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

Dept of Education email reply yet again!

Discussion in 'Supply teaching' started by historygrump, Dec 2, 2011.

  1. historygrump

    historygrump Lead commenter Forum guide

    Is it me? I have been emailing the dept of education on the use of support staff to teach and the lack of jobs for teachers and the need for the Dept of halfwits, sorry Education to do something. I kept getting the head in the sand reply, which we are all use too, so I sent these suggestions. (I did sugest other things, but these are the two basic ideas)

    1. That is why we need more clear and enforceable rules, with more established requirements on the minimum qualifications needed to teach lessons. This point is accepted by some Cover Supervisors (CS) as well, when I have suggested this on the forums. Would the Dept of Education work with supply teachers to clarify the rules and make them clearer for everyone to understand. This would maintain standards of support staff and defuse the serious arguments between support staff, and supply teachers, and possibly stop the abuses by the HT's. It would also create more work opportunities for the thousands of unemployed and struggling supply teachers. It could be also be a bench mark for the Free schools on the requirements for the employment of unqualified staff.

    2. So would the Dept of Education work with supply and unemployed teachers, and agree to extend the retraining scheme to subjects with the Ebac and focus the effort on the high number of unemployed teachers, because in these times of austerity, you are wasting a vital resource of skilled and highly trained teachers.

    The reply was a classic, even for the Dept of Education 'I would like to thank you for your comments and I appreciate that this may not be the response that you were hoping for, but I do hope that it explains that the Department has nothing further to add to the replies that you have previously received'. They have not responded to the suggestions at all. . I think that this idea of the Dept of Education consulting with supply teachers on the need to clarify the rules and the need to enforce the rules, would be the way forward, but they just don't want to discuss them. Is this due to the hidden agenda by the Dept of Education, because I remember reading a post, in which the dept applauded a HT who recruited and used support staff to cover lessons as the way forward for all schools.
  2. historygrump

    historygrump Lead commenter Forum guide

    sorry the edit button failed, yet again!
  3. I have written to politicians and the Department for Dumbing Down before and I have had the same responses as Historygrump. The department nad Nicj Gibb have both said tha they are not prepared to make any more comments. They keep saying the same things which show that they do not understand the issues.
    An example of the ignorance of people like Nick Gibb; I have supplied him with statistics on the number of support staff being used during PPA time and he seemed to think that I was talking about "cover during teacher absence"
    Teachers are not absent during PPA time and absence only occurs when the teacher is not present to teach during a timetabled teacing lesson.
    All children deserve the attention of a qualified teacher all the time. But the majority of children in primary schools are being denied the services of a qualified teacher for the equivalent of 3.8 weeks a year at a minimum. Compare that with the loss of one day when teachers are on strike.

Share This Page