h1

Nick Hassey’s Views on The College Of Teaching

February 5, 2015

Every so often there’s a comment posted on my blog that’s so brilliant, and so long, that it deserves to be a blogpost in its own right. This one from my last post is by Nick Hassey, who I assume is the researcher with that name who works for Teach First, rather than some completely different person with the same name. Apologies if I have got that wrong. Also, apologies if you have read this already. And thanks, Nick.

A college of teaching should be where school teachers set out what support and training they need, what that support should look like to be of most use to them, and for the college to then identify who can provide this support and training. It must be a voice from the front line because this is what is currently so lacking and so urgently needed. It’s absolutely true that universities and others have valuable insight into education and teaching, but the value of other royal colleges is that its where front line staff within a clearly defined field (say GPs) can say what they need undiluted and unfiltered through other organisations and then try and do something to address this need. Excluding people who aren’t teachers from the college isn’t to diminish their work or expertise in the slightest – it’s just to say they are not school teachers and their support and training needs will therefore be different to a professional teaching in a school.

Indeed this is how each of the medical colleges basically started. As medicine developed and became increasingly specialised new colleges were established out of existing ones to provide support and training to particular professionals who had distinct needs. They excluded other professionals not because they thought they were better but because they recognized that they needed specific types of support that the other professionals wouldn’t benefit from. School teachers require different training and support to those in universities and from consultants and from researchers. It’s not to say one is better than the others, just that this college of teaching isn’t the right body for them to receive training and support from. If university staff in education departments don’t feel properly supported in their training needs they should set up their own college.

Others with an interest in education would therefore still be involved, a college isn’t the Freemasons, it’s not all secret knocks and totally closed doors to anyone who isn’t in. Teachers would still debate these ideas with others – the college could even invite people like me to events or to debate with others, or to advise, and non members would probably deliver much of the training selected by the college. But they wouldn’t be in the college as members, because that must be reserved as a place for teachers, and teachers only, to say what their experience is telling them they need. The whole point is to establish teaching as a profession, where professionals set out what they need, not what someone else says they need, so when the decisions come it must come from a body that only consists of people from the profession.

In this sense not only does it have to consist only of teachers but it isn’t clear what anyone who wasn’t a school teacher would even want to be involved – if you’re not school teacher what would you benefit from getting training and support in how to be a teacher? Dealing with people who leave the classroom for a while are easy to deal with as they can just re-join when they return to the classroom.

It’s feasible you could set up a rather complicated constitution that allowed non school teachers to join but not vote but that’s complicated and it’s still not clear what benefit they’d get from being in the college so why would you bother asking them in in the first place? If it’s to keep their voice involved I’ve already explained how they can kept “involved” without the danger of providing membership. The only reason I can think of for why someone who wasn’t a teacher would want to be involved at that point would either because you want to be part of a cool club, in which case – become a teacher – or because you’d be worried somehow teachers on their own might pick the “wrong” type of support or training. However the whole point of a college of teaching is that it’s a body where teachers set out as a profession what they think they need – if you don’t think they’ll make the right choice as professionals then the whole idea of a college is redundant.

4 comments

  1. This is an entirely astute contribution. That this analysis isn’t utterly obvious exposes the deep fractures in the professionalism debate. Well done


  2. Reblogged this on The Echo Chamber.


  3. Agree completely with Nick’s point that it’s still not clear why any non-teacher would advocate to be a member. That’s the line that needs to be repeated as often as possible because any attempt to answer it tends to show precisely why non-teachers becoming members undermines the whole thing.

    There is a thorny question here, though. If the only way to get adequate funds to have a College of Teaching is to have non-chartered members who pay a fee: is it still worth going ahead? Is it so problematic to have other members that it would be better not to go ahead at all? The answer to this dilemma is critical – because as much as my preference is for a teacher only college over a more open alternative, if I’m faced with non-teachers or quits, I’d be inclined to go for non-teacher openness than an all-out “it’s not happening”.

    That said, I’m still with Nick on thinking it’s a bit weird that non-teachers would be pushing to join anyway.


    • Given my years of experience as a teacher in English state secondary education, I should not be in any way surprised at the almost complete lack of focus in this post and in the 2 which precede it.

      But I am.

      Nowhere is there any mention whatsoever of the existing 3 professional teacher bodies existing within the UK; in Scotland, Wales and the Six Countiers respectively. (The Scottish one being, I believe the first statutory body of its nature anywhere in the world and having been set up almost 50 years ago now, around 1967.)

      The fact that these 3 bodies, 2 of which share a land-border with England, have taken root whereas the equivalent English body sunk ignominiously without trace surely merits at least a moments reflection here? If notslightly more?

      I enclose a listing of the compostion of these 3 bodies, taken from their respective websites. (There is no mention anywhere as far as I can see of non-teacher members of the professional body. Where else but in the realms of English teaching, I ask, would the idea of a professional body “including :non-members of the profession” meet with anything but contemptuous derision):

      Structure of the General Teaching Council Scotland
      The Council is made up of 37 individuals who fall into one of three categories:
      • 19 elected registered teachers
      Currently the elected registered teacher membership of the Council consists of:
      o 9 teachers (including 2 headteachers) in primary schools or nursery schools in Scotland
      o 8 teachers (including 2 headteachers) in secondary schools in Scotland
      o 1 lecturer/teacher in the further education sector in Scotland
      o 1 lecturer/teacher in universities in Scotland providing courses of Initial Teacher Education
      • 11 members nominated by educational stakeholders as follows:
      o 3 by the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities (following consultation with the Association of Directors of Education in Scotland)
      o 3 by Universities Scotland (following consultation with universities providing recognised teaching qualifications for individuals seeking registration as either teachers or further education lecturers)
      o 1 by the governing bodies of the Further Education Colleges
      o 1 by the Scottish Council of Independent Schools
      o 1 by the Church of Scotland
      o 1 by the Roman Catholic Church
      o 1 by Parent Councils and Combined Parent Councils

      • 7 lay members appointed, following an open and fair selection process, by the independent Appointments Committee.

      ****
      Currently 4 of the 11 GTC(S) members in the second category above are in fact “Registered Teachers.” As a consequence the de jure bare majority of 19/37 registered teachers on the Council is de facto a 23/37 majority. (My added comment here: BFEM)
      ++++

      The General Teaching Council WALES currently consists of 21 members; eleven are teachers elected by their peers. seven members are appointed following nominations made by the teacher unions and other educational organisations. three members are direct appointments of the National Assembly for Wales.
      +++++
      The General Teaching Council of the Six Counties membership comprises:
      • 14 elected teachers;
      • 5 teachers appointed by the Six Counties Teachers’ Council;
      • 10 appointments by various representative bodies with a stakehold in education; and
      • 4 appointments by the Department of Education of whom one will be representative of industry and commerce and 3 will reflect the wider public interest.

      .



Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: