Bbc article about unqualified teachers

[rollonthesummer]

The tories are defending it by saying there were more unqualified teachers under labour anyway...?!

A Tory spokesperson says...

"There are some brilliant teachers who have not got qualified teacher status - nuns, great linguists, computer scientists, engineers and other specialists that inspire their pupils.

Nuns?!

I don't know of any unqualified people in schools near me that sound like that list. The ones I know are very young-no time to have been a nun, great linguist or successful in business- and have not yet passed NQT for various 'unknown' reasons.

right back

I can tell you're smart. And I bet that feeds into your work. But what helps you debate well here is surely only a tiny part of what makes you a good teacher. It's loud-mouths like me who get to run education, not people who are superb teachers. That's the whole bloody problem!

It's loud-mouths like me who get to run education

Are you Michael Gove?

Independent schools can hire whoever they like and call them whatever they like. They have the money and can afford to be picky about their hires. I'm afraid I don't give a shit if the main teaching unions won't accept them, they can set up their own.

On the other hand state schools do not have lots of money and a lot cannot be picky about who they hire. There will be a market for cheap staff, even if they are of lower quality.

Are you Michael Gove?
I'm that bloke who used to advise him :)

I have taught in schools that used unqualified staff, believe me they were not employing highly talented geniuses who had spent years immersed in their subject.

I have seen classes taught for months on end by staff with no interest or passion, who did their crossword whilst the kids rioted around them. This is what happens in our toughest schools who struggle to balance the books and attract and keep staff. Often the schools that need the best teachers are struggling to keep and attract talented teachers, I want the government to make that less likely to happen and not more likely.

That last bit is unclear, I want the government to make it harder for schools to get away with fobbing our most vulnerable in society off which substandard or even non existent teaching. I don't want them to legislate to make it easier for schools to fail children.

applauds philoslothy

When you were advising Gove did you not ever say 'Hang on Mike, I'm a lawyer, this really isn't my field'?

Noble

Yes, Hermia, at Westminster School, for example, more than 40% of the teachers do not have QTS and they include the Head, most of the SMT and half the heads of department.

The school regularly tops the FT's schools league table. Last year more than 50% of A Level grades were A*.

The ISC published stats on unqualified teachers in independent schools in 2010. From memory, the average proportion was smaller than at Westminster but much higher than in state schools.

Here's a link to the ISC survey I mentioned: www.isc.co.uk/Resources/Independent%20Schools%20Council/Research%20Archive/Bulletin%20Articles/2010_05_Bulletin_ICSTeacherSurvey_REL.pdf

Yes, that's right. 8% is well over double the percentage of unqualified teachers in state funded schools (3.4%). And top academic schools like Westminster tend to have a much higher percentage.

It's true that independent schools don't always publish the qualifications of their staff but that in itself is a demonstration of the fact that they generally treat teachers equally and without regard to the particular route by which they joined the profession.

Teachers I know in independent schools tell me they don't always know who's qualified and who isn't. Until the issue suddenly came to the forefront of the political debate, it wasn't one that was discussed in their staffrooms.

Appointing ill qualified unqualified teachers and sneaking in HLTAs and cover supervisors, all with a view to cutting costs, those actions by misguided and cash strapped state school heads are clearly to be condemned but they are not the fault of unqualified teachers themselves.

As the ISC report shows, unqualified teachers can be extremely successful and can enrich a school.

Joking aside,I have a right to speak on this topic as I am an unqualified teacher with a track record of improving a neglected subject

Anyway, back to what matters.

Teacher training is inconsistent and needs improving. That's what teachers tell me.

I wonder if acting is a good analogy. Actors seem more confident that honing their craft is the only thing that matters and that acting theories are only useful if they help with this. Top actors never call themselves "managers" because acting is deeply respected.

Will wait to see what Evil thinks as she knows about this.

Teaching leaders need to be confident that achieving virtuosity in the craft is the key skill. Some great actors are academic, others are not. I think teaching is like that.

Actors seem more confident that honing their craft is the only thing that matters and that acting theories are only useful if they help with this.

Acting is probably comparable in that anyone can have a go in an am dram production but it'll probably be a bit crap. Someone might shine, but if they are good the suggestion is usually that they get some proper training. The really good actors don't rely on their natural aptitude but go to RADA and learn how to do it properly.

Different actors approach acting in different ways. Some are method actors and live the role. Some aren't, and are just as good. That doesn't mean that method acting is shit, but that different things work for different people. As it is with teaching.

What does 'academic' mean in this context? I haven't had any papers published or anything, but I do have a masters in maths. And a PGCE. What counts?

Emma Thompson is a really good actress. She won an Oscar for acting and is one of the most highly regarded actresses of her generation. She is unqualified in that she never attended drama school.

Training and learning can take place in all sorts of ways.

Ramanujan was one of the greatest mathematicians of all time and was completely self-taught.

That doesn't make maths lessons for the rest of us worthless. Nor does it mean maths faculties should hire random people off the street on the basis that they might be as good as Ramanujan.

Ramanujan would have also been a lot better if he had had proper training.

Exceptions to rules are meaningless.