The Student Room Group

Classics PGCE

I'm currently very seriously considering applying for a PGCE after my MA and just wanted to know if anyone has done the Latin with Classics PGCE at Cambridge or KCL (the only places to offer it as far as I know).

I understand that competition is fierce, and just wanted to know how tough it is to secure a place? And do they offer help in getting jobs after the course?

Scroll to see replies

Original post by Aemiliana
I'm currently very seriously considering applying for a PGCE after my MA and just wanted to know if anyone has done the Latin with Classics PGCE at Cambridge or KCL (the only places to offer it as far as I know).

I understand that competition is fierce, and just wanted to know how tough it is to secure a place? And do they offer help in getting jobs after the course?


Do you realise that Latin is not taught in many schools? Even if you get in a course, your job prospects are likely to be very poor. Latin is a considered a dead language for a reason. Your job prospects would be better if you went for History (which seems to be your specialism).
(edited 9 years ago)
Have you talked to the course tutor of either uni?
I had looked at classics at kcl and the course tutor was really nice.
She seemed really posotive about job prospects but was really big on latin standard being at A2 level or atleast A grade AS for the course.
Ive ended up doing a pgce in it and computing due to industry experience but fingers crossed you can get on classics! The world needs good classics teachers, mine was amazing!
Reply 3
Original post by Juichiro
Do you realise that Latin is not taught in many schools? Even if you get in a course, your job prospects are likely to be very poor. Latin is a considered a dead language for a reason. Your job prospects would be better if you went for History (which seems to be your specialism).


She's reading Ancients. Latin is probably just as much her speciality as anything else. Some universities require an ancient language for entry.

Latin is a dead language, but not a dead subject. Like other Classics subjects, it's one of the ultimate indicators that you're clever.
Original post by Clip
She's reading Ancients. Latin is probably just as much her speciality as anything else. Some universities require an ancient language for entry.

Latin is a dead language, but not a dead subject. Like other Classics subjects, it's one of the ultimate indicators that you're clever.


I know but I think she could be much better employment-wise with History and then having Latin as a secondary/minor subject.

Employability wise, Latin is not currently very "alive" subject and it won't get better in the near future with other subjects getting more and more priority.

P.S. "it's one of the ultimate indicators that you're clever". That's a joke, right? It's like hardcore pro-STEMers saying that your performance in STEM subjects is an indicator of this highly ambiguous thing we call "intelligence". In case you did not know, the study of Classics is nothing but remnants of a form of elite education in the past which in turn is nothing but remanants of a view that equated intelligence with high memorisation skills. That being said, Classic Culture is a cool subject (after all I studied it myself) and I went to become a fan of Aristotle and Epicurus. :biggrin:
Original post by Aemiliana
I'm currently very seriously considering applying for a PGCE after my MA and just wanted to know if anyone has done the Latin with Classics PGCE at Cambridge or KCL (the only places to offer it as far as I know).

I understand that competition is fierce, and just wanted to know how tough it is to secure a place? And do they offer help in getting jobs after the course?


I hope I have not discouraged you in pursuing the Latin PGCE. If you search in this sub-forum you might find posts of people who applied. :smile:
Original post by Juichiro
Do you realise that Latin is not taught in many schools? Even if you get in a course, your job prospects are likely to be very poor. Latin is a considered a dead language for a reason. Your job prospects would be better if you went for History (which seems to be your specialism).




Original post by Clip
She's reading Ancients. Latin is probably just as much her speciality as anything else. Some universities require an ancient language for entry.

Latin is a dead language, but not a dead subject. Like other Classics subjects, it's one of the ultimate indicators that you're clever.


Original post by Juichiro
I know but I think she could be much better employment-wise with History and then having Latin as a secondary/minor subject.

Employability wise, Latin is not currently very "alive" subject and it won't get better in the near future with other subjects getting more and more priority.

P.S. "it's one of the ultimate indicators that you're clever". That's a joke, right? It's like hardcore pro-STEMers saying that your performance in STEM subjects is an indicator of this highly ambiguous thing we call "intelligence". In case you did not know, the study of Classics is nothing but remnants of a form of elite education in the past which in turn is nothing but remanants of a view that equated intelligence with high memorisation skills. That being said, Classic Culture is a cool subject (after all I studied it myself) and I went to become a fan of Aristotle and Epicurus. :biggrin:



Actually Ancient History is my specialism, not history - they are two quite different disciplines. And yes, to take it at postgrad level (as I currently am), you must take one of the languages.

There is actually a lack of Classics teachers at the moment, and despite what people think, they do teach it in some state school (obviously most work is in the independent sector, however).

KCL state that 100% of their students went for jobs got them, so... Employability isn't a massive concern.

Furthermore, Latin is not a dead language. People can argue about it until they themselves are dead, but the point is that neo-Latin is a thing and it has a growing community. As for its relation to education, the fact that it has recently been moved from the humanities block to the modern languages (along with ancient Greek) in terms of the PGCE bursaries suggests there is a need for Classics teachers.

I wouldn't say that Latin shows intellect, but it is certainly viewed as a prestigious subject and most private schools I've come across offer it. Also, I used to live with a final year STEM PhD student and she baulked at the work I was doing - it's all about individual strengths and weaknesses as to what you view as hard. For me, the hardest thing I could imagine studying is something a lot of people on TSR wouldn't even view as something that one studies.

Original post by Ratchit99
Have you talked to the course tutor of either uni?
I had looked at classics at kcl and the course tutor was really nice.
She seemed really posotive about job prospects but was really big on latin standard being at A2 level or atleast A grade AS for the course.
Ive ended up doing a pgce in it and computing due to industry experience but fingers crossed you can get on classics! The world needs good classics teachers, mine was amazing!


No I haven't - I'm still trying to research stuff, get more experience etc before I start hounding them with questions. I'm doing my MA part time so I have a year before I need to apply.

Ah that's good to hear that they're nice! I'm doing the advanced postgrad Latin course at my uni, which is post A level and have previously done the advanced undergrad course so technically my language skills are viewed as being more proficient than A level now.

I can only hope I'd be a good teacher! I've been working in a school for a few months now and I'm only just starting to get the hang of controlling a room full of 70+ hyperactive kids!

-----

Regarding the employability aspect - Cambridge only offers 16 places, KCL doesn't give numbers that I can find but their history PGCE only has 20 so I can't imagine Classics being much larger. So with only about 30 NQTs in Classics a year, the 10 or so jobs that I found in a very basic and half-hearted search isn't terrible (there are more but they're older than a few weeks so may be filled).
(edited 9 years ago)
Reply 7
Original post by Juichiro
In case you did not know, the study of Classics is nothing but remnants of a form of elite education in the past which in turn is nothing but remanants of a view that equated intelligence with high memorisation skills.
And how often was that kind of thinking wrong? It's only the last 25 years or so that we've decided that GCSE type learning is the way to go - and it's created a nation of academically high-achieving imbeciles.


As for being an indicator of being smart and able - I stand by that 100%.
Reply 8
To be honest education is changing all the time. My only advice to you is to do a PGCE in a subject you're passionate about. If you can put across that passion during interview you'll get a job as a Classics teacher. I could tell you something now and come this time next year it could have all changed because Labour are back in power or we've had a hung parliament and a new coalition is formed.

You seem very set on doing that particular course so go for it. There is no point struggling through a PGCE in a subject you're not 100% committed towards because you won't be as enthusiastic and ultimately your lack of enthusiasm will be picked upon in the class room. Your job as a teacher is not only to teach but to sell your subject to the pupils, make them see why its important and can benefit them and motivate them to invest time towards learning about it.
As Classics isn't taught in many schools, they probably take people who have a History PGCE, whereas a Classics PGCE is a bit limiting. Why not go for a History PGCE so you can teach History if you can't find a Classics job?
Original post by Clip
1.And how often was that kind of thinking wrong? It's only the last 25 years or so that we've decided that GCSE type learning is the way to go - and it's created a nation of academically high-achieving imbeciles.


As for being an indicator of being smart and able - 2. stand by that 100%.


1. What? That intelligence == high memorisation skills?

2. Then you should know that it is a bunch of nonsense unless you agree that any subject is also an indicator of "intelligence" where intelligence is just a synonym of your capacity to achieve a good mark in an exam. I am a strongly advocate of the need to tear apart words like "prestige" and ill-defined words like "smart" from the educational lexicon and replace them with data-proof scientific jargon. What do you exactly mean by "smart"?
Original post by Skip_Snip
As Classics isn't taught in many schools, they probably take people who have a History PGCE, whereas a Classics PGCE is a bit limiting. Why not go for a History PGCE so you can teach History if you can't find a Classics job?


According to OP, Classics has a high demand/offer ratio and the 2 PGCE providers have a 100% employability (which is really interesting as I had not ever heard of a PGCE course with such a high employability ratio).
Original post by Mr CS
To be honest education is changing all the time. My only advice to you is to do a PGCE in a subject you're passionate about. If you can put across that passion during interview you'll get a job as a Classics teacher. I could tell you something now and come this time next year it could have all changed because Labour are back in power or we've had a hung parliament and a new coalition is formed.

You seem very set on doing that particular course so go for it. There is no point struggling through a PGCE in a subject you're not 100% committed towards because you won't be as enthusiastic and ultimately your lack of enthusiasm will be picked upon in the class room. Your job as a teacher is not only to teach but to sell your subject to the pupils, make them see why its important and can benefit them and motivate them to invest time towards learning about it.


Yeah, this is why I'm set on the Classics PGCE - I love Latin, even when it's giving me headaches and I'm translating late at night and the sentences run on for paragraphs (looking at you, Cicero. Augustus, you're not entirely innocent, either). I really love ancient history too (and tbh a bit of one is needed to really get to grips with the other). I want to keep them in my life for sure, I can't see myself being happy in a job that doesn't involve one, the other, or both.

Original post by Skip_Snip
As Classics isn't taught in many schools, they probably take people who have a History PGCE, whereas a Classics PGCE is a bit limiting. Why not go for a History PGCE so you can teach History if you can't find a Classics job?


Primarily because modern history is incredibly boring for me in comparison with ancient history. And I'm bored to death of the stuff they teach in schools.

Plus, for some of the history PGCEs I don't even meet the entry requirements - my transcripts only have ancient history on them, not the mix of at least 2 of ancient, medieval, early modern, and modern. And frankly I know nothing outside of A level history that isn't ancient so I'd be an awful teacher!
Only KCL claims the 100% employability (for those that went for jobs, I presume they're not counting those that went on to do the full masters or to do something else). But it is fairly well known that there just aren't enough Classics teachers - I went to Manchester for undergrad, one of the largest unis in the country, and I would say that we started beginner's Latin with maybe 50-70 students, and that number had very much declined by the time we were A level standard. Only about 20 people took the Latin course after that.

So I guess not that many people actually have the standard of Latin required, and of those the number wanting to go into teaching Classics will be even lower.
Original post by Aemiliana
Actually Ancient History is my specialism, not history - they are two quite different disciplines. And yes, to take it at postgrad level (as I currently am), you must take one of the languages.

There is actually a lack of Classics teachers at the moment, and despite what people think, they do teach it in some state school (obviously most work is in the independent sector, however).

KCL state that 100% of their students went for jobs got them, so... Employability isn't a massive concern.

Furthermore, Latin is not a dead language. People can argue about it until they themselves are dead, but the point is that neo-Latin is a thing and it has a growing community. As for its relation to education, the fact that it has recently been moved from the humanities block to the modern languages (along with ancient Greek) in terms of the PGCE bursaries suggests there is a need for Classics teachers.

I wouldn't say that Latin shows intellect, but it is certainly viewed as a prestigious subject and most private schools I've come across offer it. Also, I used to live with a final year STEM PhD student and she baulked at the work I was doing - it's all about individual strengths and weaknesses as to what you view as hard. For me, the hardest thing I could imagine studying is something a lot of people on TSR wouldn't even view as something that one studies.



No I haven't - I'm still trying to research stuff, get more experience etc before I start hounding them with questions. I'm doing my MA part time so I have a year before I need to apply.

Ah that's good to hear that they're nice! I'm doing the advanced postgrad Latin course at my uni, which is post A level and have previously done the advanced undergrad course so technically my language skills are viewed as being more proficient than A level now.

I can only hope I'd be a good teacher! I've been working in a school for a few months now and I'm only just starting to get the hang of controlling a room full of 70+ hyperactive kids!

-----

Regarding the employability aspect - Cambridge only offers 16 places, KCL doesn't give numbers that I can find but their history PGCE only has 20 so I can't imagine Classics being much larger. So with only about 30 NQTs in Classics a year, the 10 or so jobs that I found in a very basic and half-hearted search isn't terrible (there are more but they're older than a few weeks so may be filled).


Fair enough. Btw, Wikipedia does not agree with you on Neo-Latin. I guess it has not been updated for a while? Latin still gives off that vibe of high quality education. :biggrin: The rise of Mandarin in private schools seems to give similar vibes.

P.S. Go for KCL! :smile:
Reply 15
Original post by Juichiro
According to OP, Classics has a high demand/offer ratio and the 2 PGCE providers have a 100% employability (which is really interesting as I had not ever heard of a PGCE course with such a high employability ratio).

Classics has a high employability rate (not 100%) because not many people take the course so there is less competition for jobs. The vast majority of people who apply to teach the subject are those with PhD's in the area and they often come across as academically adequate but that is a world apart from being an enthusiastic teacher of the subject.
Reply 16
Original post by Juichiro
1. What? That intelligence == high memorisation skills?


It's better than anything that has been proposed in education since.

30 years ago, the top school kids got into the top universities. The tier below them went to the other universitites. The tier below them went to the polys. Everyone else did something else.

Today, the top school kids still go to the top universities, but now more or less everyone else goes to university of some kind. What's changed? All the fluff and nonsense in education doesn't make kids any better, it doesn't teach them anything more in content nor application.

We had genius level students in the past, and we still have them now. The only change is that we can no longer differentiate the remainder.



2. Then you should know that it is a bunch of nonsense unless you agree that any subject is also an indicator of "intelligence" where intelligence is just a synonym of your capacity to achieve a good mark in an exam. I am a strongly advocate of the need to tear apart words like "prestige" and ill-defined words like "smart" from the educational lexicon and replace them with data-proof scientific jargon. What do you exactly mean by "smart"?

By "smart" I mean "able". Memorisation ability has simply been replaced by an even worse measure of educational attainment - the ability to understand the rules of the GCSE / A-level games. Those best able to do so (or with the teachers that teach those game rules best) are the ones who do best.

When it comes to university, things aren't much different, as the candidates have already been pre-selected.

Personally, I have read both Laws and Economics. These are subjects packed with people who think they are really, really clever - but are in actual fact quite mediocre, as they are yet again only being asked to play a game of module tests, courseworks and dissertations.

How does an employer decide who is smart/able, once the trappings of the education system have been stripped away? Well, in the first instance, they can take the shortcut and pick the people from the top universities - because one way or another the top people have tended to always end up there. Cambridge, Oxford, some of the London colleges.

If they don't have those applicants - what do they do? Look at grades? Huge numbers of applicants will have a 1st or 2i.

Look at subject? Well, the STEMM thing is obvious crap. The universities are chock full of international students reading STEMM subjects and most of them couldn't find their backsides with two hands and a mirror. Laws? Economics? PPE? Half the people on course are bluffers thinking they're en route to becoming barristers or financiers.

Why not pick someone who knows the basis of Western civilisation and can read between one and three ancient languages, which unlike Modern Language, cannot be faked by spending a year getting drunk in Bologna?
Original post by Juichiro
Fair enough. Btw, Wikipedia does not agree with you on Neo-Latin. I guess it has not been updated for a while? Latin still gives off that vibe of high quality education. :biggrin: The rise of Mandarin in private schools seems to give similar vibes.

P.S. Go for KCL! :smile:


Well the community is alive and well on Tumblr, and seems intent on confusing my ancient Latin knowledge!

Haha, I'll go for whichever one lets me in! KCL is swaying me more right now because they talk about employability on their page and London seems like the better option for someone without a car, but to be honest, I'd go to any one that accepted me.
Original post by Mr CS
Classics has a high employability rate (not 100%) because not many people take the course so there is less competition for jobs. The vast majority of people who apply to teach the subject are those with PhD's in the area and they often come across as academically adequate but that is a world apart from being an enthusiastic teacher of the subject.


Interesting. I wonder why no one goes for it.
Original post by Clip
1.It's better than anything that has been proposed in education since.

30 years ago, the top school kids got into the top universities. The tier below them went to the other universitites. The tier below them went to the polys. Everyone else did something else.

Today, the top school kids still go to the top universities, but now more or less everyone else goes to university of some kind. What's changed? All the fluff and nonsense in education doesn't make kids any better, it doesn't teach them anything more in content nor application.

2. We had genius level students in the past, and we still have them now. The only change is that we can no longer differentiate the remainder.




3. By "smart" I mean "able". Memorisation ability has simply been replaced by an even worse measure of educational attainment - the ability to understand the rules of the GCSE / A-level games. Those best able to do so (or with the teachers that teach those game rules best) are the ones who do best.

When it comes to university, things aren't much different, as the candidates have already been pre-selected.

Personally, I have read both Laws and Economics. 4.These are subjects packed with people who think they are really, really clever - but are in actual fact quite mediocre, as they are yet again only being asked to play a game of module tests, courseworks and dissertations.

How does an employer decide who is smart/able, once the trappings of the education system have been stripped away? Well, in the first instance, they can take the shortcut and pick the people from the top universities - because one way or another the top people have tended to always end up there. Cambridge, Oxford, some of the London colleges.

If they don't have those applicants - what do they do? Look at grades? Huge numbers of applicants will have a 1st or 2i.

Look at subject? Well, the STEMM thing is obvious crap. The universities are chock full of international students reading STEMM subjects and most of them couldn't find their backsides with two hands and a mirror. Laws? Economics? PPE? Half the people on course are bluffers thinking they're en route to becoming barristers or financiers.

5.Why not pick someone who knows the basis of Western civilisation and can read between one and three ancient languages, which unlike Modern Language, cannot be faked by spending a year getting drunk in Bologna?


1. Seriously? The watermark of education (which becomes more obvious as you go higher in education) is not the ability to memorise but the ability to analyse and think in new ways. Look at the PISA results and you will see many Asian countries like Japan and China on the top. In their education systems you will see memorisation hailed like a God of its own. Then look at lists of academic discoveries and you will see them vastly under-represented. This is cautionary tale of overrating memorisation skills, especially in a world where information is literally one swipe away.

2. Everybody wants to be on the top.

3. I agree. That's what happens when you go crazy on standardised testing. Sadly, the government does not care enough about education to do anything about it.

4. I have been there and I have seen the rules of the game. I dislike modern universities and their nonsensical bureaucracy. Unfortunately, I can't go back to Ancient Greece so I have to accept the way things are.

5. It might work for a while but eventually, students thirsty of success will study Classics too and it won't be a helpful subject for employers anymore.

Quick Reply

Latest