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

What would you do?

Discussion in 'Headteachers' started by d43587, Sep 30, 2017.

  1. d43587

    d43587 New commenter

    I am currently in the process of reviewing performance management for teachers. The targets being reviewed were set by the previous headteacher. They were not reviewed mid year. As a result a number of teachers are saying they haven't met them as they took on other whole school or class priorities which they would now like to be considered as their performance management targets.
    I have read some guidance that says this could be considered.
    What would you do?
     
    install likes this.
  2. cheesypop

    cheesypop Senior commenter

    I think you should be human and resonable.
    Work from that standpoint and you'll be fine.
     
    Pomz, d43587 and install like this.
  3. Skeoch

    Skeoch Lead commenter

    Worth checking your school policy (if your predecessor wrote one).
    And in the light of whatever decision you make, might be worth revising the policy.
    As for your decision - I think Cheesypop has it right....
     
    Pomz, d43587 and install like this.
  4. asnac

    asnac Established commenter

    So these teachers want to change their targets to match what they have actually achieved rather than what they agreed to achieve... I'd knock that on the head straight away.

    Personally I spend as little time and energy on performance management as I can and I'd advise anyone else to do the same. Insofar as the system ever works, it can only do so effectively if the person setting the targets is the one who assesses how far they have been achieved.

    Just tell the staff the performance management process will start again this year with a blank canvas.

    More difficult of course if they were promised money or promotion. But if the targets weren't reviewed, then whose fault is that, the outgoing head, or the teachers who didn't have sufficient interest to request a review?
     
    Pomz, d43587 and install like this.
  5. Marshall

    Marshall Star commenter

    Difficult one. I agree with both points of view BUT YOU are headteacher and you need to establish your authority. If you give in then they have won.
    Make your point and agree on the way forward on the understanding that YOU are in charge.
     
    Pomz, d43587, install and 1 other person like this.
  6. install

    install Star commenter

    I would:

    1 Look at the PM Policy and Discuss with all staff

    2 Find out why Mid Term Reviews were not done - is it down to several Reviewers or all / or the ex ht?

    3 Find out if the targets were appropriate and fair and agreed. If not why not?

    4 Look further at the support that Reviewers were giving. Have they been fully trained in all areas ?
    5 Look at the dates that were set for: Whole Staff Training, Meeting for Objectives, Meeting for mid term Reviews, and Meeting to decide whether they have been met...If dates were set what went wrong?

    6 Look especially at those that are expecting a pay rise following a review of their performance objectives. Will they get one and how?

    7 Make it clear what your expectations are now: evidence of what had been done up to the Mid Term Review Point; why the Objectives were changed and by whom; and evidence of what has been done after the Mid Term Review Point.

    Where is the evidence of meeting all targets actually set?

    8 Changing Objectives is highly questionable unless it was agreed with someone - whether there was a Mid Term Review or not.

    Why were Objectives changed without permission, and were the Original ones inappropriate? Surely you are not now going to judge staff on 6 Objectives - some agreed on time and others 'made up' later?

    You will need to tread very, very carefully and not be taken in too much. Being supportive is one thing - but being placed in a position of uncertainty is another.

    The Reviewers and the Reviewees need the dates, policies and training concerning how to deal with the repercussions of this. And also concerning the way forward.:cool:
     
    Last edited: Oct 1, 2017
    Sundaytrekker and d43587 like this.
  7. d43587

    d43587 New commenter

    Thank you for the responses, much appreciated. The biggest problem with this situation is one member of staff should move to UPS but hasn't met a single one of their targets set last year. They claim it is because they did other 'things' but these were never agreed to as targets.
    The previous HT did nothing, no policy, no mid year review, original targets weren't signed so teachers are claiming they weren't agreed to. Basically it is a mess that I need to find my way through.
     
    install likes this.
  8. Northhead

    Northhead Occasional commenter

    If a teacher has not met their target(s) but there was no mid-year review or any other meeting to inform that they were not likely to meet their target then you could be on a sticky wicket in denying a pay increase.

    I would also speak to your C of G as the Pay Committee will be responsible for deciding whether a teacher moves to UPS.
     
    Sundaytrekker and install like this.
  9. install

    install Star commenter

    1 So possibly, a new start with clarity and a line drawn in the sand on the past for all.

    BUT..
    2 Targets were not signed - not your problem and it seems they were not appropriate. Again not your problem

    3 Concerning pay rises:

    Where targets were worked towards and met as far as possible and in the power of the Reviewee , then of course these will be looked at. Where the Reviewee produces sufficient evidence to convince the Reviewer that they have made sufficient impact in terms of one or more of the following : Whole School Role/ Departmental Role / Teaching Role / CPD / Impact and Progress, then of course you as Head Teacher will look at the Reviewers Recommendation carefully.

    AND
    4 Your problems may be bigger if you do not draw your line - eg, all job specs, all cpd, training, all policies,

    AND

    5 YOUR SLT?? Why on earth did they not say /do something???

    AND

    6 Your Governors ???? Are their Govs Reports about this?
     
    Last edited: Oct 1, 2017
  10. install

    install Star commenter

    Edit: I would consider delegating the training and some reviews (in the absence of your ex Head Teacher) to your Deputies if necessary.

    Then that will allow you to look at their aporoaches currently and to make decisions according to their Recommendations also. It needs to be a supportive, open and fair process for all.Sounds like the ex Head Teacher didn't delegate this in some way, and thus no one questioned her/him?

    You will most likely need your deputies on side with this.:cool:
     
    Last edited: Oct 1, 2017
    Sundaytrekker likes this.
  11. Sundaytrekker

    Sundaytrekker Star commenter

    Install talks a lot of sense here. It is not as simple as everyone gets their pay rise if there isn’t the evidence against it. They should be proactive in showing how they meet the requirements for upper pay scale over a two year period. If you are not convinced then they should work to prove this over the next year. I agree you need to be fair but I agree you shouldn’t be a pushover either. Set out a detailed policy and get this year’s meetings underway ensuring the reviewers know the expectations.
     
    install likes this.

Share This Page