New teaching rules?
Author
Discussion

elster

Original Poster:

17,517 posts

239 months

Thursday 29th January 2009
quotequote all
Someone has just mentioned that they have been informed that they will no longer be able to become a teacher as now they are saying you will need a Masters.

Surely this can't be right? Anyone know any more information on this?

elster

Original Poster:

17,517 posts

239 months

Thursday 29th January 2009
quotequote all
That sounds a bit daft, so they want all teachers to do 6 years uni. For teaching all kids?

Hedders

24,460 posts

276 months

Thursday 29th January 2009
quotequote all
The have to make sure that the teachers have had the right politics instilled in them in order to pass it on to the kids.


Engineer1

10,486 posts

238 months

Thursday 29th January 2009
quotequote all
As far as i know from being on a PGCE, the intention is to increase the qualification level of teachers, the PGCE will probably simply become a one year masters in education or similar.

elster

Original Poster:

17,517 posts

239 months

Thursday 29th January 2009
quotequote all
Engineer1 said:
As far as i know from being on a PGCE, the intention is to increase the qualification level of teachers, the PGCE will probably simply become a one year masters in education or similar.
So it isn't really a masters.

Police State

4,364 posts

249 months

Thursday 29th January 2009
quotequote all
Hedders said:
The have to make sure that the teachers have had the right politics instilled in them in order to pass it on to the kids.
They already do that without the 'A' Level standard. A few days ago, an 'English' teacher told my nephew that MI5 trained Bin Laden... it was a PHSE class (a.k.a. social studies). beyond belief...

kit80

4,764 posts

216 months

Thursday 29th January 2009
quotequote all
At the moment a masters subject is not accepted for teacher training as its too narrow, so I dont see this happening. PGCE/GTP route however is majorliy over subscribed so who knows..

Merlot

4,121 posts

237 months

Thursday 29th January 2009
quotequote all
elster said:
Engineer1 said:
As far as i know from being on a PGCE, the intention is to increase the qualification level of teachers, the PGCE will probably simply become a one year masters in education or similar.
So it isn't really a masters.
The PGCE isn't a Masters. It is a Post Grad Certificate in Education.

A lot of teachers I work with are looking to do the MEd. which is a Masters. The PGCE carries 60 credits (1/3rd) towards a Masters.


kusee pee

1,021 posts

232 months

Thursday 29th January 2009
quotequote all
As a teacher myself I think this is a silly move. There has been a general understanding in recent years that subject-knowledge is of decreasing importance whilst an ability to empathise, communicate and motivate children has become more important. The recently modified QTS standards have begun to reflect this too. By narrowing the entry-criteria into teaching the profession will do itself out of many very capable people; the best teachers are rarely the most academic, partly because the more expert someone is in their field the more difficult it becomes to empathise with (and therefore explain to) those who are novices. "The more I know the more I don't know..."

Tom_C76

1,923 posts

217 months

Thursday 29th January 2009
quotequote all
elster said:
That sounds a bit daft, so they want all teachers to do 6 years uni. For teaching all kids?
Masters degree is only a 1 year course if you already hold a batchelors...

cazzer

8,883 posts

277 months

Thursday 29th January 2009
quotequote all
kusee pee said:
As a teacher myself I think this is a silly move. There has been a general understanding in recent years that subject-knowledge is of decreasing importance whilst an ability to empathise, communicate and motivate children has become more important. The recently modified QTS standards have begun to reflect this too. By narrowing the entry-criteria into teaching the profession will do itself out of many very capable people; the best teachers are rarely the most academic, partly because the more expert someone is in their field the more difficult it becomes to empathise with (and therefore explain to) those who are novices. "The more I know the more I don't know..."
What????

So what your saying is it unimportant if you know sod all about the subject your teaching as long as you're able to put it across well and empathise?
FFS. I despair.

tegwin

1,682 posts

235 months

Thursday 29th January 2009
quotequote all
No... But some people who have spent 6 years going deep into the thinkings of hitler will make crap histroy teachers... whereas someone with a much broader but less inddepth knowldge will make a better teacher...

Its all about the person rather than what they know..


Afterall... most teachers just have to be able to read the textbook set by the examboard/school and teach that in an interesting way.... very little "knowledge" per-se required!



I would like to see schools accepting people with No degree... people who went out into the world and picked up real life skills in whatever proffesion they want to teach (be it engineering, ICT etc) A PGCE is a must, but why have a degree in the field when by passive learning you could be better....

Edited by tegwin on Thursday 29th January 22:53

cazzer

8,883 posts

277 months

Thursday 29th January 2009
quotequote all
tegwin said:
No... But some people who have spent 6 years going deep into the thinkings of hitler will make crap histroy teachers... whereas someone with a much broader but less inddepth knowldge will make a better teacher...

Its all about the person rather than what they know..


Afterall... most teachers just have to be able to read the textbook set by the examboard/school and teach that in an interesting way.... very little "knowledge" per-se required!
Sorry but I have to take issue with that.
The best teachers I had at school where the ones who knew their subject backwards.
They could get through the dross of the curriculum and then go that extra mile to show you lots of additional stuff that was far more interesting but not on any exam.
Hell if my physics teacher had stuck to teaching the curriculum only, however interestingly, I wouldn't have a career, as it was his personal computer that peeked my interest in the first place.
(The school didn't have any and computing in any shape or form wasn't on the curriculum)

elster

Original Poster:

17,517 posts

239 months

Thursday 29th January 2009
quotequote all
cazzer said:
tegwin said:
No... But some people who have spent 6 years going deep into the thinkings of hitler will make crap histroy teachers... whereas someone with a much broader but less inddepth knowldge will make a better teacher...

Its all about the person rather than what they know..


Afterall... most teachers just have to be able to read the textbook set by the examboard/school and teach that in an interesting way.... very little "knowledge" per-se required!
Sorry but I have to take issue with that.
The best teachers I had at school where the ones who knew their subject backwards.
They could get through the dross of the curriculum and then go that extra mile to show you lots of additional stuff that was far more interesting but not on any exam.
Hell if my physics teacher had stuck to teaching the curriculum only, however interestingly, I wouldn't have a career, as it was his personal computer that peeked my interest in the first place.
(The school didn't have any and computing in any shape or form wasn't on the curriculum)
Yeah I agree. The big downfall with the education system is that it is all about passing on what the text book says, not knowledge. What haoppens if someone asks something that isn't in the text book? Or has curousity about a different subject.

cazzer

8,883 posts

277 months

Thursday 29th January 2009
quotequote all
Must not deviate from the prescribed programme.

tegwin

1,682 posts

235 months

Thursday 29th January 2009
quotequote all
cazzer said:
Must not deviate from the prescribed programme.
Is that not the big issue though? The emphasis IS on passing exams... not actually learning stuff...


It scared the hell out of me the other day... I went into the local primary school... PRIMARY SCHOOL FFS and it had more computers and technology than NASA... Why cant young children enjoy life without needing computery stuff...... whats wrong with pots of paint... simple reading type books and interaction with other children.... Why on earth do they need rooms full of PCS

cazzer

8,883 posts

277 months

Thursday 29th January 2009
quotequote all
Teacher on the news earlier (regarding the broadband for all bks) said...
"It would be impossible to teach children without broadband access"

They seemed to do it fine when I went to school.

tegwin

1,682 posts

235 months

Thursday 29th January 2009
quotequote all
Yup... but the wonderful government have said that everything should be taught online in an electronic way through interactive "learning spaces"... Its a load of BS... a piece of paper and a pen is far quicker!

cazzer

8,883 posts

277 months

Thursday 29th January 2009
quotequote all
I agree with you about the degree thing though...
I have, I'd like to think, a pretty broad spectrum of history knowledge. Because I'm interested in it and I enjoy learning about it.
I'd make a damn good history teacher too but I haven't got the financial backup to take a few years out to get a degree to become a history teacher.
Besides, I'd probably deviate from the party line when it comes to the "social aspects" smile

So I'm not neccesarily saying that all teachers should be educated to masters level, or even degree level, but they should really understand and have a passion for their subject.
If they don't know it well, and love it, how are they going to get that across to kids and answer questions that might stray from "the curriculum"?

Simond001

4,519 posts

306 months

Thursday 29th January 2009
quotequote all
cazzer said:
Must not deviate from the prescribed doctrine.
efa

Edited by Simond001 on Thursday 29th January 23:23