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 'Education news' started by MacGuyver, Feb 21, 2017.
Can't ever see OFSTED delivering on that. They can hot air about it but will not deliver.
Oh you don't have to tell me about that.
It's called bullying.
Maybe you as well.
They are trying to save their schools in so doing are they not? The reputation, future intake, avoiding radical imposed changes when deemed requiring improvements? Or are we saying that they are ill equipped to deal with the business model that the schools have been turned into?
Whenever the government deny the teacher crisis and talk about record levels of funding, I'm reminded of a news report about the Iraqi war. An Iraqi minister was denying that there were American tanks entering Baghdad, whilst over his shoulder, tanks could clearly be seen rolling along the road. Even when the reporter pointed out the obvious evidence, he was still in denial.
If the phrase 'any other reasobable duties' (or similar) isn't in your contract, you're very much the exception rather than the rule.
Almost all of those things (future intake, reputation, radical changes imposed) will happen with a poor Ofsted report. That and the HT losing his/her job.
That's why Ofsted are key to change. We would not all be triple marking in different coloured pens had Ofsted not indicated it would het you a good report. Now Ofsted say 'it's not required', that changes nothing. If I tell you that you definitely WILL get a wage rise if you wear a tie, but then I say it's not necessary and you MIGHT get one without, you'll still be wearing a tie tomorrow.
Currently Ofsted say 'triple marking isn't necessary, you MIGHT get a good report without it'. Change that to 'you WILL get an RI if you insist on a marking policy which damages staff and hence standrds' and you'll get the change you require.
@Mrsmumbles but Gove has gone now...
@PeterQuint your proposal wouldn't work. You can't actually measure how damaging it is to staff and how that affects standards.
What you need are teachers who stand up for themselves and each other. I would call a rolling strike. SATs week. Absolutely no messing about and no prisioners taken.
How do you expect OFSTED *a quasi independent regulator of education, to effect change to concerning employee and employer (key stakeholder) conflicts?
However, a good start would be to get rid of the catch-all phrase in nearly all teachers' job descriptions: 'and any other task that the head teacher directs the teacher to undertake' or similar.[/QUOTE]
Indeed. This line is the killer and nothing we seem to be able you do about it.
40 hours a week can't be reasonable, remember we have to make up for having 13 weeks off.
They should be able to get at least 55 hrs a week out of us.
Mine says the same.
But does it? Until there is actual proof of this workloads will not be altered.
Our school flogs staff and has high staff turn over but the result continue to be great.
I wish it were different because our arguments to reduce workload dream on deaf ears as SMT fear any reduction in workload will reduce outcome for students.
I was led to believe that London Challenge Schools that are getting great results have high staff turnover as staff are flogged. Is this true?
Is there proof of this?
A former HoD (a real SLT bottom licker) in fact told me that the reason why teachers had to work so many hours was because the public thought they only worked 39 weeks a year and went home at 3pm. My reply that I didn't give a **** what the public thought didn't impress him
Odd how, in my non-teaching job, I now have 37.5 hour weeks 28 days off a year and have never had so much free time in years!
I shouldn't care but seeing as my wife is suffering from work overload, my kids are still in the system and have friends still teaching means I do.
You seem to live in a world where that matters.
Ofsted work on the basis of assuming they've seen or not seen a whole load of things it's not possible to prove (progress of most students in a 20 minute observation), and it's not stopped them before.
All academies (should) now have a staff questionaire. They're very easy to set up. All Ofsted have to do is to standardise one and set it up. Every member of staff fills it in every year. The questions ask about worload, working practices, and so on. Ofsted look at thie results when they look at the othe data.
If excessive worload is flagged up, Ofsted look for it during their inspection, as well as holding anonymous interviews.
They look at books. If excessive marking is required, it'll soon become obvious.
Piece of cake.
How do we expect Ofsted to affect workload? I'm not sure it'll take too long to find a whole load of evidence they can do that.
There may be more Teachers, however, are they good enough!
Are people going into Teaching because of the lack of opportunities in
Anyone who goes into teaching, should do so, because they want to make a difference to pupils' lives and not through lack of work.
I carried out a three hour tutorial yesterday evening on the new GCSE Higher Tier AQA 8300 Mathematics Specimen Paper.
The pupil understood how to apply composite functions, equation of a circle formula and other components at the top end of the (1-9 ) scale.
However, when the pupil was asked to multiply 5.6 by 48, unfortunately, could not even start.
The pupil suggested that he never understood this type of computation and it was the Teachers fault!
Although I don't agree, with the above statement; are we training and employing the correct type of Teachers?
That wasn't really my question was it? To clarify we are now talking about discrepancies within individual organisations whether or not there is an overarching link and communality between similar ones. We can take the responsibility further back but the real issue is with the employers not OFSTED. Whether you see your employer as your Governors, HT or Gov't is a matter of opinion but they aren't OFSTED.