Allow me to qualify...
'Reputation is an idle and most false imposition, oft got without merit and lost without deserving'
Othello
The folk-image of the teacher?
1963 – Think ‘Whacko’: Moustache, sadist,
alcoholic, probably a pervert.
1973 – Think ‘Nuts in May’: Beard, sandals,
pot-head, probably a Communist.
1983 – Think ‘Gregory’s Girl’: Perm, highlights,
tracksuit, heavy smoker, probably writing songs about his sixth-formers.
The cultural prism through which our
folk-image as teachers is projected can be an unflattering refraction. We are
viewed with suspicion and disdain by many, poor experiences at a formative age
amplifying and rippling out much more strongly through our anecdotes and
recollections as the years progress. You may never forget a good teacher, but
you always remember a terrible one.
One use of the verb ‘qualify’ is to add
reservations, to be tentative and equivocal - I’m going to ‘qualify’ a strong statement with shades of perspective and by
perhaps acknowledging other viewpoints. A radical government is reluctant to
qualify their bold statements and policy pronouncements because the first cut
is the deepest and the boldest sound bite the most memorable. The more mundane
business of implementation and delivery demands that ideas are qualified with
details, folly and errors addressed through compromise. Similarly, it seems the
more radical a department or leader, the more reluctant they can be to do this.
The current mess in some Free Schools indicates that the (certainly initial)
apparently very lax vetting has returned to haunt the initiative and the
children unfortunate enough to be schooled in these institutions.
The debate has shifted in the last week or
so towards the question of just how essential qualified teacher status actually
is. Labour have seen the opportunity to place clear water between themselves
and the Tories on the issue and a debate took place in parliament in which a
quite stunning lack of understanding on all sides punctuated the morass of
ignorance on display. All sound and fury, signifying nothing except a
widespread failure to understand the reality of day to day teaching and
learning.
So does it matter? Is the PGCE or securing
QTS worth a hill of exercise books? It is of great value and incredibly important that the craft and practice of
teaching is taught and nurtured in anyone hoping to become a teacher. Subject
knowledge can take you a long way in a classroom of willing and engaged young
people with their eyes on the prize and a well-developed sense of respect for
knowledge and authority. Certain classroom practices are doubtless intuitive
and can be picked up as you go along; after all we were all taught once
ourselves and all possess some obvious empathy for learners. You will very
probably be nurtured and supported by a wise, experienced colleague who may
even let you come into her classroom to observe her at work. You may be
fortunate enough to work in a school with a library of books about teaching and
pedagogy that you can borrow and imbibe. I know that this is how some careers
in the independent sector begin and develop and I’m sure that there are some
for whom that is a successful path towards a semblance of CPD.
But that is an anarchic approach; a ‘crumbs
from the table’, fingers crossed strategy to growing the highly skilled and
respected profession we know we require and would demand for our own children.
I’m happy when I see ‘Phd’ on someone’s CV when they are applying for a
teaching job but there is very rarely a link or connection between this and the
quality of interaction, instruction and intuition I then see in a lesson
context. Truthfully, I have found that the ‘A’ level results a teaching
candidate has are often a better indication of both their work ethic and
fundamental intelligence than Higher education. The best performers are not
always the best Drama teachers; the most knowledgeable Chemists do not always
secure the best results.
It simply isn’t good enough to sneerily
refer back to one’s own mixed experiences at teacher training college and
blithely declare PGCE a ‘waste of time’ or, conversely, to claim that school
based training is ‘lacking in academic rigour’. There are, I’m sure, too many
ITE providers in Universities not giving a practical or relevant enough
grounding, just as there are too many school-based schemes which do not provide
a deep enough foundation in the principles of pedagogy. But I would argue that
these are the exception rather than the rule and that reform is a more powerful
approach than a wrecking ball. Whatever the complexion and make-up of teacher
training, it should be a high quality experience and not an optional add-on.
Seeking accreditation should be mandatory in order to ensure that this is the
case. I don’t have any problem with gradual routes to qualified or accredited
status; I don’t see any reason why a school shouldn’t have the freedom to
appoint someone to teach as they gain accreditation, but gaining a
qualification and the validation that should go with that, must be part of the
deal.
So the answer Hunt should have given Paxman
when pressed on whether he would allow an unqualified teacher to teach his
child?
‘Yes.
As long as they are training and working towards accreditation and qualified
status’.
We want teaching to be viewed as a high
status profession. We want parents and the public to have a much better
folk-image of the teacher than they have in the past. We want to be recognized
and rewarded fairly by those in power when we do a good job and, yes, to be
challenged and provoked to do even better because standards can and should be
much higher.
We cannot achieve this by allowing the job
to become a gentleman’s hobby. A pursuit people can play at freely ‘first’
before going on to do something better or more lucrative.
We should offer qualified support to any
politician who presents a plan that nurtures these aims. No such plan currently
exists and I am getting fed up of waiting.
