Does Your Child Go To A Proper School Or An Academy?

thegirlintheattic

puddy wrote: »

thirdly, im have mixed views about the teaching qualification, or even a degree. am i right that johnny ball did not have a maths degree when he was making his tv programmes? my dad is the same, left school at 15 with no qualifications but has an excellent mechanical mind, was an engineer for his career and can make anything he puts his mind to, surely we need people who can teach and enthuse and engage pupils, thats the first criteria, if they have a degree or teaching qualification then that is an added bonus

having said all that, im still not really sure how academies work or what their main difference is from other schools

Academies are given money direct from central government and are allowed to spend it how they wish. Whereas maintained schools get the money from the local authority (through central government) and are told by the local authority how to spend much of it. Academies do not have to stick to the national curriculum, although most do or at least don't stray too far. Maintained schools must follow the national curriculum. Academies can employ teachers without following the national pay and conditions - meaning they can pay less (or more), change the number of working days/hours etc. Maintained schools cannot. Academies can change term dates and the school day; maintained schools are limited in this.

There is no real difference in the experience for staff or students. Most of the changes are administrative in my experiences. For example, I work at an academy we are on standard terms and conditions, have same term dates and school day as non-academies and teach 'close to' the national curriculum.

As for your first point. I don't think anyone would disagree that if you have someone who was an expert in their field (without a degree or teaching qualification, they could be an asset to a school). The problem is there are no safeguards in place to ensure schools are selecting these individuals rather than employing on-the-dole Mr Bloggs from down the road, with few qualifications.

I think it is unlikely that schools are going to be able to recruit lots of 'experts'. Most people with those credentials will not give it all up for a mere teaching job with the associated low pay. I also doubt most of them would want to, or be able to cope, with the lower ability classes, particularly where behavior is a problem. Most I can see schools doing is bringing in 'experts' to teach small units of work for G&T kids.

The danger is, it is very likely some schools will use this rule change to employ unqualified teachers who are not 'experts'; saving a lot of money, but risking classes being essentially babysat. I also think that cover supervisors will now be regularly used long-term to cover classes (currently a qualified teacher is needed after 3 days, and it's recommended it be a subject specialist). CS are already used more than they are allowed to be in some schools.

Whilst the government's vision maybe good, and I agree SOME unqualified people may make great teachers; how this is likely to be implemented will harm the education of future generations.

puddy

but i seem to remember back in the 90s or early 2000s, that some schools had a 'non maintained' status (or something similar anyway), what is the difference between them and academies?

mynameistallulah

Acc72 wrote: »

Yikes, and you are worried about unqualified teachers (lol)

This was my instant reaction also - I find it difficult to comprehend how an apparently qualified teacher is incapable of using capital letters and apostrophes correctly.

Sorry OP, it seems entirely hypocritical to judge non qualified teachers when your own standards fall short of those that should be demonstrated by any teacher.

puddy

mynameistallulah wrote: »

This was my instant reaction also - I find it difficult to comprehend how an apparently qualified teacher is incapable of using capital letters and apostrophes correctly.

Sorry OP, it seems entirely hypocritical to judge non qualified teachers when your own standards fall short of those that should be demonstrated by any teacher.

on a forum? i write court reports for a career, i never use proper grammar, spelling, punctuation and capitals on here when i type, you can guess how successful i would be at my job if i wrote like that for court

DecentLivingWage

peachyprice wrote: »

You just don't get it do you. Just because they can, it doesn't mean they will.

You still haven't answered. Why would a school deliberately employ shoddy teachers that produce poor grades?

Here's my answer :

Poor families in council housing or b & B s can't move! Rich families can. Doesn't matter to some experts what the local school grades are - the poor are a captive audience and will go where they're told. Schools are being squeezed and will soon scramble to save a few quid wherever they can.... and it's the poor kids in those bargain bucket schools that will suffer. I'm just helping parents to make sure their local school doesn't turn into one. Ask Questions! Go to the school AGM, ask your local mp, go to parents eve and to the Open Eves and ask what your local school is planning.

No hard feelings at all - I can see you're very trusting - sadly i have seen a few things and am not!

tea_lover

Please stop saying bargain bucket schools! For a start, it doesn't even mean anything, and you've also really over-used it now.

mynameistallulah

puddy wrote: »

on a forum? i write court reports for a career, i never use proper grammar, spelling, punctuation and capitals on here when i type, you can guess how successful i would be at my job if i wrote like that for court

Accurate spelling and punctuation is intuitive, it is something we do without thinking - whilst you may not check yours when posting on here, you still maintain a very high level of accuracy. The OP's posts are littered with mistakes, and the mistakes are of the type that demonstrate a lack of understanding of the most basic grammar, and not just a simple oversight when typing quickly.

I don't want to take this thread off at a tangent, but I do think that someone who is criticising the "non qualified" teachers should really practice what they preach!

dizziblonde

thegirlintheattic wrote: »

The danger is, it is very likely some schools will use this rule change to employ unqualified teachers who are not 'experts'; saving a lot of money, but risking classes being essentially babysat. I also think that cover supervisors will now be regularly used long-term to cover classes (currently a qualified teacher is needed after 3 days, and it's recommended it be a subject specialist). CS are already used more than they are allowed to be in some schools.

This is already happening - it SHOULDN'T be - but it is, there are numerous testimonies across the internet of schools using CS to plan and teach subjects on a long term basis - completely flouting the 3 day rule. There are also numerous adverts for CS to TEACH children - when they should only be supervising work planned by a teacher - the rules are being utterly taken the piddle of already. And that's not just in academies - that's in LA controlled schools across the land. Supply teachers have been warning where this was all going to be heading for a good few years now - we weren't listened to.

Anyone who looks at Gove's latest announcement and thinks it's going to lead to James Dyson suddenly teaching D+T in their child's school is kidding themselves - while it may allow the odd expert into the classroom (and being brilliant in your field does not necessarily equate to being able to convey that knowledge to children - my husband is an absolutely incredible mathemetician - but can he explain how to do things - no way!), in reality it's going to be much more education on the cheap.

Incidentally private does not automatically equal awesome. I've worked in both the state and private sector and the private school I worked in was the most shambollic, badly supervised mess going! To use my mum's pet saying - it was all fur coat and no knickers (totally front-show).

peachyprice

DecentLivingWage wrote: »

Here's my answer :

Poor families in council housing or b & B s can't move! Rich families can. Doesn't matter to some experts what the local school grades are - the poor are a captive audience and will go where they're told. Schools are being squeezed and will soon scramble to save a few quid wherever they can.... and it's the poor kids in those bargain bucket schools that will suffer. I'm just helping parents to make sure their local school doesn't turn into one. Ask Questions! Go to the school AGM, ask your local mp, go to parents eve and to the Open Eves and ask what your local school is planning.

No hard feelings at all - I can see you're very trusting - sadly i have seen a few things and am not!

And what about those schools that rely on rich families? Many schools don't have a bountiful supply of the poor and desparate to sit on their seats. Your theory is only a problem in schools that are already at the bottom end of the scale that were going to fail their pupils regardless, not in affluent areas where teaching does matter.

It's not a matter of being trusting, I have my own first hand experience. My sons have just left a school that became an academy a little over a year ago. My daughter starts the same school in September. Nothing has changed, the staff are the same, the head is the same, the over-subscription is the same, the demographic is the same, the name is the same. Nothing has changed, it's still the most sought after school in the area.

DecentLivingWage

Yes, i don't send my son to school to be babysat! I send him to school to be educated to highest possible level of his ability and by the highest possible standard of staff! I am monitoring and watching v closely and suggest all parents do the same.

And no, therell be no improvement in my typing! I'm also a freelance writer/journo and can produce excellence when i have to!