Teacher Recruitment Falling for Third Straight Year – And Guess Why?

Apparently teacher recruitment is falling. However, it is not only falling short of required numbers but the government are actually recruiting fewer and fewer teachers despite a rising population.

The coalition is serially failing to match its own teacher recruitment goals, prompting critics to warn that there will be 27,000 fewer teachers in three years’ time than will be needed.

For the third year in a row the government is set to miss its target for trainee teachers across primary and secondary schools. Just 30,510 trainees have been placed in teacher training so far for 2014-15 – more than 4,000 short of the target and 7,700 fewer than were recruited in 2010.

To make matters worse it doesn’t sound like this is due to ‘austerity’ as, according to Labour, more money is being spent now on a recruitment campaign than in 2010 even though targets are actually lower.

Now here’s the HILARIOUS bit – we all know, deep down, why fewer teachers are being recruited, don’t we? Well, one commentator in The Guardian’s comments section gave that very reason – and it turns out it was the top rated comment:

guardian-teacher-shortage-comment

The comment is of course screen capped here incase The Guardian decide to delete it. It will be interesting to see if they do as they are known to love censorship – as I have found out many times until I gave up trying to comment there.

Who knows, perhaps if there are no teachers then the school system will collapse – an end to our system of feminist indoctrination education?

 

 

 

 

 

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

4 Responses to Teacher Recruitment Falling for Third Straight Year – And Guess Why?

  1. Opus says:

    A breakdown of the new teacher-trainees by sex would doubtless make the matter entirely clear. Presumably the government will solve the problem by doing what seems to be quite common – treating classroom-assistants as teachers – or perhaps, by increasing class size.

    I would no more agree, in the present ethical-climate, to teach or give a lift to a hitch-hiker – and certainly to no member of the opposite sex – than I would to baby-sit. Last year, and after closing-time I turned down the opportunity to act as unpaid health-care worker to a drunk-female unable to stand on her own feet as she tottered on her high-heels and down-dropped to the pavement – a condition she had clearly created of her own volition; her female friend’s insults to me as I sauntered away merely amused me as I reflected that at least I was not going to be on the receiving end of some false claim of assault as a result of acting the Good Samaritan.

  2. This would be a great chance to vastly increase salaries for female teachers (after all there is a scarcity). Male tax payers can pay for it.

  3. Alan Vaughn says:

    I’ll give him credit he is rather resourceful
    No H-S we will NOT read your anything-goes aspie blog.

  4. thedude says:

    The Guardian commentator is spot on – you’d have to be out of your tree to do any profession that leaves you alone with anyone under 18 these days.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s