A good fortnight ago now I endured what was quite possibly the most tense, nail-shredding interview in my short little life. As I may have mentioned, I have been looking at routes into teaching for some time, as well as doing some voluntary work experience at a nearby school. The work experience has been incredibly useful - for showing me what the job really entails, how hard and stressful it can be and also how rewarding it is to see your pupils learning and developing. Work experience is also a little extra padding to fluff up the CV, always useful in a crowded job market i.e. the rest of my working life. Anyway, I took my experience (still rather fledgling at this time) and applied for the GTP (Graduate Teacher Programme) at a centre called Education Management Direct in Grantham, Lincolnshire. The GTP differs from the standard PGCE as a training course in many ways, the fundamental difference being that you are in the employ of a particular school and you earn a wage as you train for your qualification there.
I was pleased to see that I had made it through the first hoop and was invited to an interview at EM Direct's Grantham headquarters. The interview itself was mentioned rather sketchily in the letter from the organisation so I really wasn't all too sure of how it was going to play out, but it was certainly as difficult as I was anticipating. More so, even. Anybody interested in applying for the GTP might be interested in reading how my interview unfolded.
Initially, the candidates (all 9 of us in total) introduced ourselves and were praised by the interview staff for getting through what was a very thorough, very tough selection process. We were then told that out of the 130 candidates still left to be interviewed, only 70 of those would advance from the interview stage onwards. Which meant on paper, at least four or five of my group would not be getting through. They then gave us our first task; a group discussion between the candidates discussing how a teacher would prioritise his/her day when faced with a multitude of hypothetical situations e.g. meeting deadlines, being told of a sensitive issue by a child, facing criticism from a fellow co-worker, etc. I did my best to contribute any ideas and also delivered a presentation forwarding our opinions on the different issues at hand, but I think nerves and the knowledge that their whole performance was being judged by two members of staff were forcing a lot of people, myself included, to try and assert themselves strongly in order to make a good first impression, so it was more difficult then it probably could have been in other circumstances and in a different, more relaxed atmosphere.
After that, we were broken up for our individual assessments. As my focus is primary teaching, I had what was a rather standard GCSE style maths paper, which I believe I did rather capably, having quickly brushed up on basics such as what is the area of a square/how to work out the hypotenuse of a triangle, e.t.c. Straight after that came an English reading comprehension exam. I'd like to think I did really well on this, too - my background is in English and I would be ashamed to know that I'd bombed it. We had to analyse an article written a few years ago when Labour was still in power, about the effects that a new government emphasis on teachers completing masters degrees would have on job prospects for those teachers that elected not to study for one. The article was easy enough to digest and discuss, in all honesty.
They saved the very best til last, though. In my interview confirmation letter, I was informed that all candidates would have to perform a ten-minute 'introduction' or starter lesson. Any subject area in the curriculum could be used for this, and we were advised to treat the interviewers as though they were members of your own class. I was most nervous about this, just reading it on the paper gave me the chills. How do you treat a group of middle-aged women as though they were 9 years old? I tried not to think about it too much originally and crafted my presentation on the phases of the Moon - a lesson I'd seen many Year 5 teachers give and so I had an idea of how I could tailor the lesson to my own style and still keep the core of the subject intact. It is also a subject that I quite enjoy learning about myself, so I was hoping to convey my enthusiasm in a way that would impact positively on my performance.
In actuality, the presentation was no way near as stressful as I was expecting. The two interviewers are very good at putting you at ease, although I wouldn't recommend that either of them pursue careers as method actors (they only really asked childlike questions or made immature comments about three or four times - the rest of it they just sat there like adults, judging your presentation). I may have slipped a little bit too much into the role, though - I told one of the interviewers that she was probably too young to know which band has an album called 'The Dark Side of the Moon'! Additionally, I accompanied my Powerpoint presentation with a flip-chart diagram, and as I as writing this I noticed that my handwriting, as I was so tense, was appalling. It's not good at the best of times, so I don't think I scored many points for that one.
Finally, after all that, came the main interview. In retrospect (always the clearest view) I believe I spent too much of my time preparing for the presentation and neglected to research the details of the interview. A quick search through Google would've given me enough inspiration to begin my preparation for the questions I was likely to face. As such, I was unable to answer some of the questions as satisfactorily as I would have liked. I answered many very well, however, and believe I surprised the interviewers with some of my answers, although I still left the EM Direct headquarters feeling frustrated and annoyed at myself for such a foolish oversight.
When the rejection letter came a week later my initial reaction was shock, although in my heart of hearts I believed I saw it coming. These days I believe that it was probably justified. I'm still awaiting feedback and critique from EM Direct, which should arrive by the end of the month, but I think I can identify many of my shortcomings myself. I still lack enough teaching experience which I believe had a detrimental effect on my confidence when pitted against some of the more robust candidates I was pitted against (all of whom were lovely people, mind - I wish them all the best). My handwriting needs a real boost in order to reach a stage of neatness fit for a child's eye. And I believe I just needed to see the interview this time around, just to know what to expect and how to prepare myself for future forays into the interview room. Maybe when the next intake of graduates comes around, I'll re-apply and hope that the lessons learnt will have honed me and focused my priorities for the interview. Many applicants take years to finally land a a training post, so perseverance is definitely the key in this field. I know I have what it takes to be a good teacher, I just need to show that I know it.
No comments:
Post a Comment