Should Michael Gove have abolished the need for teachers to have QTS? PDF

Preview

Summary

Looking at if we need to abolish a QTS and examining the debate around it...

Description

Should Michael Gove have abolished the need for teachers to have QTS? Teacher training in the UK has always been a complex process which has bought up a wealth of questions- how should teachers be trained? Should they be trained? Who should train them- universities, training providers or another body entirely? These are some of the many questions that are asked – by teachers, parents and pupils when discussing the subject of teacher training and education. Through all of the articles published and debates had we can see that Education and schools as a topic is very open to interpretation, debate and opinions. The topics I am going to be focusing on in this essay concern Initial Teacher Training and gaining Qualified Teacher Status in the United Kingdom. As it stands, there are a variety of ways that you can be trained as a teacher in the UK- you can be trained in a university setting such as doing a Primary Education undergraduate degree (3 year degree equipping the student with the subject knowledge and training in order to successfully teach, as the name suggests, this degree is for students wishing to teach primary) or a PGCE where you have assignments as well as working in a school. (For a primary teaching PGCE you may choose any subject as your undergraduate degree however if you wish to teach secondary you must at least major in the respective subject that you wish to teach) These are the main ways that a student/trainee teacher can be trained in a university setting but by no means the extensive list of ways universities can train teachers, students/trainee teachers can also undertake courses such as the “assessment only” route, where employees already meeting the teaching standards can gain QTS by assessment only or members of the armed forces can undertake a “troops to teachers” route, which provides army troops with the opportunity to learn to teach. Although training in a university is a popular choice, it is by no means the only way a student/trainee teacher can gain QTS. Students/trainee teachers can undertake initiatives such as training with the training provider Teach First. Teach First was established in 2002, Their website states that “Each year we recruit, train and support new teachers to work in primary and secondary schools serving low-income communities across England and Wales”. This means that Teach First trains teachers to work in poverty stricken areas in the UK in order to raise the standards of the schools and pupils. Students/trainee teachers can also train with Schools Direct, an approach which sees students/trainee teachers trained to teach directly in schools, as opposed to being given assignments and working in a school, like they would do in a university setting. Although all of these approaches are quite different, the one thing that unites them is that on completion of them, they all lead to the student gaining Qualified Teacher Status (QTS). In the past, it was the law that every employee in a primary or secondary school in England and Wales needed to have QTS in order to teach. In 2010, Michael Gove stated that “The importance of teaching cannot be over-stated. And that is why there is a fierce urgency to our plans for reform”. (Gove, 2010) To this effect, in 2012 Michael Gove announced plans to “scrap” the need for teachers to be qualified. This plan, announced on the day of the Olympics opening ceremony, meant that anyone could apply and be hired in a school. Lori Beckett called it a “watershed moment in teacher education”. (Beckett, 2014, page 3 “introduction”), People such as mechanics, plumbers or musicians could become teachers in their respective fields, without needing to be qualified to teach. The Government’s website states that, “independent schools and free schools can already hire brilliant people who have not got qualified teacher status (QTS). We are extending this flexibility to all academies so more schools can hire great linguists, computer scientists, engineers and other specialists who have not worked in state schools before”. We can see that, from this quote, independent schools and free schools were able to hire unqualified teachers before it was announced that academies could. We can also see

from this quote that it is not a completely new plan, the policy had already been rolled out in a number of schools, as I have explained above. He also announced the plans on the day of the Olympics Opening Ceremony as, Gove knew that the policy would undoubtedly cause some controversy and so, by announcing it whilst Britain’s minds were on the Olympics, he felt that it would draw attention away from the debate that was undoubtedly going to be had when teachers, head teachers, students and parents found out. The first thing that I am going to be focusing on, is the advantages of abolishing the need for a teacher to have QTS in order to work in a school in England and Wales. One of the main advantages is the fact that there is a distinct lack of teachers, for example especially Design and Technology teachers. If schools were able to employ workers with skills in specific areas without the need for them to be trained in how to teach, it would save them time and mean that more teachers would be able to be employed sooner. As the employees would already have the subject knowledge then in theory, they should be able to teach. On that note, the hope would be that if someone didn’t want to teach, they wouldn’t apply for jobs, showing us that hopefully only the best teachers would be recruited. This could also be a major advantage as, even though someone has training, they may not be the best teacher. As I have mentioned above, in order to qualify for a entry onto a teacher training course, you need to have completed a degree but, Another advantage is that it if people didn’t need to train to teach then the waiting time for new teachers would be significantly shorter. Since 2015, the demand for new teachers has been rising, 11% of teachers left in 2015 and another 43% plan to do so in 5 years. This is an alarming statistic and we can see that there are many reasons for this, one being that teaching isn’t seen as a respectable position. Sam Freedman, Briar Lipson and Professor David Hargreaves state that “Teaching has been a relatively low status job since the post-war expansion of schooling” (Freedman, Lipson and Hargreaves, 2008, page 6), we can see that this is true as teachers are undervalued and underpaid by the government. They are also underappreciated – by the government, parents and pupils, who can often be “rowdy” in lessons and “disrespect” their teacher. We can also see that if a person is working in a hard job with little appreciation then they are more likely to quit, this is one explanation of the figures I mentioned above. If teachers were able to be employed faster than the demand would decrease significantly meaning that there would be less pressure put on schools if they had enough competent teachers. This would mean that schools would be able to function more efficiently, for example they wouldn’t need to hire supply teachers in order to fill in a gap where no new teacher has been hired. This would greatly improve schools as as the government’s website notes, “This additional flexibility will help schools improve faster.” (Gov uk, 2012) As well as this, if an employee who wished to be a teacher didn’t have the necessary funds in order to train, this route would mean that they could start work and start earning as soon as possible, bypassing the debt and time loss that they would incur by training. This links in with the second point as, if employees bypassed training then schools would have more teachers applying to work, reducing the demand and pressure on schools. This would benefit the individuals applying as, they would be able to become a teacher without getting into debt from training. The second thing that I am going to be focusing on is the disadvantages of abolishing the need for a teacher to have QTS. The obvious disadvantage is that, if teachers haven’t had proper training, how does the school know that they are going to be competent teachers? It is one thing for a teacher to be skilled in their subject area but it is another for them to be skilled in being able to manage a class. Deborah Loewenberg Ball and Francesca M. Forzani state that “We must build a system for ensuring that new teachers have the requisite

professional skills and know how to use them.”(Loewenberg and Forzani, 2010). This quote explains that we must have teacher training in place that ensures that teachers have the necessary skills in order to teach. This quote in general shows support for teacher training and supports my argument that teachers need QTS in order to demonstrate that they are a sufficient teacher. Teachers could employ someone who they believe to be competent at managing a class but, could find when it comes to actually watching them teach, that they are less than adequate in controlling their students. This could potentially be a major disadvantage for schools as, if they aren’t employing good teachers, the exam results and general grades of their pupils may start to slip, meaning that the school might drop to a lower position on the league tables, which could potentially stop parents from sending their children to said school. As well as this, Headteachers could employ their “friends” over other, stronger candidates. The “friend” may not be the best teacher but they would be hired on the basis that they know the head teacher- this is another issue with this policy. We can see that, a teacher who is employed directly by the school without any training will not hold Qualified Teacher Status, this is another disadvantage of this initiative. Parents and indeed students might not trust the teacher if they cannot demonstrate that they have formal training- in general, people see training as an indicator of weather someone is competent at their job- if they have had no formal training then it is assumed that they won’t be good at what they do. Although this is not always the case, as I have mentioned above, it is extremely hard to distinguish whether someone will make a good teacher or not if they haven’t had any formal training in the field. The North Carolina Centre for Public Policy Research states that “a person cannot be a good teacher without first knowing the subject areas and that the process of certification is designed to guarantee that teachers have such basic knowledge. No one could argue against the fact that all teachers should be fully qualified” (Woolford, 1981, cited in: Hawk, Coble and Swanson, 1985) Another area that we need to consider is the fact that qualified teachers may not apply for jobs in academies, if they know that they are up against unqualified teachers. Some qualified teachers may not want to teach alongside unqualified members of staff, for example, they might feel that it is unfair for a trained and an untrained teacher to work together. Another disadvantage is that some people, especially parents, may see this move as a cost cutting measure. They might say that, instead of it being a way to effectively employ more teaches, it is a way for schools, universities and other training schemes to save money. This would have a negative effect on the reputation of the scheme, government and schools as, parents are one of the main groups who influence schools. Lori Beckett states that “The funding between new academies and the secretary of state allow these schools the right to employ staff believed to be properly qualified” (Beckett, 2014, page 4), this shows us that the government and the academies had to come to some sort of funding agreement, further clarifying my point that parents might see the policy as a cost cutting measure, rather than a measure to improve teaching standards across schools in the UK. Beckett goes on to state that “the news article summarised stakeholders responses, including the teacher unions opposed to cost cutting as well as any move towards profit making schools”, (Beckett, 2014, Page 4), we can see from this quote that as well as the policy potentially upsetting parents for being cost cutting measure, it has also sparked negative comments from the teachers unions in the UK. Another disadvantage is that candidates for employment could “lie” or “embellish” their CV’s, if they haven’t had the proper training and the checks that would come with being enrolled on a teacher training course, they might embellish their CV in order to look more attractive to potential employers (schools). To many people, embellishing a Curriculum Vitae or Resume, seems unethical but Alexiel. M. Marcoux states that “I argue on consequentiality grounds that, given some plausible background conditions, a limited form

of résumé embellishment is morally permissible”, (Marcoux, 2006) we can see from this quote that this is still a subject very much up for discussion although, I would argue that if a teacher embellished their CV when applying for a teaching job, it should be seen as a negative as the whole job description of a teacher is them passing on their knowledge to their students and so, for example, if they lie about having a C in maths then their knowledge may not be enough for them to effectively teach a class in said subject. In conclusion, I believe that the policy of “scrapping” qualified teacher status in the UK should not have been implemented. Although the policy does have some advantages, for example I believe that there are skilled people out there who would make excellent teachers, it’s extremely difficult for us to tell whether they’ll be good teachers or not and, if we allow teachers to be employed who haven’t had the proper training, then we can’t be sure that they’ll do an effective job and be competent teachers. This could have an effect on the school, their reputation as well as the education of the pupils, who’s grades could potentially suffer if they are being taught by incompetent teachers who have the subject knowledge but not the training in how to teach effectively- for example how to control the class and how to command attention. As well as this, as I have mentioned above, it’s the parents as well as the other staff members who influence the decisions and overall running of the school (as well as the pupils) and so any view that they have could have an impact on how the school functions. Teachers should be qualified in order to ensure that their students have the best opportunity to succeed in life.

Bibliography: Ball, D.L. and Forzani, F.M. (2010) ‘What does it take to make a teacher?’, Phi Delta Kappan, 92(2), pp. 8–12. doi: 10.1177/003172171009200203. Beckett, L. (ed.) (2013) Teacher education through active engagement: Raising the professional voice. London: Routledge. company (2016) Teach First. Available at: https://www.teachfirst.org.uk/what-wedo/developing-leaders-schools-0 (Accessed: 12 January 2017). Department for Education and The Rt Hon Lord Hill of Oareford CBE (2012) Academies to have same freedom as free schools over teachers. Available at: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/academies-to-have-same-freedom-as-free-schoolsover-teachers (Accessed: 12 January 2017). Education, Majesty, C. of H. and the Secretary of State Parliament (2010) The importance of teaching (cm.). London: Stationery Office. Friedman, S., Lipson, B. and Hargreaves, D. (2008) ‘More Good Teachers’, . Hawk, P.P., Coble, C.R. and Swanson, M. (1985) ‘Certification: It does matter’, Journal of Teacher Education, 36(3), pp. 13–15. doi: 10.1177/002248718503600303. Marcoux, A.M. (2006) ‘A Counterintuitive Argument for Résumé Embellishment’, Journal of Business Ethics, 63(2), p. pp 183–194....