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

marking: OFSTED vs The School

Discussion in 'Pay and conditions' started by saynotoboxticking, Sep 21, 2015.

  1. saynotoboxticking

    saynotoboxticking New commenter

    My school has staff marking in green pen and creating a dialogue between staff and student.

    Yet OFSTED claim "Ofsted does not expect to see unnecessary or extensive written dialogue between teachers and pupils in exercise books and folders. Unnecessary or extensive collections of marked pupils’ work are not required for inspection.”

    So do I ignore the SLT team and trot out this as a defence, or can they impose whatever they want on me and say it is in our school's (academy) policy ?

    Would be interested to know where I stand legally on this one, especially when books are marked and results are strong for the groups I teach...
  2. chriszwinter1

    chriszwinter1 New commenter

    Collective response from union is what I would advise.
  3. Piranha

    Piranha Star commenter

    It seems a legitimate thing for the school to ask for, and you could be in trouble for refusing. The fact that OFSTED don't ask for it is irrelevant - your contract is with the school not OFSTED. In any case, thyey don't even contradict the school - the inclusion of the words "unnecessary or extensive" suggests that some kind of dialogue is seen as a good thing.

    If the school is asking for too much, then it is right to make a collective response.
    Rott Weiler likes this.
  4. coppull

    coppull New commenter

    If your are NASUWT there strike instructions on marking .See their web site . If you are in NUT or ATL check their web sites
  5. Piranha

    Piranha Star commenter

    I hadn't realised that there wa a policy, and the NASUWT version looks a bit vague to me; who decides if the workload generated is too much? However, it looks sensible on the whole, and does not contradict the idea that it can include some element of dialogue with the student.

    As a matter of interest, how can a teacher prevent evidence from book scrutinies being used to assess them?
  6. johnberyl

    johnberyl Occasional commenter

    This is straightforward enough. If you are a member of the NASUWT simply implement the Action Short of Strike Action instructions. These were recently updated to include excessive marking. The NAS advise that your PPA time provides a useful guide as to what constitutes a reasonable amount of marking per week. The action is lawful and you cannot be victimised for pursuing a lawfully held dispute. All the evidence suggests that the NASUWT and NUT have had quite a bit of success in prompting communications from Ofsted such as the one that you refer to. In the past, management teams often cited Ofsted requirements to enforce punishing workloads on their teaching staff. More difficult to do now that Ofsted has clarified its position.
  7. Piranha

    Piranha Star commenter

    So what do you do in this scenario? The Head collects some books and goes through them, and decides that your marking is not up to scratch, and your pay rise reflects this.

    I'm sorry, but I think the NAS are wrong in thinking that you can complete all marking in PPA time, and do it well enough to help the students (which must be the main point of it). I worked for a very enlightened HoD, who did his best to reduce workload while maintaining standards, but I still had to do some marking after school or at home. Excessive marking is one thing - I am arguing for adequate marking.

    BTW, I don't fully understand the legal side of Action Short of Strike Action. If we go on strike, we are protected from action being taken against us, but lose pay. If we don't perform all our duties without going on strike, surely there must be the prospect of some financial consequences. Otherwise, the unions could instruct us to turn up at school but refuse to teach, and we would have to be paid. An extreme I admit, but still an extension of the current instruction to teachers to refuse to do a legitimate part of their jobs. As an ATL member, I have not had to deal with this myself.
  8. ScienceGuy

    ScienceGuy Established commenter

    Colleagues at my school have been told that if they do not cover a lesson (as ASOSA would indicate) they will be docked pay as they are effectively taking an hour of unpaid leave. I am not sure if this threat has been followed through with anyone
  9. johnberyl

    johnberyl Occasional commenter

    ASOSA has been in place for four years or so. Thus far the action has not been challenged despite appeals from Gove's advisers for school management teams to do just that. In the one case that I am aware of, the management team backed off from applying sanctions for so-called breach of contract. Indeed, the Government has begun to backtrack by releasing the 'clarifications' referred to earlier.

    One other aspect that may be worth bearing in mind is that if your HT is a member of the NAHT, as a union now affiliated to the TUC, members should not undermine the lawful industrial action of the members of another union affiliated to the TUC.

    Of course, if you are the only member of staff in your school who is implementing the Action instructions then you may be vulnerable to victimisation by your management team but I would think you are just as vulnerable, if not more so, if you give the HT & his team carte blanche to subject you to all the actions which ASOSA is designed to protect you from.
  10. johnberyl

    johnberyl Occasional commenter

    If colleagues act collectively they will find they are far more powerful than they suspect. The sun will still come up tomorrow!

    I suppose that it is sad that it has come to this, but you only have to read the accounts on this forum of insane workloads and horrendous bullying to realise that a stand must be taken and that it is in the interests of pupils as well as staff that this happens.
  11. Piranha

    Piranha Star commenter

    I suspect that this is because the impact on schools has been so limited.

    Why "so-called". Refusing to do what is in your contract is breach of contract. If we refuse to do the work we are paid to do for an hour, as when we refuse to do legitimate cover, then we are effectively on strike for that hour.

    Sadly, this action causes minor inconvenience for schools and none whatsoever for the Government. The only ones to really lose are the students, and, to some extent, colleagues from other unions who probably, without it being made explicit, end up doing more than their share of cover.
  12. chriszwinter1

    chriszwinter1 New commenter

    This is La Morgan's take on it:

    So that’s why I’m delighted to announce today that we’ll be setting up new working groups to address the 3 biggest concerns that teachers raised in the workload challenge - marking, planning and resources, and data management.

    The marking group will look at marking and feedback in schools which are successfully raising standards without generating unnecessary workload, with a focus on the implications of certain practices such as ‘deep marking’


    So she's made an announcement is going to set up a working group. Sir Humphrey would have approved:

    they will give it the most serious and urgent consideration, but will insist on a thorough and rigorous examination of all the proposals, allied to a detailed feasibility study and budget analysis before producing a consultative document for consideration by all interested bodies and seeking comments and recommendations to be incorporated in a brief for a series of working parties who will produce individual studies that will form the background for a more wide-ranging document considering whether or not the proposal should be taken forward to the next stage.'
  13. Piranha

    Piranha Star commenter

    She is in a difficult position. Under Gove, teachers were lazy ******s who should be forced to work harder, and your average Tory Party member was convinced. If she goes back on it, she will find herself out of a job. We could do with a sensible official policy on marking, at least as a starting point, as too many schools seem incabable of coming up with one that does not create vast amounts of work. I just hope that these working parties get on with it and come up with something quickly. However, don't hold your breath!
  14. johnberyl

    johnberyl Occasional commenter

    Workforce reform specifically stopped the routine use of teaching staff for cover. It is schools who are in breach of the agreement here.

    Head teachers are in breach of their own contracts if they fail to prevent staff from being subjected to unbearable workloads. The Government's own statistics show that teachers are working 60+ hours a week.

    Colleagues from other unions may choose to come across to the NASUWT or the NUT if they wish to change their situation.


Share This Page