This article is one of a series of interviews with Faculty PGCE alumni about their experiences as trainee teachers at Cambridge and their views on recently-proposed Government reforms which, if implemented, could lead to the University withdrawing from initial teacher education. Emily Williams completed the General Primary PGCE this year and has just started her first job at Histon and Impington Park Primary School – a Cambridge partner school and part of the Histon and Impington Brook School Teaching School Hub.

From day one, the personalised nature of the course really shone through.

The Primary team make it their priority to understand every trainee’s learning journey before enrolment and then set about supporting the professional development of each, by building on personal strengths while providing individual support in areas where we may feel less confident. They made it clear that “no question is a silly question” and they were only ever an email away. This personal attention was, for me, what made the training year such fantastic preparation for teaching my own class.

One of the most valuable features of the PGCE is the access you have to the latest research

Throughout the course, academics from the Faculty lecture on current research that either has implications for the classroom, or could benefit children in other ways. We met leading academics in fields such as dialogic learning, multimodal literacies and inclusive learning environments. I came away with a really nuanced understanding of key ideas in education that I then took into my placements, where I was able to explore how they can actually be applied in a school environment.

Trainee collaboration underpins the course. Even though we trained at the height of the pandemic, we had regular professional study group calls after lectures, where we shared ideas and experiences as a group. I found that these sessions provided a really important opportunity to reflect critically on what I was doing as a teacher and how I might adapt my practice.

If I hadn’t been able to explore different ideas in the PGCE as I did, I’m convinced that my own practice would have been worse off.

What I came to realise more and more on the course was that, while teaching certainly requires a lot of thinking on your feet, the ability to absorb and implement evidence, and to reflect on your own practice after you’ve done it, is also crucial.

I’m deeply concerned about the proposed reduction in Faculty-based teaching time, which was central in helping me to draw the connections between research theory and teaching practice. Because the ITT Market Review essentially proposes a single curriculum for all new teachers, it’s also difficult to see how it could prepare trainees to reflect, critically assess evidence and their own experience, or innovate in their own schools.

Future generations will pay the price if the Market Review proposals are not reconsidered

Given the overwhelmingly negative response from the sector – and with Cambridge and Oxford considering withdrawing their PGCE courses – it seems obvious the reforms would undermine the supply of outstanding teachers. We would be losing teachers who are motivated, know how to strive for continued professional growth, and are ready to help children flourish. That can only be bad for future generations. I would urge the Government not to rush into a decision about this; they need to work closely with institutions who are already providing incredible teacher training. That takes time. It’s also crucial that trainees still have different options available so that they can pick the route into teaching that suits them.

The withdrawal of university-based PGCEs would, of course, also be devastating for children – after all they are the ones who stand to benefit most from ambitious, reflective and forward-thinking teachers. Every child has different experiences, different strengths, and different things with which they struggle. If we want teachers to support children with this in mind, making them conform to a single training model, which assumes there is only one way to do the job, is surely a mistake.