PGCE Training to Become Maths teacher but don't have Maths A Level!

Hello I am in first year studying Economics and interested in training to become a Maths teacher with PGCE in 2 years time.

I do NOT have A Level Maths.

I got an A in GCSE Maths.

Will I even get a place on Secondary Mathematics?

Scroll to see replies

Volunteer Section Leader

Original post by mattymoo432

Hiya

I've moved your thread into this sub-forum so you should hopefully get the replies you're after. :h:

I always like to say that anything is possible, but as the other users have already made clear, I think you may be very lucky to get a place.

Reply 4

ALL888

Original post by mattymoo432

You sound perfect for the job. They want maths teachers to know as little maths as possible, so they can carry on dumbing down education. I know of more than one person with a good maths degree whose application to do a maths teacher PGCE was rejected. Also it really helps to be left wing.

Reply 5

username2837176

Original post by ALL888

Are you being sarcastic?

Reply 6

Muttley79

Original post by ALL888

What utter nonsense! You need more than a good maths degree to get on a PGCE course - perhaps your 'friend' was not the right sort of person and, by the way, not all teachers are left-wing.

(edited 6 years ago)

Reply 7

ALL888

Original post by mattymoo432

Are you being sarcastic?

No, maybe exaggerating slightly.

Reply 8

username2837176

Original post by ALL888

No, maybe exaggerating slightly.

Thank you for your contribution

Reply 9

ALL888

Original post by Muttley79

What utter nonsense! You need more than a good maths degree on get on a PGCE course - perhaps your 'friend' was not the right sort of person and, by the way, not all teachers are left-wing.

If you say anything remotely right wing in the interview, you will be rejected. One of the people that I was referring to got a first in maths at a good university.

Reply 10

Muttley79

Original post by ALL888

If you say anything remotely right wing in the interview, you will be rejected. One of the people that I was referring to got a first in maths at a good university.

Having a first does not make you a good teacher.
By 'right wing' what do you mean? What did they say that they think got them rejected?

I know a number of Tories who teach in state schools.

Reply 11

ALL888

Original post by Muttley79

Having a first does not make you a good teacher.
By 'right wing' what do you mean? What did they say that they think got them rejected?

I know a number of Tories who teach in state schools.

Saying that the syllabus is not what it was. Saying that the standard of maths in UK schools is 2 years behind places like Russia.

Reply 12

Muttley79

Original post by ALL888

Saying that the syllabus is not what it was. Saying that the standard of maths in UK schools is 2 years behind places like Russia.

That's not right-wing, it's ignorant! They should have known about the recent specification [not syllabus btw] changes which increase the content.

This would have come over as arrogant and someone not looking to improve things just criticise them.

Reply 13

ALL888

Original post by Muttley79

The last thing they want is someone who wants to improve things. The people behind the scenes of education are trying to shut down Western civilization.

Reply 14

Muttley79

Original post by ALL888

The last thing they want is someone who wants to improve things. The people behind the scenes of education are trying to shut down Western civilization.

You couldn't be more wrong - and this is way off topic so I suggest you take your conspiracy theories elsewhere.

Reply 15

ALL888

Original post by Muttley79

You couldn't be more wrong - and this is way off topic so I suggest you take your conspiracy theories elsewhere.

I suggest you take your complacency theories elsewhere.

Reply 16

Muttley79

Original post by ALL888

I suggest you take your complacency theories elsewhere.

What is complacent about what I've said? Everything can be improved - if your 'friend' really wants to be a teacher perhaps s/he could get a job as a TA/LSA and then they might have more understanding.

Reply 17

ALL888

Original post by Muttley79

That everything is fine and that there is no hidden hand behind the scenes. The aim is to worsen the education system, not to improve it. Increased content means more learning and less understanding. It also means that a muppet can get ahead of a genius.

Reply 18

Muttley79

Original post by ALL888

That might be YOUR experience but the new specification relies on more in depth understanding not less. This is not difficult to achieve if you teach through a problem solving approach which is what the National curriculum is based upon.

Muppets NEVER get ahead - you can't memorise content these days.
In the O level days people just learnt geometry theorems parrot fashion and could get a grade C that way - not true any more.

Reply 19

nerak99

Whilst there are lots of improvements that have been made in Maths in school, as someone who did O-Levels,
This "In the O level days people just learnt geometry theorems parrot fashion and could get a grade C that way" is nonsense.

You can come here to praise new approaches without any need to bury old ones.

BTW most, if not all, O levels were graded 1-9 with 1 high and supposedly a 1-6 mapping to A-C. You could get a 7, 8 or 9 but you did not get a certificate for those. In a state comprehensive, anywhere from 20 to 60% of children took O-level, it was never meant to be an all-ability qualification like GCSE.

The predominance of Geometric proof was a marker of School certificate and I have noticed that the proof content of the newer GCSEs does not seem to included Geometry in the same sense. A pity IMHO.