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 professionals and have your say on the issues that matter to you.

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

    Dismiss Notice

Do you think the IFL should be scrapped?

Discussion in 'Further Education' started by MrJob, May 23, 2010.

  1. The new government is scrapping hundreds of thousands of jobs and is looking to close or reduce educational quangos. So far the IFL has not been mentioned in the press.
    www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article7134040.ece While we are at it we should scrap the level 5 additional diploma for numeracy and literacy lecturers - a degree and a PGCE is surely sufficient. In these hard times colleges and local education authorities are making cuts and cannot afford to pay for these unnecessary qualifications just to satisfy government tick boxes. It is time to challenge to all the stupid waste and bureaucracy before colleges start going bust or more likely making even more people redundant whilst student numbers increase.

     
  2. The new government is scrapping hundreds of thousands of jobs and is looking to close or reduce educational quangos. So far the IFL has not been mentioned in the press.
    www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article7134040.ece While we are at it we should scrap the level 5 additional diploma for numeracy and literacy lecturers - a degree and a PGCE is surely sufficient. In these hard times colleges and local education authorities are making cuts and cannot afford to pay for these unnecessary qualifications just to satisfy government tick boxes. It is time to challenge to all the stupid waste and bureaucracy before colleges start going bust or more likely making even more people redundant whilst student numbers increase.

     
  3. In itself not a bad thing. Students and the taxpayer should be able to expect high standards of teaching. And someone should ensure that these are achieved.
    I think it has prosecuted what has previously been government policy. This is not the same as propaganda.
    Not entirely true, but so far, it has done so with the voice of a mouse, and has given the distinct impression of being the creature of others.
    You may have a point about the 'just'. But specifying the standards that FE teachers should maintain is no bad thing per se.
    In ths short term certainly.
    What addtional diploma?
    Many of my colleagues don't have a degree. Why would they need one? What they need to be able to demonstrate is that they are affective teachers, and this does mean demonstrating CPD. An obligation that many of us already meet as dual professionals.
    What are these?
    Scrapping the IfL would not result in one more penny going to FE, it would go towards the cost of bailing out the banks.
    The truth is government cannot scrap the IfL becuase it is not a quango, it has been created by legislation and by law it must exist and must police those regulations.
    However I imagine it will remove its funding and oblige us to pay for it (like the GTCE).
    The immediate challenge for the IfL is to begin to truly represent its members and to take on government and the AoC when and where necessary. Otherwise it will be as hated by its members as much as its older sibling, the GTCE, is by their members.
     
  4. Someone from the IfL spoke at the University I am doing (well, done, just finished) my DTLS at. I think it was a favour as he knows our course leader. I really didn't know that it had been around for nearly ten years and that it was created by a group of teachers who were fed up that nothing was being done to raise the status of lecturers. Or is this all part of the propaganda Mr Job? I'm even more confused now. We were also told that it isn't a quango because it was set up not by government but by the sector, so maybe that's why you've not seen it mentioned.
    I think I'd miss it if it wasn't there but maybe that's because I'm new to this teaching game. Surely having professional status has to be good for us, doesn't it. I know some of my colleagues who have been in teaching a lot longer than me say it hasn't done much but I think that's because they think locally and don't see a bigger picture.
    I really disagree with you on the issue of subject specialist qualification for skills for life. Teaching numeracy and literacy is a skill in itself and we shouldn't go back to the days of any old teacher being able to teach in this area.
     
  5. Hello shirtandtie
    Was it created by legislation? The way it was described to me was that it already existed before the legislation came in but that it was given the responsibility to deliver the regulations when they were introduced. And hasn't the funding already been removed? Don't we have to start paying for ourselves soon anyway, I'm sure my tutor said something along those lines earlier this year, there was some kind of announcement though I just looked in google and couldn't see anything.
    I'm with you that scrapping IfL would not mean any extra money going into FE. At the end of the day what could I do with thirty quid, I know a great many of my colleagues waste at least that much a year on resources they don't need or use. We've had to introduce controlled access to the photocopier because some abuse it and just create a load of handouts that end up in the bin. I suppose I could buy all of my students a can of coke once a year ;o)
     
  6. I have posted about the IFL, unfortunately people on the TES website seem to have a vested interested in the IFL as they deleted my posts.
    The IFL appear to have no real purpose, and are unable to represent people in FE.
    I have had a few issues with them and ended up having to contact them on Facebook as my reperated phonecalls and emails were ignored.
    I resent having to belong, they don't recognise 1/2 the qualifications in existance and have never answered my queries satisfactorily.

    Let's hope they go
     
  7. jacob

    jacob Lead commenter

    I have posted and argued against the IfL since it started (yes ten years back) as it uses words like "professional", but is not representative of us as a professional body. It is no more than an FE Thought Police, like the GTC. Kill it, and the GTC, even if it only saves twenty quid to pay for an MP's taxi across London.
     
  8. Jacob, I'm intrigued as to why you would have protested against it
    ten years back, wasn't it voluntary then? Why would you protest against
    that?
    I happen to think that it is fairly representative of me
    and my qualifications are recognised so I don't know why someone said
    they don't recognise half our qualifications.
    A guy I work with is an early member, keeps going on about his "AA status" and that he was in the first 1000 members. He says it hasn't turned out exactly as he would have wanted but that FE needs a professional body. I tend to agree with him.
     
  9. CB400 and Jacob - I too have voiced considerable concern about all aspects of IFL and agree that this forum appears to be VERY partisan and nowhere near the impartial line I expect from a news forum. However, I received the following from a trusted and informed colleague yesterday. Let's see what comment can be made to the content below......

    IfL has gone from bad to worse! Having held a secret AGM where no one was invited with an attendance of only 12 (how was this quorate?) the IfL took away voting rights from its 'members' and gave them only to IfL fellows (most of whom are non-teachers, e.g. managers). It never made this public but the mem and arts were secretly changed. So now the professional body, by teachers and for teachers doesn't allow teachers to vote or attend its conferences. It does however allow college managers to run the place and sack teachers for breech of conduct.

    But lately this government puppet got even worse, IfL is spending its members' money on an employee tracking system which it will make available to colleges in the next 2 months. This system will provide data to colleges on; who is an IfL member, who has or hasn't done their CPD. It will also be sending letters to colleges threatening them that if their staff don't declare their CPD they will inform the SFA. Colleges will most likely use this to fire staff as opposed to make them redundant given the current climate.

    Since refusing to join CALL. IfL has continued to show its true colours. There are those there who work their who still care about teachers but they are seriously outnumbered.

    Boycott renewal, boycott CPD. The money should go straight to colleges to provide CPD on the ground, not this arbitary **** of 30hrs/ year... Or better yet go online and join IFL under a false name, sorry you can't have Leon Skytrot, Darth Vader, Guy Fawkes or Professor Plum as I've already got them (there's £180 of public money in fees... how much remission would that be for CPD?). Remember folks! To join IfL you need no proof of qualifications, proof of ID, CRB check... anyone can do it and IFL makes absolutely no checks. Why not tell your friends?

    By the way, be sure to make your new persona/ personas IfL fellows fIfL, then you'll have voting rights at the AGM... an honour not bestowed on real teachers!

    Finally for a laugh, IfL's latest video... these members are actually all IFL council members... what a put up...

    http://www.ifl.ac.uk/get-involved/related-links/the-value-of-ifl-membership-a-member-video

    20k well spent? How about some remission to do CPD?

    ** So, let's hear a rational response IFL**
     
  10. I refused to pay extra for FIfl so they demoted me.... my MSc was deleted from their system. Marvellous. I am dedicated enough to get a Masters in my own time and at my own expense and my professional body tries to charge me! In what way does that encourage CPD?
    Is it illegal to charge one group of customers more than another group for exactly the same service?
     
  11. Jude Fawley

    Jude Fawley Lead commenter

    Jude Fawley, the IfL and TES
    We've had our little dances.
    Scrap the IfL now!
    Let schools of education train and educate teachers and lecturers who are up and running on graduation.
    The IfL is an insult to the schools of education.
    The IfL is an insult to any trained teacher or lecturer.
     
  12. TCSC47

    TCSC47 Lead commenter

    My twopence worth.
    I'm not a fan of IFL. In theory it sounds good. Our business certainly needs quality control of some sort. However, I do not see the IFL capable of delivering adequet QC.
    And as for their Reflect, I am still seething from the time I had to spend trying to make the system work last year. I spent so much time on it, only to find out (much to my relief) that I didn't need to use Reflect after all!


     
  13. As there has been no denial or rebuff to the post I made earlier, I think I am justified to make this point -

    Clearly there are people who have responded on this thread who have not read what I posted. How exactly does enforced membership of a body that clearly fails to even recognise or check professional qualifications going to uphold professional status????? It's a farce.

    As I have said in previous posts - in FE professionalism comes from the attainment of high level vocational qualifications and / or academic qualifications such as Cert.Ed, B.Ed, PGCE, B.A/Sc etc.

    If a colleague has high levels of experience, skill and knowledge in plumbing or bakery I class that person as professional. If they teach 'O' / 'A' levels etc. I expect them to have the appropriate qualification ie. a degree in the subject. All who teach I expect to recognise the need for a qualification in teaching and a Cert.Ed would do fine. The individual professional needs to make the decision if they recognise a need to update skills not some remote body.

    It is the knowledge, skill, experience and qualifications gained through effort that justify professional status not the cheap membership of some mickey-mouse club, obeying their crazy diktats and the payment of fees.
     
  14. cariadwch

    cariadwch Occasional commenter

    I understand that under the previous government, the IfL was to become self-financing by 2012? As there may be 300,000 members by 2012 and the government have been paying the registration fees for most thats about £9 milion quid to find each year. I guess we'll have to pay the annual registration yet its only £30 as the gov't gets a bulk discount .If members had to pay individually the cost for a members professional status would more likely be £75-£120 per year.
     
  15. And you are a teacher?
    How sad, not sure who I am sorriest for, you or your students.
     
  16. TCSC47

    TCSC47 Lead commenter

    Cheapshot comment.
     
  17. Some interesting points of view.
    For now the IfL is not scrapped (or the GTCE).
    Personally I'm not bothered about having to demonstrate that I continue to meet the standards for an FE teacher (I have to do this as an engineer anyway), and in this respect I have no fear of big brother.
    But the IfL must realise it's time to 'man-up' and prove its worth to its members.
    Tick tock.
     
  18. cariadwch

    cariadwch Occasional commenter

    Don't you have to demonstrate that to your employer? Does being a member of the IfL and registering 30 hours of CPD really demonstrate anything at all to anyone?

     
  19. Yes. And do that in a variety of ways, one of which is by being in 'good standing' with both a professional teaching and an engineering institution.
    I do question the validity and worth, but not the principle. It demonstrates more than nothing.
     
  20. And I would also point out that there are other stakeholders in my ability; students, their parents and employers, the taxpayer. They also need to know that I can do a proper job.
     

Share This Page