I donāt quite get the āIāve been teaching 30Ā years, why do I need a qualification?ā argument. (āState puts weight behind teaching qualification dataā, News, 29 August.) If experience is so superior, why do we offer degrees?
Letās try a little experiment. Critics of the suggestion should work their way through theĀ following list: cutting hair; driving; eyeĀ testing; defending clients in court; pulling teeth; performing appendectomies; flying commercial airliners; analysing cervical smears; supervising PhDs; teaching in primary schools; teaching in secondary schools; teaching in university. At which point would you be happy to accept a lack of qualifications? IĀ suspect that most people would stop at cutting hair, especially if it were their own hairĀ being cut at the time of the revelation.
Yes, Iām being silly. But the argument against teaching qualifications is pretty silly, too, particularly if the best reason that can be given is āIām too busy doing research to get oneā. Iām sure that will fill potential students with nothing but confidence.
Jonathan Baldwin
Cambridge
Register to continue
Why register?
- Registration is free and only takes a moment
- Once registered, you can read 3 articles a month
- Sign up for our newsletter
Subscribe
Or subscribe for unlimited access to:
- Unlimited access to news, views, insights & reviews
- Digital editions
- Digital access to °Õ±į·”ās university and college rankings analysis
Already registered or a current subscriber?