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?

To be fair the government have 3 choices - people are leaving teaching in droves -
change things (no one can agree on what needs changing and half the people - parents/teachers/kids hear change and have a wobble),
chuck money at it (no chance),
chuck new people at it...

guess which is cheapest.

The ideal teacher would have subject knowledge and aptitude for teaching though 80smum.

Saying that some people who are an expert in their subject is a bit of a strawman.

Crikey at my old secondary school half the fifth formers would have had boyfriends older than the teacher...

How's it actually going to work? They surely can't be thinking of sticking an 18 year old fresh out of college in front of a class of 4 year olds?

I suppose it could work if they did degree style learning alongside working in the classroom without sole charge - and gradually increasing responsibility. But don't routes like this already exist?

What a pp said above is quite right; I work in an industry where apprenticeships are common, as is graduate entry. An apprentice would be starting out in a position where they couldn't do any damage if they cocked up; no one's going to be too upset if they fail to balance the bank or get a debit and credit the wrong way round as it would be corrected before a client saw it. You can't do that with teaching.

...the scorn they'd get from the parents and especially from the kids (don't know about primary, but secondary? Bloody hell)

My mum's been in primary education for 30 years and got called a retarded cunt by a 7 year old the other day, so definitely alive and well in primary too! She deals with safeguarding issues and social services 3 or 4 times a day sometimes. Definitely difficult to put that upon an 18 year old.

I'm not massively averse to different routes into teaching but 18 is too young. I assume it would be age discrimination to introduce an upper age limit though.

Well, I'm not a teacher but I am both a parent and a school governor and I think this is an absurd idea. There is no way that I would want an unqualified, poorly educated 18yo teaching my dd, and there is no way in which I would stand by and let that happen in the school where I am a governor either.

Do people really think so little of teachers that they think that this is ok? Do they really have so little respect or understanding of what teachers actually do? How depressing! It's no wonder that teachers are leaving the profession in droves, and yet the Secretary of State's solution is simply to devalue the profession further. Instead of looking into why there is a terrible shortage of suitably qualified teachers in this country, she is just going to let anybody get up and teach instead. Still, it might solve the school funding crisis as 18yos will be cheap as chips.

I pity our children and fear for our future. Shame on this Tory government for fucking the next generation over.

Hayeksing

Your suggestion that primary teachers don't need a degree absolutely confirms my previous comment that anyone who has an understanding of children's development would not think this is a good idea, regardless of whether or not you have a PGCE. If you understood the depth of knowledge required at primary level in particular about how children acquire and develop knowledge and understanding then you would know that it is something which needs to be studied in depth by teachers at a theoretical level so that they can then use this in their practice.

that there are students who would be bloody good at a job but just didn't quite get the grades.

Yes, because you want someone who failed their a-levels, or didn't get a great mark, walking out of a classroom in June and walking into one teaching that a-level in September. That's a cracking idea...

Students pay to do a PGCE, they are unpaid and there is a class teacher already assigned to each class they teach who can swoop in and take over if there are problems.

Teach First and Schools Direct pay trainees, so there isn't any class teacher in charge at the same time.

Apprentices are paid. Schools do not have the money to pay a class teacher and an apprentice to be in charge of the same class. Therefore the apprentice would be on their own with the class. Even if they have a mentor, that mentor will be teaching their own class.

Doesn't anyone here know how an apprenticeship works. They don't just do the work on day one, they have to work under supervision, attend college and receive instruction. They have to complete the same assignments as the students doing the same course full time at college. Most of them get paid more than the minimum allowed. Nobody is going to take an 18yo and put them in charge of a class.

You not only think you don't need a degree to be a teacher but also have such poor A-level results that you couldn't get onto a degree course?

As a teacher you should understand that a degree level apprenticeship is the same standard as a university degree. If you don't then why on earth is every teacher in my childs school telling me that a degree apprenticeship is as good if not better than a university degree? You can't have it both ways. Theyre either as good and therefore great for those students who want an alternative to University or theyre not, in which case teachers should stop telling everyone they are.

Surely until not long ago the main route into teaching was A levels then one year teacher training college with work placments. I think a degree level apprenticeship is fine, especially for primary level. Similar to someone obtaining an ordinary degree then doing a PGCE one year course - the ordinary degree won't fit them for teaching, it's the PGCE that will.

Placements. My teacher training college trained teachers did teach me to spell proper like.

Reinette why were you talking about students who 'didn't get the grades but would make good teachers'?

The uni level apprenticeships I've seen students go on to do have high A-level entry requirements and aren't for kids who fluffed up their A-levels.

I went to a college that had a lot of teacher training on B ed. most of them had two D's of 2 Es at A level, this was 20 years ago. I don't see any of my children's high graded a level friends in uni going for teaching or talking about it as a career. Something has got to give, people don't want to teach anymore, and the profession does not hold that respect it used to.

Doesn't anyone here know how an apprenticeship works. They don't just do the work on day one, they have to work under supervision, attend college and receive instruction. They have to complete the same assignments as the students doing the same course full time at college. Most of them get paid more than the minimum allowed. Nobody is going to take an 18yo and put them in charge of a class.

^^ This.

Teaching will remain a graduate profession - DEGREE Apprenticeships mean the apprentice gets a DEGREE.

Doesn't anyone here know how an apprenticeship works.

Do you understand how teacher training works?

The depressing thing is that this will place more of a workload on experienced teachers who will undoubtedly be expected to plan, supervise, support, mop up the tears of this cannon-fodder, most likely unpaid for this extra responsibility.

titchy

They will be a teacher, teaching classes way before they get their degree. Years before.

We can only hope that the GTC resist this in Scotland. It may we'll be harder as they lose their independence from Scottish Govt though.

I think most teachers probably know a couple of TAs who would be more than suitable for an apprenticeship. It would also probably be used to replace the Cert Ed, which still exists, mainly for vocational tutors. I can see this route being very good for mature candidates with suitable experience.

This is just about saving cash and nothing to do with quality minimum standards of education or creating new decent jobs for teachers. This isn't the only way that school funding is being downgraded:

www.fairfundingforallschools.org

As a teacher you should understand that a degree level apprenticeship is the same standard as a university degree. If you don't then why on earth is every teacher in my childs school telling me that a degree apprenticeship is as good if not better than a university degree? You can't have it both ways. Theyre either as good and therefore great for those students who want an alternative to University or theyre not, in which case teachers should stop telling everyone they are

This absolutely! Unbelievable levels of snobbery on this thread, presumably from teachers who are supposed to be encouraging suitable candidates to consider a degree level apprenticeship

Putting subject knowledge aside. What about the safe guarding and disclosure issues teachers sometimes have to deal with? I think 18 year olds are still pretty vulnerable.

Stupid idea

I must be missing something. Teachers in secondary schools need a degree in the subject area and then a post grad teaching qualification to acquire the knowledge on how to teach.
The government is talking about putting them in classrooms before they have either degree-level subject knowledge or any teaching skills -WTF?

I'm a bit confused about the disdain at primary level. I wanted to do a degree in primary years many moons ago and very early on it involved classroom experience in regular blocks of 6 weeks. I'm not really sure why an 18 year old on a degree course teaching a class with supervision ok, but an 18 year old on an apprentice ship teaching a class with supervision is a disaster. It just means that people that can't afford the degrees can train. A proper apprentice should still get plenty of training in subject knowledge and child development on their days in college.

I see that at secondary level the degree level knowledge of your subject is a necessity.