Teaching to stop being a graduate-only profession - 18 year old teachers.

[noblegiraffe]

There were rumblings about this a while ago when the apprenticeship levy was introduced, but it looks like Justine Greening is going to introduce an apprencticeship route into teaching.

schoolsweek.co.uk/greening-teaching-will-cease-to-be-only-for-university-graduates/

I'm very concerned that in secondary schools, specialist subject knowledge won't be a pre-requisite for going into the classroom, it will be seen as something that can be picked up across the years, shortchanging the classes who get the apprentice in the first few years of the training (how long is an apprenticeship?).

In primary school, the education of a class for a full year could fall to someone just out of school themselves.

This isn't just about training on-the-job, we already have that as a route into teaching. This is about deprioritising a certain level of education for teachers and devaluing the profession. It's saying you don't need to be well-educated to teach, because you could be teaching straight out of school. The 'learning how to teach' part of any teacher training programme is so intense, that acquiring degree-level subject knowledge will certainly not be a priority from the start.

The wage for apprentices means this is just another way for schools to get teachers on the cheap and hang the consequences for education.

And knowing how many parents already view young teachers, fresh out of uni and just finished their PGCE, how will they take to having their child being taught by someone who hasn't even been to university?

As a TA I assume. Or as a cover supervisor.

NOT LOOK ANY DIFFERENT TO THE EXISTING SCHOOL BASED TRAINING PROGRAMMES.

Existing school-based training programmes require a degree. If as Justine Greening says, some are to not require a degree, then they will have to look different. No?

And if they won't be teaching for 3 years, why don't they just get a degree the usual way?

Because degrees cost £27,000, plus maintenance loans, plus you can't work much, which is a bit of an issue if you've got kids and a mortgage...

At secondary I doubt they'll look any different. At primary they could well have existing TAs as I have said before doing this. They'd be doing the same TA job, but studying as well.

All this talk of how it could work in primary schools....but there isn't a shortage of primary teachers is there? The major shortages are at secondary, where it seems even fans agree this won't work.

This degree they get will have to be a degree in education presumably, as I can't see how they can get a degree's worth of subject knowledge alongside the education component. So how can it ever work for secondary subject teachers?

I think we've come to the conclusion that for it to work in secondary you would need an entry criteria that required a degree.

It's the entry criteria for primary we're quibbbling about. If it's going to go through then I think it needs entry requirements that match those for degree entry.

Why do people keep comparing this to nursing? Nursing is still not a graduate entry profession in its entirety. Offering apprenticeships provides would be nurses with a potential step up from basic entry, surely?

Nursing is an important job - but it is not teaching. In my head it is entirely possible to train on the job, picking skills up and having access to patients and clinical decisions limited and gradually introduced. In teaching, you are either in a classroom, teaching - or you aren't. But I am sure any nurse who made it on to this thread might have some choice words to say about nursing apprenticeships.

I can't see where we can have education in a position where we have TAs who aren't actually TAs in a classroom, supporting a teacher ,and then also TAs as well.

The only TAs I know who actively want to be teachers are the young ones who do a year as a TA as experience before applying to a PGCE / Schools Direct etc. They generally have degrees already or are working as TAs at aged 19 before going to get their degree. They are doing it to see if they like teaching.

The older previously entitled mum's army don't generally want he increased workload of being a teacher. There are a few who have gone off to train , but they already have degrees from some years back pre marriage and children. I have one friend who converted later in life to teaching who probably would have liked this idea.

Because degrees cost £27,000, plus maintenance loans, plus you can't work much, which is a bit of an issue if you've got kids and a mortgage.

not if you do a shortage subject and you have the correct degree.

but then that is the circular argument isn't it.

Also how are you going to make sure that there are no major knowledge gaps in the apprenticeship?

Or are we supposed to teach them to the current curriculum and hope that the problem isn't ours when the curriculum changes or the student moves on.

So these TAs in primary would continue to work as TAs for 4 days a week, going off to uni for 1 day a week and in that 1 day a week they would learn all the stuff that normally takes 3 years to learn? Then once they'd learned all that stuff (let's say charitably that it takes them 7 years) they would finally be allowed to have a go at teaching in the 4 days a week that they had been working as a TA?

More likely that 1 day a week they'd go off to uni and the other 4 days would be spent doing as much teaching as the school could get out of them. After all, (HL)TAs already teach in primary schools, so more would be expected of teaching apprentices.

Interesting blog

blog

Is there genuinely any evidence that there is a load of TAs somewhere (preferably with STEM leanings of course!) who want to be fully fledged teachers?

I haven't RTFT entirely but my main concerns would be about the following:

1. Subject knowledge: it is vital at secondary. When I plan I can break down and re-shape concepts because I know them really well and feel confident with them. This is much, much harder outside my subject area. I would not and could not teach full time in a different subject area.

2. Life experience- dealing with students requires the kind of empathy/ mental toughness that is unusual in teen. Putting them in situations with vulnerable children and sensitive issues is actually quite unfair. This would happen even if they were in a TA position.

3. The temptation towards exploitation- school managers are under increasing pressure to cut budgets. This could prove to be too much of a temptation for some. Does a good apprenticeship route include being used as a TA/cover supervisor/ janitorial staff etc? I can see cash strapped heads giving in to the pressure.

4. Damage to education- don't be fooled. This is not a way to drive up standards. It is a way to plug the recruitment gap. It is the opposite of what we should be doing to our education system.

Yes, me too. I am afraid my friend who is now a teacher and was a fabulous TA is n the 'should of' camp mentioned earlier...

Likewise, I'd be an unbelievably shit TA.

The university study component of ALL degree Apprenticeships isn't full time.... apprentices study at university on a part time basis. The study workload isn't an issue. Lots of part time degree students work in the day, and successfully compete degrees in the evenings and weekends. In addition they'd have a day off a week.

I think we've come to the conclusion that for it to work in secondary you would need an entry criteria that required a degree.

Yes I agree.

school managers are under increasing pressure to cut budgets.

We have a school manager doing the manager degree apprenticeship

I think we've come to the conclusion that for it to work in secondary you would need an entry criteria that required a degree.

I'm not certain Justine Greening agrees.

I think it would be a mistake to introduce this for primary as well.

So did we titchy . I mentioned her upthread. She quit after less than a term. Hated working in a school!

There was also an apprentice lab tech and IT tech. I think those jobs make sense for apprenticeships.

My understanding is they tried to get the lab tech to sign up for teacher training. he did some sort of work experience / unqualified teacher type thing and was awful.

It is a way to plug the recruitment gap.

With my policy head on I disagree - I think it's a way for JG to show she's on board with the Governments apprenticeship agenda....

Despite that I think it could work along the lines I've suggested although I agree numbers entering through this route won't be huge.

Now, on that I agree!

From the blog Appuskidu linked to:

"I don't think there are many teachers our there that don't see this move from government for what it is, and what I said in the title of this post, a last desperate attempt to ensure our schools have enough teachers without spending the money it would take to actually do this properly. With the minimum wage of a first year apprentice being £3.50 an hour this means schools could feasibly get a teacher in the classroom 4 days a week for as little as £4427.50 in wages, assuming apprentices would get paid for the same 1265 hours of directed time that is still commonplace in many schools. Of course some schools may offer more than the minimum wage, but in reality this is likely to be just so they don't lose any money in the apprenticeship levy - I can completely understand schools taking the attitude, "we have to spend this money on apprentices so we will pay ours a little more". I suspect though that even this will be unlikely - schools will probably just try and secure more apprentices and only resort to paying more if they are facing losing the money anyway. What then happens to these apprentices once they qualify and become more expensive is of course a different matter - as a cash-strapped school will I employ one of the apprentices I just trained but will now cost me a whole load more money, or will I just let them go at the end of their apprenticeship and take on a new apprentice? I have already seen this happen time and time again with apprentices in the back office or site team, and I have no reason to believe that some school leaders wouldn't behave in the same way with apprentice teachers."

Another teacher who thinks that teacher apprentices will be teaching on the days they're in school.
It's odd, the assumption that they wouldn't be.