Do you think that primary teachers should have a degree?

[Rumpel]

I am relying on the wealth of experience and strong opinions of all you Mnetters out there to discuss this topic so that I can see how the general opinion lies. TIA

Lots of ways Mz.

Submitting drafts of assignments for marking/correction prior to final submission.

Being allowed to resubmit work after failing.

Having a tutor walk you through coursework.

Having spelling/grammar errors being overlooked because it's unfair on people for whom English is not their first language, or because it's not considered material.

Having exams where the students are given the exam questions beforehand, and exams are "open book", or students are allowed to bring a "cheat sheet" of notes in with them.

(all these things happen at a local university to me - it's very poorly ranked, but it's a "degree" nonetheless).

Seriously, there are many, many graduates in the last few years who have no idea how to use grammar, punctuation, spelling, write just a wall of text etc. Who write "we done/I seen/could of etc. Don't know how to use journals, don't know the basics of research.

It's what happens when people who aren't academic or particularly bright go to poor universities that only require a D and an E at A-level. Yes, it's about bums on seats in some universities.

I do not think these degrees should mean a person should be eligible to train as a teacher ahead of someone who is more intelligent but chose not to go to university, for whatever reason.

If someone is intelligent and a good teacher in the wide range of subjects primary needs, then they should be given a chance to teach, or at least do an accelerated course to allow them to.

Yes I too have seen people use text speak grammar/English IYKWIM in assigments🤔

Seriously rumpel? I think I might have to go and have a quiet cry in a corner.
I'm used to children cutting and pasting chunks of Wikipedia without actually being able to either read it or understand it, under the impression that they are 'doing research'. But those are children. Not graduates.

I thought that primary school teachers have always had to undertake what would now be cosidered degree level training that took a number of years - atleast since the Second World War.

Merry mouse, yes in state schools, certainly since early seventies, and probably much earlier, teachers have been required to have degree level equivilent training. The old Cert.Ed which I studied for in the mid seventies was replaced by B.Ed ( seemed to be identical in content at my university from my observations of the year group that followed me), my friend who trained in the early sixties also was required to have a Cert.Ed. Since the late seventies the teaching qualification has been a degree.
Someone will probably come along to correct me though!

Except HLTAs are allowed to teach too with or without a degree.
I teach whole classes at least four times/lessons a week. Some HLTAs teach all week but not in our school. This came about to cover PPA time initially. I also cover short absences such as Drs, hospital and dentist appointments. Illness last minute. Time out of school if some children are going to special events I then teach whoever is left. I'm not sure if it is right or not. I sit on the fence because I can see pros and cons for both views.

That certainly wasn't my experience when I studied AA. Writing had to be of an academic standard and nothing was overlooked. A friend completed his degree this year and I know he lost marks in his early assignments for poor grammar (writing as he would in informal emails to friends).

I absolutely agree that there are people who may not have done a degree who would make amazing teachers. But how would you prove they are 'intelligent' enough if 3 years of undergraduate study, a year of teacher training and maths and literacy skills tests aren't cutting it ?

A question: could a teacher with a degree in early primary teach in a secondary school?

We have vice versa in Sen.

What I will say is that the in service teacher training really does help us identify a very good teacher irrespective of back ground. And probably equips them very well too.

Geraniumred - don't cry. They were not degree students lol. Still 😮 though.
Clarella - I think it entirely depends on the degree of said primary teacher. As secondary school teaching is specific to subject then I think, in most cases, the degree would need to be specific to the subject in order to teach effectively. ASN is a specialised area also and any teacher entering this area needs to have extra kit in their tool box to cope with the multifarious demands of this particular area in my opinion. I work in ASN at the moment.

I'd prefer a teacher to have 3 A grades at A-level (in traditional subjects) and the natural ability to teach, to someone with two Es and a 2:2 in management studies from the University of (Random Backwater Town).

That's why I think having an arbitrary 'degree' requirement before teacher training can be shooting yourself in the foot.

Mrz, didn't say all, said some. More than people realise though. Not all degrees/universities are equal.

Rumple - a ba hons teaching degree - early years. I can't see that translating to secondary?

Yes all our teachers in our setting for mld/ asd and complex needs have the 'right' attitude and manner.

So aye- you'd say if the 'face fitted,' a primary ba hons person could teach in a secondary school. If they were just a good kid/ people person?

Although I am a primary trained ASN teacher, I worked in secondary. In fact they preferred primary teachers, as secondary teachers rarely had any idea how to simplify work for pupils who needed additional help.

The secondary teachers had a great level of knowledge in their own subject,
but primary teachers were more used to differentiating work for children at varying levels

A friend who studied with me has only ever taught in secondary and FE. A teaching degree qualifies the person to teach across the age range.

So aye- you'd say if the 'face fitted,' a primary ba hons person could teach in a secondary school. If they were just a good kid/ people person?

No. Not what I said.

I said a secondary school teacher should have a degree in their subject, then do their teacher training.

Primary school, I said I wouldn't assume that someone who had a (any) degree was more intelligent than someone who didn't, nor better equipped with communication and organisational skills and able to impart study/learning/research methods, as has been suggested.

Primary school, IMO, needs a good all-rounder, with excellent maths and English skills, then some form of teacher training. If they are that and have a degree too, then excellent. If they are that and don't have a degree, they shouldn't be overlooked for teacher training in favour of someone with none of the above, but a degree in management or media or whatever.

Agreed AyeAmorak👍🏻

Yes, well said!
This has certainly been an interesting thread.
Wonders if Rumpel realised what a discussion a simple question would make. Make a good dissertation!

Primary teachers would be horrified at having their end of the profession stop being a profession, I would think.
There isn't some mystical way to assess all those skills, there's just an application form and an interview. Seeing if someone has a degree is a good short hand way of setting the standard.

Ditsy - yes I knew - hence why I asked and have used the stats data to form part of a presentation😉
Have been a mn for 9 + years so know the lively debate which can get going on here👍🏻😄

I don't have a degree (Dip Ed), but I have excellent passes in 4 highers that many prospective teachers nowadays would struggle to pass and have very good standards of spelling and grammar.

I work alongside recently trained teachers - all with degrees, some with honours - most cannot spell or speak English that is grammatically correct. There are countless mistakes in marking and wall displays, so having a degree is not necessarily an indication of ability to teach.

I will have a degree, and have been offered several places on PGCEs and a SCITT for my teacher training in Primary.
I think having a degree is, or should be, a good thing. It should give you all the skills that have already been mentioned and should offer a certain level of general knowledge and common sense (I know it doesn't always).
My degree will be an MA hons in archaeology and English language, it's a four year degree and honestly it's been seriously hard work. However that doesn't mean I can't do maths and science and I'm sick of the assumption that because I have an Arts degree I can only do Arts subjects. I actually did this degree because I thought it would be more challenging than my original first choice of going down the astrophysics line.
I'm also dyslexic and dyspraxic, doesn't mean I can't teach children to read or spell, it just means that I have to double check what I write (which teachers should do anyway) and I have a greater toolbox for helping children access the information, because I had to learn differently.
I also know where polar bears and penguins live!

I'd love mr dyslexic child to have the role model and support of a dyslexic teacher

That would be my, not mr, good advice about checking what you write pp!