QTS Tests : Knock on effect for Students/Parents

Geordie1944

I take on board your comments, they are your opinions. I'm sure the qualifications you achieved via school and university were adequate for you to gain your teaching qualification, and obviously all the other qualifications you have achieved along the way.

There are some very valid points on both of these forums. The whole issue of these skills tests is contradictory. Whilst you say if they fail these tests then you don't want them teaching your children and grandchildren, it is only in England that they have to sit these tests. In NI, Scotland & Wales they do not however, they can come to England and teach in our schools, in England without them students can teach in Academies and Independent Schools. So unless you were privy to that information, you wouldn't know who was teaching your children. If students have the entrance criteria i.e required GCSE & A levels/degrees and are then successful in the interview process why do they still have to sit these tests?

Who can say that a 1 mark pass on a computerised test makes that teacher a better teacher than the one who failed by one mark.

There is no consideration for students who have passed GCSE's more than a few years ago
It is also the timed nature and that you can't stop the clock ticking - plenty would struggle.

Wouldn't it be better to build into the training course opportunities where students can demonstrate their ability to deal with the kind of Maths/English they may need to use as teachers and have that accredited in some way. Instead of paying private companies to run examinations at huge expense with no proven benefit.

It should be moving requirement that a Welsh/Irish/Scottish graduate should need to pass the QTS tests if they want to work in the UK. I understand Gove has no say over what those other countries do, but he can state what a teacher should require here.

Posted from TSR Mobile

I suspect for legal reasons this would be difficult . I haven't researched EU law in quite a while but as a requirement of the freedom of movement of workers that EU qualifications for professionals be recognised across the EU imposing another test for EU nationals who haven't trained here would probably be classed as discrimination and against EU rules.

Firstly, thank you for correcting my typo - I have no letters left on my keyboard - it was a failure to proofread properly. Lesson learned.

Why are the literacy and numeracy tests compulsory in England but not NI, Wales and Scotland? No idea. Take it up with Michael Gove but don't expect an answer from the repulsive little man. Are there no Scottish etc. teachers who can tell us?

Why are teachers in academies not expected to have passed these tests? They're cheaper - that's why.

But....given that these tests do exist in England, they have to be passed to be able to qualify. The real question is why are so many failing?

I'm glad someone else tried the tests and found them easy. I passed the numeracy - just, admittedly, but that was with no preparation whatsoever and years after having had to use percentages on a regular basis . The literacy was ridiculously easy and should have been well within the grasp of any graduate.

Several here are upset because their friends or daughters have failed and it seems unfair. Does a mark on the wrong side of the divide mean they won't be good teachers? No, but it does mean that they have an insufficient grasp of the language to be able to correct their pupils' errors and thus the mistakes continue.

Ask yourselves, if your offspring weren't involved and you received a school report riddled with SPaG errors, would you be as complacent? Would you really be saying it doesn't matter, I'm sure Miss X is a good teacher? Bet you wouldn't - bet you'd be thinking if Miss X can't spell, or write a grammatically correct sentence, how is she going to help my child to be fluent in the language?

Ask any employer about the current standard of written English. They'll tell you it is woefully inadequate. Is that what you really want - for it to continue just because your daughters have set their hearts on being teachers but can't pass a simple test? Sorry, but you are blinkered.

Are you sure that passing that Literacy QTS test is going to ensure there will be no situations you have described in your post? I'm sorry to say, but I doubt it.
The adequacy of written English, IMHO, comes from writing a lot and reading a lot (not mentioning the Grammar knowledge, of course), which Trainee Teachers are required to do on a daily basis in their School or University, which has nothing to do with the test.

Besides, it seems to me that we're moaning about the Numeracy here (and yes, I did moan a lot before the actual test), which is not even comparable to Literacy in terms of level. The mental arithmetic section is ridiculous - does it test your English listening skills, or maths as it supposed to?
In regards to the Numeracy - several things need to be done, I think:
1) 18 second time limit is laughable. Get rid of it.
2) The 4 miserable practice tests on the TA website is nowhere near enough. Do people really have to buy additional books or enroll on the training courses to pass the Numeracy or have to sign up to websites that make you pay? Oh please. All the materials should be available on the TA website, along with 10-15-20 practice tests. Then we will all be in the same position to pass them.

In regards to the Numeracy - several things need to be done, I think:
1) 18 second time limit is laughable. Get rid of it.

The timed section is ridiculous, this is the part I feel, that adds the extra pressure and results in students thinking the question is maybe harder than it is and because they are up against the clock.....they panic! Also, in this timed section, when the screen moves on to the next question, that is it, no going back. Which gets students in more of a panic when the next question appears because maybe they have just worked out the answer to the previous question as the 18 seconds were up, but they just did not get typing in their answer.......this to me is not a sign of failure!!

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.

I'm not terribly familiar with the tests, but is it not 48 minutes for 28 questions? Is there a separate time constraint of 3.6 minutes for the mental arithmetic?

That's the information I have been given.




Firstly, the fact that people from other parts of the UK can teach without them is not a valid criticism. Parliament has no control over the countries other than England with regards to education, and saying that someone qualified in another country hasn't qualified properly is a ridiculous plan - it would mean re-training everyone not trained in England before they teach here and is horribly impractical. Furthermore, the argument 'other people aren't doing it' is a terrible argument that simply doesn't prove it's a bad idea. If a misbehaving child used that excuse, I hope you'd have none of it. The fact that Gove's plans are muddled and contradictory doesn't mean that part of them are wrong.

Secondly, pass boundaries and time pressure are aspects of all tests. All children are expected to undergo testing in similar conditions.

I have to agree. I've recently taken these tests myself and they are very easy. 3 times to only get just over 60% on a test that is well below GCSE standard is more than enough attempts. There seem to be many excuses about why people can't pass such as nerves, pressure, been a while since they sat a GCSE etc but the tests are laughably easy and you can get a third of it wrong! 18 seconds is also ample time on the mental arithmetic part, many of those questions can be answered before the question is repeated!

I agree. Yes (as people have pointed out) other tests/exams are timed, but how often are you given 18 seconds to answer each question? I don't think being able to work out an answer in that amount of time determines whether you have the knowledge to be able to teach.

Posted from TSR Mobile

18 seconds would seem like a long time to the pupil waiting for a response while their teacher tries to work out the answer.

It is now considered the responsibility of all teachers to promote high standards of numeracy and literacy, regardless of the subject, so it is important that they have those skills themselves.

I agree with several posters that have said that the tests are easy. I passed all of them first time. Yes I was nervous and yes I struggled with the practice tests. In response to this I worked hard to make sure I understood it all well enough before I took the test. At the end if the day it is a requirement, and if you don't pass, you don't teach.

Posted from TSR Mobile

I agree. Yes (as people have pointed out) other tests/exams are timed, but how often are you given 18 seconds to answer each question? I don't think being able to work out an answer in that amount of time determines whether you have the knowledge to be able to teach.

I know in my experience, I ran out of time on a couple of questions (I did actually pass), and it threw me off a bit, therefore I can understand that this is a problem with other people taking the tests.


Posted from TSR Mobile

18 seconds would seem like a long time to the pupil waiting for a response while their teacher tries to work out the answer.

It is now considered the responsibility of all teachers to promote high standards of numeracy and literacy, regardless of the subject, so it is important that they have those skills themselves.

I agree with several posters that have said that the tests are easy. I passed all of them first time. Yes I was nervous and yes I struggled with the practice tests. In response to this I worked hard to make sure I understood it all well enough before I took the test. At the end if the day it is a requirement, and if you don't pass, you don't teach.


Posted from TSR Mobile

Well done on passing Emily, I'm really pleased for you. And again you make some valid points. I have read that they are going to take the timed element out of the tests, however I don't know when, but I'm sure will be a help. Good Luck in whatever you do I'm sure you will be fab! xx

I was just reading through this as I was very close to taking the teaching route recently before changing and would say in your daughter's case, and with regard to the whole decision making process which has taken place, it might be well worth your while consulting a solicitor about a process called judicial review.

As an observation, having tried the QTS tests as a recent graduate and now doing the lawyer's version during our PGCE equivalent, I do think they set the bar about the right level, if not slightly low. if other liberal professions expect at least A grade standard maths and English I see no reason teaching shouldn't too, given the importance of their job is, I think, only equalled by that of doctors and nurses.

However, the way it is done is a shambles. The law version is integrated into the normal exams we sit, if we fail those questions that's still it, but it avoids that sense your whole career rests upon these questions in an area which is not your specialist one, which creates unnecessary stress. In terms of alternatives, surely every year there are exams set which are really good at deciding your GCSE level in maths and English, the maths and English GCSE papers, why not just get students to sit them and save an awful lot of unnecessary hassle and expense?!

Hi Roh,

Thanks for the advice, I would go down the legal route, but I'm not sure about the expense. What's more frustrating is that I have received communication from two reputable agencies about this and they contradict each other. My MP is looking into that. And you are absolutely right it is a total shambles. xxx

Thank you!
As I said, I try to keep up to date with all of it because I know how stressed I was at the thought of being locked out and I still don't agree with them being carried out the way they are.
I sympathise with those of you who are having problems with them and I really hope everything works out for your daughter eventually (:

Posted from TSR Mobile