School Direct or PGCE Secondary MFL

I think if you ever want to work abroad and/or see yourself wanting to get an M.Ed, the PGCE is a no brainer (although most PGCEs are 90 credits towards a masters, not 60). To work in many other countries, the accreditation of the PGCE will help hugely, and it is recognized/respected worldwide.

I'm not sure getting QTS after a year is as an advantage. I believe you would still be paid at M1 on the pay scale in your first salaried year- and would you get the NQT benefits of a mentor and slightly more PPE each week?

If you're already working in the school, then Schools Direct will let you hit the ground running, and you already know the systems, which is great. It's more of a known, as you know the environment and you know how supportive they are to trainees.

I do think it's an advantage of the PGCE that you get to experience two different contrasting schools.

Anyway, I chose a PGCE because the route appealed to me more, but if you know the school you're currently in is great, it might be a good idea to stay. However, it sounds like you're leaning towards the PGCE more?

I would love to work abroad. I have school contacts in China, South Korea and Thailand. I'm also convinced I will do an education-related masters within the next 3 years.

I really like the fact that the feedback and mentoring continues past the trainee year. It will definitely help smooth those harsher aspects to your teaching persona. I can completely see how SD trainees could be at risk of remaining rigid throughout their teaching career as a result of not having enough critical feedback in their initial years.

I am working in the school and have done for 5 years (2 years as a mainstream SEN TA and then 3 years as a TA in an ASD unit attached to the main school (have taught small groups literacy, numeracy, languages and most other subjects in this role). The school isn't fantastically supportive to trainees from what I've seen; they are a school in West London and I think they are coasting on having a bigger pick of applicants rather than developing a seriously sharp programme for trainee teachers and CPD. There were 41 applications for a TA position recently and I imagine it be similar for trainee teacher positions.

I am leaning more towards the PGCE. I like the idea of being connected to a university and having the support networks (professionally and socially) AS WELL as the support networks of the different placement schools. I am also a big fan of education and I would like to study it comprehensively before going out and 'practising it'.

Thank you for your response, it has helped me confirm that the PGCE is what I want to do.

At the university / SD course I did, the only difference between SD and university led was that I knew which school I would be training at. SD also tend to be better because you train at at least one Outstanding School (training schools must be outstanding). By contrast, university led placements could be in any school that Requires improvement or better. Some of my peers found themselves commuting up to 3 hours a day to schools where their mentors didn't take much interest in what was going on.

For me, it would be SD or SCHITT every time as you are more in control of what you are getting.

Good luck!

I think if you want to do an education related masters in the next 5 years, then it's a no brainer to get the credits from a PGCE.

It doesn't sound like your school is hugely supportive, and being able to build up a professional network is another big benefit of the PGCE.

It sounds like that's what you would want to do, so go for it, and good luck.

I wouldn't listen to anyone in your school on this subject btw- obviously they're going to be biased towards having a known quantity working there for free!

Thank you, I wish you best of luck in whatever you are pursuing (?). Also, how sad it is that the PGCE is becoming less available by the year!

I'm doing a secondary science PGCE in September (Haven't decided where yet though). From what I've seen at interview, I would say the decline in PGCEs probably matches the decline in applicants, unfortunately. Very few PGCE courses are full at this stage and applications are down.

I think anyone who wants to do a PGCE in this country and meets the minimum standards can probably find a place (except maybe for PE). I do think this is sad, though, but I think it's more related to the devaluing of teaching as a profession.

That's interesting to note, I hadn't anticipated the fall in popularity was so large but it also makes sense. Well, enjoy your musing and bask in the glory of success! I love the Science lessons I support in, and I would have really enjoyed being a Chemistry teacher, but I chose a different degree path. The nice thing is that once we qualify, we can use out knowledge and expertise to teach across the curriculum.

Obviously, most schools aren't outstanding. The management of the school is important but from a trainee teacher perspective, I would argue that seeing the extent of the challenges schools and students face is far more beneficial than seeing the cream of the crop (or at least, what is deemed by regulators to be as such).

Outstanding schools are not outstanding because of the pupils. They are outstanding because of pupil outcome which comes about because of the practices in place. My current school (Outstanding) is in one of the most deprived areas of Manchester.

My philosophy is generally that if you want to be the best, you need to train with the best. You have the rest of your career to save the world. I have been very fortunate to have only set foot in outstanding schools and for the time being, that is how I wish to continue. My move to save the world will happen when I am confident that the majority of my teaching is outstanding. Unless you get lucky and have a superb mentor, you are unlikely to become a great teacher training in a school that is happy to coast along in Requires Improvement or Good, and sadly there are many schools like this.

If you think you will become the best teacher you can be just by working in schools that are 'outstanding', then you are mistaken.

At the university / SD course I did, the only difference between SD and university led was that I knew which school I would be training at. SD also tend to be better because you train at at least one Outstanding School (training schools must be outstanding). By contrast, university led placements could be in any school that Requires improvement or better. Some of my peers found themselves commuting up to 3 hours a day to schools where their mentors didn't take much interest in what was going on.

For me, it would be SD or SCHITT every time as you are more in control of what you are getting.

Good luck!

Although this is true, some universities do guarantee your placements will be in schools that are good or outstanding. The commutes also vary hugely from university to university. IMO, the quality of the placements is one factor that can help you decide between universities.

Equally, I am not sure about the ethics of a school that relies on unpaid trainees teaching pupils, especially in OPs case when the candidate is a known factor.

I can't speak for all courses or schools but my training was identical to my university peers. Only I knew where I was going to train and benefitted from additional extras put on by my school e.g. mental health course.

I don't think that. But what I do know is that if you want to be better, you need to surround yourself with people that are better than yourself. I don't doubt there are many fantastic teachers working in all manner of schools.

But when it comes to training, you have one shot. Why settle for anything less than the best you can get? If I had applied to do a university led PGCE, it would have been pot luck as to where I would have ended up training. I wasn't prepared to take that risk.

There certain techniques and practices that almost all outstanding schools will do. That is why they are outstanding. Other schools may not have these practices in place and as a result will not be able to pass that on to their trainees. It has nothing to do with shining above everyone else. In an outstanding school, the teaching team are one and united. There is no room for superstars doing their own thing.

Especially not if it is a training school, where trainees will likely come and go, for the sake of cost saving.

I think you are confusing what school direct training is. I didn't replace any teachers. When I was teaching there was always the regular class teacher present. You are getting confused with teach First I think where trainees are literally thrown in at the deep end.