Tuition fees / potential for unqualified teachers in Scotland

[Scotslassie1]

Worrying. 😰 See below-

'Gavin Williamson refuses to say Westminster won't impose tuition fees on Scots.

THE UK Education Secretary has refused to rule out the possibility Westminster will use its post-Brexit powers to impose tuition fees on Scots students.

Gavin Williamson was speaking in Parliament earlier today when he pointedly avoided saying the Internal Market Bill would not be used to “undermine” the free tuition policy and set university fees in Scotland from London.

The Secretary of State for Education was asked to confirm that the Internal Market Bill will not undermine the ability of the Scottish Government to set university fees in Scotland or to continue providing free university tuition.

Williamson gave an evasive answer which suggested that “proper use” of the higher education market across the whole of the UK would be decided in London.

He said: “The honourable lady seems to always miss the point that we live in a United Kingdom of four nations together where there is one single market, and we have to ensure there is efficient and proper use of that market so that all four nations properly benefit.”

Last month, the General Teaching Council for Scotland (GTCS) warned that the Internal Market Bill could be used to force registration of unqualified teachers from outside Scotland, by centralising the teacher registration process at a UK level.

GTCS chief executive Ken Muir said: "The bill makes it quite clear that the General Teaching Council would be expected to register and give full registration to any teacher from any of the jurisdictions in the UK.

"And if they are in the teaching profession in England, irrespective of whether they are highly qualified or unqualified, the expectation is that we would register them."

Re teaching qualifications, I think it's definitely a positive thing that teachers are required to have a level of qualification. However, I think there has to be some kind of accreditation or grandfathering type option for those who move between the differing systems. Qualifications by themselves dont a great teacher make. I am sure that there are many great teachers who don't have the qualifications, just as there will be qualified teachers that are poor. What happens at the moment if someone moves from England and wants to teach in Scotland?

Tuition fees I wouldn't be too worried about and I say that with two DC in University. It doesn't really matter too much how much they owe, they will be paying it back at the same amount, just for longer. It might level the playing field in terms of gaining places at University for Scottish students as this would mean the end of the limits on places.

Well if there is one way to absolutely increase the drive for independence it would be to impose change on Scotland in respect of devolved areas.

I’m not opposed to tuition feee but there are many other factors that need to considered including loan amounts, repayment thresholds. Plus many in Scotland pay higher taxes - if there are less benefits from paying higher taxes there will be less willingness to pay.

That said the cap on Scottish student numbers is something that needs to be looks at.

If someone has qualified in England they need to do a probationary period in Scotland before they are qualified to teach here.

A teacher working in England with no qualifications cannot get a job as a teacher in Scotland.

We'll need to agree to disagree on the tuition fees font. 😉

I don't get the comment about fees. Why is there no disadvantage to paying back a higher debt, which takes longer than paying back a lower debt?
And Westminster will probably want Scottish students to pay the same very high rate of interest as English students.
If this happens, there'll be a bigger vote for independence.

You're correct NewRoman. 😢

I'm not saying the English model is perfect and the one we should adopt, but there are loads of disadvantages to the current no fees model.

It stifles people opting for courses at English universities that might suit them more, it limits opportunities on the more prestigious courses in Scotland as the amount paid by ScotGov is not enough to be sustainable for the university and places are capped. The maintenance loans are not enough for DC who want to live away from home and they have no way of borrowing more. This is on even modest parental income which takes no account of whether the parents are supporting other children either at home or in further/higher education.

So someone with a take home pay of under 27k is expected to top up the max loan by at least £3k per student per year, regardless of what outgoings they have or people they have to support. The loan may or may not even cover rent.

I'm not saying no fees is a bad thing, but it's not great either.

On the payment of student loans (SAAS loans in Scotland, loans for fees and living costs in England) I think the point that posters are making is that many who take out student loans will never pay back the full amount so it doesn’t matter what that full amount is or, to some extent, what the interest rate is. The more important factor is the actual monthly repayment and, with the lower starting salary at which Scottish students start their repayments, Scottish students are making higher monthly payments right until the point at which their loan is paid off, which might be 20+ years into their career.

So, a Scottish student will have accumulated a debt of £19,000 (4 years of SAAS at £4,750) that’s accumulating interest at a low interest rate (its linked to inflation/RPI) and repayments start when the student earns £19,390, and they pay back 9% of their salary over £19,390.

English student will have their living costs (probably a higher loan but only for three years), maybe £18k or so. And also tuition fees of £27,750. And a higher interest rate (also linked to RPI but with an additional percent or so). But the payment threshold of earnings is £26,575 so they are not repaying until they reach a higher salary, and paying back 9% of salary over that amount.

So, if there are two graduates in the same job earning £25k, the Scottish graduate will pay back £505 over the year. The English graduate will pay zero as still under the salary threshold. On £30k salary Scottish student will pay £955 over the year. The English student will pay £308. At £35k salary Scottish £1,405, English £758, and so on...

This is not a comment on Gavin Williamson’s comments yesterday, just trying to clarify this point. It has always surprised me, given that free university tuition is such a flagship policy (and, I believe, a good one) why SAAS loans are so low (just £4,750 per year if family earns more than £34k) and why the repayment threshold is so much lower than the rest of the U.K. (I know there is stated intention this threshold will be raised but I don’t think any of us should bank on that happening)

So, yes as a headline it sound horrendous that an English graduate will have a debt of £50k plus, while the Scottish graduate will only have £19k. But then it’s not great that a Scottish graduate will be making monthly repayments quite a bit higher than English graduates right until the point the debt is paid off. If the graduate is still in Scotland at this point they will likely be in the higher tax-paying bracket anyway so that’s not necessarily a massive benefit over the English student still paying off loans.

I really don't want a tit for tat re loans but Scottish people can choose to attend an English unversity if they want to. I know on my application I had to put if I had siblings at University and that wasn't too long ago. If we had to pay tuition fees you or your children would need to pay more. I don't want a life long debt for my children due to their education.

I know, public thread, but there's been lots of threads on Scotland vs Eng Uni costs and my point is the SG won't have control of it in the future due to the bill the Tories are putting through.

They don't ask about siblings and it makes no difference. I currently have DC in the system. Yes they can apply to English universities but only a tiny percentage do as obviously they think that the fee status makes a big difference.

The current system isn't good and isn't fair and if its looked at as part of the UK wide higher education system then I don't think that's a bad thing.

We need equality of opportunity.

So you're ok with the Tories being in control of Scottish University costs? ( As that's what the bill says- a UK Gov minister will decide what happens across the UK). Also, are you happy with non qualified teachers being able to gain employment as teachers in Scotland?

We'll need to agree to disagree.

That's not what I said. You are also talking about the tories when I presume you mean the UK government? I don't think qualifications are everything when it comes to teaching but I would expect that there is a competency assessment undertaken. I believe it's pretty difficult to get rid of underperforming teachers which is also something that should be looked at. If a teacher was good at their job then I suppose I'd rather that than a shitty one who is qualified.

Sounds like you're ok with the bill. 👍

Not looked at it to be honest. As a non tory, non snp voter, I'm quite used to lots of stuff being imposed on me that I didn't vote for. Sure it won't be last.

The GTC in Scotland has always imposed stricter standards for teachers than those in England. There are many trained-in-England teachers in schools, the GTC just checks the level of qualification they have and will ask for further training if necessary. I read stuff on here about staff in England teaching exam classes in subjects they did not train for, that would not happen here or would be very exceptional if it did. A degree+teaching diploma is the basic standard in Scotland. I don't think we want to go "lower" than that. Teachers wouldn't be being assessed on whether they are really good but unqualified, if that rule changes it would be any person qualified in England not just ones who were particularly good.

What happens in EU countries? Not being snarky, just wondering.

Presumably schools still have the option to employ the staff they want so if a teacher wasn't particularly good or wasn't qualified to the standard they preferred, they can offer the job to someone else?

Yes Mistress, my friend has been head of department in a few schools in England. There's been several times where the school's employed someone with no qualifications but is fluent in a language. She ends up tearing her hair out as they can't do the job without a ton of support. No idea how to write even a basic lesson plan or formative/ sumative assessment. I always think, would would the parents think if they knew?! I really don't want that here as it doesn't help anyone. Yes, I think HT's should have more autonomy regarding staff but teachers need to be qualified. Otherwise it's the kids that suffer.

And also if the UK Gov is in charge of Scottish education and the rules are changed re unqualified teachers, we could also see a replication of the schools seen as businesses - cost saving- employing unqualified teachers to save money that exists down South. Not good.

No idea how to write even a basic lesson plan or formative/ sumative assessment.

Surely that's a fault in recruitment? Why wouldn't you check that?

I'm guessing maybe because some areas have very high levels of immigration and lots of DC that don't have any english so they need native speakers more than they need people with teaching skills?

Aside from some areas in the bigger cities, I think that schools in SCotland don't have to deal with some of the issues that a lot of english schools face in trying to successfully educate large numbers of children who arrive not even speaking the language. And yet aren't they performing better overall? Or can't we compare anymore since we fell down the league tables and removed ourselves.

Yes, it's eminently desirable that teachers are highly qualified but I'm presuming that staff aren't just imposed on schools and that scottish schools will continue to operate in a different environment when they don't have to choose between a teacher who can communicate with the children adequately, and one who has teaching skills.

It's not currently a fault on recruitment as it's a basic part of our teacher training. So can be assumed. Yes every school could try to weed out candidates who degrees weren't really relevant enough to the subject being taught, who had minimal training in pedagogy etc, but we currently have a system that does that already! The GTCS will establish if your degree allows you to teach a certain subject, for example (as sometimes it is do with credits in certain subsidiary subjects). I don't think lowering standards are in anyone's interests, unless having a warm body in front of a class is the priority, which it may well be as the year goes on!

No WaxOn I'm talking modern foreign languages- French/ Spanish/ Italian. To mainly white (and affluent) areas.

You 'd need to ask the HT why they were taken on but the fact they're cheaper as they have no qualifications probably gives you the answer.

Yes some areas of Scotland aren't multicultural but in the ones that are, or at least in Glasgow, the teachers do a fantastic job- especially I think it's Annette Street School which has the most languages spoken in a school in the UK and the two lower primary teachers do a fantastic job of teaching English through play.

I assume that poster was talking about England where obviously it can't be presumed.

I agree that the better qualified the better, but that doesn't necessarily make them a good teacher. I don't think it's suggested that unqualified teachers will be imposed, it will still be up to the recruitment process to identify the best candidate and that may very well be the one with the desired qualifications.

I think that sometimes people (including me) make judgements based on their own experiences. I'm just pointing out that if you have half your class with no English, it can be a bit of a hard choice in terms of whether the need to communicate with the children whilst having to train someone to make up a lesson plan is better than someone who can make a lesson plan but us unable to communicate. Ideally you'd have candidates for the job that can do both obviously.

You're missing the point completely. We're not talking about a class where half have English as a second language. We're talking about where English is their first language. Anyone can be employed as a teacher in England. Primary teacher, maths teacher, business and management teacher. Modern Foreign Languages is just what I have personal experience of via my friend.

You're clutching at straws again just to argue something that you've not even looked at.

No I'm not missing the point, I was typing when you gave further information. I don't have a crystal ball.

At the end of the day they can say anything but recruitment can still do what it always does and employ the candidate that they want.

Yes and if we take on the model talked about , this will potentially be the cheapest candidate and the parents won't have a clue and the qualified teachers will be put aside.