was established?

It's not a PGCE then. To qualify through a PGCE for secondary, trainees need to spend a minimum amount of days in school. (It's something like 24 weeks minimum.) As for being overrated: trainees' experiences vary a lot exactly because they are all sent to different schools, so it's a bit of a lottery. It is certainly not a course that many people enjoy no matter where they train. And if there is a need for teachers in the subject and location, the PGCE is very effective, and the most common route for becoming a teacher.

Patseya, have you checked out TES forum?

Are you talking about England? The overwhelming majority of the PGCE is spent teaching in schools on placements. Trainees are assessed and awarded QTS based on observations of their lessons. A PGCE (as patseya has found) is a prerequisite for working in almost all schools (that or some other formal qualification with QTS). I cannot stress enough that it is absolutely valued in the sector. Not only that, it's expected.

Not even if you want to be a teacher? (Though I agree it is worthless if you don't intend to teach in the institution for which you are trained.)

I don't know anything about the EdD, but bewildered has given excellent advice: I know that the tutors who delivered my ITT lost their jobs along with many others at the end of the last academic year. Most didn't have doctorates anyway; they had many, many years of varied experience as teachers. But who knows what the future holds? Education is a political football. Keep your mind and your options open.

I would say though that any route that allows you to keep your job (because you say you like it) seems the most sensible (not that I'm necessarily an advocate of choosing sensibly). Aren't FE positions in short supply?

Might I just add though that if you do well on the PGCE, your PhD will make you a very competitive candidate. Schools will value it, not above your ability to be an effective teacher, but assuming you have that nailed, it will give you an edge over your peers.

I did a PGCE a couple of years ago. 9k student loan for fees + 9k bursary (which is subject and degree classification specific; I got a first in a core, but not a shortage, subject). Most people on my course received 5k bursary (for having a 2.1 in a core subject) and took the rest in loans. I think the situation was the same then and that certain subjects received no bursaries and were dependent on student finance. What you've been offered is not unusual at all. Those who tend to do other routes often have experience in schools (such as having been a TA or having worked in the particular school in some capacity).

Whether or not it is worth the investment depends on two things: subject and location. As I mentioned in another thread recently, there was plenty of work for me and my fellow graduates, and it was a worthwhile investment. But as someone else pointed out, that is not the case everywhere, and I am aware that teachers of some subjects struggle more than others (such as PE, ICT, Art, based only on my observations and talking to teachers).

Yeah me too. Teaching sucks, for the reasons you mentioned and many others. There is a reason that it's relatively easy to find a teaching job in England during these hard economic times, that Gove keeps coming up with ridiculous initiatives to entice other professionals into teaching to address the shortage, and that 40-50% leave within 4-5 years of qualifying.

Yep- England. Just two years ago. It was the same for the cohort before mine: all found jobs (though I don't know the number of these that were permanent rather than a year's contract). I do know though that there is no problem with short-term contracts where I am. There are lots of teaching jobs available, but as I said, certain subjects and locations are different. If you're in a core subject and geographically mobile, there is plenty of work. Employment prospects for teachers are much, much better on the whole than for PhDers.

This is a good point. 100% of people who completed the PGCE with me (there were quite a few that dropped out!) got jobs. Yes, some were on one-year contracts (the majority were permanent), but within a year, ALL had secured permanent positions. Of course, the amount of trainees admitted onto teacher training courses are limited by government, and, also in contrast to higher education, there are no benefits in hiring short-term. (Apart from the obvious benefits of having permanent, committed, established teachers who know the school and students, it is far more expensive to hire short-term.)

I'm a qualified teacher. If you want to do it, do it. I think it extremely unlikely that you will find any difficulty returning to teaching at any point. If you complete the PhD and decide to return, all the better. If you were to return, you would, of course, be competing with cheaper NQTs with recent experience for jobs. However, teaching is one of few professions that still values academic qualifications; all the schools I know would love a Dr on staff. Furthermore, you could easily keep your foot in the door by joining an agency and doing as little work as you like to keep your teaching experience recent (and for quick extra cash).

Timmy, it surprises me that you've been unable to find a secure position in teaching. I'm not in a shortage subject (such as science) but I've had job offers thrown at me. There is no shortage of work out there for most (though there are exceptions: certain locations, for example, and supply seems to be full of ICT teachers). The amount of teachers leaving the profession is astounding (I'm one!), and I can't see it improving as conditions continue to worsen.

Good for you that you like teaching, science_teacher! I know too few who feel the same!

Seems like a template and they've just added your scholarship name to it. They should have amended the "The amount shown" part, as they haven't written the amount. Nonetheless after deducting the value of "Graduate school home/EU 14/15", you owe nothing. Seems to me that the "self-funding" part just means that you can only have the award (which covers fees too- if that's what you've already been told), if you haven't already secured funding elsewhere (i.e. if you've already been offered funding from another body, you're expected to take it). Don't worry. Seems fine to me.

I also think it's fine - direct, requires an answer, and sweetened to avoid sounding pissed off (up)

I'm not a fan of the negative interrogative to be honest ("Don't you think I should know about my examiners by now"). I find it unnecessarily indirect in structure which potentially creates the implicatures that a) you should know by now, b) he should agree that you should know by now, and that c) he's at fault (all of which may be true, but is that what you want him to infer?). It therefore has a kind of scolding effect not helped by the subtlety, depending on how he takes it of course; if he doesn't infer the above things, he could possibly assume that you're simply asking for his wise advice i.e. "should I know by now? I thought so, but what do you think?"- which is certainly not what you're going for, but I think the former interpretation is more likely.

This is the first time you've emailed him about the matter, right? I think you can be assertive in a more direct way without being rude i.e. "I'm not happy that I don't yet know about my examiners or when I am likely to find out [followed by your concerns about preparing for your viva]" which is more direct but more polite in my opinion because you're not implying your dissatisfaction - it's honest, reasonable and backed up with an explanation. Or you could simply request "Please let me know about my examiners as soon as possible. [again, viva etc]" Or perhaps you want a question so that he has to answer: "When will I know about my examiners? It is in my interest to know as soon as possible so that I can prepare for my viva, and I fear a delay could prove detrimental because...". I think there's about a million ways to do it, but for me personally, the one you've suggested has its flaws.

I can't advise about whether or not you should suggest possible examiners. I hope, when the time comes, my sup already has good examiners in mind, but you never know.

Good luck getting some answers
(mince)

I understand people asking for help on how best to construct a decent proposal, but I don't understand people coming here for topics. Your desire to research should come from your passion for your chosen topic. If you don't have any ideas as to what to research, you can't reasonably expect to conduct independent research. I have (what I believe is) a great idea for research, and it was the result of a lot of reading and thinking that I did out of genuine interest in my field. Nobody did it for me. Good ideas aren't magically summoned at will.