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?

If it's cheaper to get apprenticeships than trainees of whatever ilk I'd expect the academy chains to start changing who they're getting in as trainees.

In my day a school got a bit of cash to take on a trainee but apprenticeships cost schools that currently don't have enough money to pay existing staff. A school won't pay £25-40k on costs for a classroom teacher and £6k+ for an apprentice for one class as they haven't the money to do this. Either the apprentice replaces a TA or a teacher. Most likely a teacher once they've had some kind of induction period if schools think they can do this.

Why would the teaching apprentice not be teaching their own class when other on-the-job teaching trainees do?

So that's your objection? That they'll be doing what current schemes of school based trainees do? That's a fair objection. But nothing to do with the fact that the scheme has essentially been re-branded.

Look you can call the scheme apprenticeship, School Direct, Fred or George Weasley as far as I'm concerned. If the method doesn't work it doesn't work. Object on that basis, not on what it's called.

And comments about these leading to an inferior degree or not a proper degree, or a different sort of degree, along with 'why do a degree apprenticeship instead of getting £50k into debt to do a degree' kind of suggests posters don't know how they'll work....

Titchy can you not see it's not at all what current trainee teachers do? Teachers have repeatedly been trying to explain this.

Pgce students will visit several different schools and at each school be taken under someone's wing for a few weeks, mentored etc (heck of a lot of input from staff) and get to teach a few supervised lessons leading to a block in their final placement.

The kids in any class are getting a degree qualified teacher in their class taking lessons for a period of time but being supervised by their main teacher. Most of their year will be their main teacher and their main teacher will still be in the class.

Thing is, though , on the model described by no teachers, there is an assumption that a full degree squeezed into one day and teacher training/ teaching in 4 more is a manageable workload. Everyone acknowledges teaching has a workload beyond 8.30 - 3.30 (and it is usually particularly extreme in eager trainees) and that a full university course has demands beyond a seven hour one day a week visit to a uni.

People may well 'manage FT jobs' while being 'FT students (although that did make me wonder about the quality of both!!) but I'll bet it wasn't teaching!!

I'd be extremely worried about burnout.

titchy - that hasn't just been said! It was said pages and pages ago and has been repeated MANY times

Titchy can you not see it's not at all what current trainee teachers do?

It's not the PGCE model no. It IS the School Direct model.

Trainee teachers on the Schools Direct model ALREADY HAVE A DEGREE!!!!!!

Yep Noble has it in one!

And I'm pretty sure apprentices training in secondary schools will also be required to already have a degree.

It's really frustrating, titchy. You keep bringing it back to secondary and apprentices having a degree when NO ONE WOULD CARE IF THAT WERE THE CASE.

titchy you keep saying others are under or ill informed. Where is your assertion coming from ??
Are you, in fact, Justine Greening ??

The conversation seems to have gone like this for 500 posts;

Titchy: secondary apprentices will probably need a degree anyway
Everyone: Justine Greening says that at least some apprentices won't.
Titchy: Primary blah blah just as good as a degree blah blah probably work as a TA and not take classes
Everyone else: yeah right will the apprentice not be expected to teach, also getting a degree 5 years into your teaching career isn't really good enough when you'll have taught a billion lessons by then, plus the workload will be horrendous
Titchy: but in secondary you'll probably already need a degree so it's fine

We did wonder if Mr Gove's wife was online one point in the past so maybe it's a policy person!!

I was driving home from school today and on Radio 4 they had Mrs Gove and Toby Young on discussing book recommendations. I think my driving got slightly more aggressive and my jaw slightly more clenched!

It is evident that some people do not know or care what higher level and degree apprenticeships are. They do not want to use research methods to find out and certainly are not capable of applying analytical thought to extrapolating how the model could work for teaching.

From the Daily Mail worthy headline through to the intolerably sloppy reasoning, the main conclusion is under and ill informed. A billion lessons , I thought you were a Maths teacher.

There is a reason why teaching apprenticeships won't work, this thread shows it. They will be bullied and derided by their colleagues.

Oh, that is just nonsense.

I have extensively researched and put a link on form a leading educationalist and journalist.

I don't think either you or titchy read it.

You simply cannot keep asserting you have done your research when you clearly haven't.

Once more : Greening has said teaching is set to stop being a graduate only on entry profession. She has explicitly herself linked this to a shortage in STEM teachers at secondary level.

I thought you were a Maths teacher.

Piggy can explain hyperbole to you, she's an English teacher.

I have also shown evidence that I understand them by citing the fact that they are in clearing where they do exist and that they are generally confined to (business chiefly) courses where an apprenticeship degree would place a person above (academically) normal entrants to a profession. so they should be attractive prospects. An they aren't, it seems.

noble

pestilencalone if I understand correctly (most likely not as I've just skimmed posts) titchy has stated that the apprenticeship model will be the same as the School Direct model. How successful has the School Direct model been so far?

Currently most (all?) routes into teaching involve you already having a degree before you can start teaching proper. Degree level apprenticeships add nothing to the mix other than you can probably pay an apprenticeship less than you can schools direct or teach first.

Many years ago I worked with TAs doing teaching qualifications whilst working as a TA. They were asked to cover classes on their own that they were doing for their training when the usual teacher was away but they were not paid to do cover as it was part of their training entitlement! If they'd covered another lesson they would have been paid and facilitated cover rather than teaching and it's associated workload for minimum wage and no extra. Teaching apprenticeships will be exploitation of people with less choices, if they can actually sort out what it is and get people to sign up.

I'm very concerned that in secondary schools, specialist subject knowledge won't be a pre-requisite for going into the classroom

If only this were true. Loads of teachers in secondary schools are teaching subjects that they don't have a degree in. Specialist subject knowledge SHOULD be a prerequisite now but sadly it's not.

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?

Every nqt I've come across has been absolutely brilliant. I would have no worries about them teaching my children.

Mum similar to Schools Direct. In some ways it is the same and in other ways it will be different. The standards have not been written yet, they will have to follow some rules. A well written apprenticeship scheme seeks to avoid exploitation of the trainee.

Currently some schools provide training, support and proper mentoring. Others it is like lambs to the slaughter, bottom set Y9 etc. Bringing it under an apprenticeship umbrella should mirror the good version. If the school does not provide the correct level of support, training and supervision, they would lose the apprentice funding and the provider would help find the apprentice a new placement.

It really could have legs. However, this rubbish about 18yos teaching GCSE or A level Maths and the insistence that apprentice degrees are second rate is preventing progress.

@fakenamefornow so will it improve the situation to bring in new trainees who definitely don't have a degree?