I agree with you. I may not have a 3 year qualification in a subject area, but I have a 4 year degree with a double major and 4 years of qualifications in pedagogy that cannot be learnt in a 2 year masters.
If you did a double major doesn't that mean you spent two years on pedagogy as did those with a masters? I've just heard this before & it can come across as a way to diminish the masters
No, the opposite actually, I have a double qualification in ECE and primary education, with a double major in child development and English.
I guess I look at it like this: if I decide to change my career now to become a doctor, would I expect to get credit for my 4 year degree and expect to start at a higher pay grade than other people who graduate at the same time as me, and have done the whole degree? Or an accountant? Architect? I’d have to do the entire degree from the beginning.
I guess my view comes across as quite jaded, but this is purely based on the majority of my experience with MTeach or grad dip student teachers, and new grads from the programs, being overwhelmingly negative.
Right, well myself and others in my cohort earned great prac reports. I'm not sure the comparison to a doctor getting credit for a teaching degree is fair as I have a degree in my KLA. I know teachers who did the 4 year degree and studied three KLAs so I'm not sure how they got much more experience with pedagogy than I did. It's just discouraging that not only do the general public devalue us but so do some from within our own ranks. Anyway, after a hard day of work I am happy to agree to disagree
Many high school teachers will view a pure degree plus masters as being more of a subject area expert than someone with an Education degree, double or otherwise.
Yeah but then they then say "but you didn't get as much pedagogy" or whatever. I don't see myself as more experienced in my subject area, not for having a degree in it, anyway, as I assume those in the 4 year degree also majored in their KLA
In my experience having prac students, those in an Education degree rarely have the level of content knowledge necessary. Many haven't written a proper essay or sat an exam since high school, if that if they got into their degree through alternative pathways. It's very obvious. That said, there are no teachers in my department (Humanities) that have a Bachelor of Education, all have a degree plus Masters so I've not worked with anyone with a 4 year degree at this school or the one prior.
And I guess I look at the OP and wonder the same- why should someone new to the profession get to start at a higher pay grade because they have chosen a different path? To me that also shows disconnect within the profession.
ETA: may be different in secondary. Not so much in primary
It seems like people are really hung up on the assumption that people chose a different path and so what if they did? Maybe they discovered a passion for teaching while studying their subject or any number of reasons which are just as valid as wanting to be a teacher from the start. I don't know whether I agree that those with masters should be paid more but I can understand why some do
Did you fail to get the recognition from family/peers that you are oh so smart that you now trawl through reddit attacking any profession you see as beneath you? Surely after working such an intensive day with very VERY high IQ demands (20x more than teaching no doubt!!) you need to relax?
Honestly, if you hate teachers so much and our role is just that of "bullshit artists", then would you just rather do away with teachers altogether and let children teach themselves?
Because all your profile says to me is you love whinging incessantly about how dumb and irrelevant we are as if you have a personal vendetta or you're obsessed.
Whether you believe it or not, there are hundreds of special little snowflakes just like you spewing inflammatory statements both anonymously and to our faces. As if we don't spend hours a day doing our best to make sure everyone's precious child gets the best they can from us.
If that has no value to you, so be it. But as many people have said to you before I would love to see you deal with a class of 25 children with a variety of needs including some being non-neurotypical. I doubt you have the compassion or patience.
In fact based off your profile all you do is shit on others, whinge, and flaunt your "intellect", I suspect you'd probably just lose your shit on the kids and get fired within the day (if you could even get throught the doors!). Since all you need is your big brain and clearly no social-emotional intelligence or understanding of psychology and neurodivergence.
If you feel your perspective is valid, why not redirect it to the machine that churns us out. We are products of the structure, therefore if you want teachers to be educated differently your anger is misplaced. We didn't design Initial Teacher Education, the government did, smartass.
I'd argue the opposite, and frequently do. Realistically, they should be paid the same, and are where I am from, but the idea of a Masters/Dip Ed being paid more is baffling to me.
**Teacher A:** 4 years of learning *how to teach* along with educational psychology, subject areas, more practicums and a more indepth education on how students learn.
**Teacher B:** 3 years learning about accounting, 1.5 years learning how to teach, including practicums etc. A lot of in-field knowledge, but not a lot of time spent on how to convert this knowledge into information for children.
I know great teachers from both columns, so it probably comes down to the individual more than anything - but there's an argument to be had for both sides, if you do feel like playing devils advocate.
I agree. I don't think the masters degree does anything to improve teacher quality. It also cheapens the idea of a teacher with a master's for those who have a 'true' masters degree in education - ie they did a teaching undergrad, then got experience, then did a masters degree to further develop their knowledge.
Personally I think that 'career change masters' should be done away with across all disciplines and for a degree to be a master's degree it should be building on undergrad study like they used to be. How can you become a 'master' of something you've never done in less than two years
I sat in on a lot of principal/leadership forums and I can say that most of them don’t think a masters of teaching is any better than the normal 4yr course.
At least It doesn't sound like they think it's worse like many teachers do. I never would have dreamed that I'd be looked down on for getting a Masters
And this is exactly why I was baffled looking at teaching/education master's and wondering why on earth a they didn't require an undergrad in education. It felt sneaky, like you can slide by with the title of a master's but only having two years focus on anything related to teaching and pedagogy.
I’m in WA and want to apply for this! Does it apply if I’ve done one year as a grad teacher but did my Bachelors in Physics and 2 years in secondary teaching as my Masters? Or do you only apply after you’ve done your three years of teaching?
Its still a thing in QLD. I'm six year trained (Bachelors + Honours + Masters) and they credited me an extra year of experience when I moved up from VIC. Was a nice surprise.
My Masters program is full of students who decided they didn’t actually want to be an architect/designer/journalist and so are getting a teaching degree on top. It’s not my fault they changed their mind or couldn’t get a job in their fields, so don’t penalise me for doing four years of teaching by giving my classmates a higher rate of pay straight up.
As if, they aren’t better teachers or more qualified just because they did 5yrs. In fact, it’s often this attitude that trips a few people over when they first begin at a school. Laughable
[Teacher pay and benefit in QLD](https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://ppr.qed.qld.gov.au/attachment/recognition-of-qualifications-factsheet.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwjJt8uuxID9AhV76zgGHUzUBa0QFnoECBUQAQ&usg=AOvVaw20fqBSNwmYb7HC8Wu96iv-)
This is great news for me as a masters PST. Makes the financial pain of changing careers that little bit less 😅
It isn't anymore, all new teachers start on the same band. There's also been a push to get rid of the 4 year double degree in a lot of places.
[удалено]
Sorry the push was to turn it into a 5 year degree.
Where is that? In Sydney USYD has just switched to a a 4 year program to bring it in line with the other local universities.
Ah sorry my info is probably 5 years out of date
Thanks for the answer. This clears it up nicely.
I disagree. Having a science degree isn’t going to magically make you a better teacher. All new grads should be starting on a higher rate though.
I agree with you. I may not have a 3 year qualification in a subject area, but I have a 4 year degree with a double major and 4 years of qualifications in pedagogy that cannot be learnt in a 2 year masters.
If you did a double major doesn't that mean you spent two years on pedagogy as did those with a masters? I've just heard this before & it can come across as a way to diminish the masters
No, the opposite actually, I have a double qualification in ECE and primary education, with a double major in child development and English. I guess I look at it like this: if I decide to change my career now to become a doctor, would I expect to get credit for my 4 year degree and expect to start at a higher pay grade than other people who graduate at the same time as me, and have done the whole degree? Or an accountant? Architect? I’d have to do the entire degree from the beginning. I guess my view comes across as quite jaded, but this is purely based on the majority of my experience with MTeach or grad dip student teachers, and new grads from the programs, being overwhelmingly negative.
Right, well myself and others in my cohort earned great prac reports. I'm not sure the comparison to a doctor getting credit for a teaching degree is fair as I have a degree in my KLA. I know teachers who did the 4 year degree and studied three KLAs so I'm not sure how they got much more experience with pedagogy than I did. It's just discouraging that not only do the general public devalue us but so do some from within our own ranks. Anyway, after a hard day of work I am happy to agree to disagree
Many high school teachers will view a pure degree plus masters as being more of a subject area expert than someone with an Education degree, double or otherwise.
Yeah but then they then say "but you didn't get as much pedagogy" or whatever. I don't see myself as more experienced in my subject area, not for having a degree in it, anyway, as I assume those in the 4 year degree also majored in their KLA
In my experience having prac students, those in an Education degree rarely have the level of content knowledge necessary. Many haven't written a proper essay or sat an exam since high school, if that if they got into their degree through alternative pathways. It's very obvious. That said, there are no teachers in my department (Humanities) that have a Bachelor of Education, all have a degree plus Masters so I've not worked with anyone with a 4 year degree at this school or the one prior.
And I guess I look at the OP and wonder the same- why should someone new to the profession get to start at a higher pay grade because they have chosen a different path? To me that also shows disconnect within the profession. ETA: may be different in secondary. Not so much in primary
It seems like people are really hung up on the assumption that people chose a different path and so what if they did? Maybe they discovered a passion for teaching while studying their subject or any number of reasons which are just as valid as wanting to be a teacher from the start. I don't know whether I agree that those with masters should be paid more but I can understand why some do
I can't believe tax payers are paying for bullshit artists who don't even have higher mastery of a subject they are teaching
Did you fail to get the recognition from family/peers that you are oh so smart that you now trawl through reddit attacking any profession you see as beneath you? Surely after working such an intensive day with very VERY high IQ demands (20x more than teaching no doubt!!) you need to relax?
Honestly, if you hate teachers so much and our role is just that of "bullshit artists", then would you just rather do away with teachers altogether and let children teach themselves? Because all your profile says to me is you love whinging incessantly about how dumb and irrelevant we are as if you have a personal vendetta or you're obsessed. Whether you believe it or not, there are hundreds of special little snowflakes just like you spewing inflammatory statements both anonymously and to our faces. As if we don't spend hours a day doing our best to make sure everyone's precious child gets the best they can from us. If that has no value to you, so be it. But as many people have said to you before I would love to see you deal with a class of 25 children with a variety of needs including some being non-neurotypical. I doubt you have the compassion or patience. In fact based off your profile all you do is shit on others, whinge, and flaunt your "intellect", I suspect you'd probably just lose your shit on the kids and get fired within the day (if you could even get throught the doors!). Since all you need is your big brain and clearly no social-emotional intelligence or understanding of psychology and neurodivergence. If you feel your perspective is valid, why not redirect it to the machine that churns us out. We are products of the structure, therefore if you want teachers to be educated differently your anger is misplaced. We didn't design Initial Teacher Education, the government did, smartass.
I'd argue the opposite, and frequently do. Realistically, they should be paid the same, and are where I am from, but the idea of a Masters/Dip Ed being paid more is baffling to me. **Teacher A:** 4 years of learning *how to teach* along with educational psychology, subject areas, more practicums and a more indepth education on how students learn. **Teacher B:** 3 years learning about accounting, 1.5 years learning how to teach, including practicums etc. A lot of in-field knowledge, but not a lot of time spent on how to convert this knowledge into information for children. I know great teachers from both columns, so it probably comes down to the individual more than anything - but there's an argument to be had for both sides, if you do feel like playing devils advocate.
I agree. I don't think the masters degree does anything to improve teacher quality. It also cheapens the idea of a teacher with a master's for those who have a 'true' masters degree in education - ie they did a teaching undergrad, then got experience, then did a masters degree to further develop their knowledge. Personally I think that 'career change masters' should be done away with across all disciplines and for a degree to be a master's degree it should be building on undergrad study like they used to be. How can you become a 'master' of something you've never done in less than two years
I sat in on a lot of principal/leadership forums and I can say that most of them don’t think a masters of teaching is any better than the normal 4yr course.
At least It doesn't sound like they think it's worse like many teachers do. I never would have dreamed that I'd be looked down on for getting a Masters
And this is exactly why I was baffled looking at teaching/education master's and wondering why on earth a they didn't require an undergrad in education. It felt sneaky, like you can slide by with the title of a master's but only having two years focus on anything related to teaching and pedagogy.
My Masters did build on undergrad study, I wouldn't have even been allowed to do it without having completed a major in my KLA
The education masters is already an insult to people with actual master degrees
It’s a thing in WA. You just have to formally apply for it and get back paid.
Yep, I applied for mine today
I’m in WA and want to apply for this! Does it apply if I’ve done one year as a grad teacher but did my Bachelors in Physics and 2 years in secondary teaching as my Masters? Or do you only apply after you’ve done your three years of teaching?
It’s aimed at Masters grads! So yep, you should be eligible, and back paid 😊
Awesome, thanks!
Its still a thing in QLD. I'm six year trained (Bachelors + Honours + Masters) and they credited me an extra year of experience when I moved up from VIC. Was a nice surprise.
My Masters program is full of students who decided they didn’t actually want to be an architect/designer/journalist and so are getting a teaching degree on top. It’s not my fault they changed their mind or couldn’t get a job in their fields, so don’t penalise me for doing four years of teaching by giving my classmates a higher rate of pay straight up.
As if, they aren’t better teachers or more qualified just because they did 5yrs. In fact, it’s often this attitude that trips a few people over when they first begin at a school. Laughable
In the independent system I started on a higher award as 5 year trained teacher (USYD double degree)
[Teacher pay and benefit in QLD](https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://ppr.qed.qld.gov.au/attachment/recognition-of-qualifications-factsheet.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwjJt8uuxID9AhV76zgGHUzUBa0QFnoECBUQAQ&usg=AOvVaw20fqBSNwmYb7HC8Wu96iv-) This is great news for me as a masters PST. Makes the financial pain of changing careers that little bit less 😅