Job description / UPS 3

hello,
we have just been given new job descriptions.
I am ups3 and my new job description includes 3 sections

• main duties and responsiblities
• curriculum area
• leadership responsibility

i want to clarify the final section. threshold is an entitlement and although there are minor leadership roles, i consider that i am not a leader and am not on SLT.
The section includes writing parts ot the SEF, mamaging a budget and presenting it to finance commitee, analysing data and taking it to SLT, being responsible for other techers and staff within my unit.
i do not want to sign the job description.
i have met all core standards and threshold standards.
please can you give me advice.
frazzled friend

 

Hello
From my understanding of UPS I thought that would fall into the sustained and substaintial contributions to the school section. Every subject leader at my school controls the subject budget and every year group leader controls their (very small) year group budget, regardless of UPS.The same applies for analysing subject and year group data. Its all part of being a subject or year group leader. We have TLRs for Key Stage leader and curriculum leader (which is next up the management ladder) Finally, your contribution to the SEF - as a subject / line leader you have the knowledge to write sections of the SEF that SLT may not have. We draft certain sections of the SEF for editing by the SLT. Its not a huge burden as it is only a small section and it is draft; the final responsibility does lie with the head.
If you are not going to take responsibility for subject and phase leadership how are you providing evidence that you are ellible for UPS3?

 

PS
I forgot to say.. you could contact your union. Mine was very helpful with a similar query

 

sunflower57 has fallen into the trap of believing what was told by her school.
UPS3 does not require any additional duties at all - and in particular cannot include any responsibility or accountability for a subject: that requires a TLR
See the STPCD:

 

thank you TAFCAM - that is what i thought. Just needed clarification before i go in tomorrow and ask for an ammended job description.

 

Wow! My school will come to grinding halt! If we should not be doing any of that without a TLR nothing will get done.
"This does not mean that they can be expected to take on the responsibility of, and accountability for, a subject area or to manage other teachers without appropriate additional payment"
The SLT (i.e. head, deputy and senior teacher) can't line manage all the staff and take responsibility for all the subject areas. Luckily none of us have got job descriptions. So there should be some interesting discussions at school on Monday! Do I understand this correctly TAFAM that UPS shouldn't carry responsibility for a subject and, in consequence neither should MPS, without additional payment? Where does that leave small primary schools where teachers carry several subject leaderships? I'm mega confused now!

 

Why cannot a headerteacher and the leadership team take responsibility for all the subjects?
They might well direct teachers to be involved in the planning of the curriculum, its assessment, etc., but teachers on the main or upper scales cannot be held responsible for a subject, unless they are paid specifically for that responsibility.
The problem is that in most primary schools - and I may well get shot down here - too often subject leadership is the label given to the people who keep stock ordered, or who know how to do a particular thing in that subject. In fact, subject leadership should be about taking steps to raise standards across the school; providing leadership in improving the quality of teaching, in assessing the subject; monitoring the assessment of that subject; identifying where improvements are required, and leading those improvements. Those elements of the role take time and expertise, for which quite right staff ought to be paid.

 

TafKam has it absolutely correct, UPS carries no requirement to take on additional responsibility and the STPCD specifically states that any classroom teacher, and that includes post-Threshold teachers - should not.

To quote TK, why not? that is partly what management is about and why managers get paid more, surely.

Can't see that as luck, more a recipe for exploitation and bullying. But then if there are no TLRs, they are not needed as there are no actual 'jobs' to do. We all have a default job description in the Professional Duties of a teacher outlined in the STPCD.

 

I'm on UP2 and I've got given three 'leadership objectives' relating to leading good practice in Science across the school and coaching and mentoring other teachers on teaching and assessing Science. That this is necessary for working towards UP3 has been specifically mentioned in the paperwork. This is in addition to all the targets/objectives set for my class. Is this not correct then tafkamf?

 

It would be perfectly reasonable to set a target at Performance Management based on sharing good practice. The UPS criteria (the P criteria on the professional development mapping) include mentions of exactly that sort of thing. Likewise the mention of coaching and mentoring.
That said, it should not be in addition to the criteria that would have been set had you not been at UPS2. The point of UPS is that it requires a <u>higher standard</u> and <u>quality</u> of practice, not just <u>more</u> work

 

Compare your job description with this widely-accepted model.

http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&source=web&ct=res&cd=3&ved=0CBUQFjAC&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ethicaltraining.com%2Fresources%2FPost-Threshold%2520Teacher%2520JD%2520Aug%25202009.doc&ei=lx7bSq69Cse2jAeV_v2CBw&usg=AFQjCNHlNWunXNUXrSY0XJmMq2GE_ftKUA&sig2=TUBGVyJBfF33svE9d99TiQ

 

Is the cape standard issue when you pass threshold then?!

 

sorry - Seriously I am confused here. Can't see a difference between leading/coaching/mentoring to raise standards across the school, being the contact point for Ofsted, holding the title of Science co-ordinator on the one hand & having responsibility for the subject in the Smt sense on the other.

 

Surely nearly all primary teachers coordinate a subject in their school once they have passed NQT year. I don't think it is just ordering stock, in my experience you are supposed to know what is happening across the school, monitor planning and children's books and be answerable in your subject if Ofsted comes. Many teacher's coordinate 2 subjects without a TLR.
So I think there is a lot of confusion about accepted practice.

 

Our Unions have fought for us to be professionals and have our rights recognised by heads and governors.
responsiblity and leadership should have financial reward - with TLR or being placed on leadership pay.
threshold is an entitlement and not payment for responsibility.
you need a job description .
teachers need to be aware of their rights. if they arent then they will not be treated as professionals.

 

Widely - where? accepted - by whom?
Since when does a document formulated by a private group of consultants with no statutory standing supplant the STPCD? missed that meeting.
Threshold (ALL stages) is a pay level not a job or award for responsibility, any Threshold 'job description' is a made-up thing, of significance only to its authors.

 

Teachers take on responsibility for subjects because it's what we've always done. I am the co-ordinator for 3 subjects BUT with union advice do not do any work for these subjects unless I am given time to do so.
When I informed the head of this he was very annoyed, however, for the last 2 years each subject co-ordinator is released from the classroom for at least 1 day in every term to complete work for their subject. In addition action plans are written during inset days and our contributions for the Sef are also completed during directed time. This proved to me that the head knew all along that we weren't supposed to do this work in our own time. At first whenever we were told to do anything relating to our subject responsibilites I asked when we were having time to do it. I rarely have to ask anymore as we are told to use staff meeting time or some other directed time.
The union also told me that I cannot be directly responsible for the progress of pupils as I am not paid on the TLR scale.

 

Then the union is an ass.
You are directly responsible for the progress of pupils you teach,

 

Nomad, I read that as saying they weren't responsible for progress of pupils in the subject they co-ordiante e.g. if the Art co-ordinator doesn't have a TLR, they can't be help responsible for pupil progress in Art across the school.
I think we all accept responsibility for the progress of pupils we teach or I hope we do!

 

This debate will go on and on........there are those who are committed and did not enter the profession as "jobsworths" but as enthusiastic teachers of children. We are undertaking a restructuring at my school currently as the initial 2005 remodelling was basically handled as an assimilation process, with the old head not wanting to upset the long term staff members. The new structure has more specific job description for TLRs and an acceptance that more specific managerial and leadership roles can thus be expected of the UPS 1-3 staff members.
Of course more experienced teachers should take more responsibility. Their expertise needs to be utilised, particularly in Primary Schools. Thankfully we still have teachers who care, who are enthused by their subjects and who have professional camaraderie for their colleagues.
Of course we have inexperienced teachers who would like to gain experience of subject leadership for their own progression, despite the fact they will not be specifically paid for it. That's how you gain respect and help career progress.
All these UPS 1-3 staff that quote union guidelines simply come across as lazy. They are the sort that would not help a child with a nose bleed because they are not the designated First aider, or would not clean up spilt water in the dining hall because they are not a diner lady.
You do the school or yourselves no favours by pushing this point. The ambiguity in the STPCD leaves Headteachers the opportunity to interpret in which way they wish. Do yourselves a favour and play along as best you can. The job will all of a sudden seem fun again.