By Douglas Weir,
Former Dean of Education at the University of Strathclyde
THE ongoing anxiety over teacher shortages seems to indicate that the Scottish Government’s recent approaches to teacher recruitment have fallen short. We need an imaginative and long-term solution which helps more undergraduates enter a career in secondary teaching. At the same time, we need to ask whether our current numbers and types of teacher are the ones we really need.
Your recent article about a lack of teaching time for Advanced Higher pupils is a case in point. Most of our Advanced Higher pupils already know that they will get a university place and therefore sixth year should prepare them for the “stand on your own feet” reality of university, rather than filling their timetable with teacher contact.
In the same vein, why do more than 60 per cent of an age group stay in school right through to sixth year? Almost half will not go immediately to university and might be better taking an earlier step towards independence through experience in college, training or work. If there are many staying in school to fifth and sixth year through a form of inertia, we need to act on this, and staff the senior school accordingly.
Even so, there will still be a need to recruit teachers, but perhaps different types of teacher. There are too few graduates in some “shortage” subjects and too many other labour market opportunities for them. We are therefore unlikely to fill the gaps in the workforce by more intensive teacher education courses or financial inducements. We need to reconsider the qualifications and expertise required of a secondary teacher. For example, how much subject knowledge is needed for a secondary teacher to be effective? The minimum subject content requirements laid down by the GTC for Scotland are relatively slight and a teacher could have less than one-quarter of their degree content in the secondary subject that they are teaching, with the remainder in other subjects which they might, but do not, teach. Does this make them less effective than the graduate with more degree content in the single subject that they teach?
If we use that concept of the “generalist” degree to help determine the size and type of the teacher workforce, we can envisage more of the teacher workforce being trained to teach two or three subjects. If they were teaching all of their subjects regularly, even if only in S1, 2, and 3, they would be perfectly competent. If a broad general education in these years is a national priority, then we need to develop a teacher workforce specialising in that phase. Therefore many graduates with broadly-based degrees are a potential source of “new” teachers, helping to ensure that teachers in “shortage” subjects can be better deployed.
In addition, most current teachers have taken a degree and then a teacher education course. Only a few had the opportunity to enter a course leading to a career in teaching earlier in that process. Yet there is no evidence that the few who have undertaken that more integrated programme are less capable teachers, and some indicative evidence that they are in fact better teachers. The integrated programme can offer more flexibility and a better match between its content and the school curriculum. It might even contribute to lower teacher wastage because those who enter teaching through such routes have had a longer preparation and more time to review their career choice.
If we spent more energy recruiting large numbers of second and third year undergraduates (and their HND equivalents in colleges) into a secondary teaching career track, what impact would that have on teacher shortages?
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules here