Qualified to teach KS3 and 4 maths but not A level?

[Melawati]

Is this a thing? Apparently although my DC’s maths teacher is fully qualified to teach secondary maths they are not qualified to teach A level.
Can a teacher be trained just to teach up to GCSE level and not the full secondary range?

Yes. Most PGCEs are 11-16 not 11-18, so technically very few of us are "qualified" to teach beyond 16.

In reality though, experience and expertise trumps "qualifications".

My PGCE was definitely up to A’level. Does your DC’s maths teacher actually have a PGCE?

Very unusual. They're usually 11-16 or 14-19.

That's not to say that someone on an 11-16 course won't have experience of post 16 teaching.

What exactly has been said? And in what context? Frequently, teachers will teach more than one subject, but not necessarily both to A level because of the specialism involved. I teach Spanish and French, for example, but couldn’t manage Spanish beyond KS3 because I have not lived there, and have no fluency or feel for the language. As maths is a shortage subject, it may well be the case that the teacher doesn’t have a maths degree and couldn’t do the complexity of A level the justice the students need.

@Shiningsilverargent Spot on - there are a large number of maths who don't have A-Level Maths as a qualification let alone a degree.
Teaching A-Level maths is a lot more demanding than teaching gcse (obviously) in terms of difficulty of content.
However it's not all bad - there are plenty of excellent teachers of KS3 / KS4 who don't have the ability to teach KS5.

This sounds a bit of an odd thing to say- what context has this been said in?

Once you have QTS (which is the important bit, not a PGCE- and you can have QTS without a PGCE), you are effectively qualified to teach any age/stage/subject- e.g. I know people who teach physics, up to A-level who qualified in maths, etc.

It may be that the school doesn't consider them qualified, but that's a different issue, and would point to them not being a subject specialist etc.

FWIW, I did an 11-18 PGCE but I think they are rarer, because they have to guarantee some experience teaching post-16, which can be a challenge in some areas.

It's entirely possible that they trained 11-16, therefore have never experienced teaching A-level.

It doesn't matter- they will still be absolutely fine teaching KS3 and KS4.

Also worth considering that some people really don't want to teach A-level - maybe that's why they don't? In the department I led last year, I had a brilliant teacher - fantastic all rounder in terms of science and great at KS3 and 4. I offered her the option of teach A-level but she simply didn't want to.

Thanks everyone, this has been very helpful. I just thought it was an odd way of presenting someone’s qualifications/training and wondered if it was usual. It clearly is.

QTS is QTS and although you will train in a particular phase there’s nothing to stop you teaching in another if the school is haply
to employ you. You can teach KS5 with an 11-16 PGCE but you will need support and development for your subject knowledge. In your DD’s teacher’s case it is almost certainly because they aren’t a maths graduate and their highest maths qualification is an A Level.

I don't really think the PGCE makes much of a difference to be honest. I did an 11-18 PGCE, but it contained barely any content specific to A-Level. I do teach A-Level now, but to be honest, I'd prefer not to , it's so much more work with planning and keeping on top of my subject knowledge (as it's an area that you need an excellent knowledge of up-to-date current affairs so need to be constantly researching).

Pretty much the same here!

OP when I taught in secondary, I taught French all the way through including A Level because I have a degree in French and lived in France. My second MFL of Spanish I only taught up to GCSE as I only have A Level myself and never lived in a Spanish speaking country, so don't have sufficient subject knowledge or competency.

I also taught some KS4 Maths, but do have A Level Maths and it was also a part of my degree.

When I was doing my PGCE many years ago, we were always told to feel comfortable teaching a subject, we should ideally have one level higher than what we were teaching ie degree for A Level, A Level for GCSE, GCSE for KS3 etc.

It is an odd way of phrasing it, as PPs have explained, anyone with QTS is qualified to teach anything. If this is how it has been phrased by staff at the school, it may be their own internal policies. Some school have policies like, teachers don't teach a subject at GCSE without an A Level in it, or don't teach an A Level without at least some degree level study in that subject. That's becoming much much less common nowadays though, as teachers who have degree level qualifications in subjects like Maths and Physics are as rare as hen's teeth.

I did a 7-14 PGCE and yett have taught KS3/4, A-level, KS1....but currently teaching Reception 😱

I'm not entirely sure whether it matters if you have the subject knowledge and are qualified to teach.

You train to teach in two key stages.
Most school in my area don't have a sixth form.
Also as a pp mentioned not many of us maths teachers even have an a level in maths themselves.

I was under the impression that you were expected to have a qualification in that subject higher than the level you're teaching. For example, I teach Chemistry up to A-level because I have a degree in the subject. However, as I have A-levels in Physics and Maths I have also taught those subjects to GCSE level. Frustratingly, as a 'Science' teacher I have also had to teach Biology to GCSE despite not being comfortable doing so and not having a higher qualification in the subject because school leaders often think that all Science is the same!

@Card1gan I am exactly the same as you! Many of my PGCE cohort would not consider teaching in a school which did not have a sixth form as they needed the mental stimulation of teaching to the higher level. Both my boys have left school now but I would have been devastated if any of their A’level teachers had not had a degree in their particular subject.

Maths teachers don’t need a pure maths degree to be very well-qualified. I’d have no problem with an engineering or economics grad teaching my children maths. In retrospect my own maths teachers were clearly gifted pure mathematicians but this did not translate to effective pedagogy for decidedly un-gifted me!

Mine was 11-18 - I thought this was common??

It’s common but it’s not universal. Some areas have predominantly 11-16 schools. If the training provider can’t place you somewhere with KS5 provision then you can’t really claim to be 11-18 trained. I doubt that this is the case here, however. I’d bet good money it’s simply because her highest maths qualification is an A level.

I am not a maths teacher. If I am asked to teach maths, I teach it. Or history, or English, or cookery, or ICT, or RE. All of this has happened. No reason why not - I am a TEACHER - but if I was asked to teach maths A level, I would have to say I am not in the best position to support students in that subject at that level.

That’s interesting @2greenroses
would you be the only teacher, teaching that class for the whole year? Would someone help you with lesson planning?
I am a teacher (of adults). While I could have a good crack at a range of related subjects I recognise I’m more secure and a better teacher in the specialism that I’ve trained in.

Well, yes, if that is your class, on your timetable, then that is your class. You would then have an additional head of department, and if you had any problems or queries, that is where you would go. Most likely you would be given resources and text books. Lots of teachers teach outside their department every year, but hopefully not at A level - although it isn't unknown