Should someone with no teaching qualifications have been given a job as the head of a Free School in London?
There are a lot of people pretty upset by this. It doesn't bother me at all. I just think about the Head Teachers I have come across and heard about during my career and can't see why someone who is 27 and not experienced teaching in the classroom should be any worse than a small, but significant number of head teachers in this country.
I think that the argument shouldn't be about whether the school should have appointed her, but why they thought it was necessary.
The whole profession needs to look at itself and wonder why there were no teachers ready to take on the role and take the school in the direction the governing body wants. There are two elements to this. Firstly: is what the profession believe to be possible and right for the education of our young people out of sync with what the general public expect? And secondly: what does it take to be a Head Teacher and why are so few teachers ready to take this on?
I personally think that the pressure on the teaching profession is vast and unreasonable. The pressure on Head Teachers is career threatening.
My final point is that the teaching profession should not discount the input of people with limited teaching experience. Other expertise is useful to teaching, for example dealing with people, marketing, design and of course the idea of what are reasonable working hours and conditions. (However, I would say these people need to work as part of the team in the school, not as external consultants/companies who are just trying to make money).