no plan to be a teacher long term, he is being given these extra duties on top of being the chaplain, a job he plans to hold for a few years at most. And that is the trouble I think. He is not being mentored or appraised, he's just being thrown in at the deep end. And in a private school anywhere in the country this can be done, you need to be on a training scheme in England to teach in a state school and need to have a PGCE in Scotland.
If he wanted to be a teacher he wouldn't be a chaplain, I think. He'd be a teacher!

Speaking as a parent here (and not knowing what PCSGEWTF means), I'd be unhappy if my son's teacher hadn't been taught how to teach. It's fine to be motivated and knowledgable if you're in a classroom of motivated and slightly less knowledgable kids. But when you have to actually teach stuff to kids who might not be interested.. well, I'd like my son to have people who were taught to deal with that. And also who have learned how to teach various kids with different learning styles.

I do hold teachers to the same standards as our GPs. Unfortunately, last year I realized that you can't treat them quite the same.....

JJ - PGCE is the postgraduate certificate in Education.

JJ, this example was for a private school, so you aren't going to get the unmotivated kids that you would in the state system.

TBH I still maintain that I would rather the people teaching my kids are "natural teachers" than all the bits of paper in the world. I was an LSA & saw first hand how some of these "qualified" teachers were with the kids... luckily the worst one was promoted elsewhere.

My own kids have been bullied by qualified teachers (bullying from the latest one stopped immediately she realised I'd become a Parent Governor- coincidence that?). Having a qualification does not mean you are going to be a good teacher & there ARE teachers out there (apologies to all you teaching MNetters, to whom this does NOT apply!!) who are in the profession because they couldn't think of anything else to do & liked the thought of the long holidays! I've met them, & they don't even like children!!

On the other hand there are people who would make great teachers who are put off at the thought of an extra year studying. I know they have this bursary now, but someone earning £20K for example, can't live on £6k.. even for only a year.

well as a parent, I'm a bit shocked at this. I may have not understood fully, but how you describe it susanmt, I would not want my sons to be taught by someone who has:

1. No official accountabilty. If I have a complaint and the school do not uphold it, there is nothing I can do.

2. No formal appraisal. If he is underperforming, there will be no independent body to measure this.

I will be at the mercy of the school. Fine if the school is a reputable one, expects high standards from all its teachers, listens to parents' concerns, is not afraid to act. Fine if the head gives lots of support to the teachers, fine if I personally get on with the head. Not so fine if this is not so.

Also, this teacher is still going to carry out his chaplain duties? not going to embark on any training? only thinking of teaching for a couple of years? so teaching is a part time, stop gap job for him? And on top of this, he is not just giving the occasional lesson, but teaching three subjects regularly?

Ok he has a degree in two of them, he's got lots of youth work experience, he has enthusiasm and must have impressed them at interview. Still sounds worrying to me.

I am not saying that paper qualifications make a good teacher. No way. But that's not the point here IMO. It's a red herring to talk about what makes a good teacher. I believe that some people are natural teachers. I can see that teachers need to learn teaching on the job. I have been taught by some great trainee teachers in my time. But does this man consider himself a trainee teacher? does he feel he has something to learn from his colleagues? will he welcome their suggestions? I am just a parent here, I don't know. Perhaps this man feels he knows it all already. Who will tell him he needs to change things if he is wrong? Is he just herer for a trial period? what internal assessment will the school carry out - will parents be aware of this?

It's not so much the lack of training that bothers me. It's the lack of accountablity. As a parent, I am having to place far more trust in the school. It may all work out. Butto my mind a safety net has gone.

I have to confess that in my state school it is expected that a teacher teaches other subjects. I teach two other subjects and also citizenship on top of the subject I was trained in.

During times of teacher shortages we have PE teachers teaching science and a mixture teaching maths.

My goodness PR that would never be allowed here. I have done other subjects for a few days when on supply, but only when work had been supplied by someone qualified in that subject. I would, tbh, point blank refuse to regularly teach a class where I did not know the subject. What would be the point in me teaching maths??? I was terrible at maths!

tigermoth - you have made my original point a lot more eloquently than I did.

I personally believe that all teachers should be appropriately qualified. I am amazed that there are actually 'unqualified' teachers in classrooms. With reference to the student midwife earlier, a qualified midwife is accountable for any action they undertake. The student is in a formal training programme and is not just learning 'on the job'. I agree that good teachers are 'born' that way, but they must have formal training IMO.

I was amazed when my friend became a college lecturer without any teaching experience. She got given a pack and told to work from it. Her hourly rate is far greater than mine! She has now undertaken some formal training in education but I was appalled that peolpe are paying to go to college and be taught by someone learning it out of a pack!! Further Education (FE) institutions do not have the requirement for formal training like the schools do (I'm in Scotland too)

Ikwym about college lecturers not necessarily being qualified, Mears. Several friends have set themselves up with nice little numbers at various colleges in subjects in which they have no formal qualifications at all! Once they've got in, they've been able to expand their 'portfolio' of subjects and have been raking in a fortune. It's a very odd situation.

I see your point, however Further Ed teachers, even those with qualifications tend to earn less than those in schools. Also if you are on the unqualified regester you earn quite a bit less than onthe qualified. Starting salaeries on level 1 of both regesters differ by almost £5,000 a ear, a substantial amount considereng the starting sallery for an NQT is about £17, 500 IIRC

Message withdrawn

bloss, my problem is that I am having to trust the school more than usual. My trust is being tested. If the school had already made a habit of employing unaccountable, unqualified teachers, and I was happy with the teaching and the way the school supervised its teachers, then fair enough. But if the school's other teachere were qualified and accountable then the risks from my point of view would be greater.

As an aside, I think there is a differnce between unqualifited,unaccountable teachers teaching adults and unqualified, unacountable teachers teaching children. Children are more vulnerable. Many adult students in evening classes etc can vote with their feet and leave if the course if the teaching is not to their liking. And then join another class/college. Children in the state primary system can't leave so casually as a rule. And there is a higher level of pastorial care expected IME when teachers have a class of children.

Message withdrawn