'Only for elite' fear over Tory teaching deal
Digg
del.icio.us
Facebook
Reddit
Google
Stumble Upon
Fark
Newsvine
YahooBuzz
Bebo
Twitter
Independent Minds
Only students at a handful of red-brick universities would benefit from a Conservative plan to repay the loans of maths and science graduates if they opted to become teachers, it emerged today.
The Tories are offering to pay off the debts of maths and science graduates who turn to teaching, but will limit it to those who get first or 2.1 degrees from “good” universities. The qualifying institutions would be defined by the party if it came into office as part of an attempt to make entry into the profession more “elite”. One estimate today had the number of universities limited to the “low dozens”.
According to university think tank Million-plus, because the largest science departments and the vast majority of teacher-training courses are in post-1992 universities – former polytechnics – they would likely miss out on the offer.
Critics pointed out that Carol Vorderman, who David Cameron has appointed to lead a Conservative Party Maths Taskforce, got a third-class degree in engineering. When he announced her recruitment last year, Mr Cameron called her “the perfect choice” who “knows maths inside out”.
Professor Les Ebdon, chairman of the think tank Million-plus and vice-chancellor of Bedfordshire University, said the scheme showed an “amazing ignorance” of higher education as courses at all universities were vetted for standards by the Quality Assurance Agency, the standards watchdog which could cause a recruitment crisis in schools. “Any scheme which sought to exclude graduates because they had their first degree or trained to become a teacher at a post-1992 university would cause a recruitment crisis in schools,” he said.
Wes Streeting, president of the National Union of Students, added: “The message that the Conservatives are sending to the majority of students is that if you didn’t go to a university attended by members of the Shadow Cabinet, they don’t believe you’re worth as much.
In launching his education manifesto yesterday morning, party leader David Cameron praised countries like Singapore and South Korea for their “brazenly elitist” attitude towards recruiting teachers – they only allow those with top degree passes into the profession – and suggested the UK should follow them. Both countries top international league tables for pupil performance.
Mr Cameron suggested raising the bar for entry into primary teaching from a C grade pass in maths and English at GCSE to a B and a ban on entry into the profession for anyone with a lower degree pass than a 2:2.
Christine Blower, general secretary of the National Union of Teachers, said: “Being brazenly elitist could mean being brazenly exclusive of those teachers who through no fault of their own have had a tough time in achieving the necessary qualification.”
Mary Bousted, general secretary of the Association of Teachers and Lecturers, added that the plans were “a solution in search of a problem” as even Ofsted, the education standards watchdog, had said the UK at present had the best quality of teachers ever.
The plans to make teaching more elite were among a range of measures putting more flesh on the bones of Conservative education policy published yesterday in a draft manifesto.
The party’s policy blueprint included a commitment for the first time to paying teachers overtime if they worked extended hours giving extra coaching to pupils or provided extra curricular activities like sports and drama clubs.
Under the Conservatives’ proposals, heads would be free to determine their own teachers’ salaries awarding bonuses to the best and rewarding those who worked longer hours.
On discipline, Mr Cameron said: “No-one wants to put up with being assaulted or abused – as thousands of teachers are every year – in the workplace.”
New powers would allow teachers to search and confiscate items considered dangerous from pupils.
Mr Cameron made it clear that “anyone with a passion for giving children the best” would be allowed to set up a new school with state funding, along the lines of the Swedish free school system.
The Conservatives would allocate enough money for at least 220,000 extra school places in small academies in the country’s most deprived areas. They would be free and non-selective. The document made it clear it was expected they would be run by charities, parent and teacher groups, trusts, voluntary groups and co-operatives.
In addition, the Conservatives would embrace the plans being advocated by one of their former Education Secretaries, Kenneth (now Lord) Baker for a network of university technical colleges giving top-class vocational education to 14 to 19-year-olds, At least 12 would be established in the country’s largest urban areas.
However, teachers’ leaders criticised the draft manifesto for failing to be specific on funding for education after the next election.”
View all comments that have been posted about this article.
Offensive or abusive comments will be removed and your IP logged and may be used to prevent further submission. In submitting a comment to the site, you agree to be bound by the Independent Minds Terms of Service.
- Print Article
- Email Article
-
Click here for copyright permissions
Copyright 2009 Independent News and Media Limited
Comments
Now the prospective PM comes out with the word just once, but with a bit (lot) of meat attached. I personally think it a risky business to hold forth on specifics...this Labour lot will copy them and issue them re-wrapped.
But Cameron is totally correct on education. Since the subject of G*****r Schools is taboo, good for him on highlighting the desperate need to raise standards.
We goo (sic) about football players, even more about pop 'stars;...TV 'personalities' and the like.... The country will of course thrive on the so called products of these worthless people.
The future is in our children. The best brains should be teaching them. If they are indeed the pick of the bunch they should obviously be released from the choking bureaucracy which infects not only schools but Universities as well.
Interesting to note what the Balls has to say about this. He's the product of good schools and Universities. He seems to be trying his damnedest to ensure that few others get the same opportunity.
Lord knows how you spot talent but a few good teachers surely have it and the children/pupils know it and love them for it; it's a question of good communication and love of one's subject; worth their weight in gold, but b*gger all to do with qualifications AFAIK and IMHO.
I think, but cannot swear to it, that Zanulabour just cannot let good teachers do their thing, at which they may well be naturals; most people with common sense and some experience of life, can spot a natural at 1000 yards but not by the dreaded tick box method so beloved of Zanulabour.
But none of this is sufficient - to teach stuff you have to know it.
My own rule of thumb whilst doing my bit was to make sure I knew the stuff to at least a level beyond what I was trying to teach. And I was teaching at degree level. You can develop a richer set of analogies that way, aside from anything else.
I have never claimed to be good during my time teaching - because that is, as you rightly point out, an immeasurable. But I will claim to have been thorough.
Incidentally, I never ticked a box in my entire career as teacher and other things !
oddly enough I learned more by the little bit of lecturing and tutoring I did than I taught probably
but I did have excellent teachers and lecturers at at school and polytechnic, some really knew their subject ,some just had talent or were naturals; I learned more from the latter
the odd thing about education is that the more you learn, the more you "can" learn; there's probably a fancy word for that
This amazing quote is given by pretty much every newspaper today. I feel it deserves further investigation. Who's fault is it, in Ms Blower's opinion, that certain teachers "have had a tough time in achieving the necessary qualification"? Maybe, we should abolish all qualifications altogether, since they seem to promote unhealthy elitism?
As to giving teachers the power to search, that is stupid and potentially dangerous andcould put many people off teaching as they may not want to act as Police. The only people doing searching should be the Police. Any searching should be carried out by the Police following strict procedures and not by members of the public no matter what their profession.
The best way to encourage pupils to do better at school is simple. All parents should have to attend lessons in the School to learn how they can best help their children study. They need to learn the importance of reading at home as well as make sure their children use the internet for research and not just for fun. Many parents don't know how to help or encourage their children.
There are also many people who are not academic and will never go to University, or even want to. Many of those pupils will prefer more practical lessons and subjects and should be able to start apprenticships while in School.
While on the subject of education. The Government seems to deliberatly put barriers to stop long term unemployed people getting an education. The long term unemployed are discouraged from getting an Education (not by colleges) but are encouraged to go on short courses or schemes which do not give much in the way of qualifications or experience and tend to keep people trapped in the same cycle of unemployment and low paid jobs. Instead they should be given them the same amount of extra money they would get on a training course to go full time to College and if they qualify for University continue to pay them the same money and allow them Student Loans too.
People from poorer backgrounds are disadvantaged at University as they have to work as well as study. Those from better off backgrounds get financial support from their parents so can spend more time studying and possibly get better degrees. I am not sure if there are any studies that have looked into it. I'm sure the government would not want this investigating as it could show that they need to reintroduce grants so that those from disadvataged backgrounds have an equal chance.
No government will ever do this as they like to keep the poor down, it keeps the middle classes in fear. This would really challenge the elitism within the education system as there would be more people from disadvantaged backrounds in higher education (with a wide range of life experiences). The most disadvantaged leave school with no qualifications, but may realise years later that they want a formal education, at present they are denied this and cosequently denied the chance to get the best jobs, which all go to the graduates with the best results.
How much does he actually know about teaching? Not only is he not a teacher but his own education is hardly representative of that received by most young people in the UK.
I doubt there is much correlation between the standard of a degree (as determined by the conservatives) and the ability to teach.
Teaching is about good communication, creativity and the ability to motivate pupils on top of a passion for a subject, and so many other things that cannot be measured.
When I was at school some of the most awful teachers I had were actually those with the best qualifications. They may well have known their subject inside out, but they were simply unable to relate to us.
By making teaching an "elitist" profession, all Cameron will achieve is to undermine the qualifications worked for by so may graduates who, according to him, would make incompetent teachers.
Quite fortunately for us all, the standard of a degree is not yet determined by the conservatives (or the labour).
You are correct saying that the ability to teach may not correlate well with specific qualifications. Nevertheless, there is something that correlates very badly with the ability to teach any STEM subject: lack of knowledge and lack of understanding. Without knowledge and/or understanding, there can be no teaching, and no amount of creativity or passion can change this. Unsurprisingly, there is very strong correlation between knowledge and understanding in all STEM subjects and the standard of a degree.
Since he went to Eton his dream's going to take a lot of achieving. But I for one do feel that if he achieved his dream the country as a whole would benefit greatly. Is this announcement about class of degree the first step? What class of degree is needed to get a job at Eton? Is an education at one of the top universities a pre-requisite? Common sense says it is, as well as a posh accent (achievable by elocution training). However someone with knowledge of the Eton teachers mess might say otherwise.
People can't train to become Doctors with a sub-standard qualification. And the same goes for Vets. A-grade or A-star-grade A-levels and O-levels are needed for those. And in difficult subjects too. Cameron has logic on his side. To get the top qualified (arguably the most intelligent) people into teaching similar strict entry requirements are essential.
I assume people who are teachers already will be allowed to carry on teaching no matter what their qualifications - it's only future teachers that will be affected. Else many schools would be forced to close due to staff shortage.
The BBC have been giving us a relentless stream of trendy lefties emphasising the importance of soft skills in teaching, peddling the old hippie 1970s myth that being able to empathise with the little gits is more important than the ability to solve a quadratic equation or write a sentence with a subject, predicate and correctly punctuated clauses. As a result of Labour having spent the last thirteen years putting this theory into practice, there are a lot of school-leavers and graduates around who can do neither.
And in relation to Labour's private school obsession, there is no good in attempting to get more state school pupils into 'the professions' if they arrive at university without the basic skills and knowledge needed to tackle the syllabus. If you tell the universities to dumb down to compensate, 'the professions' will recruit from the ones that refuse, including those overseas if necessary. When I read a UCAS application form, it's very easy to distinguish between the ones written by state and private school pupils. The latter are usually written in clear, concise and correct English, while the former are an error-strewn, incoherent mess (including the teachers' references in many case).
If Cameron is serious about telling the cuddly-feely, all-must-have-prizes brigade to perform an impractical act upon themselves, this can only be good news for state school pupils' prospects and, eventually, our society and economy.
I attended a state comprehensive school under the Thatcher governments (1984-1990). At that time, they still sent a significant proportion of their sixth formers into higher education. Of my cohort of around 50, probably about 10-15 went to universities (as distinct from what were then polytechnics), and the same again to polys.
As an academic teaching in one of the top twenty universities in the country now, I would say that about 10% of our UG intake comes from state schools, and an even smaller proportion from comprehensives (most of our state school intake is from faith schools and grammars). I can only conclude from this that after thirteen years of Labour rule, a typical comprehensive school pupil is now considerably less likely to make it into a top university than I was under Thatcher. Comparing the applications of state and private school pupils, it really isn't difficult to see why. They also reveal the underlying cause: teachers who lack the core academic skills to be able to pass them on themselves. Most of the teachers at Eton have PhDs (ergo Eton must pay them the sort of salary that is necessary to attract a PhD), and most of the pupils at Eton go on to become highly qualified and highly paid members of 'the professions'. Nepotism has something to do with that, but not everything.
You will understand, therefore, that I am more inclined to place my trust in Cameron than in Balls when it comes to this issue.
We should be worrying about the benefit culture and the underfunding of the Further Education sector, not endlessly bemoaning poor standards at University. Technical education in Germany is completely different, a short plane hop and it's another world. I know, I've been there, working in FE for over 30 years.
I don't think Cameron's going to get a large majority even if he wins the election. Everytime he makes a specific policy statement he exposes how truly out of touch he is. I remember full well his disasterous "hug a hoodie" photo call in Manchester and the response it got. If David and his chums get the power they think they are entitled to and form the next government, look foward to incredulous and weird ministers making a catalogue of loony mistakes. Poor us!!!
OK Mr Clever-Dick Startus, I know full well what "incredulous" means. I had pictured Tory ministers, finally in power, being brought information and facts and being incredulous in the face of civil service advice. Anyway, never mind overlording it as pendant in chief, what nuggets of enlightenment have you to share with us today?
I'll get me coat...
And yes, a 2.2 is setting the bar pretty darn low.
Oh! I forgot, not every child, if Mummy and Daddy have cash to spare, you can get special attention, good, bad or plain weird at one of our private establishments which have the supreme advantage of being outside government meddling and Gradgrind politics.
Mum later became a dinner lady and infant helper. But she was a terrific teacher, sometimes helping with - or in emergency taking - classes and showing children how to read, do maths, tell the time - even juggle. She knew how to explain things clearly and show them that all these activities were fun.
She's one of the best teachers I've ever known and she didn't even have an O-level.