Despite having practised law and seen my plays performed at the Sydney Theatre Company,I was shocked at how little this counted when confronted with the difficulties of classroom management and needing to engage a variety of students with complex and competing learning needs.

I learnt the hard way that effective pedagogy requires planning,critical reflection,resilience and patience:a set of entirely different academic,personal and professional skills.

The non-profit provider of my two-year apprenticeship model told me I would be part of “transformational change” in my community,helping to create better futures for “disadvantaged” young people,and promised ongoing observations and support. They promised a resume-booster,too:at one stage,their recruitment tagline was “From Classroom to CEO”. The combination of doing good and being supported (and paid) while doing so was irresistible.

Over time,for myself and many of my competitively selected cohort,it became apparent that this was slick marketing that appealed to philanthropic donors and government policymakers rather than being our reality. As we learnt more about our school communities – including engaging with many dedicated and passionate teachers already working there – the framing of us as educational saviours for failing students and staff felt increasingly problematic.

In my second year,my teaching was barely observed at all by the provider,while at the same time I was pressured to apply for leadership positions within my school. I could barely teach,but I was already expected to demonstrate leadership development.

Meanwhile,studying a Masters online while teaching four days a week led to me having to prioritise my job,or my study. It was impossible to do both at the standard I wanted,and have any kind of a life.

Tellingly,of the group of friends I made during the program,only one remains in the classroom.

I had assumed once I graduated with my Masters and was able to begin a more “normal” teaching career,things would become easier.

Instead,I now worked five days with a modest pay rise. The demands of crafting and assessing effective curriculum,engaging with parents and school leadership,the expectations around NAPLAN and VCE performance,and the endless administrative tasks that saw lunchtimes disappear and evenings stretch into the late hours only got worse.

I lasted another two years before transitioning into education academia,burnt out.

While I remain deeply passionate about and committed to public education,I am cautious about apprenticeship-style models being a large-scale solution to deeply entrenched problems.

Those who do thrive in them are still faced with the challenges of the system upon graduation.

A focus on entry points into the profession detracts from the bigger,more difficult questions ministers seem to have mostly avoided:why aren’t teachers staying,and what can we change about the system to fix this?

Pay gets a lot of attention,but few teachers are attracted to the profession– or enticed to remain in it – by pay alone.

Teachers are driven by wanting to work with students,parents and communities. Unrealistic teaching loads,limited planning time,constrained curriculum and ongoing data-gathering for often unknown purposes all take teachers further away from what they do best.

These should be the first areas addressed to support those already teaching,before the issue of supply is considered.

I have found contributing to Initial Teacher Education – particularly with doing an apprenticeship-style model – is a more personally sustainable path.

I hope the students I work with are supported with ways to survive,thrive and stick it out in a way that I couldn’t.

Our education ministers owe them that.

The Opinion newsletter is a weekly wrap of views that will challenge,champion and inform your own.Sign up here.