Teacher apprenticeships ...

[Piggywaspushed]

In the news again today and unsurprisingly the whole thing has been a) jobs for the boys (literally : cf the gender paygap) b) secretive c) bit of a balls up ....

schoolsweek.co.uk/teacher-apprenticeship-providers-get-fast-track-treatment/

I know noblegiraffe will be interested!

So what’s the difference between an apprenticeship and Schools Direct, then?

An apprenticeship means that the school can claim back their apprenticeship levy. There is absolutely zero need for graduate teacher apprenticeships, and this goes against the advice on improving teacher recruitment that the DfE need to simplify the teacher recruitment process as there are currently too many routes to and it is confusing and off-putting.

So it looks like they’ve had to put a lot of resources into getting training providers through the hoops in order to meet an artificial September deadline to provide something that’s only required because the government was too dim to exclude schools from the Apprenticeship Levy.

Well done everyone.

These schemes are further ruining the already broken education system.

I've tried to mentor 2 student maths teachers so far this year (both on the massive bursary scheme) and have had to terminate both placements. They were awful - didn't do any work, prepared nothing, made no effort... basically wanted to sit at the back of my classroom playing on their phones. These were both people in their late thirties.

I had a look down the list of approved providers and recognised the name ‘Bright Futures’: www.tes.com/news/exclusive-academy-trust-sponsored-grammar-school-owes-ps58m
So they’ve approved an academy trust in financial trouble to run this new scheme? One that’s recently lost one school and is looking to ditch another?

Oh hang on, I’m confused too now about training routes. “We hope that the apprenticeship route will complement our successful Schools Direct and SCITT programmes and enable us to support more entrants into teaching“

I thought SCITT was Schools Direct. Is it something different then?

Just occurred to me that they want to offer these apprenticeships from September. So they’ll only now be advertising them? But most prospective student teachers already have applied and got places, and we’re in the summer term so there’s not much time left to recruit?

I’m sure it will be fine.

Thankfully here in NI we don’t have any of the newer routes into teaching, just PGCE, so it is much simpler. The downside is that here, as we have no recruitment crisis so PGCE courses are incredibly competitive and a significant number of graduates and older would be teachers have to apply 2 or more times just to get a place on a course.

I am genuinely interested in what the advantages of apprenticeships or TeachDirect schemes are above the traditional PGCE route.

Interesting. Are they a viable route for people with degrees already working in a primary (which is not already a training provider, except as a placement school) in a non-teacher role (e.g. learning support), who would prefer to remain in the same school and get at least some pay - ie an apprentice wage - while training?

I have heard them talked about in that context - and IME there are really quite a lot of women (in particular, especially single mums) stuck in TA jobs taken when their children were young, who have the qualifications to train as teachers but can't afford the gap in earnings while they do a PGCE. SCITT primaries are - IME locally - quite rare.

(As in, pretty much every TA I have ever worked with has been a graduate. Every one of them could take my place in a heatbeat, but lack the piece of paper. Most are constrained by family circumstances from doing a PGCE. If the apprentice scheme was a way forward for them, that would be a significant and useful development)

I don’t know, can’t, but if a school isn’t a training provider then how would it be able to run an apprenticeship which is a training scheme?

From what I can see, the primary schools which are on the approved list for apprenticeships already offer SCITT schemes.

SCITT definitely isn't Schools Direct. I know this because my gaff offers SCITT but not SD. But not sure of the exact difference.

percy I think NI should stay just as it is. there are only PGCE routes in Finland, too. We should be emulating them - not fragmenting our training. If it's hard to get into teaching in NI, frustrating as that is for some, it's probably overall a good thing?

Canadian teachers can train, but can't get jobs in Canada, often. The youngsters are lured over here, bunged in Luton or Great Yarmouth, or somewhere else with a recruitment crisis, get terrible culture shock and head back home again!

IME schools direct have a university/ college involved but a SCITT doesn't need to have so may offer QTS but not a PGCE.

A scitt is an school based accredited provider in their own right. This means that they can make a recommendation for QTS without the involvement of anyone else.

Many scitts partner a university who will accredit a pgce academic qualification alongside this.

A school direct is a partnership of schools that provides training alongside an accredited provider. They cannot make a recommendation for QTS directly. They can work with either a university or a scitt to do this. A university is more common to work as most candidates want the pgce academic qualification alongside the QTS recommendation.

School direct groups do not have to administer things like student loans, bursaries, international equivalent qualifications ect as these are the responsibility of the accredited provider, as is the collection of evidence for ofsted so smaller alliances find this a more suitable method of working.

Don't understand at all why Goldsmiths are involved, as I was under the impression they'd all but terminated Schools Direct as many schools didn't want to work with them (at least for my subject).

Interesting. So could a primary school join a school direct partnership (e.g. a local secondary which already does teacher training) and then offer apprenticeships, I wonder?

@cantkeepawayforever the partnership would have to have beens successful in their bid to be included in the register of apprenticeship providers to offer apprenticeships. We didn't apply so I'm not sure if you have to apply separately for primary/secondary.

Also, although the school can use their levy to fund the training, they still need to find the funding to pay the apprentice (Inc national insurance, pension contribution). I know we don't have the budget to pay for supernumerary staff.

If the school is a Local authority school it is the local authority that pays the levy. Some Las here are operating a bidding system for schools and central departments to access the levy funds. For academies they can choose what to spend on themselves. I've seen catering, admin and facilities apprenticeships locally.

Hmm. Local secondary already offers teacher training AND apprenticeships in other areas.

Question probably comes down to whether primary could piggyback on their teacher training rather than the apprenticeship route - as i say, there does (locally) seem to be a need for graduate primary TAs who want to be teachers to be able to train without having to compete for (vanishingly rare and quite distant) SCITT places or (very distant, and so a nightmare for travelling / childcare, if they exist at all) schools direct places.

I doubt this will be about primary, though, as presumably primaries won't have to pay the apprenticeship levy as they are smaller (their MAT might, though) and there currently isn't a shortage of primary teachers....

Shame. Honestly, most of the graduate TAs I have worked with could teach brilliantly if only they could afford a year off to train.

A surprising number of primaries do pay the levy. All local authority schools do, as the local authority is the employer alongside any in a decent sized mat.