[ Date Index ] [ Thread Index ] [ <= Previous by date / thread ] [ Next by date / thread => ]
On Wed, 11 Jan 2012 10:02:27 +0000 paul sutton wrote: > On 11/01/12 09:48, Grant Phillips-Sewell wrote: > > On Wed, 11 Jan 2012 09:09:55 +0000 (GMT) > > Gordon Henderson wrote: > > > >> Perhaps there is hope after all: > >> > >> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-16493929 > >> > >> Gordon > > It's a good start, but I can't see it coming to fruition easily or > > soon. In my experience, I(C)T in schools is almost always 'taught' > > by non-specialists - there are exceptions to the rule, but that's > > always the case with broad generalisations - and as such there is > > unlikely to be a body of I(C)T teachers in schools that are willing > > or capable of teaching the 'new' curriculum. > > > > Getting IT specialists in to teach the subject would be the best > > option, but that is not going to be an easy task. I, for one, would > > be quite happy to go and teach IT in secondary schools, but it > > would mean an absolutely massive drop in salary... and that's from > > someone who is qualified to teach (I have a PGCE, but in "post > > compulsory education and training")! To start out in a secondary > > school, I believe we're talking about a salary of something in the > > region of Â17k or Â18k... not bad to start with, but for many in IT > > that would represent a huge drop. > > > > So where are we going to get these new IT teachers from? Those at > > Uni studying IT courses will most likely not know of this proposed > > change, and their experience of IT at school will probably put them > > off going in to teach it anyway and those in the IT industry are > > likely to be put off entering the teaching market by the > > potentially significant drop in salary. > > > > Grant. > > > Surely to teach programming it would really help to have people > teaching who have real world programming experience, so rather than > graduates from Uni we have graduate --> industry --> teaching that > way you are bringing knolwedge and experience to the post. > > It is like me with rugby, I could easily undertake a level 1 coaching > course, having never played all i would do is teach what was on the > course where as someone who has played can bring a different level of > experience to that coaching. I am just sticking with tag. > > I guess its like giving a lesson on Life in china, having never lived > there, or been to the country, where as if you bring in someone from > that country to give a talk in a lesson you bring a new dynamic edge > to the lesson, with resources etc > > Lets see what happens, but yeah, why go into teaching when you can > earn far more in industry ( what did kevin post as a salary Â25 an > hour). > > Paul Although an hourly rate doesn't usually convert well into a salary, Â25/hr in Education would mean this: Let's take an almost "worst case scenario" for a full-time teacher (based on my experience): 25 hours per week "contact time". 12.5 hours per week "other duties". 10 weeks "holidays" (let's say unpaid as this is a worst-case scenario (6 weeks for summer, 2 for Winter, 2 for Spring)). 20% taken off for taxes and other stuff. Â25 * 37.5 * 42 * 0.8 = Â31,500 take home salary. A bit different to the average starting salary of Â17k (take home of ~Â13.6k). Grant. -- The Mailing List for the Devon & Cornwall LUG http://mailman.dclug.org.uk/listinfo/list FAQ: http://www.dcglug.org.uk/listfaq