Tough Young Teachers

I am no fan of Teach First, but I think the point is that they are meant to be very, very closely mentored and monitored. I have watched all of the programmes and can't decide if the young teachers are not getting the support that they should have or whether the editing of the programme just does not show it. I am a bit uncomfortable that in some cases it all feels a bit like missionary work. The second year Geography teacher is very good, though.
I am a bit at some of the SLT support.

I'm reading Shirley Williams' autobiography 'Climbing the Bookshelves' at the moment and in it she comments that education provision has always had the problem of sudden changes in the demographic and how to respond quickly to it.
The period she was talking about was the post-war years when then baby boomers (yes us again!) increased the school population by something like 20% within a few years.
Ex-servicemen and women took crash courses in teaching to fill the gap and according to Shirley, 'became some of the best teachers the schools had ever had' - a rather fatuous comment I thought.
But it shows that the problem is not new, and that politicians think that a quick fix of barely-trained novices will be 'alright on the night'

I don't fully understand what makes these 'young people with good degrees' so special that they don't need proper training and support on the job. DD is currently halfway through a PGCE course and needed a good degree (in her case a first) to get onto it - as did all the others on her course. The cynic in me says this is just a cheap way of teaching children in very disadvantaged schools - thereby adding to those children's disadvantage. It's certainly no way to either produce or retain excellent teachers.

Yes, I can see that Mishap, it's no way to learn how to put a lesson over and control the 'let's disrupt this lesson' brigade.

There's nothing wrong with people with degrees learning 'on the job' but this is just 'on the cheap'. There needs to be more time spent in the trainee teachers observing good practice and much more support and feed back.

I didn't see this, but surely they should have had experienced mentors. In the high school where I was a governor, all NQTs were mentored usually by a line manager.

I can see that it might represent a fresh approach - and I guess that is needed - but the absence of proper on the job support was very worrying. The pupils were missing out because the young trainees did not know what they were doing; and some were teaching GCSE classes. And the trainees themselves were under such stress - several, male and female, finished up in tears.

I agree, jane! Just because someone has a good degree doesn't mean they will make a good teacher without the usual rigorous training. I feel sorry for them, and sorrier for the schools, and even sorrier for the students.

I haven't seen the programme, but I think it's quite an insult to the teaching profession to suggest that six weeks' training is sufficient for someone to be able to teach, even if they are graduates.
Not fair on those who have got a degree and a PGCE, either.

There will be plenty of young people wanting to go into teaching when they realise they don't have the career options they once had.

Lambs to slaughter or a fresh approach?

Thanks for the link Mishap it's a tad late to watch it tonight but I'll catch it tomorrow. I can tell it has had a powerful effect on you. We did used to say that teaching was like working in a mushroom farm (they keep you in the dark and shovel s**t manure on you)

www.teachfirst.org.uk/bbc-three-documentary-tough-young-teachers

This is the link aka. It would be interesting to know what you, as a teacher, think about this.

I didn't see this Mishap but from what you say nothing has changed. Throw them in at the deep end and see why 20% give up in their first year. There is going to be a chronic shortage of teachers in the next decade.
If I was starting over again, in the 21st century, in the UK, I'd not choose teaching again.