So we do need teachers who know the period and know what they are talking about.
I would agree with you. Of course we want teachers who know what they're talking about. I personally would like everyone to know what they're talking about. If they don't know a subject, they should shut up and listen... and take notes... and verify what they had heard via other sources... and feedback - the dialectic.
Unfortunately in this day and age of the veneration of pap and ersatz culture, what with X Factor, Dancing with the Stars, Celebrity Makeover Cookery Bachelor Love Match on an Island show, fewer and fewer interesting things are discussed and those not to any interesting depth. We intellectuals are a small and increasingly 'persecuted' group.
In terms of primary school teachers and to a lesser extent, secondary school teachers, I feel I have to say something. This was, by far, the most difficult job I have ever had with the longest hours. I must also say that everyone with whom I came into contact in the profession was a dedicated professional - dedicated to delivering the highest quality teaching and to improving their craft. This is not to say that primary school teachers are wonderful people. I was lucky, I worked in a school with a very supportive culture. I had friends and colleagues who worked in schools which seemed to have a very toxic work environment, and a significant minority of teachers seemed to be very petty, almost childish, which seemed contradictory seeing as they were such competent professionals. I remember discussing this with a more experienced colleague. I believed that such people were attracted to the profession, whereas she believed that the number of petty people was not significantly higher in teaching than in other areas, and that there is something about working with children 7 hours a day which can subtly affect your dealings with adults.
Anyway, primary school teachers teach all subjects. The subject knowledge requirements are a particular challenge. The primary school teacher is required to be something of a polymath, a renaissance man (if you pardon the sexist expression. I mean 'man' in the OE sense). Although we'd all passed our subject knowledge requirements, different teachers had different interests, strengths and weaknesses. My weakness were science, computers and math, and paradoxically these ended up being my strongest teaching subjects, presumably because I focussed on them, and I was aware of the difficulties in learning them.
The year 3 teachers in my school, had not been exposed to the Anglo-saxon period, and thus were not interested in it. It was another increase in their workload. Luckily, I sat in on their meeting and talked about the interesting role of the Godwisons, Harold's fight with Hardrada and his heroic march south, the battle of Hastings (two very different styles of warfare coming together), Cnut's union of Scandinavia and England, the role of the witan, and finally alliterative poetry. I was speaking off the top of my head. I'm more interested in the language and prosody of Anglo-Saxon England than I am of the history, but as I said before, my enthusiasm was palpable.
At the end, the weary faces had raised eyebrows as if to say "this stuff is more interesting than I thought". And I think that that strikes at the heart of this organisation and its purpose. We can lament lack of knowledge of the period all we want. In fact, I lament the lack of all kinds of knowledge and thinking skills. But lamentation gets us very little. As was said in a previous thread, what we should do is know our stuff and communicate that knowledge when called upon to do so.
There are a few of us writing novels set in the period and some of us posting videos on YouTube. Those of us in Anglecynn and Regia, just be aware that the Anglo-Saxons is a year 3 history option and cold calling schools offering services might be an idea - get some income, give the teachers a break and create some interest and knowledge in the period among staff and students alike.