Teacher training tests
Discussion
ninja-lewis said:
motco said:
OdramaSwimLaden said:
Listening of the radio this morning it will be a test done in a room with a pc and you have 12 seconds to answer each question. If you fail, you have to wait 2 years to re-take.
One sample question was - What is 17% of 175?
Not many could do that without a calculator in twelve seconds. One sample question was - What is 17% of 175?
motco said:
Not many could do that without a calculator in twelve seconds.
It is quite easy to arrive at a ball park figure which might be all you need if the test is multiple choice. 10% is 17.5, 20 is 35. Can arrive at that almost instantly. I'd be using a pencil and paper to remove 3x1.75 from 35 though. I don't play well with things like that.
Big news for everyone. Teachers already do these tests in English, Maths etc. They are called QTS (Qualified Teacher Status) tests. The government is suggesting something that is already done! Furthermore, all trainee teachers must have at least a C grade in English, Maths and Science I think, except in Scotland; indeed, a well known route around it is to train in Scotland but then work in England.
It is ironic that a government who has announced that those who teach will no longer need QTS, thus allowing anyone, without adequate GCSEs, A Levels, a degree, PGCE or QTS to teach, is also espousing schemes such as extra tests to raise the bar in terms of teacher education and qualification. They have no idea and are hell bent on undermining teachers in the press, turning society against them, in order to pursue an agenda of pay and pension cuts. You may not know it but I'll bet if your kid is in a comp then several of their 'teachers' are not teachers at all qualifications wise and lack any specialist knowledge at all in terms of a subject.
It is ironic that a government who has announced that those who teach will no longer need QTS, thus allowing anyone, without adequate GCSEs, A Levels, a degree, PGCE or QTS to teach, is also espousing schemes such as extra tests to raise the bar in terms of teacher education and qualification. They have no idea and are hell bent on undermining teachers in the press, turning society against them, in order to pursue an agenda of pay and pension cuts. You may not know it but I'll bet if your kid is in a comp then several of their 'teachers' are not teachers at all qualifications wise and lack any specialist knowledge at all in terms of a subject.
maix27 said:
I think half the problem is that teaching is so underpaid and under appreciated that people with the skills and experience to do other stuff, do.
Funny, a good friend of mine from college with an MEng has quit civil engineering to become a teacher, as the pay is just as good for a hell of a lot less work.On the original subject though, I recall a reading about a study of standards of teaching across Europe, which showed no correlation between teaching standards and pay.
It did, however, show a rock-solid correlation between standards and the entry criteria to the profession, namely the higher the bar to entry, the better the teachers were, with (I forget) either Finland or Iceland having the best teachers, because they had to have a really good - possibly a postgrad - degree to get on to a teacher training course, though their pay was at best no better than in the UK.
So on that basis, this move by the government would seem to be on the right track, especially given that teacher training courses are presently very oversubscribed; might as well weed out the thick ones rather than the ones who are bothered by the salary.
I think we all know that - they're just making the tests a bit harder.Johnnytheboy said:
...they had to have a really good - possibly a postgrad - degree to get on to a teacher training course,
People who want to be teachers normally do a years PGCE after their degree so it's effectively the same thing. Then they do a year as a Newly Qualified Teacher (NQT) either by finding a job themselves or by being placed.Lotusevoraboy said:
Big news for everyone. Teachers already do these tests in English, Maths etc. They are called QTS (Qualified Teacher Status) tests. The government is suggesting something that is already done! Furthermore, all trainee teachers must have at least a C grade in English, Maths and Science I think, except in Scotland; indeed, a well known route around it is to train in Scotland but then work in England.
It is ironic that a government who has announced that those who teach will no longer need QTS, thus allowing anyone, without adequate GCSEs, A Levels, a degree, PGCE or QTS to teach, is also espousing schemes such as extra tests to raise the bar in terms of teacher education and qualification. They have no idea and are hell bent on undermining teachers in the press, turning society against them, in order to pursue an agenda of pay and pension cuts. You may not know it but I'll bet if your kid is in a comp then several of their 'teachers' are not teachers at all qualifications wise and lack any specialist knowledge at all in terms of a subject.
As far as I know, they were allowed to retake these simple tests about 8 times within a year. They're now making it so if you don't pass within 3 turns, you can't even attempt to do it for the next 2 years. It is ironic that a government who has announced that those who teach will no longer need QTS, thus allowing anyone, without adequate GCSEs, A Levels, a degree, PGCE or QTS to teach, is also espousing schemes such as extra tests to raise the bar in terms of teacher education and qualification. They have no idea and are hell bent on undermining teachers in the press, turning society against them, in order to pursue an agenda of pay and pension cuts. You may not know it but I'll bet if your kid is in a comp then several of their 'teachers' are not teachers at all qualifications wise and lack any specialist knowledge at all in terms of a subject.
But I do agree, they have no idea what they're doing. Especially when it comes to education and their "it's what we did in our day" approach.
Johnnytheboy said:
maix27 said:
I think half the problem is that teaching is so underpaid and under appreciated that people with the skills and experience to do other stuff, do.
Funny, a good friend of mine from college with an MEng has quit civil engineering to become a teacher, as the pay is just as good for a hell of a lot less work.On the original subject though, I recall a reading about a study of standards of teaching across Europe, which showed no correlation between teaching standards and pay.
It did, however, show a rock-solid correlation between standards and the entry criteria to the profession, namely the higher the bar to entry, the better the teachers were, with (I forget) either Finland or Iceland having the best teachers, because they had to have a really good - possibly a postgrad - degree to get on to a teacher training course, though their pay was at best no better than in the UK.
So on that basis, this move by the government would seem to be on the right track, especially given that teacher training courses are presently very oversubscribed; might as well weed out the thick ones rather than the ones who are bothered by the salary.
Interesting studies too, I wouldn't have thought that the case. Amazing what a bit of research shows up though. Maybe the gov are right for a change!
I do think it's a tough thing to
maix27 said:
motco said:
OdramaSwimLaden said:
Listening of the radio this morning it will be a test done in a room with a pc and you have 12 seconds to answer each question. If you fail, you have to wait 2 years to re-take.
One sample question was - What is 17% of 175?
Not many could do that without a calculator in twelve seconds. One sample question was - What is 17% of 175?
If you do need a full answer, you then need to subtract 3 x 1.75 = 5.25 from 35 (1% of 175 is 1.75 then multiply by 3 as 17 is 3 below 20) therefore the final answer is 29.75.
ETA - beaten to it by about half of PH
Edited by oldbanger on Friday 26th October 22:28
holes slag off teachers indiscriminertley.oldbanger said:
maix27 said:
motco said:
OdramaSwimLaden said:
Listening of the radio this morning it will be a test done in a room with a pc and you have 12 seconds to answer each question. If you fail, you have to wait 2 years to re-take.
One sample question was - What is 17% of 175?
Not many could do that without a calculator in twelve seconds. One sample question was - What is 17% of 175?
If you do need a full answer, you then need to subtract 3 x 1.75 = 5.25 from 35 (1% of 175 is 1.75 then multiply by 3 as 17 is 3 below 20) therefore the final answer is 29.75.
Johnnytheboy said:
maix27 said:
I think half the problem is that teaching is so underpaid and under appreciated that people with the skills and experience to do other stuff, do.
Funny, a good friend of mine from college with an MEng has quit civil engineering to become a teacher, as the pay is just as good for a hell of a lot less work.On the original subject though, I recall a reading about a study of standards of teaching across Europe, which showed no correlation between teaching standards and pay.
It did, however, show a rock-solid correlation between standards and the entry criteria to the profession, namely the higher the bar to entry, the better the teachers were, with (I forget) either Finland or Iceland having the best teachers, because they had to have a really good - possibly a postgrad - degree to get on to a teacher training course, though their pay was at best no better than in the UK.
So on that basis, this move by the government would seem to be on the right track, especially given that teacher training courses are presently very oversubscribed; might as well weed out the thick ones rather than the ones who are bothered by the salary.
Please provide a link to what you're talking about with regards to teaching standards and pay across the countries. It's not anything anyone would doubt, but a link to such would be useful for everyone to see. I for some reason imagine the kids in Finland and Iceland not to be of the typical variety we see in our country though - perhaps in Finland and Iceland kids don't stay behind to ask you what they should do about their alcoholic parents, or perhaps, the kids actually listen in the lessons rather than talking about their latest iPhone App.
The more difficult tests are not an issue...anyone doing a bit more revision will pass it. The best thing about the reforms are that teachers don't get to retake them 8times and still qualify. In my opinion, the driving test should be upgraded to be like this. If you fail three times, you should not be allowed to retake within the next 2 years. You're obviously not fit for teaching or driving on the road...end of.
motco said:
Lotusevoraboy said:
Or you could just divide 175 by 100 and multiply it by 17!
In your head, in twelve seconds?It's barely different time-wise from the 20% less 3% approach, 35 - (3 x 1.75), 35 - 5.25
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff