This is what 'Education' is all about

Yes, I agree jura, that was just what I was trying to say, a C grade is not great.

Of course I only get my information from the BBC, Radio 4 and BBC ! so I am probably completely misinformed compared to 'grown up newspapers and C4'

Here:

French
German or Italian
English or other 3rd language
History
Geography
Maths
Physics
Chemistry
Biology
Art/design/music
PE

In France also Philosophy.

In all European countries, it is more or less the same as above. It has advantages and disadvantages (discussion of such for another thread, perhaps). The point being that in the UK, a Head of School may well have never studied, in this case English language, beyond the age of 15/16, and my only have got a 'C' grade for it at GCSE- which is quite low.

Please could you list "all the main subjects" for us, jura, for your own country at any rate, but others too if you know.

There is a HUGE gap between GCSE- especially at 'C' grade- and A'Level. Many of our students who got 'A' grade really struggled with the huge gap if they went on to study that subject for AS then A'Level- as it was totally different.

To be a teacher, or any professional- and only have 'C' grade at GCSE is really very low compared to requirements in other Countries (non Anglo-Saxon)- where students have to continue all main subjects to aged 18/19.

I tried to explain to GD's teacher that GD age 6 found it confusing when her homework, printed off, US English, maybe wasn't a good way of learning to spell, obviously UK English. Her response was, it's only for fun! She didn't want to discuss this any further so I left it with my reply that actually, it's not funny when you can't spell properly.

Saw a maths o level equivalent mock paper yesterday. He scored 23/80 and got a B!

The requirement to have an O level pass in Maths came into force in 1969. I know because a friend with a first in philosophy had four attempts before she got it! Couldn't start her PCGE until she did.

When I was a school governor in England in the eighties it was not a requirement that all teachers had an 'O' level pass in Maths. I found that quite shocking since primary school teachers have to be able to teach mathematical concepts from Year 1.

They had to have one in English. I guess it changed in the late eighties/early nineties. It may have been true that all new teachers had to, but ones who had qualified a goodish time ago did not have to. However, I think good schools encouraged primary school teachers without any formal Maths qualificationto go on updating courses.

You also need a GCSE in a science subject if you are going to teach primary pupils.

Nonnie, 'C' in English and maths at 16 is not a very high level, really- if those subjects are never touched upon again at a later stage. A friend of mine taught sociology and tore her hair out because the great majority of her students could not fathom at all how to work out statistics, for instance.

Apologies Anno, you are right. Talking about England, where students 16-18/19 only take 4 subjects at AS and then 4 for A'Level. Which means many teachers and Head teachers (and everyone else btw)- is likely to not have studied maths or English beyond GCSE's at 15/16- and a 'C' grade is quite low really, and based more on communication than accurate use of Grammar, syntax, spelling, etc. As said, a narrow system has its advantages- but also means that many people going to to Uni do NOT have a good basic rounded knowledge of many subjects (for me even worse that history is only studied by a tiny minority of students now- which in this war torn world, could provide many insights).

The English system is absolutely unique in the world for being so narrow- and you are right, the Scottish system is much more balanced.

granjura, you speak of the 'A-level system in the UK'. As far as I know, the Scottish exam system is still more broadly based than the English. England is not the UK.

But of course the context is that of QTS - none of that applies in schools where QTS is not required ie academies and the independent sector

Nonnie - how can I possibly answer that question? And not only do prospective teachers have to have those qualifications , they have to take tests in literacy and numeracy as part of the application process. I find looking things up on sites like UCAS and DfE about such things so much more helpful than just relying on the ' news' - although I alsofind reading a proper grown up newspaper and C4 news also very informative

Then why was it in the news during the last year?

Nonnie - this is already the case

Didn't I hear recently that in future all teachers are expected to have at least a C in English and Maths? Why hasn't that always been the case?

The A'Level system in the UK is unique- it has great advantages too- but it certainly creates professionals, including teachers, with a very narrow educational experience- escpeciall since most schools have dropped the extra subject that used to be called 'General Studies' So a science teacher is very likely to have studied only science subjects from the age of 16- and only studied English to GCSE's- perhaps with a basic C grade. A Modern Langs teacher will have only studied languages, and perhaps another humanities subject at As- etc, etc. I know previous comments on the extreme narrow nature of A'Levels have not been well received previously. As said, on the Continent and most non Anglo-Saxon countries- all students continue to study all subjects to 18/19, although choose a course where they will specialise in either Science, or Arts/humanities, etc.

As said before, the intentions were excellent- but a Head teacher should really know the difference between English English and American English.

OK, I'll put my pants on and pick up my purse and put them in the trunk- must go and get the windshield repaired- lets hope I don't fall on my fanny slipping in the rain. (won't mention the fags).

Neither do I. not important.

Re your last para, if I have understood it correctly (typos)....

... actually, I'm not sure I do understand

I agree about teachers being au fait about what they are going to teach. If you are going to be a science teacher good communication skills are important but perfect grammar maybe not quite so important, though desirable if possible. And so on and so forth.

Not my criticism, Thatbags I have said nothing against the author of that letter except that I myself would have not have written it quite like that. Some people, granted, were more critical.

It is true, however, that some teachers do not have a very good grasp of English grammar and spelling - probably because when they were at school the emphasis was on the content rather than on the "rules". The pendulum had swung a bit far. I was arguing that they really should be au fait with what they are employed to teach. Diversions into the time when teachers could not be married were irrelevant. I was sidelined into inaccuracy, which was fully exploited by our resident unloving man.

As Penstemmon says, a struggle with a subject makes you more careful to put it over so that is understood, that does not mean that no-one can comment on a mistake made by a teacher. In their own field, yes, they should take care not to set a bad example, which is likely to be the one thing more copied than all the good ones.

I may have exaggerated a bit about your different points of view to teachers, but where you you were right, I do sure that they accepted your opinion.

I don't remember putting teachers right, elegran. I've certainly argued a different point of view with a few. I've nothing against criticising teachers' actions per se but the criticism over that letter has struck me as rather excessive in the circumstances. All a bit OTT.

I think being an imperfect person made me a better teacher. Certainly my struggle with maths helped me to work hard at making sure children I taught fully understood what they were doing.

I agree re teachers and quality of English (spoken and written). I have had difficult decisions to make when appointing some applicants because their pronunciation of phonics was not clear.

Is the sun -well-- over the yardarm where you live then LovingMan ? I have nver read duch a load of tosh non sequiturs. My subtlety suppleness was always highly commended particularly by Englischmaenner. (Phone doesn't do Umlauts)