Should your child's reception teacher have GCSE maths and English?

[mrz]

https://www.tes.com/news/school-news/breaking-news/dfe-drops-gcse-maths-and-english-requirement-early-years-educators

OK. I will use all the knowledge I've gained from this thread to answer all the questions:

• I expect a Reception teacher (the one doing the planning and main delivery) to have Maths & English GCSE. This is because I expect a Reception teacher to also be qualified to teach year 6 and I'd definitely want that of them. I would be a bit unsure of a school who employed a teacher who didn't have Maths & English GCSE or who was restricted to only teaching the youngest as it would show some lack of flexibility.
• I would expect all TAs in primary schools to have at least level 2 Functional Skills in Maths & English.

In a nursery setting, either attached to a school or as childcare, I would expect someone to be educated to degree(?) standard in something related to child development. They would be responsible for overseeing that appropriate activities are being undertaken.

I would not expect all staff to have GCSEs in Maths & English, especially those in the 'baby rooms'. However again I would expect anyone dealing with 3&4 yo to have level 2 Functional Skills in Maths&English. I'm still unsure what I think is needed for the toddlers.

I also expect that anyone with Level 3 EYE qualifications doing childcare should be paid more than NMW.

I would expect reception teacher to have same qualification as all the other primary teachers have.

I would expect a reception teacher to have comprehension and communication skills exceeding those demanded by GCSE English. I have re-read the whole bloody thread, I am disappointed.

I am also wondering - as I have seem mrz's posts for a large number of years - whether her account has been hacked, as her recent posts here and elsewhere on MN ave been so different in style, manner and approach from those a little longer ago. I remember her as a kind, knowledgeable poster, always willing to give freely of time and energy to post fully in answer to queries and difficulties. I appreciate that any poster can run out of energy and time for repeatedly posting on what must seem very similar threads, but it dos seem very odd.

Are you OK, mrz?

"I expect a Reception teacher (the one doing the planning and main delivery) to have Maths & English GCSE. This is because I expect a Reception teacher to also be qualified to teach year 6 and I'd definitely want that of them."

"I would expect reception teacher to have same qualification as all the other primary teachers have."

"I would expect a reception teacher to have comprehension and communication skills exceeding those demanded by GCSE English."

Thank you ...

"but they contribute to the discussion in the thread which is ongoing and out of your hands."

And that's fine I'm not the one with a problem the way the thread has moved

Mrz What is your opinion on all of this?

cant ditto

I would expect the teacher to have QTS and the be able to teach in any year group and the TA to be well qualified and have good English and Maths skills.

How do you define 'well qualified' and 'good' ?

Very difficult to quantify with watered down training. Not all level 3 qualifications are equal IMHE.
Someone who studied for ten weeks part time v someone who studied for 2 years full time...

Does anyone here think that a reception teacher shouldn't be a qualified teacher like all other primary teachers e.g. Degree, teaching qualification, proper GCSEs?

Anyone?

Bloody hope not noble!

Nobody?
However, there is an overlap and an EYT is qualified for nursery and reception, just not the rest of primary.
Some areas still have middle schools, so Y7s are being taught by junior teachers, fine. I would not take that teacher and drop them in Y10 bottom set maths.
To allow for all the variations there needs to be slight overlap.

"However, there is an overlap and an EYT is qualified for nursery and reception, just not the rest of primary."
A EYT currently can't teach in a school nursery or reception class Pestilent...that's one of the changes mentioned in the link.

They can teach in an academy or free school.

Anybody can teach in a free school or an academy!
I'll see if I can find the advert for head if maths stating GCSE maths would be desirable

http://www.yorkshireeveningpost.co.uk/news/education/failing-leeds-school-advertises-for-unqualified-maths-teachers-1-6261730

That's disturbing, they must be really desperate for teachers. Making teaching a proper respected profession that is difficult to get into (because only the best should teach) is the way to go, not making it easier for unqualified people to teach.

Private schools routinely employ unqualified teachers.

I am doing my level 3 early years educator at the moment, (2 year, whilst working part time - I haven't heard about being able to do it in a matter of weeks....not sure how this is possible, but would have been nice!!) When I qualify I will be able to manage a setting, and think all level 3s should also have maths and English gcses.

I just think there is a huge difference between childcare and ey education, and treating them as the same thing is a big mistake.

I think that ad is proof that schools save money by employing NMW admins who miss the point. You have to show your GCSE certificates and PGCE but when I mislaid my degree certificate nobody batted an eyelid.
EYT do have GCSEs I am a bit surprised they can't do maintained nursery. But as we have seen on this thread, nursery provision across the country is a mish mash.

It can be enormously difficult to recruit teachers in shortage subjects, such as maths, for 'more difficult to teach in' schools. Such teachers ould generally, unless they have particular reasons for wanting to enter a more challenging school, will tend to go for jobs in the 'better' schools.

I do know of schools where it has been absolutely impossible to recruit specialist maths teachers, and as a result teachers who teach other subjects have been trained 'in house' to teach Maths.

I am so glad our DC went to maternelle in France where fully qualified primary teachers are the rule.

A school in special measures would much rather employ a good, qualified Maths teacher, however much more they cost than an unqualified teacher. It is not a money saving exercise. It is a recruitment crisis.

If childcare wasn't a minimum wage job, many women wouldn't be able to go back to work.

I think this isn't the right way to frame the issue. Childcare needs to be of high quality - as does schooling - and its costs should be met in significant part by the state in order for this to be so.