Teacher in 6 months, Head teacher in 4 years

mewbie_2

MyLastFiver wrote: »

You can find past papers on the exam board websites. AQA is the biggest. Their A Level maths papers are here: http://www.aqa.org.uk/qual/gceasa/mathematics_assess.php

My God that is so easy :eek:

1. Add any three different numbers together to make the sum 21.
2. If a man earns 3 pounds an hour how much will he earn in two hours.
3. How long in metres is 200 centimetres.

And so on. Rubbish.

bristol_pilot

spuds wrote: »

• London fringe: £21,619 to £31,138
• Outer London: £24,000 to £33,544
• Inner London: £25,000 to £34,768
• Rest of England and Wales: £20,627 to £30,148

So someone working at a professional level in industry in science, engineering, maths etc is looking at a 50%+ salary cut if they become a teacher, more if they are middle management or higher. Obviously LOTS more if they are in banking/finance. Doubling public sector salaries can't be seen as an option so, for shortage subjects, I think the government is right to shorten the training period or they will never get good people to switch to teaching.

sabretoothtigger

That doesnt sound like a level maths. The biggest difference in difficulty there would be that the course is more modular then it was twenty years ago.

If the mark then was 100% on a final exam of 2 years learning, now it might be a test on 2 months learning repeated 10 times for an average mark

silvercar

A level maths has 6 units: 3 units in the first year which combine to give a grade for the AS level, and 3 units in the second year, so all 6 go together to make the final grade. You can retake earlier units later if you wish.

Most pupils take core 1, core 2 and one of mechanics 1, statistics 1 or (less popular) decision making 1 in the first year.

In the second year they would take core 3, core 4 and 1 of mechanics 2, statistics 2, mechanics 1, statistics 1.

ninky_2

mewbie wrote: »

My God that is so easy :eek:

1. Add any three different numbers together to make the sum 21.
2. If a man earns 3 pounds an hour how much will he earn in two hours.
3. How long in metres is 200 centimetres.

And so on. Rubbish.

i didn't find any questions like that, the stuff i saw was unintelligible to me. guess that's why i didn't do maths at a level. i say give credit to those who do. this stuff looks pretty tough to me!

LydiaJ

ninky wrote: »

This story has been spun out of all proportion and editorially twisted to make catchy headlines. The scheme is for ALL professionals, not specifically bankers. As it is, anyone with a degree can already do a PGCE to train to be a teacher, and as this is done over 1 academic year, given these run OCT - JUN plus time off for Christmas, Easter, Half Terms etc etc, fast-tracking this into 6 months is not really different.

This betrays a fundamental misunderstanding of how schools work. The autumn, spring and summer terms are all different! You haven't experienced a school year unless you've done the beginning, the middle and the end. Also, you can't just do your teaching practice in a more concentrated way by working through the summer holidays - there won't be any kids there to teach. It would be much more sensible to let these people with mortgages and families go straight into schools to teach reduced timetables with lots of support and mentoring etc. Then they could earn a living while being trained on the job. We already have this in place. It's called the GTP.

I'm not going to say all over again what I said about a "project" being to take a group of kids through the whole of a 2 year course - I suggest you read what I said above.

ninky wrote: »

I don't think 4 years is too short to make head teacher. You would not automatically be awarded a head teacher position after four years, it would still have to be achieved on merit. Four years is A LOT of training, especially if you are older and have already had a professional career.

LOL Nobody is suggesting they should have four years of TRAINING - that would be ridiculous. But IMO they need a lot more than four years of EXPERIENCE of schools and kids. Other professional careers don't necessarily prepare you for the particular challenges of the school environment. Children (whether primary or secondary) are just not like adult customers of ordinary businesses. And educating them isn't like relating to customers of ordinary businesses either. They are in school all day every day for 39 weeks of the year for 11 or 13 of the most formative years of their lives. That's a much bigger deal than providing financial services, even if our recent governments want to make us believe that life is always only about money.

Please would someone who's worked in banking tell me (because I don't know and genuinely want to know) how many years of banking experience most bankers have before they rise to the position of being in charge of 1000+ people? (Or how many years of experience of whatever business you know about.)

kabayiri wrote: »

Why is it people are so defensive ?

This may not be a great idea without a lot of refinement, but at least it's an idea.

We need more staff resources in schools. Employing someone from a professional background (not just city people) to come in on a part time basis and provide supplementary specialist tuition...well, what's wrong with that?

I have been into 3 schools recently, and can honestly say the IT knowledge they had was a joke. Their IT spend was badly planned and implemented, and they had sod-all understanding of security. Accepting some form of additional expertise whilst its available on the cheap might help address these problems.

Yes yes yes - great idea. But the thread is about fast tracking people with no previous experience of education to be head teachers in four years, which is very different from inviting them in on a part time basis to help out with IT or whatever.

alm721

ninky wrote: »

i didn't find any questions like that, the stuff i saw was unintelligible to me. guess that's why i didn't do maths at a level. i say give credit to those who do. this stuff looks pretty tough to me!

Yes I'd be interested to know where those questions came from. Not on any A level maths paper I've ever seen, guess mewbie must be having a laugh!

mewbie_2

alm721 wrote: »

Not on any A level maths paper I've ever seen, guess mewbie must be having a laugh!

Well no one else was, so bit of a wasted post. Oh well.

exprog

LydiaJ: Quite right.

The problem isn't that people from banking (or anywhere else) might enter teaching; it's the notion of them being given special favourable treatment on account of their previous successes. To read some of the nonsense on this thread you wouldn't know that these myopic imbeciles had just ruined their own jobs, bankrupted their companies, and destroyed the global economy.

After thirty years of Blatcherite governments giving schools minute instructions on what must and must not be taught (and how it must be done), all to further the ever-greater successes ( :rotfl: ) of the banker-run economy, now schools are to have the 'benefit' of having these wondrous beings imposed on them. :eek:

ninky_2

exprog wrote: »

LydiaJ: Quite right.

The problem isn't that people from banking (or anywhere else) might enter teaching; it's the notion of them being given special favourable treatment

who said they should get special favorable treatment?