Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    Could be a good way to go.

    I looked into teaching as a career a few weeks back and was immediately put off by the pay, if that were to be adjusted somewhat I would be very tempted.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Tombola)
    I'm sorry but I don't like this proposal at all.

    Please don't make the profession seen as a respectable/high wage career. It attracts the wrong sort of people into the profession.
    But surely if now it's attracting people who are just getting thirds and going into it because its the most stable career available to them that is no good either?

    Better to have people going into it for the money (under a high wage/prestigious teaching career regime) and getting the job done than people going into it for the wrong reasons and not? And perhaps people who would make excellent teachers i.e. motivated to pass on knowledge etc. aren't going into the profession because they don't think that the salary is high enough. Part of job satisfaction after all is linked to your salary, people shouldn't be expected to do a job just for the 'reward' of helping others.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    I don't see it as such a bad idea. Bright graduates could be lured into teaching for a few years by the promise of their student loan being written off, as that's what they will be worrying about immediately after graduation - getting a job to pay it off. I think that taking money away from people who got 3rds to fund this might work.

    Although they also need to put something into the science syllabus, at the moment it's so thin. I got put off teaching after realising how mind numbing it would be having to teach such a thin amount of science. 30 years ago people were taught much harder stuff, and I'm sure kids haven't just been getting dumber. They need to realise that the quality of the subject matter is more important than the number of A* grades. It would be better to revamp the subject and then either do grades by top so many percent get A*, etc., or to just let everyone know that a B is really good now.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Tombola)
    Not really. Teaching material at secondary and primary school is not university-based difficulty. It's mostly about whether the individual is willing to put effort into learning the material that they want to deliver, it requires a broad range of knowledge that can be attained easily if a teacher is motivated enough to do so for children.

    The teachers that are being refered to as bad teachers, are those not with a bad degree, but instead those who have a lack of enthusiasm in actually delivering the knowledge.

    All those teachers that hate kids, but have are academically qualified are worse than those with a lower degree qualification but have a desire to learn and pass on the knowledge.
    I agree that a teacher who has no teaching skills and a first from Oxford is probably going to be a worse teacher than someone with a third from a poly with good teaching skills.

    However, I've had teachers in the past who have had really poor subject knowledge, couldn't explain anything beyond what was written in the textbook and couldn't answer any wider questions. I have on the flip side also had teachers who had extensive knowledge and could answer almost any question. You can guess which teaching experience I enjoyed more. If teaching was just about memorising a textbook and regurgitating it, then there would be no need to do a degree in your subject at all. In my opinion, the best teachers have both excellent teaching skills and a firm grounding in their subject.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    This is a waste of time without improving salaries and the reputation of teaching as a graduate profession. Given that this costs lots of money I can't see how this can be possible whilst ensuring that Big Dave cuts the deficit as he promises. If teaching colleges could recruit the brightest and the best then they would, wouldn't they?

    All a load of spin designed to attract the middle class vote.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I had an A-level physics teacher who claimed he failed he failed his physics A-level and had to redo it. He went into teaching after being made redundant at engineering or something, TBH though he was useless and just told us the page numbers we had to look at.
    Offline

    2
    I quite like the idea actually, my favourite part hasn't been mentioned by anybody yet which suprised me. The bit about a headmaster having more discretion over bonuses to different teachers based on how well they're doing. Hopefully that would act as an incentive to get better grades for teachers, when they realise it could actually lead to more money.

    I also favour the government interefering with things using the carrot rather than the stick, and so I quite like the idea of gaining more maths and science teachers by offering to scrap their loan payments. The problem for these graduates is that they're in a position to earn more money than being a teacher would earn them, so they probably do require more financial incentive.

    The point about teachers with less than 2:2's is being overstated, did everybody actually read this part:

    (Original post by the article)
    Meanwhile, financial help with postgraduate teacher training would be removed for those who have achieved a third-class degree or lower.

    But, according to the Training and Development Agency for Schools in England, this only accounts for 2% of postgraduate primary trainees and 4% of postgraduate secondary trainees.
    This is far more to do with gaining more science and maths teachers than it is with replacing 2:2 teachers for 2:1 teachers, this thread is just full of knee-jerk toryphobes who hate the party because their parents told them to and don't actually offer any proper criticisms of them, though.

    And to JacketPotato, the labour supporter who just hates a party that promises cuts and increased spending (in this case a small expense too) in some areas, pot kettle black?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by IceDiveFresh)
    But surely if now it's attracting people who are just getting thirds and going into it because its the most stable career available to them that is no good either?

    Better to have people going into it for the money (under a high wage/prestigious teaching career regime) and getting the job done than people going into it for the wrong reasons and not? And perhaps people who would make excellent teachers i.e. motivated to pass on knowledge etc. aren't going into the profession because they don't think that the salary is high enough. Part of job satisfaction after all is linked to your salary, people shouldn't be expected to do a job just for the 'reward' of helping others.
    People can't really get into the PGCE program with a 3rd so I'm not sure where this idea is coming from. To me, those who with knowledge that go into the job for the money are equally as bad as those who go into teaching because they can't do anything else.

    Meh. Whatever, there are lots of people applying to the PGCE program with 2.2/2.1s that have no desire to teach and fail badly.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by JW92)
    I agree that a teacher who has no teaching skills and a first from Oxford is probably going to be a worse teacher than someone with a third from a poly with good teaching skills.

    However, I've had teachers in the past who have had really poor subject knowledge, couldn't explain anything beyond what was written in the textbook and couldn't answer any wider questions. I have on the flip side also had teachers who had extensive knowledge and could answer almost any question. You can guess which teaching experience I enjoyed more. If teaching was just about memorising a textbook and regurgitating it, then there would be no need to do a degree in your subject at all. In my opinion, the best teachers have both excellent teaching skills and a firm grounding in their subject.
    I'll ask one question.

    Those teachers with poor subject knowledge. Are you sure that they had a poor degree qualification?

    This whole policy undermines the importance of enthusiasm in teaching.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I think it's a good idea tbh, those with 3rds shouldn't be able to teach, they clearly suck at education...
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by CandyFlipper)
    I quite like the idea actually, my favourite part hasn't been mentioned by anybody yet which suprised me. The bit about a headmaster having more discretion over bonuses to different teachers based on how well they're doing. Hopefully that would act as an incentive to get better grades for teachers, when they realise it could actually lead to more money.
    Without oversight, this could easily turn into a cauldron of nepotism and favouritism. With oversight, the point of a headmaster having control is somewhat defeated.

    I'm struggling to see the benefits...
    Offline

    2
    (Original post by Captain Crash)
    Without oversight, this could easily turn into a cauldron of nepotism and favouritism. With oversight, the point of a headmaster having control is somewhat defeated.

    I'm struggling to see the benefits...
    You could say the same about any bonus system that exists surely, would you scrap them all?
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    I plan to become a teacher after my degree. Would like to work in secondary school and teach art as I never had any good art teachers in school. I see this as more of a standard to set myself too, a 2:1 than there being anything really bad about what he said.

    But there is one thing that is a must in this. You can't have good teachers without the love for educating. I'd like to see teachers with passion for the subject and good knowledge than a teacher who has the grades but not the enthusiasm.

    The best teachers I ever had we're the passionate enthusiastic ones who made you want to learn the subject with their enthusiasm. Like my History teacher had a 2:2 in History but he could engage with his students and we'd re-enact battles XD, times periods etc. He really loved teaching us and made the subject real to us. Good teachers need more than the grades.
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by CandyFlipper)
    You could say the same about any bonus system that exists surely, would you scrap them all?
    I prefer bonuses that are allocated (either by committee or by independent body) anonymously based on results rather than in the hands of a single individual.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz)
    Give teachers a 6 figure salary and a bonus for every A* or A they churn out if you want to improve teaching lol

    Don't get a certain amount ie 30% C 40%B 30% A then off you go

    Hell i'd become a teacher if that was the case.
    Sorry that is precisely one of the major problems with education at the moment... getting grades is a case of jumping through hoops meaning that teachers are focusing on getting kids through these hoops rather than encouraging a rounded knowledge of the subject. The reason why teachers are doing it is because the public have become obsessed with league tables and so teachers are told by their management to focus only on getting the grades.

    I also agree that the idea that you should need a 2:2 or above is rubbish, potential teachers should be assessed by their enthusiasm for the job rather than their own achivement as if you have a degree at all you are already miles beyond the subject matter you will actually have to teach. There is much more to teaching than academic knowledge, as demonstrated by those already mentioned who have got on to a PGCE with good grades and been terrible at it. Teachers contribute more than just the teaching itself to their school - many of them give up much of their free time for other activities (sports, music, drama, school trips, academic competitions, other stuff for especially keen / talented students...), normally for no extra pay, that has little to do with what grade they got at uni.
    Offline

    2
    (Original post by Captain Crash)
    I prefer bonuses that are allocated (either by committee or by independent body) anonymously based on results rather than in the hands of a single individual.
    Well maybe this is what would end up happening, but I have always felt that good teachers need to be rewarded more for being a good teacher, so I see this as a step in the right direction. It suprised me that nobody mentioned it except for me, and also that everyone is STILL caught up on the issue of 2:2 vs 2:1 when it's not actually what he was trying to get at, he was trying to find maths and science teachers.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    I think paying off the debts of top science and maths graduates who want to become teachers is a good idea.

    But actually I think maths and science teachers should simply be paid more, because their market value is higher and we don't have enough good ones in schools and that is having a knock-on effect on the number of people taking science at A-level and uni and how much they have learned at each stage - and this is affecting our economy.

    We need to encourage science and maths, and I say that as a historian.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by vas876)
    So our education system is fantastic and there are absolutely no problems in the NHS or society?

    Are you joking?

    Who reads the daily mail anyway, they get abused by everyone, i really want to know who is reading it.
    No our education system is not the best but Cameron sure isn't the guy I would want to reform it. Society can be a piece of turd but yet again this is down to the Conservatives and good ol' Thatcher's policy of "individualism". The NHS is aiii, from personal opinion only though. I can't really comment on the state of the NHS as I don't pay taxes, and I am not a frequent visitor.

    And my friend's mother reads the Daily Mail, "but only for the t.v. guide" lolz..
    Offline

    16
    (Original post by Spinnerette)
    I plan to become a teacher after my degree. Would like to work in secondary school and teach art as I never had any good art teachers in school. I see this as more of a standard to set myself too, a 2:1 than there being anything really bad about what he said.

    But there is one thing that is a must in this. You can't have good teachers without the love for educating. I'd like to see teachers with passion for the subject and good knowledge than a teacher who has the grades but not the enthusiasm.

    The best teachers I ever had we're the passionate enthusiastic ones who made you want to learn the subject with their enthusiasm. Like my History teacher had a 2:2 in History but he could engage with his students and we'd re-enact battles XD, times periods etc. He really loved teaching us and made the subject real to us. Good teachers need more than the grades.
    It would seem the new policy would undermine you idea of teaching. They would go into teaching presumably to get their uni debts lifted?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Doyle&TheFourFathers)
    give us some examples
    What about his vividly described alternative policy regarding the economy? :rolleyes:

    Or his use of soundbites to tempt the electorate into voting for his retarded ass?

    Year For Change? What the hell is that? The Tories aren't even original in their slogans! I thought Conservatism was what it said on the tin?

    Look at him in PMQ's, all he does is poke fun at Brown, rather than question and scrutinise his policies.
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Has a teacher ever helped you cheat?
    Useful resources

    Groups associated with this forum:

    View associated groups
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Write a reply...
    Reply
    Hide
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.