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

IfL

Discussion in 'Further Education' started by carbon footprint, Sep 4, 2007.

  1. jacob

    jacob Lead commenter

    You are the typical undereducated **** found in this sector, Witchy. Perhaps you and Sixth Form fascist are out the same limited mould?

    This is fascistis' statement from the other thread:

    " As a 'professional' in the sector, how is it that I am ignorant of the most important policy initiative to impact on the sector for 75 years?"

    Where does it mention LSC funding? Where does it talk about the things you mention 60% or 40%. If you cannot prepare a riposte without stoopping so low, I am very glad you don't work with me.

    I still, to get back to the point, do not see how the imposition of an unwanted body on people who do not want to be members, in a "sector" which does not fit together into a coordinated whole, will serve any purpose. And, if you can read, you might note that most of the posts written about the IfL (on several threads)actually put forward the same idea: that the IfL is unwanted, not required, pointless, and offers no possible positive benefits for any individual.

    If the IfL was so flaming wonderful everyone would have joined when it was a "voluntary" body.


     
  2. Apologies for the absence, Easter pilgrimage.

    Thank you for the amplification Witchfinder Specific, you are spot on. I'll not bother to say much else, there is only so long one can beat ones head against a brick wall. Fortunately, as the sector matures these brick walls are reducing in numbers.
     
  3. Hi Amanda,
    I just read the thread and I feel that in your Post 11 you were the first one to get personal with Jacob. I think you came across as too heavy handed, saying he was offensive, calling him miserable and whingeing and that set up the conflict between you which of course escalated. I don't think it was your intention - in face to face conversation your post would have come across very differently, tongue in cheek I feel - but on an internet forum/written it comes across really badly as essential paralinguistic features are either lacking or harder to create! We all have to work harder to put across tone of voice, body language, gestures etc. Thank God for emoticons lol! [​IMG]
    I do agree with your point on the IFL - I am trying to be optimistic - and I too found Jacobs bent over bottom imagery a little, erm, disturbing!!! [​IMG]
    However I think he makes very valid points and is clearly an experienced tutor with strong opinions despite his way with words. As a new teacher compared to him it would be unwise of me not to pay attention to what he is saying even if I do not 100 % agree now. I might be glad of his words in years to come if what he predicts about the IFL/other things goes on to happen.
    So I would say - Jacob, a little less, ahem, imagery would be nice [​IMG]
    Doritos xxxx
     
  4. You might find that, given the age of this thread, the 2 protagonists have moved on!

    Such arguments happen a lot around here! S'part of the fun!
     
  5. Hi, I'm a reporter on FE Focus. Since this thread's been revived, I thought you might like to discuss the latest news on IfL: the Government wants it to be self-financing, which the fees will have to come from FE staff themselves. But the legislation will still be in place making it compulsory to join - so it's a bit like an extra tax on teaching in FE.
    It's mentioned in our skills strategy coverage, but we're intending to cover this in more depth too:
    https://www.tes.co.uk/article.aspx?storycode=6027587
     
  6. jacob

    jacob Lead commenter

    Exactly as I predicted then.
    I TOLD YOU SO!
     
  7. I remember this thread lol. What has changed in two years? well the IfL have cemented what it means to be professional by setting out the professional formation requirements for QTLS/ATLS. I have applied and it now remains to be seen whether I meet the professional/licensed threshold.

    Wish me luck.
    Alex. [​IMG]
     
  8. hey good luck Alex.

    I have to do mine after I get my diploma.

    Have to say I really don't get the fuss about paying. Surely if we pay our own fees then it makes IfL stronger.
     



  9. Thanks Dtlsheadache. best of luck with the remainder of your course. Alex.
     
  10. All the best from me too Alex. Oh and don't worry, the old paint splatterer will just about make it through teacher training [​IMG]

    I'm a member of the Academy of Food and Wine (costs me £75) and the Local Authority Caterers Association (again £75). I'm also a Fellow of the RSA (£150ish I think). All have been around for a long time and I imagine they all suffered from "why should I join" or "what's the point" type questions at the start.

    Now I'm fairly new to teaching (and suffering, I mean enjoying teacher training) and without a doubt I would have voluntarily joined an appropriate professional body - because I believe in them. I actually think the IfL has done pretty well in a few short years and agree with Alex about the importance of QTLS as a benchmark for the sector. at the moment I don't think that much about what else I can get out of IfL, because I don't pay for it. When I do pay for it, and I will, I will become a much more discerning member because I want return on my investment. I also want a professional body that works for me and if IfL delivers I will expect to pay the market rate. It already does more for me (for free) than the Academy of Food and Wine, yet I pass over my £75 quid happily.

    So, in response to the journalist. If we end up with a strong professional voice and a real community of teachers, why should we worry about paying for it. I doubt it will stat at £30, but if it is doubled I'll be getting this for just over a quid per week and I'll be a member of a body that is truly free from government (have the policy wonks really thought the consequences of that through, just a thought?) and able to lobby for me. Could be a real bargain.

    Excuse me - just seen time and I have a pastry class to get started - whoops, have I breached the code of practice if I'm 5 mins late for class (only joking, it starts at 9.15).
     
  11. Not really - is it? That's just a journalistic view to incite reaction, I imagine?

    My partner is in CIPD, no regulations there but her industry is like a closed shop - no CIPD membership = no HR job. She doesn't think of it as a tax - I just asked her. And she also said it would strengthen lots of sectors if professionalism was regulated, in her opinion as an HR manager it would make her job far easier.
     
  12. cariadwch

    cariadwch Established commenter

    Professionalism is regulated. The IfL and its code of practice is just another layer of regulation. Teaching is clearly one of the most regulated professions.
    HR professionals are regulated too, they also have a code of practice...issued by the CIPD.
    So the CIPD is a closed shop...If you think thats a good thing, then why not get rid of the IfL and make the UCU the official voice of FE professionals.
     
  13. Absolutely not so - ask a lawyer, doctor, care specialist, nurse, policeman/woman, indeed I suspect my own industry is far more regulated than teaching - as I imagine are gas engineers, electricians, builders, etc. I'd argue teaching (FE teaching or lecturing) is one of the least regulated professions.
    Yes, but no one has to join CIPD through statute or regulation - in that sense it is not regulated other than through self-regulation.
    No, and I didn't say that. In my limited experience UCU is a total waste of time. In my college it spends all its time arguing the toss for two lecturers who, I understand, have been on the same (silver book) contracts since the mid 90s. That is my branch's only focus and above all else, apart from trying to get a couple of hundred quid out of me for no real benefit, it does nothing for new teachers or professional status. UCU is an absolute farce.


     
  14. welshskyline

    welshskyline New commenter

  15. I am sooooooooooooooooooooo frustrated with IFL. I've been trying to get a sensible answer out of this lot for the past year - bloody **** . They need to get their act together!!! FAST.
     
  16. Jude Fawley

    Jude Fawley Star commenter

    That will be because when you phone 0844 815 3202 you are actually dealing with Orbital Marketing Services Group.
    Orbital Marketing Services Group are trained to deal with your queries!
    Contact Orbital Marketing Services Group at their shiny new O M S G Contact Centre.
    Note how the old IfL switchboard number 0870 757 7894 is very close to the LLUK phone number which is 0870 757 7890.
    You can't get hold of membership on 020 7190 1690 now because like the old number it is dead. Orbital Marketing Services Group is your new advisory centre.
    Not a memebr of IfL staff in sight at the OMSG Contact Centre - but the call centre staff have been trained to deal with all your queries!
    You really must remind me to sit down and tell you what has actually been going on re the IfL.
    Just why do you think the old phone number is the LLUK with a 4 extension?
    Always remember:
    The IfL: Your Professional Sector Body Maintaining Standards In Further Education And Training.

     
  17. I see, so the IfL is a subsiduary of LLUK. It is ironic with institutions like LLUKthat this country has gone in the opposite direction to LL. The government have made the fatal mistake of handing education over to the corporate fat cats. As an academic I see only darkness for this country's future, not the enlightenment of a proper education. Industry and learning go together about as well as potassium nitrate and carbon.
     
  18. Just to point out that IfL is not now and has never been a subsiduary of Lifelong Learning UK. IfL was founded by teachers and came into being in February 2002. With the support of NATFHE (UCU), FENTO (LLUK), DfES (DBIS) and other key partners, IfL was able to grow as a voluntary membership body and gain sufficient credilbilty for its work for government to invest in it the responsibility of taking forward the reforms set out in Equipping Our Teachers for the Future (Nov 04).
    At this time IfL shared office facilities with LLUK - LLUK was the newly formed sector skills council and, as it was still growing, had spare capacity in it's offices to offer IfL some space. This made absolute sense given the newness of both organisations and IfL's relatively small staff. By mid 2006 we had outgrown the space available to us and moved into temporary serviced office accommodation. The 0207 telephone number cited above was the landline into the membership team at the serviced office, the reason it is no longer available is that we moved in May 2009 and you are not able to port numbers owned by landlords without their permission.
    Lots of FE organisations have 0870 757 numbers as these were released on block to the sector at that time. We gave up ours early in 2007 for the current 0844 number as it offered better value for money for members. We contract with an outsourcing membership service for our helpline because it enables us to provide the best possible level of service to our members. The staff are dedicated to IfL, are as trained and supported as our membership team and, contrary to the view expressed, IfL's Membership Manager and other key staff are at the centre on close to a weekly basis to assure the level of service. At peak times we receive up to 5000 calls per day and have adopted a strategy which enables us to manage the variable volume of calls throughout the year.
    I spent time at the centre during the height of the CPD declaration period and was greatly impressed with the work of our staff there. These people are highly trained in our processes and I know from feedback I receive that members appreciate the time taken to explain REfLECT, Professional Formation and other aspects of IfL's work.
     
  19. Lee

    Clearly you not do use the service ahem.
    I shall e-mail you very soon with a query. If I am lucky, I might get a straight answer.
     
  20. Actually, I do use it - as a 'mystery shopper' from a QA perspective.

    By all means ask your question here, if I can answer it I will.
     

Share This Page