The University of Cambridge has expressed deep concerns about new Government proposals to change initial teacher training (ITT) in England – but what do trainees themselves think? We have been asking some of our recent alumni about their own experiences of the Faculty of Education’s PGCE courses.

Katharine Kidd, who has just completed the Secondary PGCE in Modern Languages, explains why she benefited from a choice of routes into teaching, Cambridge’s strong network of partnership schools and the tight integration of theory and practice that the course provides. Katharine has recently accepted a job at one of our partnership schools in Saffron Walden, where she will be teaching French and Latin next academic year.

The university-based model really suited the way that I wanted to train

I originally applied for school-centred initial teacher training (SCITT) courses, but at the Cambridge interview I was completely blown away. Part of the appeal was the integrated model of faculty and school-based work, a structure that allows trainees to learn theory drawing on the very latest research and put it into practice at the same time. I felt that this was ideal for me.

As well as this, I was drawn to the fact that all of the trainees have to undertake a final research project – many fine past examples of which I had read through the Journal of Trainee Teacher Educational Research (JoTTER) – and to the Faculty’s exceptionally strong links with its partnerships schools. All of this proved persuasive when it came to choosing Cambridge as a place that would really suit me. Despite this I’m really grateful to have had a choice of different routes available through which to enter the profession. That range of options is really beneficial because there are so many different types of people who can make fantastic teachers.

I’d be deeply concerned about any reforms which threaten Cambridge’s partnerships or the balance between faculty and in-school training

One of the most noticeable things about training as a teacher at Cambridge is that the Faculty of Education has, over the years, developed excellent ties with its placement schools. It was clear throughout that the Faculty lecturers and link lecturers knew, and were often good friends with, mentors and professional tutors at placement schools – often former trainees themselves. This means that as a trainee, you have access to a thriving network of enthused, engaged and nurturing professionals. I fear that would be lost if the proposed changes to the placement system go through.

The proposed reform to increase the number of weeks spent in school is another cause for concern because it would result in the loss of 10 days – two working weeks – in the Faculty. This is precious time; Faculty days, interspersed with days in school, were absolutely crucial in allowing our cohort of trainees to come together, share experiences, and reflect on different examples of practice. Such benefits need to be taken into account on top of the actual purpose of those Faculty days, which is to read and discuss research with experienced teacher trainers and each other, and to think about what that means for own practice in school, both teaching our specialist subjects, and in our wider professional roles. Cutting that amount of Faculty time, would, I think, make for a very different and less effective course.