Only 32 Troops to Teachers

[noblegiraffe]

There were 180 places in the first round of recruitment, only 41 places were taken up and only 32 teachers have emerged at the end.

www.tes.com.c.tes.ent.platform.sh/news/school-news/breaking-news/troops-teachers-scheme-misses-target

What a stupid waste of money.

Still, teacher recruitment crisis, what crisis? Eh, Nick Gibb?

"Stress free"

Totally different sorts of stressors.

It would be foolish to underestimate the stresses military life even when they're not on active operations. Also to try to draw comparisons generally.

And you'd look a bit of a tit of you tried to make a comparison to an operational tour.

Nobody saying teaching is any more or less stressful than being a soldier on active duty. People we responding to the claim that teaching is a stress-free job.

I was comparing teaching jobs to being on a battlefield. I was not meaning to imply that teachers don't have stress, or don't work hard.

I just think it would be a good way to reduce the numbers in our armed forces without making any of them redundant. And into a profession where it would be easy for them to be reservists, in case they were needed in an emergency.

Given we have teachers leaving schools in droves wouldn't it be a good idea to recruit people that can cope with stress? Of course we could pay 'regular' teachers a lot more so they wouldn't feel put out. And it wouldn't cost anything because the expense would be recouped by the reduction in the defence budget. Its a win win situation.

I completed teacher training last year and one of my colleagues was ex army (not STEM). Erm... His stories of his cushy army life explained why he did the barest of minimums. Not every soldier is on the front line! This wasn't through this scheme.

I certainly don't see any reason why soldiers can't become teachers. But surely it's a better use of money for them to go through normal channels? There is no money in education right now, that money would have been better used elsewhere.

Jeremycorbyn some ex military would be good teachers, some wouldn't.

You do realise that just because you can cope on a battlefield doesn't mean you can cope with the stress of a classroom and vice Verse?

Totally different skill sets. This post was not about teachers or the benefits military teachers - it was about the failure of a scheme that cost lots of money.

The difficulty some ex military have when teaching is that they expect the students to follow their instructions, we had one who simply didn't know what to do when a pupil refused!

My dad was military - RAF from age 17 to 44. You are trained to both give orders and take orders. He was a Flight Sergeant by retirement which meant he gave orders to many and took them from few. He found the civilian workplace very difficult initially and couldn't believe the 'defiance' (as he called it!) of ordinary people. He'd have lasted, by his own admission, 'three minutes in a comprehensive in Dagenham'.

Given we have teachers leaving schools in droves wouldn't it be a good idea to recruit people that can cope with stress?

Or maybe - bit radical I know, but - the government could stop interfering in a profession it clearly knows little about, and let teachers get on with teaching? Then you wouldn't need to seek out people you think could put up with the stress.

The government refuse to admit there is any sort of crisis or even slight niggling problem, so they certainly aren't going to stop interfering.

I couldn't give a shiny shite if we recruit ex-army or not, as long as they are good colleagues doing a good job. Recruitment might be a big issue, but it's nothing compared with retainment. The profession is haemorrhaging.

And it's definitely not stress-free.

I know it isn't the done thing to resurrect an old thread @noblegiraffe but I found some buried news in today's Sunday Times (so I can't link) that there is a plan to rejuvenate this failed , defunct scheme. They plan to attach a bursary of 40k as an incentive to leaving military personnel (3 years' training, two years with bursary: not sure why other than expense).

Couldn't see what the differences were from the previous scheme tbh... it wasn't a very detailed article! Even the ST was at pains to point out its spectacular failure last time round!

I am not in teaching but do have some knowledge of how hard it is for troops to retrain into any other profession and I would say that retraining 32 troops to be fully trained teachers is an accomplishment within itself.

I think you need to view it from a different angle in terms of creating a career for personnel that may not find transition into a civilian career that easy.

My DD is possibly looking at a career in teaching (although only in Yr11). I would dearly love to see some positive press on teaching to encourage more of our younger generation into this field... We need positive role models and I actually think EX Military personnel are positive role models (one of DD's teachers is EX Miltary and she is a very positive role model helping out with Dofe outside school etc)

I think you need to read some comments on the thread. I have resurrected this because the last scheme failed but the government seems to want to (very quietly) resurrect it.

My main issue is the erosion of the qualifications required to be a teacher. And the throwing of (a lot of) money at a scheme similar to one that patently failed. A few years on we can now say the government's plans for the first scheme was to get thousands - thousands!- of ex military personnel into classrooms! There were obviously many more attractive prospects!

I am not suggesting someone leaving the military with A levels and a degree should not be able to take up teacher training.

I do tend to think anyone who wants to be a teacher at the age of 16 will commit themselves to it and make a great teacher. I am not one who tries to put youngsters off, personally.

... but helping out with DofE (whilst great if you like that sort of thing) constitutes a tiny proportion of what teaching is...

I suspect the ex military teacher you know qualified via the usual route?

A quick look at the old Troops To Teachers site suggests they didn't even require A levels. I may have misinterpreted as there is loads of jargon (which probably put some potential applicants off!!)

Rightly or wrongly I think the government are I assume looking at an over resource in one area (military) and an under resource in teaching and trying to manage both situations .... its just a shame if they have marketed the scheme to alienate current teachers by using terms like military ethos” into struggling schools.

I didn't mean to imply that dofe was a large part of teaching ...but just a very good teacher who had additional skills who was using them to benefit the school by volunteering her weekends to assist students to gain confidence and learn outdoor skills and teamwork.

I think you are looking at the old details : there aren't any details on the new programme other than 40k bursaries (which is more than graduates with 1sts get..)

Oh god Piggy does the DfE not have any new ideas (like retaining teachers??)

I just googled and found this: "The Sunday Times published an exclusive piece on a new £40,000 bursary for ex-service personnel to retrain as a teacher. From September, courses at universities nationwide will offer the incentive to veterans who have left full-time employment in the British Army, Royal Air Force or Royal Navy in the last five years, or anyone leaving before training begins. The scheme will be formally announced this week.

Defence Secretary Gavin Williamson said:

Through leadership, teamwork and problem solving, veterans are ideally suited for a career in teaching once they leave the Armed Forces."

Leadership, teamwork and problem solving? What about subject knowledge and the skill to impart it, endless patience, and an ability to connect with young people? I suppose at least he didn't mention 'discipline'.

I also found a programme that launched last year called 'Further Forces' about getting ex military to teach in FE - engineering and the like. That, at least, makes sense.

I think leadership is the slightly misplaced word here...not sure what problem solving is always required either! To me, it is not the main feature of the job that's problem ignoring

I juts don't get why of all things they want to resurrect something which, with absolutely no quibbling from any political or educational quarters, completely failed.

I am guessing the bursary approach is fixing a perceived problem with the previous incarnation?

My SCITT started with 64 students in September. We’re down to 60 now, and I know at least two trainees who do not intend to seek a teaching job for next year.

So we’re on a drop out rate of 7%. So far...

I find it incredibly offensive that the government are suggesting offering £40k bursaries for this scheme when they have scrapped bursaries for nurses.

Have they? Goodness, that is offensive. They spent millions on the Troops to teacher scheme at an estimated £62000 spend on each teacher who actually qualified.

Do they not want any of these troops to become medics and paramedics, nurses etc? For all I know there is a different scheme to do with this...

Its just a bit gimmicky. I'm sure many ex soldiers would and do make excellent teachers but it was sold as something to sort out schools and that made it a gimmick, plus they wasted a great deal of money on it.
on a personal note, I worked with 2 ex - soldiers, one is an outstanding teacher and the other was an complete arse.

From looking at the news stories about the original scheme, they had loads of applicants but very few were suitable to even start the course. The £40k is surely just going to tempt even more non-starters to apply? What's the competition and who are they trying to draw in?

That £40k surely must be spread over 3 years of a BEd or something, otherwise it's just bloody ridiculous.