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.
Discussion in 'Workplace dilemmas' started by BigFrizz, Nov 17, 2018.
You are working for idiots. It probably won't end well
Sounds like a complete waste of time and a crock of s***. Not a particularly helpful post, for which I apologise but the ineptness shown throughout the UK by many SLT members leaves a lot to be desired...
On the plus side, the OP now has an EBI for the HT and T&L bod and an opportunity to give 360 degree feedback to these people (in a constructive, diplomatic and professional manner, of course).
Do you know of any evidence showing that planning, when assessed in such a way, has any impact on anything whatsoever?
Anyone who thinks they can "investigate" what limits quality of lessons in such a way should be stacking shelves, except I imagine they'd get wrong too.
OFSTED says lesson planning is unnecessary so why the Rag assessment of it system?
Exactly, teachers could RAG rate the quality and efficacy of the bod’s RAG rating of their MTP’s. Why not, it’s just as crazy and pointless. Just hope that there are a lot of red, orange and green pens at the OP’s school this could literally become an infinite feedback loop.
What a load of rubbish. This makes me so angry.
Our planning is graded on different elements. Generally, the next step feedback is more about conforming to ridiculous, stylistic requirements rather than anything of substance which might actually affect learning. Absolute waste of time and if I'd known it would happen, I'd never have accepted the job.
Well done for setting up a meeting with your Head. I hope your other colleagues aren't so accepting of it all.
As professionals, we deserve better.
Put in lengthy very good plans the first time, too long for anyone to read in detail. Get a green. Second time submit random ******** formatted the same way and see if it is even read.
Just to clarify - Ofsted have never stated that lesson planning is unnecessarily- However, they have repeatedly stated that they have no preference as to how it is undertaken and do not expect to see examples of written planning as part of the routine inspection process.
Lessons should be well-considered and planned in advance, it just makes no difference how this is done or whether the process is recorded in any particular written format.
No such (reliable) evidence exists.
Many leaders appear to fall into this flawed way of doing things. They know that standards need to be higher, but lack the ability, credibility or imagination to bring genuine improvement about.
Thus they create a plethora of pointless administrative tasks, in the mistaken hope that an increase in forms and specified procedures will lead to improved outcomes.
Teachers are professionals and do deserve professional respect, but it it the role of leaders to challenge and correct when things are not being done as well as they might. But it needs to be done in a constructive way that doesn’t needlessly disgruntle staff.
Demanding lengthy written plans and then ‘rating’ the completion of a document against subjective, personal preferences is clearly not constructive...
Training on every aspect
Formal description of what is expected
Time to do this
Details of what each rag rated colour means
Details of who and how each mtp will be graded
Also -get Union to stop this . And start looking elsewhere for a better more supportive school. Not one where slt sit in offices and fire off 'tick box' demands. Do you have an Ofsted soon? Sounds like someone covering their backs to me and treating real teachers awfully
Exactly! What feedback, or analysis of the effectiveness of an 'initiative' do we ever get? I cannot recall getting any. All the 'feedback' I can remember is criticism for not following the minutiae of the process ("Your lesson plan summaries should be 250 words +/-5%: 241 is therefore unacceptable.") but nothing about what had been learned, or how effective it was. Usually, nothing more is said, it becomes 'expected practice', and yet another burden: hence the 'accretion effect'.
Our feedback focuses on highlighting something in the wrong colour and not writing questions in italics. Obviously, the question marks do not make the questions clear enough. The people responsible for scrutinising planning actually say: "This needs to be correct so that it's easier for me to identify these things when I look over your planning." Obviously the impact on their workload of having to actually look for something must be unbearable. Poor souls.
Worse? These "rules" for planning are written down absolutely nowhere. It's actually embarrassing that our senior leaders dedicate/waste so much time doing this rubbish. I spoke to a friend who is SLT at another school and he was just speechless.
Conversly, @Piscean1, if our managers did not have to do all this nit-picking scrutiny, and have to find meaninglessly negative things to say in lesson observations, they would be out of a job. Now there is a thought!
Unwritten rules are useful when criticising someone for not following them, as you can make them up as you go along.
There are way too many of these people in positions of responsibility. You don't have to be a scientists to see the unscientific nature of a lot of this sort of practice in schools, just reasonably intelligent. Too many people are too thick to be doing the jobs they have. They are a dangercto the health, sanity and wellbeing of hardworking teachers.
@Jolly_Roger15 I can't pretend I'd be devastated. We're struggling for money and we could buy some glue sticks and employ a few TAs on that money.
Exactly! One question that none of these pundits who come round to schools selling their brands of snake oil will, or even could, answer is, "What evidence is there that your scheme will improve teaching and learning?" If pressed hard, you might get, "The school down the road is doing it, so we must," or even, "Well, it can't do any harm, and we won't know if it does any good until we try it, can we?"
Sorry, I stand corrected. I meant lesson plans the document not lesson planning the process. Well spotted @Pomza I stick by everything else that I wrote in my previous post.
And purple pens of progress so that both feedback giver and receiver can show that feedback happened, was understood and used to make ‘progress’.