The Student Room Group

Scroll to see replies

Original post by sairaaas
does anyone know if the pass mark of 63% for the skills test has changed? or is it still the same?


63% is the pass mark
I just read through this post and think it is a bit ridiculous. There needs to be standards for teachers. They are not that hard. The literacy was actually harder than the numeracy. Also, it should be the students rather than the parents doing something. The students are 21 year old plus adults and very capable of doing something for themselves.

Sorry if this sounds harsh but we need standards.
Reply 922
My daughter is 17 years old and is having to pass these tests as well as finish college otherwise she will have her place at university for teaching retracted. Passed her numeracy first time and has one final attempt left for literacy. If she doesn't pass then what no university for her in sept. Don't agree with the 2 years lockout and not been allowed to start the teaching degree
Original post by dmpeza
My daughter is 17 years old and is having to pass these tests as well as finish college otherwise she will have her place at university for teaching retracted. Passed her numeracy first time and has one final attempt left for literacy. If she doesn't pass then what no university for her in sept. Don't agree with the 2 years lockout and not been allowed to start the teaching degree


You don't agree that people shouldn't be allowed to teach children until they can pass a basic literacy test? Personally I agree that we should uphold a minimum standard for teachers. If your daughter works hard to pass her test I'm sure she will and will make a wonderful teacher. If she is unable to pass it then unfortunately she doesn't meet minimum requirements and shouldn't be allowed to teach until she can.


Posted from TSR Mobile
There are a lot of strong opinions and feelings on the rights and wrongs of the prof skills tests here but, whatever we think, it does provide a benchmark and consistency.
As a career changer moving into teaching after 28 years in a different profession I had to pass the tests which I think is a good thing. I know I have the right knowledge base now in literacy and numeracy for teaching and my ITT provider knows that too.
I would have hoped and thought that younger applicants (and presumably those more recently in education) would find it easier. Perhaps not?
(edited 8 years ago)
The thing is, a lot of schools and universities set their own tests during their interview processes because they don't feel that the skills tests are helpful, relevant or rigorous enough. One of the government's own reviews recommended changes because the panel felt that the tests weren't quite right. They should be overhauled with schools and universities getting some input regarding the content and format, so that there is less of a need for further testing at interviews.
Original post by Pierson
The thing is, a lot of schools and universities set their own tests during their interview processes because they don't feel that the skills tests are helpful, relevant or rigorous enough. One of the government's own reviews recommended changes because the panel felt that the tests weren't quite right. They should be overhauled with schools and universities getting some input regarding the content and format, so that there is less of a need for further testing at interviews.


Regardless of whether or not this is the case, that doesn't mean we should just ignore the fact that some people are unable to pass these tests. If the system needs improving them by all means let's improve it, but we can't just let anyone teach simply because they want to.


Posted from TSR Mobile
That is why I said that the tests should be overhauled, not scrapped, but the fact that people are being locked out of the profession by tests that a number of ITT providers, employers and an independent review panel have argued aren't really fit for purpose can't be ignored (which is exactly what the current government is doing), especially in light of an increasingly problematic recruitment crisis. ITT providers and employers should be consulted to ensure that the tests are fit for purpose - these tests are pointless if they're not letting the right people through.
(edited 8 years ago)
Original post by VelmaStaplebot
There are a lot of strong opinions and feelings on the rights and wrongs of the prof skills tests here but, whatever we think, it does provide a benchmark and consistency.
As a career changer moving into teaching after 28 years in a different profession I had to pass the tests which I think is a good thing. I know I have the right knowledge base now in literacy and numeracy for teaching and my ITT provider knows that too.
I would have hoped and thought that younger applicants (and presumably those more recently in education) would find it easier. Perhaps not?



I think they are a great tool to ensuring we have good standard Teachers but the stressed placed on passing this test can make confident students suddenly fail. I know currently going through doing my last skills tests (numeracy) the stress is horrid. Knowing I have given every single blood sweat and tear into getting where I am and failing now is horrible.
Reply 929
Original post by LisaLouiseFox
I think they are a great tool to ensuring we have good standard Teachers but the stressed placed on passing this test can make confident students suddenly fail. I know currently going through doing my last skills tests (numeracy) the stress is horrid. Knowing I have given every single blood sweat and tear into getting where I am and failing now is horrible.


I agree. Although I personally think these tests are not a great measure of skill (in particular the English one), I do think that anyone training to be a teacher has the skills and knowledge necessary to pass them (at least, after a small period of revision in some cases). But the format of them results in a lot of stress for some candidates which can stop them passing. Particularly those with maths anxiety who may now have no support as the tests are taken before they start the course.

Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by kpwxx
I agree. Although I personally think these tests are not a great measure of skill (in particular the English one), I do think that anyone training to be a teacher has the skills and knowledge necessary to pass them (at least, after a small period of revision in some cases). But the format of them results in a lot of stress for some candidates which can stop them passing. Particularly those with maths anxiety who may now have no support as the tests are taken before they start the course.

Posted from TSR Mobile


If you have a degree im pretty sure you should be able to handle the stress of a pre-C grade GCSE maths exam.
Original post by physicsphysics91
If you have a degree im pretty sure you should be able to handle the stress of a pre-C grade GCSE maths exam.


More importantly, if you cannot handle the stress of an exam, how on earth are you going to handle the stress of teaching?


Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by Pierson
the fact that people are being locked out of the profession by tests that a number of ITT providers, employers and an independent review panel have argued aren't really fit for purpose can't be ignored


What number are we exactly talking about?

Original post by myblueheaven339
More importantly, if you cannot handle the stress of an exam, how on earth are you going to handle the stress of teaching?Posted from TSR Mobile

I was about to say exactly the same. If someone is too stressed to pass a test in front of a computer on his/her very own, I can't see how the person is going to handle teaching in front of 25 pupils.
(edited 8 years ago)
I work in SEN schools with PMLD doing assessments, teaching and support and find it stressful based on how important the tests are. Its about failing at the final hurdle that gives me stress.
Original post by LisaLouiseFox
I work in SEN schools with PMLD doing assessments, teaching and support and find it stressful based on how important the tests are. Its about failing at the final hurdle that gives me stress.


Which is why there's not one, nor two, but three possible attempts to pass the QTS tests. Anyone one their first and second attempts should feel confident enough by knowing that he/she won't 'fail at the final hurdle'. By the third attempt I think it's fairly clear that this was not the factor that made some people fail the test.
(edited 8 years ago)
Original post by abel.suisse
Which is why there's not one, nor two, but three possible attempts to pass the QTS tests. Anyone one their first and second attempts should feel confident enough by knowing that he/she won't 'fail at the final hurdle'. By the third attempt I think it's fairly clear that this was not the factor that made some people fail the test.


Exactly! Additionally, exam pressure in schools is felt very strongly by everyone, dealing with that is a skill we have to pass on to our pupils. I can't tell my pupils that if they don't pass they should claim it's unfair and ask for the bar to be lowered!


Posted from TSR Mobile
Reply 936
Original post by myblueheaven339
More importantly, if you cannot handle the stress of an exam, how on earth are you going to handle the stress of teaching?


Posted from TSR Mobile


I disagree. I know people who very competently cope with the stresses of teaching, taking everything in their stride (and I know teaching is an extremely stressful profession in many ways) but found the tests pushed them close to their limits. These are very different situations...

The stress, as a poster mentioned above, results for many from the limit. Knowing that their entire life as they had planned it for years and invested so much in could be blocked to them, based on what happens in the next hour, is an incredibly stressful situation for anyone who lacks confidence in those areas. I personally don't like exams as an assessment method for this reason, but I guess that's a different topic! Some people who are very skilled struggle in exams because of the pressure placed on such a short while and their image in our society- if you think back to school, you should remember some people throw up or pass out in exam situations and those people generally get on just fine in jobs, and handling stress in general.

Also as I mentioned before, Maths anxiety affects a large number of people in the UK and sitting a test with no support network is not the best way to overcome this. With the chance to work on skills in the company of others feeling the same people can get over this very effectively, but the current set up just makes it worse, and excludes the people that the school system has failed in this area. I know of competent, skilled teachers who are good at both these key subject areas, who I believe may have realistically failed if they didn't have the PGCE team convincing them they could do it.

Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by kpwxx
I disagree. I know people who very competently cope with the stresses of teaching, taking everything in their stride (and I know teaching is an extremely stressful profession in many ways) but found the tests pushed them close to their limits. These are very different situations...

The stress, as a poster mentioned above, results for many from the limit. Knowing that their entire life as they had planned it for years and invested so much in could be blocked to them, based on what happens in the next hour, is an incredibly stressful situation for anyone who lacks confidence in those areas. I personally don't like exams as an assessment method for this reason, but I guess that's a different topic! Some people who are very skilled struggle in exams because of the pressure placed on such a short while and their image in our society- if you think back to school, you should remember some people throw up or pass out in exam situations and those people generally get on just fine in jobs, and handling stress in general.

Also as I mentioned before, Maths anxiety affects a large number of people in the UK and sitting a test with no support network is not the best way to overcome this. With the chance to work on skills in the company of others feeling the same people can get over this very effectively, but the current set up just makes it worse, and excludes the people that the school system has failed in this area. I know of competent, skilled teachers who are good at both these key subject areas, who I believe may have realistically failed if they didn't have the PGCE team convincing them they could do it.

Posted from TSR Mobile


We shall have to agree to disagree. Stress management is a skill that you can apply to a huge range of situations, and one that you never stop learning and developing.

I also feel quite strongly that the current situation is better, in that if you fail the tests you cannot begin your course, rather than the previous system where you can all but complete the course but the tests being the only thing that stops you gaining QTS.

It is quite well known that the QTS tests are required to start teaching. It someone has invested time and planning as you suggest, it would seem logical that they would also invest in getting support for their maths anxiety.

I am by no means suggesting that people who fail these tests wouldn't be wonderful teachers, but we do need a minimum requirement. Until we find a better way to define this, which we clearly need to, these tests will have to do.


Posted from TSR Mobile
Reply 938
Original post by myblueheaven339
We shall have to agree to disagree. Stress management is a skill that you can apply to a huge range of situations, and one that you never stop learning and developing.

I also feel quite strongly that the current situation is better, in that if you fail the tests you cannot begin your course, rather than the previous system where you can all but complete the course but the tests being the only thing that stops you gaining QTS.

It is quite well known that the QTS tests are required to start teaching. It someone has invested time and planning as you suggest, it would seem logical that they would also invest in getting support for their maths anxiety.

I am by no means suggesting that people who fail these tests wouldn't be wonderful teachers, but we do need a minimum requirement. Until we find a better way to define this, which we clearly need to, these tests will have to do.


Posted from TSR Mobile


I respect your opinions. It looks like we agree on some things - compared to the recent cohort who had a limit on chances but had already started the course (some of whom started the course when there was no limit), this situation is better. Certainly if there is going to be a resit limit the tests should take place before the teacher training commences.

In an ideal world everyone would get support to overcome maths anxiety. Remember though that some people will still be studying in the school where it developed, or won't be studying at all, so won't necessarily have someone to turn to for support. Luckily we have access to the internet which can open doors to new support which is good. I feel like with the current set up, many people who have these issues with maths (anxiety and extremely low self confidence) will scrape through the tests and end up teaching in classrooms and passing on their issues. I think the QTS tests taking place during the training for my cohort actually allowed a good group of these people to understand and confront their views on maths and realise that actually, no, they CAN do maths, and this will hopefully stop them from passing on the issues to their own pupils.

I'm also one for trusting teacher trainees as professionals to make good judgements about who could make a good teacher, and whether someone is ready to pass the teacher training. I don't think an external government test is necessary at all. Though with the government pushing for more school based ITT I guess this may be changing. Again, that's probably another discussion!

Posted from TSR Mobile
[QUOTE=kpwxx;64191119]

I'm also one for trusting teacher trainees as professionals to make good judgements about who could make a good teacher

Posted from TSR Mobile
I absolutely agree with this.

Myblueheaven says "we do need a minimum requirement. Until we find a better way to define this...these tests will have to do." Trainee teachers already have to have GCSE maths and English at grade C or above, and if GCSEs don't define basic competence in their subjects we should be looking at ways to make sure they do, otherwise what is the point of them? You can't tell me that the QTS maths test is more rigorous than GCSE, surely? If someone can pass GCSE and repeatedly fail a more basic QTS test something is very wrong with the system somewhere.

As has been pointed out many times before, secondary teachers teaching subjects such as art, languages, literature etc etc don't need to be a whizz at maths in order to be good teachers. Literacy is a different matter - any teacher of any age group and any subject needs excellent literacy skills, but in my view the QTS literacy test is a very poor way of assessing those skills. Sadly this could be seen from some of the posts in the (now disappeared - why?) QTS skills test thread, where some people happily posting that they had passed the skills test showed really poor spelling and grammar!

However, I think the more relevant, and worrying, question now is exactly what standards are going to be enforced now that QTS is going to be abolished?
(edited 8 years ago)

Latest

Trending

Trending