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?

Agustarella wow that is an assumption! Would you advocate 'home university education then?' I accept DC could do an OU course.

state schooling = babysitting!?!? good lord.

Agusterella, you're clearly talking out of your arse.

Childminders don't babysit, they have to fulfill Ofsted regulations and so it goes on through all the years in education. What job do you do Agustarella? If you don't mind me asking.

moonshine You should not be expected to teach such a wide range of children. It's not fair on you and it's not fair in the children themselves.

As for 18 year olds being teachers, I think that is inaccurate. They would be following a course of study starting at 18. I would expect them to be teachers at 22 or even 23.

I think the notion that value to a profession is added via qualification by a degree is misguided at best. My DC have had EY teachers who have been able to connect with my children. One teacher in particular stood out. She barely spoke English but she taught my autistic son how to hold a pen, write his name, eat with cutlery and paint. I am forever thankful that the administration had the common sense to keep her when a group of parents were complaining incessantly about her lack of English.

Teaching is devalued right now because teachers don't demand the respect they deserve. I see most teachers here in the US with 20 years of experience making $100k a year with a final salary pension. They also don't put up with the crap teachers are expected to put up with in the Uk. I drop DC off at the front door. They know where to find me if there is a problem and I email the guidance councilor if I have questions.

The special needs provision in the UK is dire. They don't understand inclusion doesn't mean you sit in the same class. We are also short changing ourselves by not investing in education.

I think this is a good idea. We are not talking about an overhaul of how teachers are educated, its what... 1 apprentice per secondary school.

Between a student who does a crappy media studies any degree, scrapes a pass, cant get a job so decides to go into teaching at 22. Verses a student who gets good A-Levels and wants to be a teacher, spends 3 years in a school as an apprentice learning the ropes then becomes a teacher at 22. I know which one I would prefer teaching my DC.

I have known many teachers who dont have a degree in their subject. I can accept a good degree would be needed to teach A-level, possibly GCSE, but subject specific degrees dont seem to be needed lower down (not saying they wouldn't be desired in an ideal world).

I cant see the down side given if a school under-performs then the management/MAT will be replaced.

If a school underperforms the downside is that children have been affected. It's too late for them if the management/MAT is replaced, their education will have suffered regardless.

Are there any PGCE courses that would accept you with anything less than a 2:2 degree?

Why do posters think that teaching Primary does not require a higher level of education? I teach secondary, but there is no way I could cope with the demands of Primary, it is a totally different skill set and one I admire.

Justine Greening is a fucking idiot

spends 3 years in a school as an apprentice learning the ropes then becomes a teacher at 22

What exactly do you think 'learning the ropes' involves? They'll be teaching well before they are 22.

I haven't RTFT but I think this is a ridiculous idea and insulting to teachers.

I also hate the assumption that Primary Teachers have a lesser skill set. In fact, I find Primary teaching harder than secondary and I've done both. In secondary I only need to teach English. In primary I need to teach every single subject as well as basic skills, how to read, handwriting, PE and countless other things.

Finally, Finland has the best results in the world. This is down to many things but their teachers are only at or above Masters level and this is one of the reasons they do so well. We should be moving in this direction not the opposite.

When I was at primary school in the 70s it was usual for teachers to have a certificate of education rather than a degree.

Exactly noble

This post from earlier has stayed with me:
She has the right experience and knowledge to be an apprentice teacher, yes

Absolutely no she doesn't. And even if she did, all school children deserve the right not to be used as guinea pigs to find out.

Teaching is devalued right now because teachers don't demand the respect they deserve.

Teaching is devalued right now because the government has spent years running us down, the press have spent years calling us work-shy whingers and you'll see from Mumsnet that a lot of parents see us as glorified childcare.

When teachers have tried to demand anything, like decent pay and conditions, we've been told to shut up and suck it up. That's why one in ten teachers quit last year.

Are there any PGCE courses that would accept you with anything less than a 2:2 degree? Yes an ordinary degree is less than a 2:2

They'll be teaching well before they are 22 That depends on what you mean by teaching. Does a building apprentice build anything? And yet they are allowed to help build houses that could kill if done incorectly.

Finland has the best results in the world Or do they just teach everyone to be average. How many Nobel Laureates do they have?

So an apprentice teacher (who is not qualified to take a class) could potentially be earning more than a TA, who may be a qualified teacher?

That depends on what you mean by teaching

Standing in front of a class delivering a lesson with the expectation that the students will actually learn something from you. Do you think it will be 3 years before an apprentice will be doing that?
Do people think that schools will be paying apprentices for years to hang around watching teachers doing the actual teaching?

I see most teachers here in the US with 20 years of experience making $100k a year with a final salary pension. They also don't put up with the crap teachers are expected to put up with in the Uk.

I follow a teaching subreddit which has majority US teachers - that's really not the experience of most I see on there. Heavy paperwork loads, expected to bend over backwards for parents, buying most of their own supplies, many struggling in Title 1 schools. Wherever the teachers you are talking about are based, they're lucky.

@Fresh8008, sorry, perhaps I've missed a post but I'm not sure I understand. There are PGCE courses that accept applicants with 3rds or just a pass? Are there many?

I don't think so. Friend down here (amazing TA) doesn't have honours and can't get onto a training course locally or Scitt etc without it.

Fresh you think they'll just be sat watching classes for 3 years not teaching?

If they are forced to take apprentices they will have to pay them to hang around and observe. Where that money is going to magically appear from is unclear. Let alone where they are going to find the money to pay above minimum.

Cutting the other members of staff would be the obvious first choice but with many already getting rid of TAs it will have to be qualified teaching staff.

I fail to see what's in it for schools at all tbh.

Agustarella

It is interesting that you are posting about a return to the old days, but seem to miss the fact that there is no evidence to say that it was better.

MrsSchadenfreude
When I was at primary school in the 70s it was usual for teachers to have a certificate of education rather than a degree.

It was also usual for teachers in the 70s to hit children as a form of punishment and SEND wasn't recognised.

Standing in front of a class delivering a lesson with the expectation that the students will actually learn something from you There isn't a week goes by where DC aren't sat in front of a video/a cover teacher/self study/a handout... and apparently taught something for a lesson, so I do actually believe an apprentice could be better.

Do people think that schools will be paying apprentices for years to hang around watching teachers doing the actual teaching? Watching and learning yes. With increased involvement yes. A bit at a time.

There are PGCE courses that accept applicants with 3rds or just a pass? Are there many? I dont know if there are many, but I do know it happens.