Why are primary and secondary school teachers paid the same if secondary school teachers have a degree and then do a PGCE?

[worried63xx]

Just a genuine question really, not meant to antagonise.
Don't secondary school teachers have to have better qualifications to get into teaching?

[y0rkier0se]

I have a politics degree and PGCE and I teach primary

[Aragog]

When I qualified in secondary education in 1996 it was also GCSE English and Maths at grade C and no science specified.

[fedup21]

I think that attitude is probably mirrored cant in OP's idea that secondary teachers are 'cleverer' than you primary teachers who are just kind and hug a bit.


Yep-we just play in the sand all day.

[noblegiraffe]

Oh cant, come and join us in secondary - my school normally has about 3 Drs on staff too. Science seems to get them most often.

[Kneehighinshit]

And some teachers have a goal of 'getting out'

[worried63xx]

I didn't once say secondary school teachers are cleverer I was thinking in terms of quantity of qualifications. I know that both are hard work I have family who are primary school teachers so don't misconstrue and exaggerate what I said.

[damnthatanxiety]

Surely its not right that if someone gets a law degree they get paid way more and someone gets law degree and teaching status and teaches law at A level its way less. Especially when teachers work very hard?

you seem to be stuck on some strange idea that collecting more and more qualifications entitles you to higher wages. I'm not sure how old you are OP but the world has never worked like that. Lawyers earn more than teachers on the whole. You could have a Phd in astrophysics and be a teacher but you aren't going to be paid what the head of NASA gets paid...

[noblegiraffe]

Yep-we just play in the sand all day

Oh don’t do yourselves down so much, sometimes you get glitter and glue out too!

(Definitely couldn’t be a primary teacher).

[worried63xx]

@damnthatanxiety I don't think it automatically awards you a higher wage, I just assumed that the more qualifications the further you go. I know that lawyers earn more but if you have the same educational background and both work as hard then certain careers shouldn't earn loads more than others i.e. teachers deserve higher wages which you can't disagree with.

[cantkeepawayforever]

Weasel words, OP. 'Better qualifications' does at the very least imply 'cleverer'.

Most importantly, 'better qualifications' - like 'more ambitious' or 'looking for progression' - do NOT imply being a better teacher

[fedup21]

Oh don’t do yourselves down so much, sometimes you get glitter and glue out too!

And don’t forget the playdo .

Best way to spread worms in EYFS, I understand. Scratch bum, don’t wash hands, insert wormy nails into the playdo, friend eats playdo...

[worried63xx]

@cantkeepawayforever I didn't say cleverer and I have said that my wording was not great and what I was focusing on was the quantity of qualifications and therefore perhaps the enhanced subject knowledge that someone might have if they did a normal degree before an educational qualification.

[Piggywaspushed]

I am not misconstruing OP. You are being a tad evasive about why exactly you want to know these things. And very much stated that you felt secondary teachers would deserve higher pay. You need to know this is a fraught, thorny and controversial topic in education.

You said 'better' qualifications form the get go!

Have you a mentor you can discuss career progression and routes with?

[TimeforanotherChange]

@cantkeepawayforever
The very best teachers stay as class teachers, though some do eventually get dragged into SLT through their expertise. SENCos would be an honorable exception to this - they are generally excellent classroom teachers who develop an expertise in teaching and managing the needs of the children with the highest needs

I would absolutely agree with this - and also your point that a move to SLT is an increase in the part of the job they like least. For myself, I was a fairly reluctant HoD who has now realised the benefits of being able to plan the SoW and do all the cool, fun bits I want to do probably outweighs all the bullshit meetings and admin crap that goes with it. I have firmly resisted any suggestions at applying for SLT roles - I would be utterly bored and totally shit at it. It is all the parts of the job I'm worst at; I'm hopeless with data/spreadsheets/pointless Ofsted hoop jumping. What I'm good at is being in a classroom with teenagers - and I've happily remained there. I love my subject, and I love the kids. Agree that SENCOs are usually fabulous with kids and have gone into the role because they are passionate about ensuring that SEND students get as much of the help they need as possible.

SLT is all the dull bits of the job in my opinion. I couldn't bear to be producing Progress 8 reports full of percentages per subject and showing how our school compares against national averages, etc. Why would anyone be interested in doing that - even for the extra salary - when they could be doing stuff about highwaymen or prostitutes in Victorian London?

[cantkeepawayforever]

If one follows your logic, OP, then surely someone would be a better teacher if they had a BEd than a non-education degree, because they would know more about education?

[Piggywaspushed]

An MA or a PhD would not necessarily enhance subject knowledge or teaching ability. Depending on the content of those qualifications.

[Schoolchoicesucks]

OP are you really a term into PGCE?

[worried63xx]

I have come from this from a curious tentative questioning perspective. If you read my opening post I said I am not meaning to antagonise. This should be a place where (as some have) people can be corrected and learn more and I have learnt a lot and its been great to understand more about education. Some people on mumsnet love a good argument and so can't comment on a post without doing that when I have not been antagonistic at all and admitted my ignorance. In terms of my questions and my position, I am doing a PGCE at the minute and as my mentor etc. are very busy which is fair enough I haven't had a chance to ask these broader questions about teaching and education- why the wages are so low, what your wages are based on in terms of qualifications, how people progress to SLT, do they even want to progress to SLT? etc.

[cantkeepawayforever]

Agree with Piggy - even if I had gone into secondary science teaching, my science PhD would have been fairly useless as to subject knowledge (as its overlap with 'school' science is miniscule), and no guide at all to teaching ability.

[Piggywaspushed]

It's an amusing irony here that I would really like to be SLT and am not!

I am actually a good teacher: honest! and quite clever

[cantkeepawayforever]

Piggy, I don't think that my comments about SLT and best classroom practitioners is extendable to secondary - because SLT in primary and secondary are such different jobs, due to the differences in size and organisation of the two types of school. So I have no doubt that you are an excellent teacher and very clever indeed!

[Piggywaspushed]

haha! Thanks!!

[DrMadelineMaxwell]

My BEd was 4 years. And I'm always glad I did it rather than a PGCE because I had far more time of teaching prac. in a wider range of schools than you get in one year and had far more teaching specific lectures and research to do. I don't argue that PGCEs work but would rate a BEd above it due to the wealth of experience you get.

[Piggywaspushed]

OP, book some time with your mentor or ask at your uni of they plan to run a session on career progression (they often do).

You sound a little all at sea /unsupported.

One thing : I think you should begin to think of us/yourself as 'salaried' : not 'wage earning'.

Not after an argument but we teachers do like a good debate!

[namechangedyetagain]

@MyNameIsJane I have applied for a schools based PGCE and the course requires you to have a GCSE in Maths, English and Science.