---

@cee-dee wrote:

The numbers of teachers can hardly be an issue but the quality might? If the numbers of teachers is anything to "go by", they're not doing a very good job at the moment because the standard of literacy isn't good and spelling is atrocious.

 

Old hands will know I've said this before but when "they" tried to mass-produce teachers (= give them a short-cut in to the job) it introduced a militant bunch of people who've now mass-produced more of similar ilk.

 

Those "new" people looked at older teachers who had, during their life as teachers accumulated a nice house, nice family life and nice cars. Those "new" people took no account that the older teachers had carefully earned their position, the newcomers wanted the same and they wanted it NOW. After all, they were teachers just the same as the older ones?

 

When you looked at the "type" of people going to the new-fangled "teacher training colleges" you saw a dirty, scruffy, lazy, indisciplined, casual bunch of people who had no regard for punctuality, they were going to teach the kids to be just like them with the same attitude to the "old school" and they did!

---

I don't know where you get your impression of what schools and the teachers in those schools are like but it is completely contrary to my own experience.  As an ex-school governor, ex-member of three PTAs and a daughter who is herself now a teacher, I have to say I really don't recognise the picture you have painted.

From my perspective the problem has not been, and is not now, the quality of teachers nor the training they have to complete to become teachers but rather the constant interference from central government.  Why do you think that so many of the "old teachers" you refer to retired early? - it wasn't conflict with new colleagues but disillusionment with the curriculum and "new methods" they were forced to use.

The curriculum is constantly changing, targets are set in terms of results nationwide without taking into account local special needs and to top it all bureaucrats are setting the methods that teachers have to use in their classes. 

The people who are actually the professionals, the head teacher and their staff, have very little say in how they teach the children in their care - if you want standardised teaching that doesn't take into account the needs of the individual students then the way to achieve this is to replace teachers with technology!

Government's job in the education field is. in my opinion, to guide rather than instruct, to set standards not targets and to assist schools in practical terms in regards to finance, resources and checks.  In general OFSTED inspections fit within these aims, where they fall down though is placing higher priority on teaching methods, (as set down by government), rather than the performance of the pupils being taught - this is not the fault of OFSTED but rather that of politicians.

If there is one area that would dramatically improve student performance then this has to be greater parent and community involvment.  It is no coincidence that the most successful schools also have very good relationships with the parents of pupils.