Official Report 272KB pdf
Good morning and welcome to the meeting. I remind everyone to switch off their mobile phones and pagers. The first item on the agenda is on the General Teaching Council for Scotland. We will hear an update on the work of the council in the light of its annual report. We have with us Matthew MacIver, who is the chief executive registrar of the GTCS. I understand that his colleague Norma Anne Watson, who is the convener of the council and was due to be with us, is stuck in snow somewhere in the vicinity of Broxburn, so we do not have the pleasure of her company this morning. I hand over to Matthew MacIver to tell us a bit about the GTCS.
Thank you for inviting me; it is good to be here to represent the General Teaching Council for Scotland. The GTCS is the regulatory body for the teaching profession in Scotland. It was set up by an act of the Westminster Parliament in 1965, so we are celebrating our 40th anniversary this year and—almost 40 years to the day when the GTCS was set up—we are holding a conference in June, of which the Minister for Education and Young People and the First Minister are aware, involving teaching councils from all over the world. That will be this year's big commemorative event. At 40 years old we are arguably the oldest teaching council or regulatory body for teachers in the world. A lot of councils throughout the world examined closely what we do before they set up their constitutions.
Thank you. Members will have questions of various sorts. We wanted to discuss the annual reports of the various bodies that lay their reports before Parliament and, where appropriate, have representatives give evidence. Recently, in the context of the Gaelic Language (Scotland) Bill, the committee has been interested in the specialist issue of Gaelic-medium teaching. We came across a number of issues, one of which is the number and supply of Gaelic-medium teachers. Linked to that is the issue of perceived difficulties in promotion prospects, which would inhibit teachers who might otherwise be interested in being Gaelic-medium teachers from entering that branch of the profession. What is your role in relation to the supply of Gaelic-medium teachers and do you have observations about inhibiting factors in that supply?
Given my background, I am interested in Gaelic-medium education.
I thought that you might be.
I was delighted to accept the minister's offer to chair an action group on how to address shortages in Gaelic-medium teachers. I am in a difficult position in that I do not want to pre-empt anything that my group might come up with. Nevertheless, it is right and proper that I express ideas that might be of interest to you.
Yes.
I hope that that secondary course will involve the local authorities that need Gaelic teachers, but we have to do far more than that. I am also interested in the teachers whom we have in the system at the moment. There are teachers who, like me, are qualified in one subject and are native Gaelic speakers but do not teach their subject through their own language. At the moment, I am devising a course with the University of Aberdeen to give such teachers professional recognition that allows them to teach through the medium of Gaelic without leaving their jobs. That is important, because we do not want teachers to have to leave their jobs to become qualified or recognised in Gaelic.
Thank you. There are probably many other issues to consider too.
I thank Matthew MacIver for his comments. The situation is slightly tricky because the action group has not yet been set up so you are still accountable to the minister. However, within that constraint, roughly what can we expect from the action group? There have been teacher shortages in other subjects before. A relatively common procedure is employed when there are teacher shortages in, say, physics or maths. Is that the kind of package that we can expect the action group to propose? If you cannot talk about such matters, that is fine.
I will deal with that last point first. There is no question of any subject having lower entry requirements or standards than any other subject. That would be invidious for us as a profession and for the particular subject involved. Part of the GTCS's raison d'être is to ensure that that does not happen.
We all recognise that it is tricky for people in an official capacity to give evidence and an idea of what they think, but we appreciate it.
Yes. That is a good point. The General Teaching Council piloted a project that was called Gaelic learners in the primary school—GLPS—in Argyll and Bute, which has now spread to other authorities. We are trying to translate that into a course that will be acceptable to us, which will involve teachers who are not native Gaelic speakers but who are learners and want to become proficient in the language. They will not teach through the medium of Gaelic, but they will teach the Gaelic language in primary schools and, it is hoped, at the bottom end of secondary schools. We are well on the way with our look at that.
Thank you for sharing your views. We realise that the working party has only just been established. There are great opportunities, and we picked up a lot of what you have just talked about when we visited Skye, where we heard about the opportunities for Gaelic speakers to take part-time teacher training courses, and so on. What challenges do you think will need to be met if we are to make the most of the opportunities?
There are challenges at certain levels. For example, how can we attract young people to become teachers of Gaelic in the secondary school sector? Around 50 per cent of the students who are entering the system at the moment are aged over 30, and they have made a deliberate career choice to become a teacher. However, there is still a flow of young people entering universities and then the faculties of education or the BEd courses. The challenge is to encourage fifth-year and sixth-year pupils to become Gaelic teachers. There is an enormous challenge to encourage career development in Gaelic.
Some of that clearly leads us into wider issues.
You have touched on the problem of the shortage of teachers in other subjects and the issue of transferable skills. I would like to hear a little bit more of your thinking on that. You will be aware that the age profile for science, maths and geography teachers is becoming older. I fear that if young people are less likely to study such subjects at university, they will not have the academic qualifications to teach them in schools. How can that be tackled? What background should someone have in a science subject before they can teach it in a school?
We are quite clear in our minds about the entry qualifications for teaching as a whole; in fact, the GTCS is sometimes criticised for being inflexible on the entry qualifications for teaching. However, that is the standard that makes us different from other countries and it is why other countries look up to us. I do not apologise for that at all, as there are certain things to which we have to adhere and, to be frank, we have no great difficulty in finding applicants who achieve that standard.
It was raised with me in the past that people once had to have three years of maths at university in order to become a maths teacher, but it would be possible to teach maths very well without having done three years.
Yes—that is exactly what I was referring to.
A constituent raised with me the situation of people who are qualified to teach in further education and who might wish to teach in schools. This touches on one of your earlier points about people who are already working. The individual concerned is an FE-qualified maths teacher who would like to teach in school. She has done the conversion course but, because she is working in an FE college, she cannot complete the practical part of the course by teaching in school. Is there a way round that and is there a way to facilitate the transition between FE and schools?
I would not think that that is a problem for us. We have now accepted that that is an issue, and we have to be sensible in considering it. If someone is qualified to teach maths to 17 and 18-year-olds in a college, they are qualified to teach maths to 17 and 18-year-olds in schools. That is not a problem for us any more. That world has gone, I hope, but we still have to be careful in managing the situation, as there are still important issues for us and the teaching profession in Scotland. FE is one of the areas where the world is changing dramatically and we need to take account of that.
On professional development, what facilities exist to help teachers who wish to change subjects, for example a teacher who is qualified in one subject and has a skill in a science or whatever but who wishes to move sideways into another subject?
I am pleased that you have raised that important issue. We have now acknowledged that the world is changing significantly and that we can no longer divide it into primary teachers and secondary teachers and a few further education teachers, and never shall they all meet. I asked a short-life working group to draw up a report for us on the matter, which will go to council on 9 March. We are moving towards a system of professional recognition in other subjects and that is quite important.
Yes, very much so.
On a linked subject, a lot of controversy has arisen over the moves by some local authorities to put principal teachers in charge of faculties rather than subject areas. Does the General Teaching Council have any views on the desirability of such developments and whether limitations to such changes are required?
No, we have no statutory authority to take a view on what the curricular areas should be. However, as I have tried to explain in the past few minutes, our thinking on qualifications is informed by an awareness that the world is changing. For example, we do not have qualifications for some popular subjects, such as philosophy, to which pupils respond well. We are aware that we need to change that. However, we do not take a view on structures and so on.
On the ability of FE lecturers to transfer into secondary schools, will you clarify the current arrangements for professional recognition? I had always understood that FE lecturers needed a teaching qualification before they could teach in mainstream schools.
That is a fair question. I did not make the issue clear in my response to the earlier question on further education.
Do such qualifications transfer automatically or must FE lecturers apply to the GTC for that to happen?
They have to apply to us.
I have a short question on further education. There is a view that it should be possible to teach 14-year-olds in colleges, but we might be in danger of restricting their opportunities if we were to require that they were taught only by GTC-registered teachers. An example that has been given to me locally is that of a plumber who earns a fortune outside college and who teaches in college only once a week. It might be a tremendous personal experience for the pupils to be taught by such an individual, but the plumber might not be GTC registered or have the possibility of becoming so.
We are currently working closely with people in the Enterprise, Transport and Lifelong Learning Department and colleagues in the Education Department on resolving that issue. We are well aware that we need to do something to meet the curricular needs of the thousands of 14 to 16-year-old children whose needs are currently not being met. However, the General Teaching Council is clear that, in statutory terms, under-16s should either be taught by GTC-registered teachers or be in a classroom that is managed by GTC-registered teachers. That is the council's view at the moment, but there is a new world coming and we are working very closely with colleagues on that.
I have two questions. The first arises from the GTC's submission to our pupil motivation inquiry. Matthew MacIver's letter highlights how teachers have sometimes felt peripheral to the policy decisions that were made about education. He suggests:
I feel quite strongly about the issue. I got a shock when I realised that I was one of the usual suspects who sat on official bodies. Thousands of teachers never get a chance even to think of being able to inform policy. In an open society, it is important that we involve people. We should consider the effects of Nolan on all people in public life. People can no longer take it for granted that they will sit on a public body or that someone will simply write a letter to invite them to do so; quite rightly, people now have to go through a public process. I have often wondered why, if we are creating an action group on whatever subject, we do not simply advertise in the national press and ask some teachers whether they are interested in becoming members of the group. Let us test that and see, because there are teachers in classrooms who sometimes shake their heads and think, "Oh gosh, it's them again—the same people on the same working groups."
My second question is perhaps not unrelated. I think that everyone shares the ambition of creating a culture of lifelong learning from the earliest years. That has led all the professions to think once again about continuous professional development—especially the professions that people regard as lifelong professions when they make their career choices. That is not the way things were 20 or 30 years ago.
Those are interesting questions, but they are not easy to answer. I was intrigued that, when we had the applications for chartered teachers, the people who came into the system were the very teachers about whom some people would say, "Ach, they're over 50. They've switched off and they don't care any more. Forget it." I would reply, "Not at all." Those teachers were people who had come from an academic background, who had taught, and who were still interested in the things that affect their professional lives.
I want to pursue the issue of those who teach in later life. Anecdotally, people sometimes say that teachers get burned out at a certain age and just coast until retirement. The other day, someone said to me that young teachers can relate to their job because they are young, like their pupils, that slightly older teachers have a relationship with pupils that is based on the fact that they are of parental age but that there is a different scenario with older teachers. Are there particular issues that we have to consider in that regard, such as the fact that packages for early retirement are not as readily available as they used to be? That might keep people sharp at the later stages of the profession. That might be an offensive and wrong position, but I am just stating that such a perception exists.
In my letter, I alluded to the situation that you are talking about. I am particularly interested in looking at the issue in a positive way and I have some interest in how other countries approach the matter. In some countries, money is taken from teachers' salaries and then, after a number of years, that money is used to pay for a sabbatical period for them. I am quite interested in that concept and in the concept of having refresher courses for teachers.
One of the perceptions that I have come across, again anecdotally, is that some older teachers have the freshness of vision that teaching requires but are not up to the physical effort of controlling classes and dealing with various disciplinary issues, which means that the whole job becomes very wearing. Can we use the expertise of experienced teachers at that level in some other way without exposing them to the same intensity of classroom experience?
Such teachers would be precisely those who would apply to be on national working groups in which they could use their expertise and knowledge. That is a flippant remark, in a way.
No, it is not—it is a serious remark.
I suppose that it is.
I am very interested in what you say. As you probably know, the committee is conducting an inquiry into pupil motivation. I have mentioned that to one or two teachers of my acquaintance and I suggest that we should perhaps consider teacher motivation at the same time.
Absolutely. That is what I was trying to say in response to Ms Alexander's question. You are right to say that teaching is a hierarchical profession, which is true of many professions; nevertheless we have to reach out to teachers, as you say. In many ways the teaching profession has been disempowered over a long period of time. My theme this morning is that we are at the beginning of something new in Scotland and one of our tasks is to empower this great profession again. That is what I am trying to say, and I suspect that it is the point of your question as well.
One of your functions is to promote the status of teachers and the teaching profession. What initiatives are you taking in that direction?
Before the McCrone committee, we took the view that we wanted to change the way in which we take people into the profession. We are a small organisation so we have to be sensible about our strategy and about how we operate at a national level. We took the view that if we could change the system of probation in Scotland we could start to work on that area—that was a conscious strategic decision. Our induction system in Scotland is now second to none. It is a good system and we should celebrate it.
In that respect, what Tim Brighouse did in Birmingham and latterly in London has provided one of the best examples of the past decade. His starting point was the principle that, irrespective of their background, pupils could achieve things and that people needed to find ways of inspiring them. One of the key transmitters was the use of confident teachers who believed that they were valued, and he concentrated many of his efforts on creating such an environment.
Interestingly, we do not have a role in that respect. Although the Government has agreed in principle that the GTC should have a role in competence, no such measure has been laid before Parliament. We play a more disciplinary role and deal with issues such as professional misconduct, convictions and so on. On the other hand, our colleagues in the General Teaching Council for England, which was set up only four years ago, have powers over competence but do not have any power in relation to professional misconduct. I am not sure where that leaves us.
I have spoken to colleagues who had been tremendous teachers but who, through emotional or personal circumstances in their lives, had become less effective. If there had been flexibility in the school or in the education authority, they might have had a chance to break from some of the classroom experiences that they felt negative about. For example, they would have been very good at developing course work. However, there was no such flexibility. I wonder whether such an approach might help.
I see now where you are coming from. I suppose that we are trying to take such an approach by moving towards a system of professional recognition in which a teacher can build up a portfolio of interests and qualifications throughout his or her career. That would allow us to move away from a situation in which a teacher has to teach one subject for 43 years.
I agree, but how do we enter that territory without reinforcing teachers' negative attitudes that, for example, we are simply having another kick at the teaching profession? After speaking to colleagues, I think that that is the real dilemma.
I hope that that is not the case. Indeed, I hope that many teachers will see a new opportunity and challenge in certain areas instead of seeing such an approach in a negative light. I suspect that they would welcome it with open arms.
Your wise counsel, when you were rector of the Royal High School, is still warmly remembered in Edinburgh; I believe that you followed in the wake of Dr Farquhar Macintosh, who is also well known to us.
That is correct.
Never heard of him.
I have three questions to ask you, the first of which concerns stress. I am told, anecdotally, that teachers are feeling under a lot of pressure because they do not have enough time to carry out all their duties. I understand that the so-called McCrone time is often allocated after school hours, so that teachers still do not get respite during the school day to plan, mark and assess their teaching practice. Might you feel able to address that area, with a view to alleviating teacher stress?
The McCrone agreement on the provision of 35 hours of CPD is not part of my remit; I have responsibility only for the probation of teachers in their first year of teaching. Nevertheless, I take your point—I know what you are saying—although I have no knowledge of the stress, the McCrone time and so on.
My second question concerns teacher retention. Does the GTC hold information on teacher retention and on those who leave the profession? We are now recruiting more teachers, but are any measures being taken to retain them?
I am always interested to read in the press that we have another teacher shortage crisis, as we have more teachers—we have more than 80,000—on the register than we have had since 1982. I do not know where they go, but they all pay their fees. We have a database—a register—that tells us the number of teachers that there are in each subject, their age and their gender, and we share that information with our colleagues in the Scottish Executive. They have access to that information and know the numbers. Although they have their own figures and census returns, we have the most comprehensive register of teachers in Scotland—in fact, we have a record of every teacher in Scotland. Some supply teachers will go only to certain schools and will not go to other authorities. There are many factors. All that I can tell you is that we have more than 80,000 teachers on the register.
Thank you. I have one more question. Could the GTC consider making the process of registration less onerous for those who have qualified outside Scotland?
Thank you for asking about that. It is a really important question. We are often criticised for the amount of time that we take to turn round an application from someone outside Scotland. Sometimes the criticism is fair, and I accept that, but sometimes it is not. I will tell you why. It is important that we ensure that every teacher who applies to teach in this country undergoes the processes that we set down. For example, we insist on references and a disclosure check for teachers, which can be difficult and time consuming. I will not apologise for the time that it sometimes takes to do a disclosure check on a teacher. All of us who are involved in child protection cringe at what has happened in the United Kingdom in the past two years. It has changed our lives forever. The Bichard inquiry report is essential reading for people such as me, because if my organisation makes one mistake, somebody's life might be lost.
The first tranche of chartered teachers has now come through successfully. It is great that the scheme has been taken up so enthusiastically, but are there any aspects that stop teachers being whole-heartedly in favour of going down that route?
That is a good question. We must talk up Scottish education and we should be proud of what we are doing—the chartered teacher programme in Scotland is causing huge international interest. However, as one would expect, there are teething problems. One issue that I highlighted in my letter to the clerk, Mr Verity, is the feeling abroad that the system is unfair, because teachers have to pay a lot of money to become chartered. It is not my job to comment on that, but my letter suggests a couple of issues on which the committee should at least reflect.
You make an important point about the need to celebrate the quality of Scottish education, with which I firmly agree. However, in your letter, you make a fundamental and fairly grim statement. You say:
That is a fair point, but I feel that what I said is true. You are right about children and parents, and I accept that. However, there is another serious and fundamental point. We have to re-empower the teaching profession in Scotland. From what I have been saying this morning, you will gather that I feel passionately about re-empowering the teacher in the classroom, about bringing them into the system and about giving them power to influence policy however we can do that.
We are encouraged by what you are saying this morning. I have a question about teacher motivation, or morale as it is often called. Does the GTCS collect any information about teacher morale? Morale surveys are always a bit dubious and the results can be used for various purposes, but do you have a measure of the impact on teachers' lives of the McCrone agreement, for example, or of the different demands placed on teachers either by their head or by the Executive's actions? Do you assess that in an individual way, in a qualitative way or through a national survey?
I am quite intrigued by that question. The answer is no, we do not and we have not. However we have appointed a research fellow to do research purely into issues in Scottish education. As you can imagine, so far we have concentrated on our statutory duties. We have done a questionnaire and we are considering the impact of the new induction system with groups throughout Scotland. As I said, we also have a questionnaire on chartered teachers.
You said that not every new teacher is necessarily a young teacher. You also alluded to bringing in people with other transferable skills. We are living in a time when the average person has seven jobs in their lifetime. They do not go into one job at the age of 15 or 21 and work in it for the rest of their lives. How old can a new teacher be? Is there a role for bringing in people who did their degrees decades ago and who have been in industry or other professions, but who would like to spend the last 10 years of their working lives giving something back to the community by being a teacher?
We are all young. There is no age barrier. It has been interesting for us to see how the trend has changed, and how people are making a conscious decision to come into teaching. Fifty per cent of probationers are over 30. Of course I want to attract the ubiquitous bank manager in Wick to become a maths teacher. Of course I want to attract the lawyer who has gone off to live in Benbecula who might be doing something else at the moment. There is no age barrier. In fact, all committee members would probably meet the entry requirements. You can get in touch with me, because we need lots of new teachers in Scotland.
It is nice that politicians are wanted by somebody.
Matthew MacIver made a couple of good suggestions about chartered teacher status and other issues, which at the very least we should address and send to the Executive.
I had that thought myself. I will write a letter with the assistance of the clerks and we will come back to the committee on that. Are there any other issues?
It would be helpful if we were kept up to date with progress on the Gaelic teacher working party.
Absolutely.
Thank you.
Thank you for inviting me. It has been very refreshing. I would like to engage with you all in looking ahead for the good of Scottish education.
We will take a quick two-minute break.
Meeting suspended.
On resuming—