Only 84 maths teachers are unqualified

mick kk

29 September, 2011 - Minister of State for Research and Innovation publishes Maths Teaching Survey results

Minister of State for Research and Innovation, Sean Sherlock TD, today published the final results of the Maths Teaching Survey carried out by the Teaching Council.

The Minister noted the results of the survey which shows that out of a total of 3,311 teachers teaching maths in 422 schools, 2,198 teachers (66.4%) are fully qualified[1] to do so, 1,029 teachers (31.1%) have undergone some studies in maths[2] and only 84 (2.5%) have no third level qualifications/studies in maths.


Commenting on the survey, Minister Sherlock said: "I want to thank schools for taking the time to complete the survey as it provides us with valuable information on what the current situation is in these schools. As I have already said I want to get to a situation where all teachers of maths have a maths qualification and the training programme I announced on 12th September will help to achieve that."

The new training programme for maths teachers, announced on the 12th September, forms part of the Government's overall strategy to improve the teaching and learning of maths in schools. It will provide unqualified maths teachers with the opportunity to upskill their knowledge of mathematics and study the strategies best suited to the new Project Maths syllabuses.

"Tenders will be invited shortly for the programme which will offer flexible options including online and face to face engagement. The training will benefit the cohort of maths teachers who do not have a maths qualification." Minister Sherlock said.

The provision of this training programme will address the following recommendation of the Report of the Project Maths Implementation Support Group: "The Department of Education and Skills should work towards ensuring that all post primary students at all levels are taught mathematics solely by teachers who hold a qualification in mathematics by 2018. Post graduate courses for existing teachers should be provided on a scale and level commensurate with this objective."

ENDS




Turns out that the media focus on this has been totally inaccurate.

Moody_mona

mick kk wrote: »

Turns out that the media focus on this has been totally inaccurate.

Well, no, because those 1029 that have some maths in their degree are unqualified to teach it.

Where was this published?

ray giraffe

Also there is probably some bias in the survey: schools which have a non-qualified teacher teaching maths are less likely to respond to the survey.

Does anybody know how many secondary schools there are in the country? It's certainly more than 422.

spurious

ray giraffe wrote: »

Also there is probably some bias in the survey: schools which have a non-qualified teacher teaching maths are less likely to respond to the survey.

Does anybody know how many secondary schools there are in the country? It's certainly more than 422.

About 700 odd, I think.

TheDriver

723 I think. Maths somewhere in the degree is a bit vague alright!

Boober Fraggle

There are still a lot of people out there (teachers included) who think having a subject in 1st year college qualifies them to teach that subject.

I read those stats as 36 odd % are unqualified, which is quite shocking.

andee

true. apparently there are loads of business, science and god knows what else teaching maths in secondary schools. Perhaps not to leaving cert higher level but to all other levels. they may have some maths in first year or may have a numeric type degree but this certainly does not qualify them to teach it. same with other subjects i suspect!

i think secondary school maths teachers should have to have studied maths to leaving cert higher level in addition to a degree in maths

- similar to the higher irish LC grade C requirement for primary school teaching (although i realise primary school teachers may not have studied irish for 30% of their degree )

donegal11

andee wrote: »

i think secondary school maths teachers should have to have studied maths to leaving cert higher level in addition to a degree in maths - similar to the higher irish LC grade C requirement for primary school teaching (although i realise primary school teachers may not have studied irish for 30% of their degree )

Somehow I think that a maths degree from a university is equal to:rolleyes: or higher then honours in the leaving cert. And the vast majority of maths graduates would have studied honours in the leaving anyway.

Also is the Irish requirement not only needed to get onto the teaching course(this principle is also required in some math degrees) and only in that respect it's required. In that when you have a B.ED from St Pats etc no one goes looking for your leaving cert grades.

MathsManiac

I'd be more inclined to believe the NCE-MSTL figures. They were based on a smaller sample, but it was a controlled one, with a higher response rate, and they surveyed the individual teachers in detail as well as the principals.

http://www.nce-mstl.ie/files/Out-of-field%20teaching%20in%20post-primary%20Maths%20Education.pdf

yourpics

what exactly do you need to be deemed qualified??

MathsManiac

yourpics wrote: »

what exactly do you need to be deemed qualified??

See page 61 of this document (although I'm told they're in the process of updating all these criteria):
http://www.teachingcouncil.ie/_fileupload/Registration/AutoQuals/Autoquals%2520updated%25201st%2520July%25202011.pdf

ArtSmart

MathsManiac wrote: »

I'd be more inclined to believe the NCE-MSTL figures. They were based on a smaller sample, but it was a controlled one, with a higher response rate, and they surveyed the individual teachers in detail as well as the principals.

http://www.nce-mstl.ie/files/Out-of-field%20teaching%20in%20post-primary%20Maths%20Education.pdf

interesting. esp that the older the teacher, the more likely qualified- which is a bad sign for the future


overall though Ireland would be amongst the top of countries with a high % of qual math teachers teaching maths. (Korea prob top)

the way it is folks. and without big dollars, the way it'll remain.

yourpics

MathsManiac wrote: »

See page 61 of this document (although I'm told they're in the process of updating all these criteria):
http://www.teachingcouncil.ie/_fileupload/Registration/AutoQuals/Autoquals%2520updated%25201st%2520July%25202011.pdf

On that basis, I would be qualified (civil eng degree)

implausible

yourpics wrote: »

On that basis, I would be qualified (civil eng degree)

Yes, if you have your PGDE.

yourpics

What sort of money is it to do a PGDE? Would it be risky ie no job at the end??

TheDriver

about 5k and yes very risky because just being able to teach maths would make you fairly unemployable because its hard to fill a timetable with just maths

mazzie

does any one know anything about the course that the Dept have announced? have searched but cant find anything on it - has it just been announced but nothing else? desperate to do a course to get maths as teaching science isnt enough and TC are no help

finlma

If the department spent more of their time providing a platform for current Maths teachers to become qualified through some sort of evening diploma instead of whinging to the media they might make some progress.

People are complaining that not enough teachers are qualified to teach Maths. The reason for this is quiet simple. People who study Maths in university are extremely unlikely to want to join the teaching profession due to the poor pay and lack of job progression. They are much more likely to go into other areas where they will be better paid and have more prospects in career development. The over supply of business and engineering graduates with very poor job prospects means that many of them will do the hdip and become teachers, taking up Maths teaching too.

It's a simple case of supply and demand. Perhaps Maths teachers should be offered €5000 more a year if they are fully qualified. This might encourage the right people into teaching.

Instead of people moaning, why not come up with some solutions.

Inspector Coptoor

What bugs me about this whole debate is that we all know people who are uber qualified in Maths and Physics, who know their subject material inside and out, and yet they cannot get this information across to a single person, never mind a roomful of teenagers.

People have already said how hard it can be to fill a teachers timetable with just Maths or just Biology and science.

I honestly find it difficult to understand how someone who did maths for 2 years in college but who majored in Microbiology or economics for example, would fare any worse at teaching the fundamental principal of counting or sets to a class of 24 1st years than someone who did 4 years of PURE maths which would be on a level so far beyond 1st year secondary school maths as to make it almost irrelevant to his/her ability to teach maths to junior cycle level.

Are we to believe that somewhere in the darkest depths of 4th year 3rd level calculus or algebra, the Holy Grail of how to teach maths is somehow unearthed?

It would be my opinion, that as long as a teacher has a sound understanding of maths and its principles, that he or she would be well cabaple of teaching junior cycle maths even if he/she only had 1 or 2 years of maths in their degree.

jonseyblub

Liam Henners257 wrote: »

What bugs me about this whole debate is that we all know people who are uber qualified in Maths and Physics, who know their subject material inside and out, and yet they cannot get this information across to a single person, never mind a roomful of teenagers.

People have already said how hard it can be to fill a teachers timetable with just Maths or just Biology and science.

I honestly find it difficult to understand how someone who did maths for 2 years in college but who majored in Microbiology or economics for example, would fare any worse at teaching the fundamental principal of counting or sets to a class of 24 1st years than someone who did 4 years of PURE maths which would be on a level so far beyond 1st year secondary school maths as to make it almost irrelevant to his/her ability to teach maths to junior cycle level.

Are we to believe that somewhere in the darkest depths of 4th year 3rd level calculus or algebra, the Holy Grail of how to teach maths is somehow unearthed?

It would be my opinion, that as long as a teacher has a sound understanding of maths and its principles, that he or she would be well cabaple of teaching junior cycle maths even if he/she only had 1 or 2 years of maths in their degree.

Agree with this statement to a large extent. However the problem lies IMO with say Business teachers who have some sort of Maths component in their degree teaching topics such as Geometry or Trig. The simple fact is that most business graduates wouldn't have touched this stuff since school. In my own school I see this as a major problem. Due to retirements and cuts etc, qualified maths teachers are being replaced by business teachers,( of which we have an over supply) so by the time I'm teaching some of these pupils in 5th Year many of the concepts of Trig and Geometry need to be taught basically from scratch. I'm not blaming the teachers themselves, they've basically been pushed into teaching it by necessity and are trying their best but it is a big problem.

Inspector Coptoor

jonseyblub wrote: »

so by the time I'm teaching some of these pupils in 5th Year many of the concepts of Trig and Geometry need to be taught basically from scratch..

That's a very fair point and it is a problem.

and yeah, you cant blame the teachers for agreeing to take the classes, they need a job.

I'd agree with you that teachers from a more scientific background, and those teaching physics, have a better handle on some elements of maths than business graduates but by that same token, those same business teachers could be teaching algebra better than a science teacher or even a pure maths teacher.

When someone studies maths and maths only at third level, how much trig or calculus or algebra do they HAVE to do?

Can you, like in Undenom. Science degrees pick certain maths modules?
Could pick just calculus and just algebra, thereby leabing a potential knowledge gap?

rainbowtrout

Liam Henners257 wrote: »

What bugs me about this whole debate is that we all know people who are uber qualified in Maths and Physics, who know their subject material inside and out, and yet they cannot get this information across to a single person, never mind a roomful of teenagers.

People have already said how hard it can be to fill a teachers timetable with just Maths or just Biology and science.

I honestly find it difficult to understand how someone who did maths for 2 years in college but who majored in Microbiology or economics for example, would fare any worse at teaching the fundamental principal of counting or sets to a class of 24 1st years than someone who did 4 years of PURE maths which would be on a level so far beyond 1st year secondary school maths as to make it almost irrelevant to his/her ability to teach maths to junior cycle level.

Are we to believe that somewhere in the darkest depths of 4th year 3rd level calculus or algebra, the Holy Grail of how to teach maths is somehow unearthed?

It would be my opinion, that as long as a teacher has a sound understanding of maths and its principles, that he or she would be well cabaple of teaching junior cycle maths even if he/she only had 1 or 2 years of maths in their degree.

But couldn't you apply that opinion to every subject area?

Also I'm sure principals don't want to waste time at interviews or even within their own schools when it comes to timetabling going 'So you can teach first and second year, but not third year or Leaving Cert?' It's far easier to hire someone who can do the lot.

Actually you often see ads for maths jobs where it specifies 'Maths to Higher Level LC', so there are probably quite a lot of people out there who are teaching maths because they have it in their degree but wouldn't have the qualifications, experience or capability of teaching HL Leaving Cert.

yourpics

I could easily and compently teach Maths, Science, Chemistry, Physics, Religion and PE but this PGDE (or lack of!) is holding me back!

rebel girl 15

yourpics wrote: »

I could easily and compently teach Maths, Science, Chemistry, Physics, Religion and PE but this PGDE (or lack of!) is holding me back!

PE and religion with a civil eng degree?? Is it only VEC school where you have to have a teacher education degree to teach certain subjects for TC registration

Delphi91

andee wrote: »

true. apparently there are loads of business, science and god knows what else teaching maths in secondary schools....
i think secondary school maths teachers should have to have studied maths to leaving cert higher level in addition to a degree in maths...

Bugger, I'm screwed so! :eek:

There am I, a humble teacher with a science degree. I did maths throughout each of my three years while getting my BSc. 6 years after doing my HDE (and teaching maths amongst other subjects like physics) I went back to University by night and did a postgrad Dip in Maths, Stats and Computing getting Hons in it. I then spent another few years doing a part-time research MSc in Maths getting honours in it also.

But I only did ordinary level maths for Leaving Cert I shouldn't be qualified to teach maths at all.

yourpics

rebel girl 15 wrote: »

PE and religion with a civil eng degree?? Is it only VEC school where you have to have a teacher education degree to teach certain subjects for TC registration

Yeah bit of a stretch of the imagination on my part! But I could do a better job than those who taught me PE and Religion!!

BTW nice user name

mr_november

Liam Henners257 wrote: »

That's a very fair point and it is a problem.

and yeah, you cant blame the teachers for agreeing to take the classes, they need a job.

I'd agree with you that teachers from a more scientific background, and those teaching physics, have a better handle on some elements of maths than business graduates but by that same token, those same business teachers could be teaching algebra better than a science teacher or even a pure maths teacher.

When someone studies maths and maths only at third level, how much trig or calculus or algebra do they HAVE to do?

Can you, like in Undenom. Science degrees pick certain maths modules?
Could pick just calculus and just algebra, thereby leabing a potential knowledge gap?

I'm in 3rd and final year taking Honours Maths as one of my subjects...haven't actually done any geometry since the Leaving Cert, but you do loads of Analysis/Calculus and Algebra...they make up the whole basis of the subject for me anyways. That said, I think that by being brought up to such a higher standard in Maths, that people with a degree in it would have no problem with trig etc. if they go back to it, even though they haven't been studying it directly in college...that's what I think anyways!