Labour plan for teacher "licences"
Scroll to see replies
Original post by scrotgrot
Only if they pay them like doctors or lawyers.
Medicine and law are usually for the top echelons of candidates that excel and pass rigorous selection procedures. Teaching is often the last resort for the bottom echelons of graduates who want into a unionised gravy train with generally unmeasurable results and little demand for success.
Funny, MPs don't seem to have to go through a licensing period every 2 years. Why don't they get objectively assessed to ensure they have performed in their role and that they have some idea about what they are doing? Maybe then we wouldn't get randomers with no experience in education suddenly being in charge of the entire educational system.
Original post by Clip
Medicine and law are usually for the top echelons of candidates that excel and pass rigorous selection procedures. Teaching is often the last resort for the bottom echelons of graduates who want into a unionised gravy train with generally unmeasurable results and little demand for success.
The reason these policies exist is because of this kid of teacher-bashing fashion that politicians want to appeal to.
If you want better teachers, the profession needs respect. It is no coincidence that in countries like China, which outputs fantastic students, teachers are genuinely revered.
Also, you have no idea what you're talking about. How can you possibly know why people enter teaching?
Original post by paddyman4
The reason these policies exist is because of this kid of teacher-bashing fashion that politicians want to appeal to.
If you want better teachers, the profession needs respect. It is no coincidence that in countries like China, which outputs fantastic students, teachers are genuinely revered.
If you want better teachers, the profession needs respect. It is no coincidence that in countries like China, which outputs fantastic students, teachers are genuinely revered.
China does not output fantastic students - they output exactly the kind of students that were apparently rejected by this country decades ago, with educational practices that generations of teachers called outmoded, outdated and unfair.
Add to that complete absence of any notion of social skills, and you just get exactly what it looks like - cohorts of students with top exam grades, but couldn't find their backsides with both hands and a mirror. Why have Chinese students not completely overrun the graduate job markets? Because they have the emotional development of a European 12 year old.
Also, you have no idea what you're talking about. How can you possibly know why people enter teaching?
The quality of entrants is demonstrable by the generally poor quality of teachers. The overwhelming majority are extremely mediocre at their jobs.
Original post by paddyman4
Funny, MPs don't seem to have to go through a licensing period every 2 years. Why don't they get objectively assessed to ensure they have performed in their role and that they have some idea about what they are doing? Maybe then we wouldn't get randomers with no experience in education suddenly being in charge of the entire educational system.
An MP can be thrown out of their job with no notice every five years - regardless of how well they are performing. They could be the best constituency MP going, but because of a minor shift in voting - they're gone. It is almost impossible to get rid of a crap teacher, regardless of how badly they are doing.
Original post by Guren
Your solution is to make the disruptive pupils (who if were disciplined properly and who could be doing academic subjects and earning loads eg doctors etc) to do vocational courses based on their upbringing and become cheap factory workers via their useless level 2 hair and beauty courses.
Your solution is to make the disruptive pupils (who if were disciplined properly and who could be doing academic subjects and earning loads eg doctors etc) to do vocational courses based on their upbringing and become cheap factory workers via their useless level 2 hair and beauty courses.
No it doesn't
But - no worries - if you don't get it then you don't get it
Original post by Clip
Medicine and law are usually for the top echelons of candidates that excel and pass rigorous selection procedures. Teaching is often the last resort for the bottom echelons of graduates who want into a unionised gravy train with generally unmeasurable results and little demand for success.
Yes, and if they were paid more better graduates would go into teaching.
It can't be a gravy train because it's poorly paid. Being unionised makes no difference. Unmeasurable results mean it's impossible to succeed on merit and lots of spurious paperwork. Little demand for success is a problem which is Gove's justification for the free schools (i.e. pay even less and crack the whip).
Original post by moonkatt
Shadow education secretary, Tristam Hunt has made the suggestion that teachers could be expected to be "licensed" every few years to work. It's a suggestion that already mirrors practice in other professions such as medicine and law where they regularly revalidate themselves.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-25686208
The unions have criticised it as pointless and judging by some comments people see it as another hurdle for people to get into teaching or a means to yet again "bash" the profession.
So what are people's thoughts on this? A way for teaching as a profession to self regulate and weed out any "bad eggs", or more red tape for a profession already overwhelmed by the stuff?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-25686208
The unions have criticised it as pointless and judging by some comments people see it as another hurdle for people to get into teaching or a means to yet again "bash" the profession.
So what are people's thoughts on this? A way for teaching as a profession to self regulate and weed out any "bad eggs", or more red tape for a profession already overwhelmed by the stuff?
I hope this is the proper thread to ask a this; Scholarships for being brainy aside, exactly how "free" is higher education in the U.K.? If your not low income do you have to pay? I suppose it's different depending on whether the University is private or public. I don't know. Just curious.
Original post by scrotgrot
Yes, and if they were paid more better graduates would go into teaching.
It can't be a gravy train because it's poorly paid. Being unionised makes no difference. Unmeasurable results mean it's impossible to succeed on merit and lots of spurious paperwork. Little demand for success is a problem which is Gove's justification for the free schools (i.e. pay even less and crack the whip).
It can't be a gravy train because it's poorly paid. Being unionised makes no difference. Unmeasurable results mean it's impossible to succeed on merit and lots of spurious paperwork. Little demand for success is a problem which is Gove's justification for the free schools (i.e. pay even less and crack the whip).
Pensions like you wouldn't believe, almost cast-iron job security against disciplinary, unmatched holidays. That's a gravy train.
What OP says they said...
what the BBC says they said...
IMO potentially positive - but with a risk of turning into a another useless red tape machine, especially given the apparent continuing desire among politicians to micromanage education.
Original post by moonkatt
The unions have criticised it as pointless
The unions have criticised it as pointless
what the BBC says they said...
Although the "devil would be in the detail", the NUT said it could potentially be a positive development.
"If this turned out to be a continuation of the Michael Gove denigration of teachers a top-down judgemental prescription of how teachers teach it would be very negative," said union official Kevin Courtney.
"But if relicensing were truly based on a new entitlement to high quality professional development that was controlled by the teacher profession then we could talk about the details of how to improve it.
"It could be very positive for education."
"If this turned out to be a continuation of the Michael Gove denigration of teachers a top-down judgemental prescription of how teachers teach it would be very negative," said union official Kevin Courtney.
"But if relicensing were truly based on a new entitlement to high quality professional development that was controlled by the teacher profession then we could talk about the details of how to improve it.
"It could be very positive for education."
IMO potentially positive - but with a risk of turning into a another useless red tape machine, especially given the apparent continuing desire among politicians to micromanage education.
Sounds pointless purely because I can imagine hardly any teachers ever failing to make the cut
Lol
We had teachers with C grade in their main subject for a-level
This gave me an naughty sense of satisfaction
+1
They gain their mandate to be an MP from the electorate; to give a member of the public sector the right to kick them out of a job on his personal whim is totally undemocratic it's unreal
Original post by scrotgrot
Only if they pay them like doctors or lawyers.
Lol
We had teachers with C grade in their main subject for a-level
Original post by Clip
Medicine and law are usually for the top echelons of candidates that excel and pass rigorous selection procedures. Teaching is often the last resort for the bottom echelons of graduates who want into a unionised gravy train with generally unmeasurable results and little demand for success.
This gave me an naughty sense of satisfaction
+1
Original post by paddyman4
Funny, MPs don't seem to have to go through a licensing period every 2 years. Why don't they get objectively assessed to ensure they have performed in their role and that they have some idea about what they are doing? Maybe then we wouldn't get randomers with no experience in education suddenly being in charge of the entire educational system.
They gain their mandate to be an MP from the electorate; to give a member of the public sector the right to kick them out of a job on his personal whim is totally undemocratic it's unreal
(edited 10 years ago)
Original post by Joinedup
What OP says they said...
Did you read the story? Its the fourth paragraph down. It's a line on it's own so it's pretty easy to see. Further into the story the unions make further comment, but then I was expecting people who were going to discuss this to actually read the story rather than making up an opinion based on the bits I'd posted here.
Original post by moonkatt
Did you read the story? Its the fourth paragraph down. It's a line on it's own so it's pretty easy to see. Further into the story the unions make further comment, but then I was expecting people who were going to discuss this to actually read the story rather than making up an opinion based on the bits I'd posted here.
I actually read the story and decided you'd not summarised it well... problem?
The 'pointless' bit relates to something they said about a different proposal under the previous government.
The last government made a similar proposal for what became known as "classroom MOTs" but then dropped it.
Unions criticised it as "pointless".
Unions criticised it as "pointless".
Original post by Clip
Pensions like you wouldn't believe, almost cast-iron job security against disciplinary, unmatched holidays. That's a gravy train.
Then maybe you should unionise too and stop bitching? "I'm exploited by my job, so everyone else should have to be exploited too."
Original post by yo radical one
Sounds pointless purely because I can imagine hardly any teachers ever failing to make the cut
Lol
We had teachers with C grade in their main subject for a-level
This gave me an naughty sense of satisfaction
+1
Lol
We had teachers with C grade in their main subject for a-level
This gave me an naughty sense of satisfaction
+1
You're an idiot. If they paid more, the best graduates would go into teaching instead of or as an alternative to medicine, law and the like. The C-grades would go elsewhere.
Original post by scrotgrot
You're an idiot. If they paid more, the best graduates would go into teaching instead of or as an alternative to medicine, law and the like. The C-grades would go elsewhere.
Lol
The same applies to being a binman, it doesn't mean you need to have good qualifications to be one
Original post by yo radical one
They gain their mandate to be an MP from the electorate; to give a member of the public sector the right to kick them out of a job on his personal whim is totally undemocratic it's unreal
Sorry, I meant responsibilities beyond being an MP, i.e. cabinet minister (hence reference to Education Minister).
The public might elect someone to be their MP, fair enough. But they don't choose who is handed a cabinet role. Which is why cabinet roles do not go to the best person for the job, they go to the allies of the PM as rewards for their loyalty. I just think it's insane that there is no objective set of criteria for appointing someone as minister. Tomorrow, Cameron could have a reshuffle and put Gove in charge of the armed forces and no one would be able to say "hang on, Gove has absolutely no experience that says he can do this job."
This is why we have an education secretary with no experience of education and a health secretary with no experience with the health sector. I'm pretty sure there are MPs who are ex-teachers and ex-doctors, but instead these crucial roles go to whoever has brown-nosed their way up the most. It's the most obvious example in the country of "it's not what you know, it's who you know."
It is not undemocratic to have an independent body that can say: has this cabinet minister proven himself in the role, has he been competent, is he producing evidence that says he is meeting the pre-agreed definition of 'satisfactory', etc. That's how it works in every other job that has performance management, including teaching. But as it stands, there is no objective assessment of performance for cabinet ministers. The only way they ever lose their role is:
1. They become embroiled in a scandal and the PM's PR-goblin tells him to cut the person out of the cabinet.
2. They challenge the authority of the PM, in which case he will lose his cabinet role in the next re-shuffle.
None of this sounds democratic to me. So I wasn't advocating taking away the role of MP - that is the bit the people get to decide - but I was advocating a check on who is given the important cabinet roles, which the people have no real say in.
So in summary, if MPs want to impose more and more performance management on people, perhaps they should have just some semblance of performance management themselves - leading by example.
I don't think it would help in the slightest. Teachers are already peer assessed through lesson observations and appraisals so their school will often have an opinion of how good they are already. And I'd be worried some teachers could lose their jobs over results when they could have just had a weak class who were never going to get top results.
To improve teaching standards I think you need to reduce class sizes in state schools rather than add more bureaucracy. It's difficult for a teacher to cater for 30+ pupils and give more individual attention, especially if the class is not put into sets.
Lack of respect for teachers from students is another problem which may turn away good teachers. People need to be taught that they need to value education more. Bullying and disruptive students should also be delt with better - both by teachers (especially newer ones who couldn't control the class) and the school in general.
Lack of respect for teachers from students is another problem which may turn away good teachers. People need to be taught that they need to value education more. Bullying and disruptive students should also be delt with better - both by teachers (especially newer ones who couldn't control the class) and the school in general.
It's an interesting idea, but incredibly flawed in regards to the problems teachers have these days.
how do you judge a "good" teacher? By the results the kids get? Sounds simple but there are many problems with this. Teachers with kids who are smart and well behaved compared to teachers with the brats seen on programmes like Educating Yorkshire - who's a better teacher in those cases? Try spending half your lessons dealing with behaviour problems rather than actually teaching. What about the other factors with the kids - sen, behaviour problems, language problems, lack of interest, lack of support from home, local issues - poverty, crime, etc. (I've worked with kids at a residential school for children with emotional and behavioural problems - the school system forced them to follow the national curriculum while some of them had the reading ability of a five year old, with friends at home making money from things like selling drugs)
The fears are the same - teach kids only how to pass the tests. Results - teachers caught cheating on exams and coursework and faking records and attendance. It's not going to get better. As for ofsted - still ridiculous. Any advance warning means the observation is based on a staged performance. I'm sure we can all remember the ofsted panic at school when our teachers suddenly had organised lessons and material just because the inspector was visiting. Plus, of course, kids who have sat through all kinds of lessons - but don't really understand any of it let alone know how to apply their knowledge. They pass the test, forget the content, learn new stuff, pass the test, then forget that too. What's the point? Actually, think of all the subjects you have studied through your life - if you had a test tomorrow on any of them - how many do you think you'd pass?
first thing I think we need to deal with right from the start is behaviour. On top of that is an appreciation for education - the world has children desperate for an education, we have kids skiving and not paying any attention in class. A review of the curriculum would help too plus an introduction of real world skills. Progression simply by age? Why not give the chance to advance a year or be held back for certain subjects? Why let any kid leave primary school unable to read and write? All kinds of things and plenty of people ready to argue about all of them.
i think there's a lot to fix in the education system first, but agree we should never let crap teachers, or teachers who start well then just give up, carry on ruining people's education.
how do you judge a "good" teacher? By the results the kids get? Sounds simple but there are many problems with this. Teachers with kids who are smart and well behaved compared to teachers with the brats seen on programmes like Educating Yorkshire - who's a better teacher in those cases? Try spending half your lessons dealing with behaviour problems rather than actually teaching. What about the other factors with the kids - sen, behaviour problems, language problems, lack of interest, lack of support from home, local issues - poverty, crime, etc. (I've worked with kids at a residential school for children with emotional and behavioural problems - the school system forced them to follow the national curriculum while some of them had the reading ability of a five year old, with friends at home making money from things like selling drugs)
The fears are the same - teach kids only how to pass the tests. Results - teachers caught cheating on exams and coursework and faking records and attendance. It's not going to get better. As for ofsted - still ridiculous. Any advance warning means the observation is based on a staged performance. I'm sure we can all remember the ofsted panic at school when our teachers suddenly had organised lessons and material just because the inspector was visiting. Plus, of course, kids who have sat through all kinds of lessons - but don't really understand any of it let alone know how to apply their knowledge. They pass the test, forget the content, learn new stuff, pass the test, then forget that too. What's the point? Actually, think of all the subjects you have studied through your life - if you had a test tomorrow on any of them - how many do you think you'd pass?
first thing I think we need to deal with right from the start is behaviour. On top of that is an appreciation for education - the world has children desperate for an education, we have kids skiving and not paying any attention in class. A review of the curriculum would help too plus an introduction of real world skills. Progression simply by age? Why not give the chance to advance a year or be held back for certain subjects? Why let any kid leave primary school unable to read and write? All kinds of things and plenty of people ready to argue about all of them.
i think there's a lot to fix in the education system first, but agree we should never let crap teachers, or teachers who start well then just give up, carry on ruining people's education.
(edited 10 years ago)
Original post by Guren
The problem with this and OFSTED is the way in which they judge the teaching.
It becomes a list of ticking check boxes which may not help students at all.
It becomes a list of ticking check boxes which may not help students at all.
Agreed with this. We had an AWESOME teacher/lecturer. What do you call teachers that specifically do BTEC?
Any way, his lessons in themselves generally were really uplifting and funny, and often in a more "adult" way as well,but when he was being observed by whatever board that came in (as well as Ofsted), it meant that he had to work the way they wanted him to work, which honestly didn't help us. What helped us was not him getting the tick in the box, but the way he taught us normally
Also,for myself, certificates tend to run out every 3 years
Quick Reply
Related discussions
- Inspector calls predictions?/ tips 2023
- what do i put in this section for my insurance
- I struggle writing essays for english
- The best way to revise English Literature?
- Exam style D question- ling the Muslim life
- Eng lit
- SQA Nat 5 English - Critical Reading - 7th May 2024 [Exam Chat]
- How do you like to revise for english lit and lang?
- Car insurance
- A-Level English Literature ASND/Drama help please!
- Gcses
- focusing for alevels - english lit especially
- English literature how to revise
- Motorbike licence
- How to get an 8 in English lit?? FOR THOSE pupils who are doing WJEC
- please mark my 'a christmas carol' practice essay:
- Has anyone done an Extended driving test?
- How to get 9 in GCSE English literature...
- What is the best way to revise English Literature (WJEC) ?
- English
Latest
Trending
Last reply 3 days ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 3 days ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?Trending
Last reply 3 days ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 3 days ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?
