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

new idea

Discussion in 'Supply teaching' started by historygrump, Feb 24, 2012.

  1. historygrump

    historygrump Senior commenter Forum guide

    After receiving a letter from Nick Gibbs and some of his minions, in which he states that there are shortages in some subjects areas, schools and academies can use support to cover and deliver lessons, when there is no teacher present and the high unemployment amongst teachers is our fault for not moving to the South East and London.
    This despite the fact that his boss said the other week, that there are too many secondary trained teachers!
    The woman who responded to me was a Camilla Abbott (camille.ABBOTT@education.gsi.gov.uk )

    However the idea I have, is if the schools minister Nick Gibb is confident in what he says, would he be prepared to meet a delegation of around 4 supply and unemployed teachers to discuss our experiences and our concerns. I will email a response to this woman and ask for a meeting with the government.
     
  2. Lara mfl 05

    Lara mfl 05 Star commenter

    Will be following what hapens next.
     
  3. I would never live in that hole for double the salary !
     
  4. What's wrong with London? It's one of the great cities of the world!
     
  5. The south east is not "a hole" either. I think that's very rude. Plenty of us like living here.
     
  6. ~Historygrump- could you scan the letter of the lady of the Camillas letter in for us to read?
     
  7. historygrump

    historygrump Senior commenter Forum guide

    I will go to the library next week, if I am not working, Haha!!!!!!! and see if I can scan it on my memory stick and edit my name and address and see if I can paste them, there is actually 3 letters, because I contact them that may times. If I get stuck, I will let you know and see if you can help in posting the letters.
    Are they telling me to stop contacting to them if they 'we cannot add any further comments to your emails and letters', because they even quoted something from June last year, which I forgot about, perhaps because I emailed them questions in July, August, September, October and November, I had a rest in December.
     
  8. The job situation for maths and science teachers in London is as dire as it is anywhere else. The idea that 'get on your bike' and come to London to find teaching work is ludicrous!
     
  9. A hole, and a hole that could be so much better if only it followed the lead of other cities in Britain. I would not work there for double my salary.
     
  10. I'll be interested to see what happens too. I'd like to tell Nick Gibb many, many things!!! Ha ha.

    Keep us posted HistoryGrump!

    As for London, as someone who is a Londoner, who moved out to go to uni and still lives 'up north' I can honestly say that there are good things about London, and bad things about London. Would I want to have to move back there to find work? No, not particularly.
     
  11. In the interests of transparency "copy and paste" all these letters in as MANY relevant TES FORA e.g. SUPPLY, OPINION etc. The more respondents the better!
     
  12. Let's keep EMAILING these deniers until an honest, intelligent response is received.
    Too many lies and denials!
     
  13. I have also sent several letters to politicians, the DfE etc and have also seen my MP on 3 occasions. He informed me that he knew nothing about the Education White Paper but voted for the Education Bill because "it was government policy" On another occasion he told me that the role of TAs was going to be in the White Paper - what mention of this topic was there in the Education Bill.
    The last time I saw him I showed him the so called regulations and guidance notes thhat Nick Gibb has said that schools should observe. He told me that all of these documents can be interpreted in many ways.
    One of the letters that I sent to Nick Gibb contained the results of a survey into the use of support staff during PPA time. Nick Gibb stated that I was making comments on the use of support staff for "cover during teacher absence". He also stated that he was not prepared to make any further comment on the matter.
    The same official that Historygrump named also responded to this letter. She agreed with me that the use of support staff during PPA time was not cover since teachers are not absent during PPA time and cover only occurs when teachers are absent. But later in the letter she talked about covering PPA.
    She also countered my quotations from published Regulations and Guidance that stated that all classes must be assigned a qualified teacher to teach them by quoting the STPCD 2011 Para 56.4 which also states that all classes must be assigned a qualified teacher. However this para omitted the words "to teach them" - in other words a qualified teacher does not have to be present.
    So if head teachers have professional responsibilities to assign teachers to all classes why do they not have the professional responsibility to follow Para 56.5 - Teach. Wy do they not have the professional responsibilty to ensure that all children are taught by qualified teachers all the time.

     
  14. historygrump and Bronco

    It sounds like the replies you've had are typical politician speak, where they'll twist everything to fit their own purposes.

    Mind you, do you think they'll actually own up and say they've got things wrong?

    Well done both of you for being so persistent!
     
  15. historygrump

    historygrump Senior commenter Forum guide

    I have contacted Bronco and he as come up with a very good idea, as I am having issues putting the letters on the TES. If neccessary, I will email you the pdf letters for you.

    The two best quotes from the letters.
    Nick Gibb
    'In maintained schools and academies, the expectationis that classes will be taught by qualiified teachers. In some circumstances, when there is no teacher available to teach a class, support staff are able able to carry out some teaching activity, including delivering lessons'
    From the second letter
    ' Earlier this year we consulted on introducing the assessment only route to gain QTS, if they meet the required standard rather then having to complete an initial teacher training course'.
     
  16. I also have letters and statistical information that I would like to share with others but I cannot attach them on here, To share this information I would need to have contact details so if anybody would like to let me have their email addresses I will gladly send you the information.
    I can offer a couple of quotes from my MP following letters and meetings with him. These quotes stem from information he had been given by Nick Gibb.
    In these meetings and letters I had been raising the issue of the use of support staff instead of teachers during a class teacher's timetabled PPA time. Even a previously named department official agreed with me that PPA time was not cover time since the teachers concerned are not absent.
    "The Minister of State for Schools response about your concern about cover for absent teachers"
    "Headteachers are allowed to decide the most appropriate staffing stucture, including the cover for teachers who are absent. However, he does also state that arrangements should meet the requirements of the regulations and take account of relevant guidance"
    Like so many of his very highly paid department officials he fails to see the contradictions in these so called regulations (laws?) and guidance notes.
    "Recent legislation makes it clear that support staff and teachers are not inter-changeable" What exactly does that mean?
    "All classes and groups timetabled for core and foundation subjects and for RE and the foiundation stage must be assigned a qualified teacher to teach them" This is a quotation from so called regulations AND guidance approved by the DfE and the relevant unions (with the exception of the NUT)
    There are also other guidelines that say that head teachers should take account of the proportion of subject time that pupils are without a qualified teacher or that cover should only be considered for short term absences.
    So why are head teachers being allowed to ignore these regulations and guidelines? Why are support staff being allowed to replace teachers during lessons when there is no qualified teacher appointed to teach the classes for the duration of an academic year? Isn't that an example of a long term situation?
    Why are the senior officials at the DfE and so many politicians allowing this to happen? In my opinion it is because they are incompetent in writing these documents in the first place and then allowing contradictory interpretations to take precedence over imperative statements.
     

Share This Page