Opinions on the TeachFirst route into teaching?

[MrsAJCrowley]

Hi guys, I need to pick your brains.

I am looking to change my career and I am looking at going into teaching. It is something I have always wanted to do and tbh, I’m not sure why I didn’t go down that route straight from uni.

I would be looking to do this course www.teachfirst.org.uk/our-programme/about-the-programme . Does anyone have any knowledge or experiences about the teach first courses?

If it’s necessary , I would look to teach history or English in secondary schools as I have suitable qualifications and a passion for both.

How old are you and do you have small children?
Just anecdotal but for what I’ve seen teach first is very full on, very long hours, all consuming. I’ve worked with a few teach first trainees and the successful ones have been incredibly dedicated. Much more so than I was and than the people I trained with on my pgce.
For me the pgce was a much more gentle start, with just a few hours teaching a week to begin with. With teach first it all looked a bit sink-or-swim to me. I was a career changer and just didn’t have the energy of a 21yo. Plus I’ve never been particularly ambitious. I’m happy just teaching my lessons and going home to my family. The people I have known who did teach first were definitely more career ladder climbers and so willing to commit more of their life than I was.
I do know there’s a bit of snobbery both ways - some teachers think teach first Doesnt train you properly and some teach first people think their a cut above the rest of the profession. Reasonable people don’t give a shit. Unfortunately there are many unreasonable people in charge of schools!

*they’re
I’m tired

When TF was set up it was intended for academic high fliers (fair enough to persuade them into teaching) but it was acknowledged (or assumed?) that they wouldn't really be attracted to the profession as a vocation and would dabble in teaching for a few years on a kind of Gap Yah and then go off to the City. This may seem an unkind assessment but there was a TV programme on that followed many of these young entrants and only one stuck it out. That may well also be a wider problem in teaching, to be fair. But that reputation has stuck with it a bit. TF are clearly trying to reverse some of that but their staff do dominate in certain establishments and certain types of establishments and so they are also viewed as quite ideological. There is certainly a lot of TFs in Free Schools and in trad schools such as Michaela which almost exclusively uses TF for staffing reasons and also because they know these highly educated sharp elbowed types will follow almost any ideology to get on, and won't have experienced anything else.

For all those reasons, I am not sure TF is suited to a slightly later in life career changer. But they have spread outside of London,, now, so there may be a different picture elsewhere. The TF school in my area doesn't have a nearby top uni to recruit from.

Does that matter though piggy?

I mean ... if someone teaches for three years but they are good, that’s OK by my book!

It does matter for the profession, yes!

and you assume they are good? Some of them will be. Some of them won't.

Why does it matter for the profession?

I’m sure there are some who aren’t much good but tbh that’s true regardless of the route into teaching.

The ones I’ve met were better than I was when I first started but I was really shit tbf

You don't think the retention of teachers beyond three years in the profession matters?? OK then...

Repeating what I’ve said incredulously isn’t an argument, Piggy

Go on. Tell me why someone shouldn’t go into teaching, teach well, then leave.

Because more teachers are currently leaving the profession than staying and a net loss is a problem. We need to get better at helping teachers stick around, not deliberately recruiting more short-termists.

I’ll tell you hash
Because being a good teacher takes more than energy and enthusiasm. It takes experience. And so many schools now are lacking in experienced teachers. Yes some teachers are good in their first few years, but good for an inexperienced teacher is no where near as good as good for an experienced teacher. No one is that good in their first year. All the teach first teachers I’ve known will happily admit that they were shit when they first started. Any one who didn’t I’d question their honesty or ability to self reflect.

The poster upthread who said their friend was a deputy head after 6 years just made me think ‘god, is that how bad things have got?’. That’s not a positive of Teach First if it’s rushing people to SLT.

I think others may have answered for me. I wasn't looking for a debate or argument tbh! Too tired for that. Six more hours to go... six more hours....

You still in school piggy? You poor sod

I wasn’t trying to be combative. I genuinely think that one of the problems in teaching is this attitude that it has to be something you do for the rest of your life, that you’re dedicated to and passionate about. Ok some people are but for others, it might be something they do first, or something they do after, a ‘main’ career. It might be something you do and then leave to have a family, or it might be something you do after a family.

Teacher shortages are another matter but that’s the point really - I don’t see anything negative in effectively saying ‘come on, see what it’s like!’

I would say the hell for leather, must be promoted in your first year thing is becoming more prevalent now. The teachers I know who seek this are often highly competent but not very reflective practitioners, are often a bit dismissive of the experience of more established teachers and are, dare I say it - a touch arrogant.

Of the three people I know who were promoted in year 1 or 2 of teaching, one found the role too demanding and stepped back and one left the country to teach abroad after finding UK teaching and the responsibility of his promoted role too draining. The other is still doing the same role. Another colleague of mine has been promoted to a HOY (we have huuuuuge year groups) after less than a year in an assistant role. His lack of experience will lead to more experienced people having to give him an awful lot of support and/or him making a lot of mistakes.

Yup, still here mumsnetting to ease the pain

Also being able to train and support Teach First and other trainees requires a school to have a critical mass of experienced, competent and confident teachers. Who will be mentoring and training them if teaching becomes a gap-year profession? A handful of young, keen teachers can be really successful in a good school with experienced staff to support them. If the majority of your staff are trainees, NQTs and NQT+1 then you have a problem.
If some of the people who train to teach leave after a couple of years then it’s not an issue. If it becomes the norm then it’s a huge problem. I remember when I was an NQT 10 years ago, I went to our LA NQT meetings where one of the other NQTs was 2nd year Teach First. She was a HOD (for two humanities!) and every other member of her team was an NQT or trainee. From what she said there were a huge number of NQTs in the rest of the school too. She seemed very keen and confident at the start of the year and an absolute wreck by the end. She could have been a great teacher under the right conditions, I’m sure, and I often wonder where she ended up. To me her situation was a sign that something was very wrong in her school and they had very poor Ofsted not long after.

But not all teachers come to teaching via Teach First sabine

All trainees require experienced teachers. Expanding a career route that doesn’t lead to an increase in experienced teachers is short-term thinking.

I think the DfE have expanded Teach First because it was actually successful at recruiting compared to other routes. That may be because of how it is advertised - a graduate training scheme for elites rather than further study for those who don’t know what else to do (as a PGCE is often seen for those straight out of uni).

But expanding the scheme will naturally weaken the entry requirements and ethos. Whether that affects retention will need to be seen, and scheme that places elite graduates in challenging schools might not be so attractive when it is placing all-comers in any school.

People teaching for three years (or less) is a disaster for the profession and for our children, no matter how good they are (and possibly worse that they leave so soon if they are good).

I’m also horrified at the thought of a DH with six years experience, though unsurprised.

I've met a few former teach firsters, only one who still teaches. Her training school was put into special measures whilst she was there and teach first were supposed to move her but never did. She is a great teacher and really tough but she told me that she really struggled during training and wouldn't recommend the route for most people.

I'm pretty sure that history is a new subject for teach first and personally I would be wary of being in a "Guinea pig" year.

Have you thought about schools direct or a scitt? Both are more school centred routes than the PGCE and are often popular with career changers. Schools Direct routes also often have schemes to help you find employment for your NQT year which might be useful in history!

I run a department almost solely made up of teachers who went through the TF route. I used to be quite sceptical of the training process but honestly, in our area and subject at least they are giving us the most motivated, high quality, resilient teachers. The people that work and train for TF are 100% better read in terms of modern theory and pedagogy that the people running our Scitt/pgce programmes and ultimately what you get with TF is people who have a fairly high standard of subject knowledge because of the entry requirements. I can't speak highly enough of them, and although I don't know first hand, but my team tell me, if you survive the first year, you're pretty much tough enough for teaching... and that is pretty tough!

I would suggest that you are sure that you want to work in deprived schools/areas. It's a very different job to, for example, working in a girls' grammar. So rewarding and I have been doing it for over a decade and wouldn't swap it for the world.

people who have a fairly high standard of subject knowledge because of the entry requirements

I’m sure I read on here that your degree might be in history but TF decide that because you have A-level maths and there’s a shortage of maths teachers and not history teachers, you’re trained by them to be a maths teacher.

I am aware of that. The number of Teach First trainees is growing rapidly though. Over 1700 this year alone. If it becomes the norm to only stay for 3 years then it’s a problem. If the numbers stay small then it’s fine.

They’ve already dropped the entry criteria to a 2:2 this year and took on over 80% of those who applied.