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.
Discussion in 'Education news' started by Maths_Shed, Oct 4, 2018.
The statistics would be even worse without the weird prisoner clauses in the teach first contracts - continue to teach until such and such a date OR we reclaim the entire cost of training from you, which is set at some hugely inflated figure might as well include 4 course meals for all the teach first staff every lunch time.....
most of the teach firsters I work with are DESPERATE to get out, but can't, without declaring themselves bankrupt.
@dunnocks that is something new that I didn't know. How long do they tend to be locked into their clauses for? 2-3 years?
I thought it was 2 years.
There’s got to be a loophole, if the conditions are awful....... I bet they just let them go for fear of litigation.
I don't know any who have been "let go", I do know two who have been allowed to change schools
I also know one person who had the clock stopped when she was signed off for monthes with WRS, and restarted when she returned.
I also know someone who chose to leave and pay the ridiculously high supposed costs.
i don't know what they would do if someone simply walked out and refused to return or pay, but I suspect they would persue them for the money, otherwise too many others would walk out too
Would the Teach First teachers still have to pay back the money if the school got rid of them?
I don't know, I imagine they would get sent to another school?
On a positive note, if we were looking for changes like:
An admittance that teach first then leave isn’t good advertising copy right now
Revision of capability rule being used to move UPS teachers out of schools
Reduction of excess workload created by career climbing SLTs
Reduction in career climbing SLTs who should never ever be SLTs
Reduction in any excess salaries being paid to MAT people who take the credit for the good work by teachers and headteachers
Reduction in MAT people involved in related party transactions
Reduction in MAT people who should be nowhere near education
Then we are in a good place to suggest them.
It seems akin to gnawing off a limb to escape a trap!
Mr Media, you, myself, and many others have been suggesting things that would definitely help, for many years. Since they are never acted upon one must come to one of two conclusions:
The government and DfE are intensely stupid.
The government and Dfe, despite their fine sounding words, don't give a damn.
Actually I suspect it is BOTH of these.
Most of what you suggest, and much more could be fixed by just one change. Remove all hiring and firing powers from heads and SLT. Like many other countries, all of this should be handled by a school board. It would also be vastly cheaper and more efficient. However, I suspect there is an old boys network, with very strong vested interests who are willing to fight this tooth and nail: starting with rubbish like a head knows (and does) what's best for the school.
How can I put this? One of the most dishonest people THAT I KNOW has recently been made Head of a MAT.
This tells me that MATs are not a good idea.
I retain my opinion that traditional conservatives (small c) are just as horrified by the waste of money in MATs, the lack of a headteacher and their school's autonomy, the teach to the test agenda with resultant narrowing of curriculum and much of this neo-liberal pro-competition agenda in education which has led to the natural outcome of the marketplace (shortage of teachers). It is a small cabal of venture capitalists with a few powerful people in support who have presided over this system.
Then you would be upsetting certain donors to The Conservative Party...
Shall we keep it simple?
There are plenty of teachers, but there's a teacher shortage.
So the question is, why are there lots of teachers not teaching?
My personal opinion is that there are lots of reasons, but two main ones.
Firstly, quite a few teachers have decided to leave due to stress/workload. I suspect this is more common with older staff who are used to what was the norm, and have an extra layer of frustration knowing it doesn't have to be like this.
Secondly, schools are skint, and older staff cost more. When older teachers realise they'll struggle to get a job due to being 'old and expensive', sooner or later a proportion of them will give up trying and leave the profession altogether.
I would suggest they're the two main reasons why experienced staff are leaving and not coming back.
Solutions? I don't know, but I can throw a few ideas in.
The government is having its (our) money wasted by all this, so it's in their interests to do something about it.
How about having an average age for teachers in a school. If your average dips below a certain point the school is fined. This would encourage schools to keep/employ older teachers, which would in turn mean fewer older teachers deciding to leave the profession. It would encourage schools to employ older teachers, rather than throwing any application where it looks like the person is over 45 straight in the bin.
How about any capability proceedings being taken out of individual schools' hands. Anyone accused of not being capable is assessed by an external panel, not someone in the school with a vested interest in getting rid of experienced (expensive) staff. If someone is deemed 'incapable', but it turns out they were simply unable to cope with unnecessarily onerous working practices, they keep their job and the school is fined for causing the problem.
How about making it illegal (or at least far more difficult) to even begin capability proceedings on anyone who is on UPS. After all, if you've passed your PGCE, passed your NQT period, and advanced up the pay scale to UPS, you are almost certainly not an incapable teacher. Why is the government not massively suspicious at the number of teachers who have progressed all the way to UPS suddenly being deemed incapable, and forced to leave with a 'deal'.
There are just a few ideas. Perhaps none would work, but perhaps something along those lines might help.
If the government is serious about tackling the shortage they need to use whatever powers they have to ensure workload/stress is reduced, and that older staff aren't forced out. If they don't, and just shrug their shoulders saying they've tried their best but ultimately it's up the individual schools/MATs, then they've no one to blame but themselves.
They were burbling about how to retain trainees in a parliamentary committee meeting about two years ago. Waiving the costs of the fees was one suggestion, this nice little idea was another. Cheery to see which one they opted for. I seem to recall that Kevin Courtney was there. He pointed out that one big issue was retaining the staff. Total disaster. He can’t get much job satisfaction, can he?
I now realise that the ‘DFE Spokesperson’ is actually just a recorded message. Stored on a droid. In Hinds’s store cupboard.
Did anybody hear the proposal to increase the duration of the NQT period to two years, in order to "build resilience"?
If it happens, it will drive even more people away from teaching - yet another year in which things could potentially go wrong; another year before being properly qualified, and in total, many, many years of education for quite a pitiful graduate wage.
They don't understand the problem, and consequently haven't a clue how to fix it.
Teacher crisis (again)
Not surprised (again)
I think you are being too generous. They have created the problem and have no interest in fixing it.
Very true. Teaching (and I personally think more specifically, secondary teaching, with some truly appalling and corrupt Academies out there), lurches from crisis to crisis.
And as you say, the problems are 99% the result of political meddling that has destroyed what was once a decent profession and a job for life.