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

Is a narrative unfolding?

Discussion in 'Supply teaching' started by littleguide, Feb 26, 2011.

  1. From Today's "East Lancashire Telegraph"
    *EAST Lancashire schools spent more than £3.4million on supply teachers last year, new figures have revealed.*
    Shuttleworth College, in Padiham, spent £370,570, the highest amount, while Tauheedul Islam High School For Girls, in Blackburn, did not use any of its budget on cover.
    Secondary schools in England spent £293million on supply teachers last year, an average of £100,000 per school, according to a report from the Taxpayers’ Alliance.
    Educatio[​IMG]n bosses said some schools could reduce supply teacher costs by employing cover supervisors who step into classes when a member of staff is off.
    But other schools use supply teaching agencies when teachers are sick.
    In Blackburn, with Darwen, £698,282 was spent on supply teachers, with Our Lady and St John Cath[​IMG]olic College spending the highest amount of £182,640.
    The council said the total supply costs amounted to 0.14per cent of the total schools budget.
    In Lancashire, Shuttleworth College paid the most with £370,570, and Bowland High School spent the lowest at £16,885.
    Coun Maureen Bateson, executive member for children’s services at Blackburn with Darwen Borough Council, said: “Schools have their own delegated budgets and make their own decisions.
    “There are many reasons why schools employ supply teachers.
    “As a council we would hope they would use their budgets prudently and effectively to achieve the best for young people and the council offers support to enable them to achieve this.”
    Dave Hewitt, Lancashire County Council’s head of human resources for Lancashire’s schools said: “Schools are directly responsible for their own budgets.
    “They make their own arran-gements to cover for absent teachers, and decide how much they choose to spend on supply cover, and where they obtain it from.
    “Headteachers will base their decision on how to fill in for an absent colleague on the specific circumstances in their school.
    “For instance, some schools employ cover supervisors on a permanent basis, while others engage supply teachers, as and when they need them.
    “Advice and support are always available to headteachers from the county council.
    “We also have our own supply teaching agency that can quickly provide high-quality supply cover to a school, whenever they need it.”
    .................................................

    More shock horror-I'll try to paste readers' comments:
    burner, blackburn says...
    10:43am Fri 25 Feb 11
    Two points
    .
    1) Kids have germs, there is an abundant population of infection in a school-based workplace
    .
    2) Stress is a major occurrence in schools thanks to successive government " initiatives and improvements " - to say nothing of worsening pupil behaviour.
    .
    So don't be too quick to condemn.Two points . 1) Kids have germs, there is an abundant population of infection in a school-based workplace . 2) Stress is a major occurrence in schools thanks to successive government " initiatives and improvements " - to say nothing of worsening pupil behaviour. . So don't be too quick to condemn.
    Noiticer, Blackburn says...
    11:07am Fri 25 Feb 11
    Perhaps if the empire builders in education, as well as the politicians who keep changing the curriculum etc., reduced the need for courses which cause teachers to have to leave their classes then the numbers of supply teachers would reduce too.
    Not shown in the statitics is the number of classes taught by teaching assistants when teachers are absent. With the best will in the world these people are not qualified teachers and most don't have the necessary skill,training and knowledge to teach classes.
    This latter fact is the most worrying and parents should be asking heads how often their children's classes are taught by assistants alone.Perhaps if the empire builders in education, as well as the politicians who keep changing the curriculum etc., reduced the need for courses which cause teachers to have to leave their classes then the numbers of supply teachers would reduce too. Not shown in the statitics is the number of classes taught by teaching assistants when teachers are absent. With the best will in the world these people are not qualified teachers and most don't have the necessary skill,training and knowledge to teach classes. This latter fact is the most worrying and parents should be asking heads how often their children's classes are taught by assistants alone. wrinkles, Baxenden says...
    1:08pm Fri 25 Feb 11
    burner, blackburn says...
    1:51pm Fri 25 Feb 11
    burner, blackburn says...
    1:58pm Fri 25 Feb 11
    happycyclist, Darwen says...
    9:24pm Fri 25 Feb 11
    Is it too much? No. You can never spend too much on a child's education. We must pay whatever it costs to give our children the best education possible. Britain's and their futures depend on it.

    For every child you lose in the education system, you pay pay for later on with lost opportunities, antisocial behaviour and crime. We HAVE to look at education as an investment.Is it too much? No. You can never spend too much on a child's education. We must pay whatever it costs to give our children the best education possible. Britain's and their futures depend on it. For every child you lose in the education system, you pay pay for later on with lost opportunities, antisocial behaviour and crime. We HAVE to look at education as an investment. Add your comment
    I'm off to bed with - so angry. Might calm down a bit after the May elections!
     
  2. From Today's "East Lancashire Telegraph"
    *EAST Lancashire schools spent more than £3.4million on supply teachers last year, new figures have revealed.*
    Shuttleworth College, in Padiham, spent £370,570, the highest amount, while Tauheedul Islam High School For Girls, in Blackburn, did not use any of its budget on cover.
    Secondary schools in England spent £293million on supply teachers last year, an average of £100,000 per school, according to a report from the Taxpayers’ Alliance.
    Educatio[​IMG]n bosses said some schools could reduce supply teacher costs by employing cover supervisors who step into classes when a member of staff is off.
    But other schools use supply teaching agencies when teachers are sick.
    In Blackburn, with Darwen, £698,282 was spent on supply teachers, with Our Lady and St John Cath[​IMG]olic College spending the highest amount of £182,640.
    The council said the total supply costs amounted to 0.14per cent of the total schools budget.
    In Lancashire, Shuttleworth College paid the most with £370,570, and Bowland High School spent the lowest at £16,885.
    Coun Maureen Bateson, executive member for children’s services at Blackburn with Darwen Borough Council, said: “Schools have their own delegated budgets and make their own decisions.
    “There are many reasons why schools employ supply teachers.
    “As a council we would hope they would use their budgets prudently and effectively to achieve the best for young people and the council offers support to enable them to achieve this.”
    Dave Hewitt, Lancashire County Council’s head of human resources for Lancashire’s schools said: “Schools are directly responsible for their own budgets.
    “They make their own arran-gements to cover for absent teachers, and decide how much they choose to spend on supply cover, and where they obtain it from.
    “Headteachers will base their decision on how to fill in for an absent colleague on the specific circumstances in their school.
    “For instance, some schools employ cover supervisors on a permanent basis, while others engage supply teachers, as and when they need them.
    “Advice and support are always available to headteachers from the county council.
    “We also have our own supply teaching agency that can quickly provide high-quality supply cover to a school, whenever they need it.”
    .................................................

    More shock horror-I'll try to paste readers' comments:
    burner, blackburn says...
    10:43am Fri 25 Feb 11
    Two points
    .
    1) Kids have germs, there is an abundant population of infection in a school-based workplace
    .
    2) Stress is a major occurrence in schools thanks to successive government " initiatives and improvements " - to say nothing of worsening pupil behaviour.
    .
    So don't be too quick to condemn.Two points . 1) Kids have germs, there is an abundant population of infection in a school-based workplace . 2) Stress is a major occurrence in schools thanks to successive government " initiatives and improvements " - to say nothing of worsening pupil behaviour. . So don't be too quick to condemn.
    Noiticer, Blackburn says...
    11:07am Fri 25 Feb 11
    Perhaps if the empire builders in education, as well as the politicians who keep changing the curriculum etc., reduced the need for courses which cause teachers to have to leave their classes then the numbers of supply teachers would reduce too.
    Not shown in the statitics is the number of classes taught by teaching assistants when teachers are absent. With the best will in the world these people are not qualified teachers and most don't have the necessary skill,training and knowledge to teach classes.
    This latter fact is the most worrying and parents should be asking heads how often their children's classes are taught by assistants alone.Perhaps if the empire builders in education, as well as the politicians who keep changing the curriculum etc., reduced the need for courses which cause teachers to have to leave their classes then the numbers of supply teachers would reduce too. Not shown in the statitics is the number of classes taught by teaching assistants when teachers are absent. With the best will in the world these people are not qualified teachers and most don't have the necessary skill,training and knowledge to teach classes. This latter fact is the most worrying and parents should be asking heads how often their children's classes are taught by assistants alone. wrinkles, Baxenden says...
    1:08pm Fri 25 Feb 11
    burner, blackburn says...
    1:51pm Fri 25 Feb 11
    burner, blackburn says...
    1:58pm Fri 25 Feb 11
    happycyclist, Darwen says...
    9:24pm Fri 25 Feb 11
    Is it too much? No. You can never spend too much on a child's education. We must pay whatever it costs to give our children the best education possible. Britain's and their futures depend on it.

    For every child you lose in the education system, you pay pay for later on with lost opportunities, antisocial behaviour and crime. We HAVE to look at education as an investment.Is it too much? No. You can never spend too much on a child's education. We must pay whatever it costs to give our children the best education possible. Britain's and their futures depend on it. For every child you lose in the education system, you pay pay for later on with lost opportunities, antisocial behaviour and crime. We HAVE to look at education as an investment. Add your comment
    I'm off to bed with - so angry. Might calm down a bit after the May elections!
     
  3. Is it the intention of the government to reduce supply costs to zero?
     
  4. I think we all know by now the government's aim is to privatise public services of which education is one branch.
    They are putting out the message that public services are bad and not only bad but bureaucratic and wasteful. Public services waste too much money trying to be accountable to their users. Nothing should be free. You should pay for everything you get. There should be minimal taxation and minimal public services. (bin emptying -read thoughts of Eric Pickles)
    This is their message : "Look at the fortune spent on supply teachers-tut, tut. Privatised academies will be so much more efficient, we'll get rid of supply, then pay and conditions for the perm staff, lock them into gagged contracts, then remove Head Teachersand install business managers.
    We'll get rid of the curriculum, then no school need be accountable and we can fill their heads with any thing we like. We will accept and exclude anyone we like.
    Oh and , just to be sure- no accountability to parents or the local community."
    Finally, while they are setting up private education companies for themselves and their friends/donors (eg the health minister on the payrolls of private health companies ready to take over NHS) -they are counting the money piling up but not bothered about the numbers of jobless piling in the job centres' doors.
    The public is being softened up, (they've just got a new team of publicists) public sector workers are being targeted and picked off. The "BIg Society" is just a red herring. The subtle or not so subtle way one group /interest is set against another is just one of their nasty tactics.
    United opposition is the only way to stop them.
    London March 26th.
     
  5. Let's have the total truth from the media NOT MYTHS AND LIES!
    What's the total staff bill for the huge numbers of teaching assistants, cover supervisors etc etc and other unqualified staff per school including all the unnecessary bureacrats, admin and highly paid SMTstaff?!
    Well qualified, experienced and registered supply teachers give tremendous added value to schools compared to all the huge armies of salaried CSs per school. They are the ones that are ACTUALLY QUALIFIED TO TEACH and not the others!
     
  6. I agree withyou, Pedigree.
    But do you see the bigger picture here?
    Massive cuts to local authorities budgets means that their support to schools is severely reduced. Schools are reluctantly or zealously accepting the bribe to become academies . Part of that bribe entails not paying for outside support -including supply teachers.
    Staff inside academies are only just realising how awful conditions really are. They cannot comment to the media, -they are even scared to comment -even anonymously- in TES because of gagging clauses in their contracts.
    Do you see what our public services are up against?
    The mass media are tory owned and have a vested interest in seeing public services abolished- to make way for private enterprises from which which tory ministers and tory donors will personally profit
    The mass media do not sell truth, they promote tory ideology- they dont want kids to have citizenship lessons-they dont want them to challenge this kind of stuff.
    Supply teachers inevitably-IF THIS GOVERNMENT SURVIVES-- will disappear. Big society will demand that done for free if you're on the dole. This is in their plans.
    There might be a bit of private tutoring- all very Dickensian.
    London March 26th
     
  7. Supply teachers were already fading fast long before this Government ever set foot in the door. What we are now experiencing in this country is Labour's legacy.
     
  8. Yep our plight was set by the Labour government. Who in my opinion spent zillians and made teaching worse for everyone. ECM, SEAL, the new last week and almost forgotten this week New Diploma. A new initiative every other week. The clumsy CRB, The almost instigated ISA.
    Constantly plastering a new initiative onto the initiative they invented the week before. Amongst all this nonsense they invented the CS role which was not good for us. They had already invented the GTCE to protect teaching 'standards'. The GTCE said 'nuffink', of course. They were going to invent Licene to teach, which would have been awful for us, even the puppet GTCE almost broke ranks on that one.
    So never in the field of education so much money had been spent by so few on so many, to make matters worse.
    So the Tories and their Liberal, hungry for a taste of power stooges get in. They may cut away a lot of the pastiche of dross the labour invented, they will certainly not do us lot any favours.

     
  9. Maybe Labour did spend a bit over the top -but the global banking crisis created the credit crunch and squeeze on jobs.Up until the crisis hit-2 years ago , I think supply teachers managed OK or even did quite well.
    What was worrying was the increasing use of teaching agencies which Labour should have stopped. Now the tories want to see most jobs outsourced to agencies so that workers cant belong to a union, cant strike, are constantly in fear and so will be "flexible" ie bend over backwards to please the employers.
    Labour didn't set out to deliberately sack tens of thousands of workers like the tories are doing now in their crusade to destroy our public services.
    I cant deny Labour wasn't perfect -as for their legacy: schools, hospitals, an NHS with its highest satisfaction rating ever,- I dread to think what the country will be like in 5 years.
     
  10. That must be the understatement of the year.
    Yes they should have - but they didn't give a monkey's.
    No, they didn't. They threw billions of pounds at public services instead (without improving them one jot). Now there's no money left and the Government is cutting back where it can. It has no choice thanks to Labour's legacy. By the way, I don't know where the NHS highest satisfaction rating comes from. Not from anyone elderly I'm sure.
     
  11. Nice try, Gordon Brown would be proud of you. I wonder where he is these days?
     



  12. Well, W.O.T. -one last try and then, I suppose we'll have to agree to disagree:-

    No one believes Gordon Brown caused the credit crunch-banks, wrapping up dodgy US subprime mortggages and bad debts, gambled and lost billions. If Gordon Brown and Alistair Darling hadn't baled them out and guaranteed UK savers their savings up to £50,000 then people-yourself probably incuded -would have seen their savings disappear, no cash at the cash machines and no petrol or goods in the shops. It was that close.

    In fact when the tories took over, there was £20 billion less debt than even Darling forecast and UK was begiining to make a slight financial recovery.

    Do you blame GB for debts of Greece, Ireland, Portugal, Italy?
    Do you think the best way to recover our finances is to destroy the public sector, sack thousands, triple Uni fees,
    abolish EMA and raise VAT to 20%?

    As an esteemed supply teacher colleague I appreciate your comments but I will never believe ConDems are good for education or UK.
     
  13. You are entitled to your opinion LG but at the moment it's too early to say if the Coalition is good for education or anything else. One thing is certain, Labour was not. The deprofessionalisation of teaching is entirely Labour's doing. Supply teachers are currently paying the price of this legacy.
    Gordon Brown loved repeating, like you, that the credit crunch started in America. What he pointedly failed to mention was that his profligate spending, coupled with the selling off of Britain's gold reserves at a bargain price, left the economy weak and vulnerable. Thanks to Brown, Britain's once healthy economy had been squandered was poorly equipped to deal with the global financial crisis.
    Yes, we will definitely have to agree to disagree. There is no way I could ever be persuaded that Labour was not an unmitigated disaster for this country. It always is.
     
  14. Sorry, '<u>and</u> was poorly equipped'
     

Share This Page