The Staggers

The New Statesman’s rolling politics blog

3:30 on an Olympic Friday? Great time for Michael Gove to bury news

Teachers at academies will no longer need qualifications.

By Martha Gill Published 27 July 2012 16:34

Michael Gove. Photograph: Getty Images

Interesting that the Department for Education chose today to remove requirements for teachers working at academies to have Qualified Teacher Status (QTS). The change means that a centrally approved year of teacher training is no longer necessary – the onus of choosing and training employees will fall to schools themselves. A spokesman for the Department for Education told the BBC:

This policy will free up academies to employ professionals – like scientists, engineers, musicians, university professors, and experienced teachers and heads from overseas and the independent sector - who may be extremely well-qualified and are excellent teachers, but do not have QTS status.

A positive change then – freeing schools from lots of unneccessary bureaucracy? The Spectator thinks so:

This change might sound technical but its importance is that it means that academies will now be able to employ people who have not gone through a year of teacher training. Previously, an academy couldn’t have employed, say, James Dyson to teach design without him having done a year in a teacher training college.

It's a shame that someone who knows alot about vaccum cleaners hasn't yet been allowed to teach people about this. Still, why would Gove announce this today, when everyone's attention is on the Games?

Christine Blower, General Secretary of the National Union of Teachers, has some reasons:

Our 2011 ComRes poll showed that 89% of parents want a qualified teacher to teach their child, with just 1% comfortable about those without Qualified Teacher Status (QTS) taking charge of a class.

By his own admission, Michael Gove is relaxed about profit-making from schools. He takes his inspiration from Sweden where profits are being made by reducing the number of qualified teachers, and where educational standards have fallen. By contrast, the reason Finland scores so highly in international tables is because they value teachers, trust teachers and pay teachers well.

“Parents and teachers will see this as a cost-cutting measure that will cause irreparable damage to children’s education. Schools need a properly resourced team of qualified teachers and support staff, not lower investment dressed up as ‘freedoms’.

Special Offer: Get 12 issues of New Statesman magazine for just £12

More from Martha Gill

View the discussion thread.

62 comments

Thu, 2012-08-23 02:20 — mamamia (not verified)

Brilliant idea we are getting there. Very good news for me as I am a butcher but with this government help I would like to be a hospital surgeon soon. My brother is in between jobs at the moment. He is the brain in our family. Got 2 "o" Levels - perfect Teacher. My big uncle is a member of a secretish mafia.org. No need to say which government job he is (un)qualified to have.Watchout Mervyn King - my cousin is a debt collector (and is looking for work).

Tue, 2012-07-31 20:46 — Zorro (not verified)

This has to happen across all schools.Well done Mr Gove..It has to be done.The experience a well vetted non QTS teacher can bring is huge.You would be amazed at the skills and qualities bring to to classroom.

Tue, 2012-07-31 20:46 — Zorro (not verified)

Tue, 2012-07-31 20:45 — Zorro (not verified)

Tue, 2012-07-31 12:21 — New statesmanYaya (not verified)

What a shocking news! I just got an offer to do my PGCE training. I strongly believe that the teaching method has to be learned before you start the actual teaching in schools. Otherwise, what the students can learn from you. Schools are not labs! We can't sacrifice our children to the government's experiment!

Tue, 2012-07-31 10:34 — Dj11 (not verified)

I completely understand that teachers need to be qualified, however I also see the advantage to someone who wishes to become qualified with QTS possibly taking on a couple of classes to teach over the school year. This already happens in a lot of schools, but it also allows experience to build. As the governement has cut bursaries for PGCE's already and changed them every year since been on power, lowered the number of places available on GTPs and PGCEs each year unless it's deemed a needed subject (chemistry, modern foreign languages, etc) it makes it more and more challenging to actually get on a course to gain QTS. I do not feel that teachers should not have QTS for ever, it's just having tried for 3 years to get on a GTP and PGCE in my subject area and finding that numbers just get cut each time making it more competitive you need to have something that will make you stand out from the rest. With GTPs changing and not being called that anymore and more control being given to schools to employ and train and tuition fees being paid up to 12,000 in some areas, maybe schools do need to step up and start to look at what they can do to train the new generations of teachers.

I don't feel that teachers should be able to teach for the rest of their lives and not do the training but it gives more opportunity to gain experience.

Tue, 2012-07-31 09:44 — MagpiesView (not verified)

So Academies are to get more money but won't have to employ qualified teachers. When this is added to Gove being happy about these schools making a profit - what you have is taxpayers paying more, for poorer quality whilst those running these Academies line their pockets.

What makes this even more suspicious is that two women who applied to form an Academy in East London, despite have a great deal of experience were rejected.

Mon, 2012-07-30 21:56 — Happy Days! (not verified)

We have had to field several job applications for the post of teaching assistants from people with degrees. The first question they ask is whether we will fund them to become a teacher via the GTP scheme, which the school has to mentor them and pay for. This is before we have even tried them out as a teaching ASSISTANT! The people applying do it because they want a route into the profession paid for by someone else. Can't blame them on one level, but why should individual schools have to pay for it, and nurse them through it? We are not a TTA or an emploment bureau! Teachers need to be graduates who have been trained on an accredited course, end of.

Mon, 2012-07-30 21:51 — Maxi (not verified)

This is a bad idea! I have been a professional in my field for 14years and thought I was an excellent trainer. Then I did my PGCE (QTLS) and found I was not as good a teacher as I thought I was. There needs to be both experience and teaching knowledge otherwise you have a person who can stand up and talk, NOT stand up and teach! I was humbled by the amount I did not know about enabling learning and by the students I had failed! There is no replacement for QTS! Instinct is not enough!

Mon, 2012-07-30 22:51 — MrT (not verified)

I think we can all agree that Mr Gove is an absolute eejit. However, fortunately we work on a day to day basis with professionals who do give a toss about the welfare of our young people and the education they receive. Any head teacher worth their salt will recognise the importance of having a team of qualified staff to teach their cohort. Here is simply another foolish initiative from a misguided politician. How this is implemented luckily resides with heads who have experienced the benefit of formal teacher training themselves.

Mon, 2012-07-30 21:45 — Happy Days! (not verified)

Obvious way to cut costs and undermine the profession. Gove really is a poisonous man.

You pay peanuts, you get monkeys. You'll see!

Mon, 2012-07-30 10:47 — Son of Belushi (not verified)

I was a bar manager for 10 years and was fortunate enough to get a career change opportunity as a member of support staff in a school in north London. Like many (obviously, from reading the tripe here) I thought perhaps teachers had it easier than most and I'm sure that while some in private schools do, they certainly do not in state schools. I work in a departmental office so I see what happens every minute of the day; it is not a piece of cake and one bad teacher can drag an entire department down. The idea of a so-called 'professional' just strolling into a classroom and automatically doing the job is ridiculous, even ignoring the obvious pay cut they'd have to take to do it. A Computer Science graduate is going to get a job in the private sector for twice what they'd earn teaching, the good ones at any rate. Mr. Gove's idea would simply attract people who are not really cut out for the best jobs to take up a career they wouldn't even have to train for (the easy route, if you will). Your typical and/or moderately successful professional earning 40k-75k per annum is not going to give up their job to teach because it would simply not be financially prudent to do so. I say this as someone who is not a teacher but inevitably plays a supporting role in classrooms. I would not want to do it day-in-day-out without appropriate training and I know that despite my technical expertise (which is considerable) I would not be a good teacher right now, because I don't know "how" to teach. Anybody out there think Joey Barton would make a good P.E teacher? Thought not.
Another quite ridiculous initiative from Michael Gove; what a tool.

Mon, 2012-07-30 00:43 — Luna (not verified)

Joe Bloggs, you are talking through your ass. If teaching is such a dream job, how come half the students who go on teacher training ,give up mid course when they realise what a shitty job it actually is. Imagine how many untrained so-called "professionals" would walk out of the class-room first time they are told to f..off by one of their charges?
And if it is such a holiday, hey! Joe Bloggs, since now anybody can do it, why don't you have a go? Then come back and tell us how lovely it was!

Mon, 2012-07-30 03:01 — joe bloggs (not verified)

I never said teaching was a dream job. I agree teaching is to some exttent a stressful job. I greatly admire good teachers. I do realise that teaching is a noble profession and there are lots of good teachers. The problem is that there are lots of piss poor ones aswell and the NUT wish to keep paying em. Also, there are lots of more stressful jobs.

Sat, 2012-07-28 21:29 — Luna (not verified)

@newstatesmankaren:
I am glad you like yourself and that you think you are an outstanding teacher. The fact you can't write a correct sentence in a three lines comment will reassure any parent doubting the government's wisdom.
You are also saying that teachers have no need of " pay and conditions" regulations. Brilliant! it is with people like you that our children will learn self respect and how the world works. I dread to think of the next generation being "educated" by people like you.I despair.

Sat, 2012-07-28 17:03 — New statesmanKaren (not verified)

I have taught for four years without QTS and am an outstanding teacher ! Let's give heads the support to create the right blance in our classrooms I am better qualified in my subject field than any of the qualified teachers at school
The argument is about protecting teachers pay and conditions which as far as I am concerned are outdated !

Sat, 2012-08-04 15:23 — !!! (not verified)

Whilst I agree that QTS is not the be all and end all it is still vital that all those who teach have been through a standardisd accredited training programme. This ensures everyone entering the profession has had equal access to learning teaching theory and practice. QTS on its own does not make outstanding teachers, however the training does enable those who may already be naturally gifted teachers to understand and therefore improve their practice and others who may not be so naturally gifted to learn good teaching practice.

In response to you NEW STATESMANKAREN, well done for being an outstanding teacher, I assume that this is how you have been graded during lesson observations? If so, were you graded against the qualified teacher standards? Anyone who does not have QTS does not have to be assessed against these standards, therefore making it possible to cover up problems in the quality of teaching and learning; difficult to take action such as competency and easier not to invest in staff contiuing professional development.

This is not simply about protecting pay and conditions - it is about ensuring that all those who stand up in front of the class to teach are properly equiped to do the job and ensure that they remain so.