Teachers should prove subject knowledge is up-to-date or lose qualified status suggests Ofsted boss

[noblegiraffe]

"Teachers should have to prove their subject knowledge is up-to-date at regular intervals to maintain their qualified status, a top Ofsted boss has said.

Professor Daniel Muijs (pictured), the watchdog’s head of research, said he supported a “periodic requirement” for teachers to demonstrate they know about the latest research and discoveries in their subject area."

schoolsweek.co.uk/ofsted-boss-calls-for-teachers-to-prove-subject-knowledge-to-stay-qualified/

Hahahahahahahaaa what planet is he living on?

Yeah i would like to do a masters in my subject, not education though, far too boring!!!! Total bollocks given the restraints on funding in schools at the moment. Just trying to put teachers down again as if we don’t have good enough knowledge.

Having said that when I joined a previous school I got told on the first day that I would be teaching a subject in which I only had a gcse (A* mind you!). I think I did a pretty good job of it but there were areas that my knowledge was a little lacking.

mini I don't think he is talking about funding you to have a nice jolly to learn more about a subject new to you,though ... or about doing a Masters. He thinks he is pleasing the Chartered College by suggesting every teacher should want to pursue the 'status ' of a Chartered Teacher ... but actually they are keeping him at arm's length.

kitty that's a very succinct post - and entirely fair.

I think it would be great if teachers were given the time and resources to examine educational research in their subject areas. I think the quality and relevance of educational research could only benefit from a massively wider, critical audience. Bring it on.

Sometimes one finds things out in research that run completely counter to practice in schools or the beliefs of entrenched SLTs. So those things get ignored or buried. There is literally no point in knowing and learning things sometimes.

Another reason why properly resourced examination of research would be great for classroom teachers. As Michaela would say, "Knowledge is Power".

I think the most useful thing I read about this lately was the idea that appraisal targets should be linked to a research project

I genuinely don't think that most teachers have the skills to do this. Not to conduct research, nor to critically evaluate it.
It sounds nice, but a lot of educational researchers can't actually conduct meaningful research, and then big names like Hattie and the EEF can't critically evaluate it, so what chance does your average teacher have?

I don't think teachers should do research projects. I do wonder what the point of educational research is if teachers don't read it? Who else can it be for?

'I bet noble will post this on Mumsnet!'

Busted. Clearly stupid pronouncements by supposed experts are like a red rag to a bull here

I agree it sounds like a ploy to make the Chartered College of Teaching actually have a point. The problem is that the way schools are going, they don't want experienced and informed teachers, they want cheap teachers and teachers who do as they are told without questioning whether Sean Harford thinks it's necessary or whether it has a solid evidence base.

That would be my thought,Piggy. Do you have to demonstrate this knowledge in the classroom, or is ‘I have read the research but SLT are still insisting on a purple pen of progress and differentiating my lesson plans by learning style’ enough?

By research project I didn't mean anything as big as you think....

Just reading up about different attitudes to feedback , for example, and trying to put some of it into practice and then evaluating for yourself how it worked : might get some teachers to be a bit more reflective (and also not just passively accept what they are told by leaders!!)

The sort of thing we get trainees to do then. That's why I love mentoring. It is my best CPD.

I am a bit biased because my job at school is based around encouraging research. However, when I was shaftedappointed I did protest that I did not actually have the expertise to lead research and that it was not just a role to give someone with more than one brain cell to keep them quiethappy.

My head has just made me research a load of stuff and come up with huge recommendations. I nearly wept.

I do wonder what the point of educational research is if teachers don't read it?

You'd have thought that the people running education, designing the curriculum, inspecting schools and so on would issue 'best practice' documents based on the best evidence, carefully considered. Instead it's all so terribly ad-hoc and bandwagons are jumped on all over the place. Then you've got the trads battling the progs and politicians wanting soundbites to win elections, no joined up thinking and the whole thing is just a total mess.

And a lot of the research is just shite.

Yes Madonna, exactly that.

I think it is true that all of that learning does vanish if not actively encouraged after the NQT year which is a shame. But it doesn't need some convoluted Ofsted badged thing attached to it.

Talking about critically evaluating research, I read this blog the other day by Old Andrew going through the EEF figures for mixed ability teaching. The EEF has got them wrong.
teachingbattleground.wordpress.com/2018/03/03/why-is-the-eef-getting-it-so-wrong-about-ability-grouping/

I mean, if we can't even trust the EEF who are supposed to be helping teachers make decisions about the evidence, then we're all doomed.

I like the idea of being given the time and space to reflect on my teaching practice. I don't think that we should all be trying to reinvent the wheel though - we know that some stuff is a total waste of time without having to try it out and then evaluate what happened.

But then, we are still relying on someone else's interpretation of "best evidence". The people running education are political appointees, not dispassionate experts, if such people even exist. And where would the experts come from?

Teachers should be well informed, because, as Piggy says, Heads with a little bit of knowledge can waste a lot of people's time. A knowlegable staff is a big disincentive to a superficial application of "research".

I remember back in the day one of my performance management targets was always about improving some area of my practice. Y'know, focusing on feedback, or problem-solving or something.
Then it all became SMART and now my targets all seems to be tasks to do and hats to wear. I don't get to work on improving my problem-solving teaching, I have to produce a bunch of resources for the department to use. I don't know if that's typical.

Your targets aren't based on exam results?

Oh, one of them is results, vaguely defined. I don't get to set that one, it just sits in the background waiting to be used against me.

I wish mine was vaguely defined!

Clearly defined means at least you know whether you've met it.

Teachers should be well informed

What is the point in being well-informed if you have no power to do anything with that information?

I know now...

I am optimistic enough to think that if every classroom teacher was well informed, SLTs would not be able to impose ill informed expectations.