QTS Tests : Knock on effect for Students/Parents

Original post by anniel4

Have you actually sat these skills tests?? (Just curious as you seem to "know what you are talkng about)
What if your children/grandchildren were being taught by a teacher who qualified in Wales, Scotland or Northern Ireland, where QTS(skills tests)don't exist.....would you want them to teach them??? Because this is where Gove contradicts himself regarding QTS!

Put the QTS question to one side for the moment and focus on the unpalatable truth.These people are failing tests that, as graduates, they should find easy. It is of concern.

How many times should a prospective teacher be allowed to take the skills test? Surely three times is ample. Failure to pass for the third time indicates, to me, that they are in the wrong job.

Reply 22

Original post by Geordie1944

I intend no personal disrespect to anyone, and I write this knowing that I will get my head in my hands to play with, but some of the contributors to this thread need a reality check.

If you can't pass the numeracy and literacy tests at the third attempt, never mind the first or second, then you have no business being in a classroom. The standard of both these tests is well within the scope of a 16 year old GCSE student, and an intelligent graduate should have no problems with either of them.

The fact that people are expecting to fail these tests repeatedly but still achieve QTS explains a lot about what is wrong with our educational system.

And just for the record, I am a lifelong libertarian socialist, a proponent of state education who taught in comprehensive schools for thirty years and now work as a principal examiner, team leader and assistant examiner for three examination boards, so I know what I am talking about.

Parents have a right to expect their children to be taught by people with sound numeracy and literacy skills whatever the actual subject being taught. And no matter how passionate, well-meaning and committed to the idea of teaching someone may be, if they fail these tests repeatedly then I don't want them teaching my children and grandchildren.

But some people aren't failing because they don't know how to do the Maths/English.. People struggle to do the mental maths in the short time given, for example. That doesn't mean that they're incapable of doing it, nor does it mean they can't teach. :confused:

I agree that there has to be some kind of limit with the amount of tests taken, because there has to be a cut off point. However, I don't really agree with them being timed, when people are put under pressure to pass them (and can't get in or whatever upon failing them 3 times) and are, therefore, nervous taking the test (which may effect their performance).

I respect your opinion, and I completely understand that teachers have to have the knowledge to teach these subjects, however I think the way the skills tests are done mean they're testing more than just your knowledge.

Edit: Also, as other people have mentioned, how is it fair that only those studying in England have to take them?

(edited 10 years ago)

Reply 23

Original post by Emily115

But some people aren't failing because they don't know how to do the Maths/English.. People struggle to do the mental maths in the short time given, for example. That doesn't mean that they're incapable of doing it, nor does it mean they can't teach. :confused:

I agree that there has to be some kind of limit with the amount of tests taken, because there has to be a cut off point. However, I don't really agree with them being timed, when people are put under pressure to pass them (and can't get in or whatever upon failing them 3 times) and are, therefore, nervous taking the test (which may effect their performance).

I respect your opinion, and I completely understand that teachers have to have the knowledge to teach these subjects, however I think the way the skills tests are done mean they're testing more than just your knowledge.

Edit: Also, as other people have mentioned, how is it fair that only those studying in England have to take them?

But every student taking GCSEs or A levels faces time constraints - why shouldn't prospective teachers?

PS - it's affect not effect

Reply 24

kpwxx

20

Original post by fragrantrose

.

Original post by Geordie1944

.

I personally would argue that the problem is these tests are not representative of someones ability or knowledge in maths and english.

Particularly with maths in the UK we have a big problem with maths anxiety. People have been taught for a long time not to understand maths but to follow an algorithm blindly. The cycle continued with teachers not understanding the maths they themselves were teaching to pupils. Many pupils, particularly it seems those of around 30 years of age, unfortunately had absolutely horrific experiences of maths in school... being told they were awful and stupid, would never get it, given endless workbooks with nothing explained and told they were failures just because they didn't get the one method the teacher had told them to learn by rote.

This is a problem the government is well aware of - they know that maths teaching in the UK has had many issues.

Now these people have grown up to be quite literally terrified of maths. Imagine something you are afraid of the the point of a phobia (affects your day to day life) because of the way you were treated in school. Now imagine someone says you have to sit and do something related to it, at a super speed, with little support from peers (as the tests are now sat pre-ITT) and if you get it wrong 3 times you have the dream career you've worked towards your whole life snatched away from you. How would you feel? Do you really think it's not going to affect people's performance?

I have seen how people who had this huge anxiety about maths have come, through the support of tutors at my uni, friends going through the same and optional sessions which actually tried to help them UNDERSTAND the maths and how it works, and welcomed mistakes as a means through which to learn, were brought to a point where they were actually proud of their maths ability, passed tests with flying colours and for the first time in their life actually realised they could DO MATHS. I can honestly say I'd be overjoyed for any one of them to teach my children... OK, they may need to look something up or ask a colleague a little more often than someone who has always been confident with maths, but they also have a huge amount of empathy for pupils who have maths anxiety because they have overcome it themselves, and will hopefully be a huge part of the solution to it, plus a great understanding of the need to find different methods which suit each child's way of thinking.

As a mathematician and an (admittedly very new!) teacher, I honestly believe that everyone can do maths. But maths anxiety is such a big, self-perpetuating problem in England that so many people think they can't. I completely agree with you that good maths and literacy skills are very important for all teachers, I find it chronically unfair that instead of supporting people failed by a system to become more confident the government simply fills them with dread and subjects them to a process which is likely to massively hinder their confidence further, and make people who have the necessary maths skills lose out on a job which they would be excellent at.

This is just my view of course; please don't feel I'm having a go at you as I fully support your right to hold and express your opinions. I just urge you to remember that these tests are by no means a foolproof indicator of mathematical or literary ability.

Btw if you're interested you might want to read more about maths anxiety, there is plenty on google. I recommend anything by Derek Haylock, he gave us a lecture which really made clear how the anxiety affects people.

xxx

Reply 25

Original post by fragrantrose

PS - it's affect not effect

Gee, thanks.

Original post by kpwxx

.

I couldn't agree more!

Posted from TSR Mobile

Reply 26

I fully accept that there are many people for whom maths is a terifying ordeal. However, knowing that you need to pass maths would you not seek help before taking these tests? Would you not put in the hours and the effort to ensure you do?

I hope I'm wrong, but I get the impression too many are 'winging' it and then surprised they fail.

Reply 27

So for those arguing for them, do you agree with the fact that it's only us having to take them, whereas if you live/study outside of England, you can get your qualification and come and teach here without ever doing the tests?

It's fair enough that there's tests of some kind, and (as I've already said), I don't disagree with them on the whole, but some people are studying and studying for them and are still failing (sometimes by as little as one mark). Not everyone who fails their attempts is going in there without preparing..

Posted from TSR Mobile

Reply 28

kpwxx

20

Original post by fragrantrose

I fully accept that there are many people for whom maths is a terifying ordeal. However, knowing that you need to pass maths would you not seek help before taking these tests? Would you not put in the hours and the effort to ensure you do?

I hope I'm wrong, but I get the impression too many are 'winging' it and then surprised they fail.

From what I've seen, many people are actually putting in many hours of study in to this (see the general QTS thread test where people speak of taking it as a full time job), often more than the study they put in to their degree if they are doing one at the time, simply because they think they need to study so much. I'll note that in reality I think a few hours of guided sessions with an understanding teacher plus a daily session practicing would be adequate for nearly everyone, but without the guidance that current trainees have access to people let their worry get to them.

As for tuition, I think it's great, unfortunately not everyone can afford it. And some are probably quite embarrassed to ask for help from friends. People don't want to admit they don't get simple stuff because they believe what they were told... it's because they're stupid. When in reality it's because they never had it explained! As an example, I saw on here someone asking a simple maths question and he was shouted down with people telling him he was an idiot. Now I know TSR is not the best place to go for a sympathetic ear, so probably not representative, but that doesn't stop people worrying that they'll be thought of as stupid if they don't get decimals. Maths has the issue that sometimes when people do get it, they can't understand how someone else doesn't get the same way, so unintentionally make the person feel bad about it.

I think you're right in that some people probably do try to 'wing it', however I think these people are in the minority.

xxx

Reply 29

Whether it is fair or not is by the by. It is a government requirement and neither you not I can do anything about it.

Rather, is it right and fair that people be allowed to teach without a good standard of literacy and numeracy? You might say that it doesn't matter if you are teaching 5 year olds; I would vehemently contradict you if you did.

Looking at my child's report full of inaccuracies (could of and its for it is - to name but two) indicates that too many are slipping through the net as it is.

It does matter that the standard of spoken and written English is declining. It does matter that our children are being failed by teachers who should know better.

Reply 30

Airfairy

21

Original post by fragrantrose

I fully accept that there are many people for whom maths is a terifying ordeal. However, knowing that you need to pass maths would you not seek help before taking these tests? Would you not put in the hours and the effort to ensure you do?

I hope I'm wrong, but I get the impression too many are 'winging' it and then surprised they fail.

I haven't taken the tests yet but the general impression I've got, along with kpwxx, is that people aren't winging it at all. I think the pressure gets to a lot of people. I got grade A in maths and English at GCSE, yet I am nervous about taking them next year just because of the pressure and amount that rides on it.

Reply 31

I did say it was only an impression - not a fact.

I've just had a go at the online literacy practice tests. They are, in my opinion, laughably easy. How could anyone fail them?

I'll tackle the numeracy after I've walked the dog :smile:

Reply 32

anniel4

Original post by fragrantrose

I'm afraid I am going to be controversial here. The hard truth is that these tests are easy. That they may be failed once, perhaps due to nerves, is forgiveable. That they are failed three times is not.

We cannot have teachers without good numeracy and literacy levels. Even if your daughters are intending to teach history, geography or art, a good standard of both written and spoken English is essential. We, the educational professionals, are already subject to intolerable pressure and scrutiny from government; why add to that by admitting new teachers who cannot communicate adequately? It only strengthens Mr Gove's position.

Of course I am sorry that your children haven't succeeded but being passionate about teaching just isn't enough. Teachers expect their students to put the work in - they need to do the same if they hope to teach.

Fragrantrose, I am assuming by your response, you are a teacher yourself? If so, when completing your skills tests, did you have unlimited attempts at passing them?
I am not sure what you mean when you say, "why add to that by admitting new teachers who cannot communicate adequately?" .....communication skills are assessed in the classroom and at interview as part of the selection process, so how can a forty five minute computerised test determine if someone can communicate adequately in a classroom setting??

Reply 33

anniel4

Original post by fragrantrose

I did say it was only an impression - not a fact.

I've just had a go at the online literacy practice tests. They are, in my opinion, laughably easy. How coanyone fail them?

I'll tackle the numeracy after I've walked the dog :smile:

But then you have nothing to lose, so no pressure!!!!!!

Reply 34

I qualified before the necessity for skills testing.

Nothing to lose, you're right annie14, but come on, the literacy test is easy. Should have/should of - does anyone really not know which is correct usage?

I take your point about communicating in the classroom but my point is that if teachers make basic errors of SPAG and confuse words such as affect/effect and the example given above then communication is compromised.

The test is to establish literacy levels. Anyone failing them three times should not aspire to teaching.

Reply 35

Original post by fragrantrose

I qualified before the necessity for skills testing.

Nothing to lose, you're right annie14, but come on, the literacy test is easy. Should have/should of - does anyone really not know which is correct usage?

I take your point about communicating in the classroom but my point is that if teachers make basic errors of SPAG and confuse words such as affect/effect and the example given above then communication is compromised.

The test is to establish literacy levels. Anyone failing them three times should not aspire to teaching.

If this is a dig at me, I have actually passed the English test. I just happen to be stating my opinion.
By the sounds of it though, I shouldn't be a teacher, because I accidentally put 'effect' instead of 'affect'. :hmpf:

Posted from TSR Mobile

(edited 10 years ago)

Reply 36

ontherazzle

11

Original post by fragrantrose

is it right and fair that people be allowed to teach without a good standard of literacy and numeracy?

No, it is not - but to qualify as a teacher you have to have good GCSEs, A levels and a degree. If you can obtain those qualifications without a "good standard of literacy and numeracy" there is something very wrong with the system. Are you really saying that a 40 minute computerised test is a better indicator of a satisfactory level of education?

Reply 37