I have recently got an offer for deferred entry teaching History from Teach First, but am now wondering if Schools Direct would be better.
From what I can tell, they are very similar in terms of being glorified apprenticeships basically, but whereas with Teach First, you get paid and they can put you anywhere, with Schools Direct, you apply through UCAS to the school and they build you up gradually, so observing, then teaching half a lesson, then a whole lesson etc.
I was just wondering if people with experience of Teach First or Schools Direct would be willing to share their experiences of the courses. What was good and bad about the courses etc.
Teach First or Schools Direct? Watch
- Thread Starter
- 02-04-2016 16:46
- 03-04-2016 17:30
School Direct graduate here.
As far as I know, TF is much more "straight ito the woods", in a way that you train in summer and then from September you're teaching full on; and either sink or swim.
SD is different: SDSalaried is more full on (gradual in Sep-Oct but then pretty much 50% to 80% timetable by the end of the course). I did that route.
SDUnsalaried is even a little more gradual, so closer to PGCE but still school-based rather Uni based.
I think the good about the courses is the same as the bad: it's being thrown into the deep end from the beginning; and either you take it or you hate it. I took it and liked it personally as I felt the following transition to the NQT year was pretty much non-existent as the workload and the timetable felt the same. But that's just me.Last edited by lantan; 03-04-2016 at 17:32.
- 05-04-2016 09:24
I think School Direct would suit someone who has had a previous career which is why I chose it. Teach First would also suit someone who has had a previous career, but in a capacity where they have worked with children, or done a lot of presenting. Eg sales role. I used to be the head of sales in a finance company and was tempted by Teach First, but I am on honeymoon over the summer and so could not go to the summer school.