Headteacher won't disclose qualifications of TA

[AStreetcarNamedBob]

My son starts reception in January and it's a long story but the "teacher" is actually a TA

I've emailed the head master and asked to know what Mrs Xs qualifications are (ie QTS or NVQ level 3 or whatever)

He has refused to disclose saying that he won't discuss his staff without a good reason. Apparently the fact that my son is going to be entrusted to this women for 6 hours a day is not a good enough reason to be told her qualifications.

Would this surprise you? Does it seem an unreasonable question. The head is acting as shocked as if I were asking something personal like what colour pants she wears.

All I wanted was a response saying Mrs X holds a level X in early years studies or something.

If a universally-recognised qualification to teach disappears, to be replaced by various on-the-job apprenticeships, you lose the existence of a body of people with a universally-recognised qualification.

You lose a body of people who have been trained to think critically about education in it's general sense, rather than trained in how to deliver the teaching a particular school likes, at a particular moment in time, or what a particular government wants, at a particular time.

You also have, potentially, a group of people trained to deliver teaching developed oy in the style of a particular school, holding a qualification with -potentially - limited recognition.

That really diminishes the bargaining power - in terms of employability - of those individuals.

Needless to say. It would have consequences in terms of unionisation and political power.

It has a knock-on effect in terms of quality of education, too.

I can't understand why there isn't more of a protest.

It is massively unfair on TAs, too, who might be doing this work for a fraction of the pay - quite possibly in the hope it will lead to a paid School Direct position, or an accreditation at some point down the line. An internship, if you will.

I can really see why people will choose the non-PGCE route in future. PGCEs are herd-going and expensive.

To answer some questions (trying not to out myself):

It is a tiny, extremely rural, island community. There is no other school option. It is a state school. We don't have any of the mainland issues of "not getting a place" etc etc.

There is one adult in the reception class. She holds an NVQ Level 2. I am 99% certain about this because the community is so tiny we all know her and her background.

She is officially on the staff list as "Learning Support Assistant" that is all the information provided.

There is a QTS teacher in Year 1 (separate classroom) and the school says because YR & Y1 together equal less than 25 pupils that the Y1 teacher is the official teacher for YR as well (from the other side of a wall)

I'm actually really really shocked at the amount of people saying it's none of my business. This is a women to whom I"m going to entrust sole charge of my child and you think I don't have a right to know her qualifications?

I agree it is massively unfair on TA's. Many of them are doing it because its term time only work, less stress than teachers have due to shortened hours and they take the loss of pay that results. What will happen to them if they lose those benefits and dont gain in terms of pay?

mumtryingherbest your link does indeed show all those teachers' qualifications, but it also shows a lot who just have degrees and not a teaching qualification and additionally "Ms Nicholls" - form 2N with no qualifications next to her name at all.

But it is a private school so they don't have to have any qualifications.

This is what Gove et al hope to achieve in state schools with academisation. Trainees with only a degree are also allowed to be teachers "school direct salaried" - they have maybe a couple of hours a week for training and the rest of the time they are the sole teacher in the classroom.

Then the class will count as a mixed age R/1 class with the teacher responsible for them, the Reception children might actually be next door with the teaching assistant but they are still the responsibility of the qualified teacher. Not ideal but perhaps the school thinks the alternative-that all 25 children are in the same room with both members of staff-is worse.

But by your own admission you have no other choice, so what do the details matter anyway?

I work as a TA and have had the misfortune of working alongside teachers that have qualifications coming out of their ears and are hopeless teachers that don't even seem to like children! But I also know TA's that are great teachers and fantastic with children.

I think the details matter because op, along with myself and others facing a similar situation, believes that her child is essentially being taught 'on the cheap'. It is a slippery slope - a qualified teacher in every other classroom, down to only one in each key stage...
It is unfair on the ta who never set out to be a teacher and is doing what appears to be the same job as a teacher for a massively reduced wage. It us unfair on those of us who have put the time and effort into gaining a teaching qualification who are seeing our profession being eroded. I, as a supply teacher, am worried that I'll effectively be priced out of the market.

I suppose it complicates things that the women in the reception classroom shouts a lot, has had multiple complaints put in about her treatment of the children and my friends children who've had her in the past say that they're scared of her.

So yes I know that qualifications aren't the be all and end all I suppose I'm just wondering if the school are breaking the law by having an NVQ level 2 member of staff (thats lower than the staff are qualified at the nursery!) as they might be 'forced' to employ someone else instead.

" But by your own admission you have no other choice, so what do the details matter anyway? "

wow I'm glad i'm not your child!

Teaching assistants may be great and fantastic with the children are being taken advantage of if they're being expected to do a qualified teacher's job on a teaching assistant's pay.

That's rally crap-I wouldn't be happy either, OP.

If schools with a very small intake had to have a qualified teacher for every year group they would not be financially viable, so would end up closing.

Ask the Head to move all the Reception children into the yr 1 classroom-problem solved.

If schools with a very small intake had to have a qualified teacher for every year group they would not be financially viable, so would end up closing.

Nobody is suggesting that though? There are plenty of schools with mixed year groups. Why can't the y1 teacher teach y1/yR?

My next door neighbour teaches in a tiny village school and has reception, year 1 and y2 al together-she still only has 24 in her class.

I would be concerned about any school that doesn't appear to action that many complaints about a single teacher.

I would wonder about the leadership of the head and the chair of the GB.

But by your own admission you have no other choice, so what do the details matter anyway?

I agree with this statement, even if you don't, OP.

Since you apparently already know from local gossip she is not a qualified teacher and your DC cannot go to another school, what do you plan to do with the information you have?

But by your own admission you have no other choice, so what do the details matter anyway?

wow I'm glad i'm not your child!

I actually didn't mean that in a snarky way. But am asking you genuinely, knowing her qualifications...what genuine difference does it make? What can you do with the information. I may simply be missing something important and you might be able to educate me.

I think in these circumstances, you could go in & express concern as to how the teacher is going to effectively divide herself between two rooms.

If the argument is that she is the classroom teacher, with whom the buck stops, for all pupils in the YR/Y1 cohort, then it's reasonable to ask how this will work in practice.

Maybe she will be planning the work & the TA then supervising. Doesn't sound ideal.

I would say firstly the head is perfectly within rights not to give her qualifications.

Secondly, you have gone about it really badly. If you know she doesn't have qualifications, what on earth is the point in trying to get the head to say that? All it achieves is riling various people and giving you something to gossip about.
On the basis he has to go there, much better to wait until he's got a place-plenty of time afterwards and request a meeting with the head. You express concern that it seems the reception class is being taught by a TA and he will probably say they're sharing with year 1. So you ask what proportion does she spend in each class. You see year R is such an important year...

That way you're working with the school to look for a solution.

You may well find that the teacher spends more time in year R Tha gossip has told you.

I know that my PGCE course was massively useful in establishing who had a knack for teaching and who didn't. There were quite a few highly educated people who were passionate about their subects who struggled to communicate this to children. As a parent, you want those people weeded out before they are put in front of your child's GCSE Chemistry class!

Of course the teacher training system isn't foolproof and there are teachers in schools who shouldn't be there, but I still maintain it is better than having no standard base level at which a teacher enters a school.

I thought my PGCE was very useful in giving me a framework from which I could develop. I would have hated to be in a school, responsible for classes and only have an overstretched dept head reaponsible for my training. I liked having a proper mentor in the school and two tutors at college who were experts in professional and subject development. I went into my first job feeling that the bases were covered.

People asking about our options - we will move. We would go back to the mainland and find a different school it's just a huge hassle obviously! (Understatement)

witchend he has got a place. He's definitely able to go to that school.

Are you in England?

No we aren't