what's this about all teachers having to do a masters degree now?

[ADDICTEDtosayingHAAAAAAAPYxmas]

is it just new teachers or existing ones aswell? what do people think of it? i do think it is a good idea cos a lot of the time teachers can't explain things cos they don't know the info that well themselves- they textbook teach as my dad calls it and i think this will stop that. on the other hand we once had this chemistry teacher who had done a masters and he bad because of it cos he couldn't explain things to us in simple terms.

Lol... Good teaching is more than academic qualifications. A good teacher has a certain X factor. Ie. the ablity to communicate well, relate to children as well as subject knowledge.

I think that the present system of training teachers is perfectly effective. Teachers mainly learn on the job rather than from lectures.

I had a fanastic Physics teacher with just a pass degree. She had spent three years at university partying. However high level physics knowledge is not required for teaching GCSE classes. A strong personality and good communication skils are!

I think that if teachers were to do masters, it should be by choice and when they have several years experience under their belt. Ie. the present situation! After all how can do a research project in teaching if you are not a qualfied teacher?

apparently they would qualify as a teacher and do a master in the early years on their job.

I work with excellent teachers who have a bachelors degree. I was taught by a dreadful teacher who had a Phd.

If you have a degree in the subject you teach, teaching up to A level is relatively simple, in terms of your subject knowledge.

Being a good teacher involves knowing your subject and being able to put it over to the kids.

Having a masters, even in education, isn't going to be a guarantee of teaching ability.

RT, totally agree wit you.

My brother was put in for teacher of the year. He is an exceptional teacher. He has a cert ed

One of the best teachers I know only has a 3rd class degree. However, I do think for high-level GCSE groups and A level, at least a 2:1 Honours should be required. As a mentor for training-teachers, I have been very shocked at the lack of what I would consider to be very basic subject knowledge with some of them but they could do a Masters in a specific area and still have lots of gaps in their subject knowledge, so I'm not sure that making them all do a Masters would help things really.

Of course once we all get this extra qualification no doubt we will be given a large pay rise to reflect our higher qualifications.

Just wondering when we would actually study for this? Wouldnt mind if we were given paid year, would be lovely actually. WOuldnt make a blind bit of difference to my teaching ability though!

I don't even know about this

Too busy teaching to read or listen to news. Masters degree haha, I'd love to do one, but are they going to give us lots of lovely time to do this?

Realistically, I think not (unless it's "cascade" training of course)

...another bloody govenment iniative...WHEN are they going to leave us alone

If it ever becomes essential I will fork out the £50 (or whatever it is now) and claim my MA from Oxford.

A masters degree in our subject,or in 'Education'?

I think it is fairly nonsensical. Who is going to train for a what amounts to a poorly paid job for someone holding a masters degree? If you're going to spend that much time/money on your education wouldn't you want something that's a bit better paid once you actually start teaching.

I also agree that classroom practice is what essentially makes a good teacher. I had a very intelligent maths teacher with amazing subject knowledge but he couldn't get it across to save his life.

Apparently this is all part of a drive to make Britain a great place to be a child - hmmm - I'm a bit dubious that forcing children into reading before they actually start school is the way to do this.

And no doubt we would have to pay for the pleasure as well........or perhaps our "contributions" to the Teaching Council Thingy could be used [cynical emoticon]

Will someone remind me why this money is deducted from my wages and paid to them.....because I appear to have forgotten[cynical emoticon#2]

it's not terribly clear but i would imagine to get teachers to do it the government would have to pay. i assumed it would be a masters in education, like a follow on from the B.Ed. as opposed the subject you specialise in - cos some a lot of teacher teach more than one subject and primary school teachers teach all of them!

have just read this - it says "all new teachers to be able to study for a masters degree" - so it seems you don't have to but the oppurtunity will be there if you want to - implying that it is paid for?

to be able

Odd though. Because Masters tend to be more specialisd don't they? And teachers are generalists. Personally, I would find a bit of degree level training in Ecology of more use in my teaching than my Biochemistry PhD.

quite.

The neurobiology research I did didn't cover the action potential, but my bachelors degree did

Interesting. Wonder what they will come up with next?!

I've never heard of teachers having to have a Masters degree. Masters in what?

Is it their specialism or in Education? If it's in their specialism, I can see no value, other than to make the school's staff list look impressive.

"One of the best teachers I know only has a 3rd class degree. However, I do think for high-level GCSE groups and A level, at least a 2:1 Honours should be required."

Surely a 2:1 is a bit high. Do you really need that level of knowledge to teach GCSE. I got excellent grades with the my Physics teacher who had a pass degree.

In science you often get teachers teaching outside their specialism. Sometimes a science teacher doesn't even have A-level in the GCSE subject they are teaching.

However provided the teacher is concienous and reasonably intelligent, they can teach well. There are lots of biology teachers who teach GCSE higher level physics well.

I don't have O level physics. I can teach it though. It really isn't hard to pick it up to GCSE level, and far enough beyond to be useful. Learning is much easier now than it was when I was 15. I'm pretty well grounded in Science generally and DH is an engineer .

I teach A-level Physics but only have a Higher myself, coupled with an Engineering degree. It's safe to say that the AS academic content I am teaching is well within the the O-grade Physics I did in the early 80s.

I nominated Physics as my PGCE specialism, so I count as a Physics specialist teaching Physics.

I trained to teach history but now teach English. It is about working hard and studying, I get good results - well the kids do. A good teacher can teach anything, it's about hard work and presence. Couldn'd do maths though....ugh, little confidence

Quite a lot of the stuff I did at 'O' level Physics is now on the AS sylabus. In fact the kids sometimes use our old 'o' level text book!

I have A level Physics and have no problems in teaching GCSE physics.

Sometimes I feel that, having found physics harder than Biology, I teach it better. I'm better at stripping things back to basics for the kids, because I had to do it myself.

DD1 has just been accepted to do a PGCE in Biology. She hasn't been told she will have to do a Masters Degree so I don't think it is compulsary.