1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Hi Guest, welcome to the TES Community!

    Connect with like-minded education professionals and have your say on the issues that matter to you.

    Don't forget to look at the how to guide.

    Dismiss Notice

It's Official! QTLS & Mandatory IfL Registration Revoked!!!

Discussion in 'Further Education' started by Ska83gbr, Sep 6, 2012.

  1. As a result of the Lingfield Report, the statutory regulations requiring mandatory registration with a professional body (IfL) and continual professional development hours in the FE sector have been revoked as of the 1st September 2012.

    You may read the full official report here:-

  2. As the (preferred) professional body, a practitioner-led organisation with voluntary membership, IfL has a distinctive role to play. No other organisation in the sector does what we do.
    With thousands of teachers and trainers across the diverse sector
    choosing to engage with IfL and with one another, as fellow
    professionals, we will continue to make a difference together, for the
    benefit of learners. IfL's priority is to support and promote excellence
    in teaching and learning for the benefit of learners, the economy and
    society at large.

    IfL works to raise the professional status of its members; ensures
    that teachers’ and trainers’ views inform policymaking; raises the
    profile of high-quality vocational teaching and learning; supports and
    facilitates individual and subject-specific CPD; and offers a range of
    benefits that support professional excellence. <u>IfL is developing a range of exciting new benefits and initiatives </u>designed to meet the needs and aspirations of individual members in their careers and professional lives.
  3. Hip, hip, hurrah ....... we no longer have the protection of secureprofessional status, a protected title and mastery of our own professional development. Indeed it is a great day where we revert back to being a workforce rather than a profession. Rejoice!
  4. lexus300

    lexus300 Star commenter

    Further Education Colleges and FE staff have always tried to ensure that the Lecturers put in front of classes have the appropriate qualifications and skill sets to provide a professional education service. Similarly they have also tried to provide professional levels of technician, clerical and administration support.
    Funds permitting, that has been maintained over 60 years or so, without IFL and the like.
    In recent times (the early nineties) Colleges became businesses
    (Corporations) since then they have introduced large numbers of very
    highly paid Senior Managers which has further drained the financial resource model(another discussion I think).
    Compulsory IFL membership (and resulting CPD requirements) and QTLS are an emanation of the state seeking to impose a 'school like' version of what 'they think' constitutes a professional FE service, they have very little idea in reality.
    FE can and does provide a professional education service mainly for Industry. FE Staff have always maintained their professional qualifications and development without the aid of IFL. Most Lecturers I have known have belonged to appropriate 'Learned Bodies' aligned to their specialist teaching area.
    They do not need IFL or QTLS.

  5. The thing about being a professional is that you develop your own skills and have a responsibility to do so due to your duty of care for your students. Our college has an excellent provision of professional development and training; I regularly am sent to conferences and training events and return to college to share and spread what I have learned.

    I do not need to be subjected to a closed shop system of "professional registration" when all that it delivers me is a data-entry assistant at the end of the phone who will type in whatever numbers I tell them to. I am quite capable of doing that myself.

    Then there is the whole, unforgivable, lack of democratic accountability which is intrinsically essential if the body in question is to reflect and represent the desires of a professional body.

    If you have read the Lingfield Report, you would see that the Government is establishing a Professional Guild which will investigate an alternative to the IfL which actually represents what FE teachers wish it to. The Government wish to protect the status of teaching qualifications such as Cert Ed's, PGCE's, QTS and DTLLS/PTLLS courses. These qualifications are still absolutely essential to gaining employment in education so I fail to see what all the furore is about the undermining of professionalism.

    This is a great day, the world got lighter! Celebrate!
  6. It's not sarcasm, mor0n, it's fact. There is no single, identifiable, describable FE teaching profession. It is why the IfL project, much important though I think it was, failed. You can't have a professional body for a non-profession. Thousands didn't reject IfL, they rejected having a common professional identity - and now they get what they deserve.
  7. Whoaaa! Seriously I thought I was the idiot personna here, having a laugh. But you really are bitter, arrogant and self-righteous, ESPECIALLY for a teacher trainer. Isn't it your job to help them see the need? I would hate to have been a lecturer in FE and had you for an observor of my lesson
    You are really negative! Get out of the profession entirely if you are that bitter!
  8. I totally disagree! In fact, I found these comments highly insulting, as there are many people like myself who are highly qualified people teaching academic subjects, such as A-level Psychology, English, Geography, Science, Maths and History, to name but a few.
    By the way, when I use the term highly qualified, I mean that we have at least an upper second class degree in the subjects that we teach and a Post Graduate Certificate of Education (post-compulsory) from a recognised teacher training provider, such as the Institute of Education. Of course, we also engaged in (and wrote about) many debates about professionalism as part of our teacher training courses. E.g. One of the arguments that we discussed on my PGCE (PC) course was whether the lack of standardised teacher qualifications in FE is one of the main reasons why teaching is actually a semi profession (such as nursing). If my fellow PGCE students and I were as illiterate and intellectually incapacitated as you claim, then why would our PGCE tutors have bothered to make us discuss and write about issues such as professionalism in FE and whether different age groups require different pedagogies in depth at Masters level?
    IfL's only mistake was in ever thinking that there was a profession to be developed, there isn't - just a bunch of failed ex-craftsmen and women who (because of age, incompetence, injury or any combination thereof) happen to now be "teachers". They are only interested in turning up, appearing to be'experts in their field' (they are not, they would be doing it if they were), taking the money and running.
    Again, you are making a lot of generalisations here! I repeat, not all FE teachers are failed ex-craftsmen and women who happened to be teachers because they couldn't hack it in their previous careers (although I agree that there are indeed unfortunately some people in the 'profession' who are letting their students down with poor teaching), but in many cases dedicated people who put up with often terrible working conditions and prejudice from school teachers and people like you on here who continue to perpetuate negative stereotypes about FE teachers, because we actually care about our students and find it very fulfilling when they achieve great things both on the courses that we teach and afterwards.
    If all I cared about was taking the money and running, I would have become a banker rather than a teacher, so please do not insult my intelligence further than you already have by using the comments of trolls and fools on tes forums to damn FE teachers in general, as they are hardly representative of the motives and competence of the FE teaching population as a whole!

  9. Yes, but that's not really what FE is about - is it? You're a schoolie who has decided they can hack it better in a college. Less that 10% of what the sector is about.
    Yes, I am - from experience.
    So jog on, schoolie - this wasn't about you.
  10. You are the idiot here but you are not having a laugh, you are boring the **** off of most folk.
    No, I'm just speaking as I find, I'm not bitter about anything
    I can only work with what I get.
    Ah so the truth is out. If you are not an FE lecturer, just what the blazes are you?

  11. What am I?
    Your choice...
    an FE English lecturer, as well as Teacher Trainer, with 30 years experience (believe that was more than you stated
    or the shadow in the dark who sees, and has a sense of humour.
    You , Sir/Madam, do not and are doing far more damage than I, if you are indeed, involved in "Teacher Ed".
  12. Yes, but that's not really what FE is about - is it?
    Yes it is. One of the things that I like about FE is the fact that it is a broad sector with people from different backgrounds with a range of experiences studying and teaching a variety of courses to match which include academic, vocational, accredited and non accredited, so that everyone has a chance to succeed in a situation which suits them. The teaching qualifications we have reflect this.
    I'm not disputing the fact that you have experience of FE and that your figure for the number of schoolies teaching in FE is correct but what I am disputing is the fact that you assume like schoolies do that most or all FE teachers only teach industry based vocational courses and did PGCEs (like ettls courses) on the job. I was pointing out that this is not the case.
    As for telling me that this doesn't concern me and to jog on, I'm not a schoolie, as I pointed out in my previous post. I have a PGCE (post-compulsory), my degree subject is Psychology and I've taught a variety of both academic and vocational courses in Psychology. In my experience, many FE teachers have done the same for their subject specialisms, so my experience is by no means an isolated one..
    This debate therefore concerns me as much as every other FE trained and practising teacher in the UK, so I will be keeping my running trainers in the cupboard, thank you for your kind invitation all the same.
    On that note, I've said my piece now, so bid you a pleasant day and will leave you and barnardbeans to your childish playground fight, while I resume my viewing of the paralympics.

  13. Yes, agree (yawn) but it remains a fact that 90%+
    of FE is vocationally based and that remains its purpose. Yes we all
    know there are schoolies here doing a wonderful job.
    user="J-RO"]I'm not disputing the fact that you have experience of FE
    and that your figure for the number of schoolies teaching in FE is
    correct but what I am disputing is the fact that you assume like
    schoolies do that most or all FE teachers only teach industry based
    vocational courses and did PGCEs (like ettls courses) on the job. I was
    pointing out that this is not the case.[/quote]
    No I don't (please read post above), but my point was about VOCATIONAL provision in FE, as suggested by the clever use of the word 'vocational'.
    user="J-RO"]As for telling me that this doesn't concern me and to jog
    on, I'm not a schoolie, as I pointed out in my previous post. I have a
    PGCE (post-compulsory), my degree subject is Psychology and I've taught a
    variety of both academic and vocational courses in Psychology. In my
    experience, many FE teachers have done the same for their subject
    specialisms, so my experience is by no means an isolated one..[/quote]
    My apologies, indeed you are not an isolated example - you are, however, in a significant minority.
    I am not fighting with him/her/it. I am not fighting with you. I expressed my opinion, and you have every right to disagree with it.

  14. We are not fighting either. You have not expressed an "opinion" but you spew toxic comments like a drunk volcano. As an FE lecturer, a school teacher and a teacher trainer, the best advice I can give you is to stop "expressing your opinion" completely. The world and you will both be better off. To aid you with this, this is my last comment to you.

  15. saluki

    saluki Lead commenter

    I am doing a PGCE in post compulsory education and I am seriously wondering what I am letting myself in for. I have a B.A. and an M.A. judging by this thread I am totally in the wrong place by wanting to teach in college.
  16. Yes, let's be fair. Your statement is wildly far off the mark. In my experience FE teaching is populated by people who are dedicated in the face of an increasingly uncertain future, to passing on their skills to young people who do not appear dedicated to learning a new skill.
    Noone has the time or inclination to debate professionalism as they are more concerned with the demands of OFSTED, the ever increasing amount of paperwork and trying to teach unwilling students.
    That they persevere at all is commendable. Many lecturers come into FE from industry and then have to train on top of a full time job - this shows dedication and should be applauded not decried. They accept lower salaries as part of the job.
    How do you expect the chippies, plumbers, caterers, hairdressers, car mechanics, horticulturists etc to acquire the necessary skills to enter the workforce? If all the people with the skills stayed in industry, who would teach them?
    Your experiences are not, I suggest, the norm. I certainly do not recognise any colleagues from your description.
    As for taking the money and running.......if only!
  17. Indeed, this is the key point and is my concern. FE teaching as a 'profession' has declined to a point where neither the salary or attendant terms and conditions can possibly attract high or even average calibre 'experts' from industry. Believe me, new teachers (and here I am thinking last 7 - 10 years) increasingly come from that percentage of vocationalists that are not succeeding in industry. What plumber on, say &pound;35 - 45k (and that's moderate), would consider a career in FE. I'll tell you from my experience: he who has never worked in industry, she who has level 2 but not level 3, he who plumbed years ago but gave it up. Seriously, you are significantly overestimating the calibre of industry experts in FE.
    And I can tell you that at UCET we ponder these concerns regularly and they are, very much, the norm.
    Agreed, and also because they are ill-equipped to enter into any such debate.
    Your example doesn't support your argument. My point was not about the dedication, commitment and application of FE teachers, I do not question dedication, I question whether or not we are attracting top notch vocationalists with the intellectual capacity to see FE teaching as a profession. By all means debate with me, but at least stick to the topic.

  18. I don't doubt that there are underqualified people teaching in FE - however, I think you are making too sweeping a generalisation here.
    People have career changes for many reasons; indeed many courses would go from colleges. and our jobs with them, if adults weren't contemplating career changes.
    You cannot possibly know the reasons some opt out of industry and into education. Be grateful that they do. I have worked with incredibly knowlegeable, articulate and intelligent people who were also very good teachers. They certainly had the intellectual ability to debate professionalism but were too busy getting on with the job to do so.
    Incidentally, in my specialist area, the salaries are far below even FE salaries; I didn't lose any money going into education. I did it because I became physically unable to do the job day in and day out and because I wanted to teach what I knew to others.
  19. I was told an old clich&eacute; by my first placement mentor on my PGCE course. It stayed with me.
    "Those who can, teach. Those who can't, teach teachers."
  20. Saluki,
    Please don't let the bitter and stereotypical conceptions of FE dampen your spirits. When I am in the classroom with my students I have a blast, because I enjoy the subject, they all want to be there and I am away from management and admin! Unfortunately the tides of change are swirling all around every sector of education at the moment, and the shortsighted policies introduced by this Government and the stress of the cuts taking effect are really making this year look like a very stressful one indeed. It may explain some of the outbursts!
    However, when all is said and done, there are FE Colleges out there that have comparable, or even better A-Level results when compared to local private schools for example.
    Some of us simply do not believe in the benefits of regimentation and overt-discipline when all we come to school/college to do is to learn or teach. I could not give a damn if someone's shirt is tucked in or not, or what colour their hair is. Expression and identity is an important part of growing up and finding oneself. A college allows students to do this whereas a school or 6th form does not, to some extent. If you interrupt my lesson however, I will come down on you like a tonne of bricks. THIS is what attracted me to teaching A-Levels at an FE College as opposed to a school or 6th form. I still find the conditions to be superior to any local school or college.
    The one thing you simply CANNOT do, which many posters above have, is paint the entire sector with one brush. The level of variation between colleges is vast and even more so than secondary schools. Take the comments, all of them, even the positive, with a pinch of salt and read some OFSTED inspection reports and talk directly to lecturers working in FE colleges for yourself.

Share This Page