Can A College Of Teaching Work?

The blueprint for a Collage of Teaching envisions a new era of professionalism. But if no one wants to stump-up the 90 quid membership fee, what influence can it hope to wield, asks Michael Tidd...

I think it’s fair to say that few governments are ever completely popular with teachers, and this one has had its share of detractors. But of all the decisions made over the last four years, I don’t recall many teachers mourning the loss of the General Teaching Council in England. Of course, I suspect that’s because teachers fall into one of four categories: those who cheered its demise; those who hadn’t realised it had gone; those who hadn’t realised it existed in the first place; and those who can vaguely recall paying £30 a year for something, but couldn’t tell you for what or why. Nevertheless, the £30-a-year fee has gone, and the GTC quango with it. Perhaps with something more of a whimper than a bang.

Given this short-lived and little-mourned attempt at a professional body, it seems hardly surprising that support for a new body is far from overwhelming. When the NFER asked over 1000 teachers last term whether they supported plans for a new College of Teaching, the response was not entirely positive. Little more than a third of primary teachers said they were in favour, with nearly half sitting firmly in the “Don’t know” camp. Perhaps more worrying for the bigwigs behind the plans for a “member-driven” organisation are the views held by those teachers on paying for the privilege of membership. Even among those in favour of a new body, just one per cent said they would be prepared to pay a fee of £91 or more; not a wholly comforting figure given that the blueprint for the new college suggests a standard joining fee of between £90 and £110.

All in all, it looks like there could be another flop in the making – and this time at something like three times the cost for teachers. But might there still be a sliver of hope for fans of the new College?

The proposals are being managed by the Prince’s Teaching Institute, and the Chair of their committee remains optimistic. However, his positivity comes not from how many people are in favour of the proposed College of Teaching, but instead from the large numbers of teachers who are entirely ignorant of the proposals. His contention is that, having had the benefits of membership explained, the number of teachers willing to pay a fee of over £75 rose to above 60 per cent.

Perhaps the most significant difference between the suggested College and the old GTCE is that membership would be voluntary. Rather than the enforced charging (and repayment!) of fees to nearly half a million teachers, the Prince’s Teaching Institute hopes to recruit just 80,000 (around one fifth) to its new body. Suddenly a figure of one third of teachers expressing an interest isn’t so bad if the grand plan is so significantly limited. Perhaps the most worrying concern about the proposed College of Teaching, then, is not that the plans have too few supporters, but that the planners’ aspirations are too limited to garner support.

All this, though, does raise the question of what such a body hopes to achieve. After all, the General Teaching Council was clear in its ‘registration and regulation’ role, but how can a body that has fewer than 20 per cent of the profession as members hope to achieve this? The GTCE also claimed to act on behalf of the profession to give advice to government. Setting aside how well it achieved this, it seems unlikely that a body that fails to gain the support of even a substantial minority of the profession will have any more gravitas when it comes to representing teachers’ views.

The proposals in the College of Teaching blueprint suggest that the new body would have three main aims: setting standards; enhancing professional development; and informing professional practice, standards and policy with evidence. In the first and last case, it isn’t clear what role a voluntary body can have in setting standards or speaking for the profession on the basis of such limited membership; indeed, the blueprint itself states that regulation of minimum standards would still be a matter for government. And while many teachers would be wholly supportive of enhanced professional development, there is nothing in the blueprint that suggests any great boon in funding or provision in this area.

Alongside all these oddities remains a significant factor: a College of Teachers already exists. It charges £84 for members, provides professional development arrangements and has a royal charter granted by Queen Victoria. One can only presume that they haven’t yet got 80,000 members either.

About the author

Michael Tidd is a Year Leader at Vale First & Middle School in Sussex. You can read his blog at michaelt1979.wordpress.com