Teach First/School Direct are just mad, right?

[noblegiraffe]

I did a PGCE and it was a difficult year with an intense workload. The periods at uni were a blessed respite from the school placements with the teaching/lesson planning/marking requirements.

My department has always taken PGCE students. They often seem exhausted by the end of their placement and work long hours. They are teaching about ten hours by Christmas, so a gentle but ramped introduction. They have a teacher in with them every lesson.

Which got me thinking about Teach First - they start on a 60-80% timetable, despite probably having as much teaching experience as my PGCE students. They own their own classes so no teacher in with them, only feedback is from proper observations. If the TF student quits, the school is then left with a hole in their staffing.

I’m not sure about School Direct timetabling but it’s also a ‘drop in at the deep end’ approach (more or less supportive depending on whether salaried).

How are they not seen as a bonkers training route? How can you hone your craft when you’re pinging from one lesson to the next from the start? And you don’t have a class teacher on hand to provide guidance and take over if things go badly?

And yet I’ve seen people on here say ‘I’d prefer to do School Direct to a PGCE because I’d prefer to learn on the job’ like a PGCE is an entire year spent in a lecture theatre.

I get that some people need the salary and don’t have a choice, but that’s not always the case.

Surely a PGCE is better for the trainee, the school, and for the classes they teach?

Yes, I'm in my second year of teaching and yes I'm responsible for a salaried student.

That’s not a good thing, and the university should not have approved it.

Unless you have unusual circumstances that mean you have actually been teaching for years before training?

I had quite a few friends who did TF after university - only one of them still teaches now, and she teaches in a leafy private. To be fair, though, the attrition rate of all teachers from the (very challenging) schools they were placed in was appalling. Friend who now teaches in a private school was made head of department after three years, because by then she was the longstanding member of staff in the subject (English, so it wasn't a small department!)

DH retrained as a teacher in his late 20s, so did look at School Direct but went for a PGCE in the end and was glad he did. That is the big appeal of those schemes though, which you haven't acknowledged - you get a (crap) salary rather paying to study, which is why lots of people prefer them. I don't think anyone picks TF or SD because they think it'll be easier.

When i applied for a pgce after years in the classroom i was told i 'didn't understand enough about teaching' so there was definitely an expectation that i would go into the classroom already able to teach, had i been successful.

Those with PGCE students who don’t take the classes of various teachers, how does that work? Do they take over the mentor’s timetable regardless of suitability and how does that work with two placements? Does the same class end up taught by two students in a year?

I'm teaching in 4 form entry school with a TeachFirst colleague. I'm not his mentor.

I would hate to train like this. I'm not keen on being in a team with a TF candidate. It's not easy on anyone.

We're a term in now and TF candidate will have his class 80‰ of the time from next week. I'm sorting and helping as much as I'm able but I have my own class, own responsibilities and own busy life.
He is doing well in terms of the relationship with his class but they are an easy class and he would struggle if they weren't. He's good at the friendly, motivating stuff but currently has nothing in the way of "nope, this is the way it works" skills. His subject knowledge is weak across all areas. His planning needs a LOT of support, his marking leaves a lot to be desired. And he has yet to do any of the expected admin like data tracking, special needs reviews etc. These four things are not his fault - it's the training he's subscribed to. However, it means his class aren't always getting what they need, his mentor has to work very hard to keep him on track and his team have to pick up pieces all over the place.

you get a (crap) salary rather paying to study,

I said I understood the need for a salary in my OP but a lot of SD places are unsalaried.

It’s a no-brainer in maths to do a PGCE because of the bursary but there are still people doing other training routes for maths!

When I say 'after three years' I actually mean at the beginning of her third year teaching, so after two years in the classroom. Literally everyone else in her department was either brand new or had been there a year. Just about the only people over 30 in the school were SLT. She looks back and says its frightening to think of all these newly minted graduates (with no real understanding of the life experiences of their students) essentially running this school and dealing alone with issues like gang violence.

No, I haven't been teaching for years. I was a TA for years.

We don't necessarily get two lots of placement students. We have two mentors in the dept and they don't tend to share nicely with us. So, yes the trainees take mainly their classes and then, sometimes, the classes of the other mentor ! I have only ever been asked when the 'day off' has caused a problem.

When I moaned about this , I was told it was an approach recommended by. or at least endorsed by, the uni...

I’m NQT+1 and about to start supporting an NQT alongside that person’s existing mentor so I can perhaps take the role on next academic year. But I have 20 years’ experience in increasingly senior management outside teaching so maybe that helps. Will be observing and shadowing existing NQT mentor as I’m well aware I am not equipped to go it alone at this early point in my career.

One of our cohort got a job as HoD on graduation, with another NQT and a trainee n his department. Terrifying to think of as a parent.

No, I haven't been teaching for years.

And now, in your second year of teaching your class has been given to a trainee so your teaching timetable is massively reduced?

I’ve always been sceptical about TF. I’ve worked with a few of varying quality. The ones who have any self-awareness (some people don’t) have admitted that they were terrible to begin with. As we all are (I did a pgce) but my concern is definitely for the poor pupils in those classes. It could mean a whole year of awful teaching in, for eg, science. Which is a lot of learning for the pupils to miss out on.
As for reflecting on your practice whilst you train - when you’re a pgce student you have always got an experienced teacher observing so they can help you reflect. This was how I learnt and I owe lots of my skills to those excellent teachers who took the time to train me. If you’re TF aren’t you just reflecting on your own mainly? How much time have TF trainees really spent studying other effective teachers?
Anyway, it’s changed so much, when I did my pgce it was the first few years of TF and the entry requirements were quite high in terms of academic ability so at least you could be sure of subject knowledge. Now I’m not so sure.

So, yes the trainees take mainly their classes

I’m faced with the prospect of mentoring a trainee next placement who is taking none of my classes. I’m feeling a bit aggrieved.

Oh no - all that extra work with no extras frees! (I know they’re not really frees when a student is taking your classes but at least you get to sit own)

And yet I’ve seen people on here say ‘I’d prefer to do School Direct to a PGCE because I’d prefer to learn on the job’ like a PGCE is an entire year spent in a lecture theatre.

Definitely. We had very little time in a lecture theatre on my PGCE!

Teach First etc seem to have very little to do with what would be good for the prospective teacher, the school or the students and much more to do with what would be the quickest at getting warm bodies in front of a class

and the entry requirements were quite high in terms of academic ability so at least you could be sure of subject knowledge.

From what I understand, if you’ve got maths A-level, even if you’ve got an entirely random degree, TF will train you as a maths teacher.

Really not sure how it can tout itself as an elite training route.

all that extra work with no extras frees!

I know! I’m also not entirely sure how I will be able to mentor them without actually seeing them teach. I’m going to have to put it on my to do list for next week to figure out.

I totally agree OP. You need time to adjust and reflect and also it’s useful to have experience of more than one school. TF is also used as a springboard to jobs in top companies after the first two years which is not great for the profession.

@WhiskersPete - why not? This is what we do and it works well. How do you organise it?

and the entry requirements were quite high in terms of academic ability so at least you could be sure of subject knowledge.

Yes, when my friends (all with Cambridge degrees) were applying (c. 2006/7) it was very competitive. I'm not that sure their excellent academic qualifications did that much to help them in situ. To be fair, they weren't expecting to stay in teaching forever - the 'First' bit seemed to be pushed much more then - but I really don't think they were at all prepared for how they would (almost) all leave - not off to do something more lucrative, having felt that they'd improved lives and done a social good, but broken, some of them signed off with stress long-term, feeling like guilty failures. It was awful to watch.

I just don't feel like TF is honest about what it's like to work in their most challenging schools. I used to be a university lecturer and a few years ago one of my favourite students - a fiercely bright, absolutely lovely young man who had some quite stereotypically 'camp' mannerisms - went to do TF. He left at Christmas after being subjected to daily, relentless homophobic abuse from the kids. I felt so deeply for him - I really think he thought it would be all 'To Sir With Love' and he was devastated.

I just don't feel like TF is honest about what it's like to work in their most challenging schools
This is a problem I think. Or it certainly used to be when TF pretty much exclusively recruited from oxbridge. The trainees seemed to have very little idea of what they were letting themselves in for.

A friend of mine did TF, teaching maths in a fairly rough secondary school. It was incredibly hard work as she had to do college work (including a full day of lectures etc on Saturdays) on top of teaching, lesson planning, marking etc. Teaching became living hell as there was a group in every lesson who just didn't want to be there and played up in every way imaginable, up to and including overt sexual harassment of my friend. She felt really bad about it because other children wanted to learn and it was so difficult getting any class to settle down to enable them to do so. When she found herself working right through Christmas Day to get an assignment done she realised the whole thing was ridiculous and gave up.

Such a shame, because she was potentially a good teacher and it's not as if we have a surplus of maths teachers.

The ‘first’ bit was definitely pushed more than it is now. I met with one of their recruiters in 2006. I was thinking about applying and since I had a good degree and phd in science someone suggested TF to me. The recruiter pretty much said time that I wasn’t what they were looking for because I clearly wanted to be a teacher and they only wanted to recruit people who wouldn’t consider any other route into teaching!
In those days you got a guaranteed interview at Deloitte if you graduated TF I believe. That’s why people did it (other post-graduation perks too and lots of city networking events)

Teach First is now the largest teacher training provider, which I think will affect its brand.

I’m a mentor for a SCITT course. We only get them for the second place mane tad we only do KS4 and KS5. I’ve had some amazing trainees and some real shockers. We do get quite a bit of pressure from the university providing the accreditation to get us to pass them. Because of this, there has only been one trainee I just could not pass they were so bad at planning, classroom management (and we don’t get any behaviour issues!)
He was also incredibly arrogant and thought he was beyond training...

I can’t imagine what he’d have been like with little to no supervision on a salaried route!