1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Hi Guest, welcome to the TES Community!

    Connect with like-minded education professionals and have your say on the issues that matter to you.

    Don't forget to look at the how to guide.

    Dismiss Notice

Allegedly outragious head teacher!

Discussion in 'Workplace dilemmas' started by delmamerchant, Sep 16, 2017.

  1. delmamerchant

    delmamerchant Established commenter

    Is it normal for a head teacher to contact the DFE and ask for written confirmation of your QTS status despite seeing certification, and accessing your DFE number online?
  2. install

    install Star commenter

    This post has already appeared in 'personal' and has received answers:cool:
    nomad likes this.
  3. Bonnie23

    Bonnie23 Occasional commenter

    I'm curious as to why you're so angry about this?

    Surely unless there is something to hide about your qualification then you would see this as nothing more than them wasting their own time. Is there a history behind this? An argument?
  4. delmamerchant

    delmamerchant Established commenter

    and I was told that it was in the wrong place
  5. delmamerchant

    delmamerchant Established commenter

    Yes, there is history as the head is new and took a dislike to the teacher and has made her life difficult, Despite this, the teacher gained QTS, gave HR all of the information so she feels that it is over kill, actually writing to ask for confirmation despite having access to her details online.
    Bonnie23 likes this.
  6. install

    install Star commenter

    The head is allowed to do this.The tagline 'allegedly outragious head teacher' does not match the action here.

    Even so, if she feels that attempts are being made to intimidate her she should keep a log just in case and inform someone she trusts.
    pepper5, nomad and Bonnie23 like this.
  7. Bonnie23

    Bonnie23 Occasional commenter

    In that case if there is a history with the head, as there often is when a new one steps into a role, log everything. Any conversations try to have witnesses, any meetings take your union rep or colleague you trust, ask for meetings to be minuted, if you're not in a union join one.

    They can ask, it does seem overkill because this was clearly done when you were hired but they can do it. I would see it as no more than a waste of their time however I can see why it can be patronising and belittling.
    delmamerchant likes this.
  8. nomad

    nomad Star commenter

    Having received so many answers which agree with each other and disagree with you over on Personal, maybe it is the wrong question.
  9. Sundaytrekker

    Sundaytrekker Star commenter

    Same answer as given on Personal: absolutely standard safeguarding requirement. It is not patronising and belittling at all. All teachers' QTS must be checked.

    If there are other issues as well, they need logging and tackling. But if they are also perfectly standard practice that you disagree with then that is a different issue.
  10. Rott Weiler

    Rott Weiler Star commenter Forum guide

    Last edited: Sep 17, 2017
    digoryvenn, nomad and Sundaytrekker like this.
  11. maz403

    maz403 New commenter

    Outraged by the misspelling of outrageous !
  12. hhhh

    hhhh Lead commenter

    But if a head is wasting time s/he is wasting taxpayers' money and IF s/he is doing things to upset good teachers (obviously I don't know whether this is true) then it IS a problem.
  13. Pomza

    Pomza Star commenter

    Again: The school HAS to verify the teacher's qualifications. It makes no difference whether they do it by the automated website, telephone or email. The result is the same.
    digoryvenn likes this.
  14. phlogiston

    phlogiston Star commenter

    If it's normal then I would have expected the head to have quietly done whatever needs to be done to check QTS status.
    The fact that the person being checked has been told about it suggests that there is more here than meets the eye and that perhaps attempts are being made to intimidate the person being checked.
    slingshotsally likes this.
  15. Rott Weiler

    Rott Weiler Star commenter Forum guide


    Quietly? As in secretly? without telling the teacher that they are verifying their QTS?

    Why on earth should the head keep secret something that's a standard HR procedure for appointing new staff and has been for years. In every school in England. For every teacher.
    digoryvenn, Sundaytrekker and Pomz like this.
  16. drek

    drek Star commenter

    I think it is a bit strange.... if you log on to the NCTL website with your dfe number, your QTS information is available for school HR and yourself to verify.
    In fact I checked mine and I had to go back to my course provider as they input the incorrect details! They provide the darabase inputers with the information.
    So they have no need to get written confirmation from the 'dfe'. This is the verification system.
    If someone is acting strange about it then would advise not to join such a school.....things may only get worse!
  17. phlogiston

    phlogiston Star commenter

    Quietly as in it's one of the things you do without particular fuss if you're a head teacher.

    The OP seems shocked by the checking of QTS. The the person being checked is new to the post then it's stuff that's done during the verification of the appointment and the OP is making a fuss about not much. On the other hand the OP might justifiably be making a fuss if the person has been working at the school for a long period of time and the head is now "checking the status of the person" as if they've been fraudulently there for a while, but is also doing it in such a way as to cause a fuss. It's a bit difficult to read between the lines.
  18. Cooperuk

    Cooperuk Senior commenter

    Been a teacher for 20+ years and have always had to supply DFE ref to prove QTS status etc.

    It's not unusual - as Tom Jones would say.
    nomad likes this.
  19. delmamerchant

    delmamerchant Established commenter

    You have got it right.
  20. Jolly_Roger1

    Jolly_Roger1 Star commenter

    Which I think that OP said they have done. To be hauled in and told that the school requires that these proofs be validated, or that the OP has to produce additional validation, seems unnecessary and intimidating.

Share This Page