Teachers strike 'is for sake of children'

Teachers strike 'is for sake of children'

Dorset teachers join a strike rally in Bristol

Teacher Donna Beddows

Michael Gove

First published in News by

TEACHERS are striking today ‘for the sake of the children’.

The claim comes from a teacher and union member who has defended the industrial action by the National Union of Teachers (NUT) which is set to cause disruption across Dorset.

Government moves to rewrite teachers’ working conditions has sparked a row with the union over pay and pensions that has gone on for more than two years. But primary school teacher Donna Beddows said policies driven by Education Secretary Michael Gove were at the heart of the protest and that union colleagues had been forced into action, losing a day’s pay to ‘fight for a better education system’.

Not all schools are affected. Dorset County Council is encouraging schools that will be hit to stay open if they can. Parents are being contacted directly if there is a partial closure of their child’s school.

Miss Beddows, from Bridport, a member of the NUT on the Dorset Division Committee, said: “I realise that teachers being on strike is an inconvenience; however, the government’s refusal to engage with unions led to this.

“We didn’t take the decision to strike lightly. We are doing so because we want what’s best for the children.

“We believe current education policies aren’t for the best such as schools no longer being required to employ qualified teachers, a new curriculum being rushed through, introducing unnecessary new tests for five and 11-year-olds, and allowing schools to set their own term dates, which could differ between schools, causing chaos for families.”

Miss Beddows added that workloads and hours were increasing and there was an ‘unrealistic’ demand for teachers to work to the age of 68.

She added: “Some might consider that we work short days and have ‘all them school holidays’, but in reality an average day for me is 7.30am to 6pm. We take work home, and catch up on work in school holidays.

“We often work 60-plus hour weeks.

“Plus, contrary to misunderstanding, we aren’t paid for school holidays as salary is based on the number of days we are in school teaching.”

• OF THE area’s main senior schools, All Saints School in Weymouth and IPACA (Portland) remain unaffected by strike action and students should attend as normal.

Budmouth College and the Wey Valley School will be closed for students in Years Seven to 10 while students from Years Nine to 11 should not attend Thomas Hardye School. Bridport’s Colfox School will be closed to students in Years Nine and 10. Weymouth College and Kingston Maurward College are not affected. For a full list visit dorsetecho.co.uk.

• Advice to schools

DORSET County Council is urging schools to stay open, where possible, during the National Union of Teachers’ industrial action.

Schools should be informing parents directly if it is decided to close or partially close.

School transport should run as normal where schools are open, and with modified services in areas affected by a school closure.

Lead advisor for school improvement with the county council, Mark Loveys, said: “We are encouraging schools to stay open, where it is feasible and poses no risk to pupils as a result.

“However, the final decision as to whether a school remains open, closed or partially closed lies with the headteacher and the chairman of governors.

“All schools have been asked to give as much notice as possible.”

Comments (22)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

7:44am Wed 26 Mar 14

Rocksalt says...

Donna Beddows critcism of the government's failure to engage with the unions is disingenuous in the extreme. The NUT was the only teaching union that refused to participate in the Workforce Agreement monitoring group which ran under the Labour government.

The teaching unions will never have any credibility whilst they stick doggedly to national payscales that mean you dntt earn any more money for working in a difficult school in a poor area than a cosy school in a wealthy area ( like Bridport, cor example)
Donna Beddows critcism of the government's failure to engage with the unions is disingenuous in the extreme. The NUT was the only teaching union that refused to participate in the Workforce Agreement monitoring group which ran under the Labour government. The teaching unions will never have any credibility whilst they stick doggedly to national payscales that mean you dntt earn any more money for working in a difficult school in a poor area than a cosy school in a wealthy area ( like Bridport, cor example) Rocksalt
  • Score: -2

8:48am Wed 26 Mar 14

southwellman says...

Teaching unions have lost all credibility full stop.. Teachers have an above rate of pay for the work they do, they also have an above standard pension paid for by the tax payer while the rest of the work force pay their own.. People are just getting fed up with the constant drivel and family disruption.. now do us all a favor and be thankful for what you have.. there are a lot of unemployed teachers who will happily take your place if you think you have the minerals to get a real job.
Teaching unions have lost all credibility full stop.. Teachers have an above rate of pay for the work they do, they also have an above standard pension paid for by the tax payer while the rest of the work force pay their own.. People are just getting fed up with the constant drivel and family disruption.. now do us all a favor and be thankful for what you have.. there are a lot of unemployed teachers who will happily take your place if you think you have the minerals to get a real job. southwellman
  • Score: 5

9:01am Wed 26 Mar 14

Duckorange says...

People who call teachers lazy are misinformed in the extreme. I know teachers whose working day starts before 8am, and they are still marking work and preparing lessons at 11pm. If anything, they're not paid enough
People who call teachers lazy are misinformed in the extreme. I know teachers whose working day starts before 8am, and they are still marking work and preparing lessons at 11pm. If anything, they're not paid enough Duckorange
  • Score: 0

9:27am Wed 26 Mar 14

Schrodinger's Cat says...

Southwellman - I don't know why you think there are "a lot of unemployed teachers who will happily take your place." In many subject areas there is a serious shortage of teachers. Why do you think Michael Gove is so keen to let schools employ unqualified people to teach?
Another question to consider is, if teachers have it so easy, why do so many quit within 5 years of joining the profession?
http://www.independe
nt.co.uk/news/educat
ion/education-news/c
hief-schools-inspect
or-blasts-national-s
candal-that-causes-4
0-per-cent-of-teache
rs-to-quit-within-fi
ve-years-9061790.htm
l
Southwellman - I don't know why you think there are "a lot of unemployed teachers who will happily take your place." In many subject areas there is a serious shortage of teachers. Why do you think Michael Gove is so keen to let schools employ unqualified people to teach? Another question to consider is, if teachers have it so easy, why do so many quit within 5 years of joining the profession? http://www.independe nt.co.uk/news/educat ion/education-news/c hief-schools-inspect or-blasts-national-s candal-that-causes-4 0-per-cent-of-teache rs-to-quit-within-fi ve-years-9061790.htm l Schrodinger's Cat
  • Score: 4

9:33am Wed 26 Mar 14

Rocksalt says...

Duckorange wrote:
People who call teachers lazy are misinformed in the extreme. I know teachers whose working day starts before 8am, and they are still marking work and preparing lessons at 11pm. If anything, they're not paid enough
Fair enough, although neither of the previous contributors, myself included, said teachers are lazy. Southwellman's comment about relative pay is a matter of opinion, but not unreasonable. It rather depends upon the comparisons you chose to make. There are-arguably-more highly qualified public sector workers who earn the same or less and work even worse hours, including shifts.

More significantly, the reality is that teachers are not currently in a strong bargaining position, unless they teach in 'shortage' subjects or in particular areas of the country.
[quote][p][bold]Duckorange[/bold] wrote: People who call teachers lazy are misinformed in the extreme. I know teachers whose working day starts before 8am, and they are still marking work and preparing lessons at 11pm. If anything, they're not paid enough[/p][/quote]Fair enough, although neither of the previous contributors, myself included, said teachers are lazy. Southwellman's comment about relative pay is a matter of opinion, but not unreasonable. It rather depends upon the comparisons you chose to make. There are-arguably-more highly qualified public sector workers who earn the same or less and work even worse hours, including shifts. More significantly, the reality is that teachers are not currently in a strong bargaining position, unless they teach in 'shortage' subjects or in particular areas of the country. Rocksalt
  • Score: 2

9:58am Wed 26 Mar 14

Rocksalt says...

Schrodinger's Cat wrote:
Southwellman - I don't know why you think there are "a lot of unemployed teachers who will happily take your place." In many subject areas there is a serious shortage of teachers. Why do you think Michael Gove is so keen to let schools employ unqualified people to teach?
Another question to consider is, if teachers have it so easy, why do so many quit within 5 years of joining the profession?
http://www.independe

nt.co.uk/news/educat

ion/education-news/c

hief-schools-inspect

or-blasts-national-s

candal-that-causes-4

0-per-cent-of-teache

rs-to-quit-within-fi

ve-years-9061790.htm

l
The reasons people leave are quite complex, often related to a lack of support in their early years. It's also worth bearing in mind that for many people this is their first job and it's not unusual for young people to move on to other things.

The reality is that in a number of subjects there is an abundance of new applicants for teacher training. And demographics mean that whilst the number of children is predicted to increase, this isn't spread evenly across the country. Birthrates are still static of falling in many parts of the country- usually the nice, rural or semi-rural areas. The big increases are in urban areas.
[quote][p][bold]Schrodinger's Cat[/bold] wrote: Southwellman - I don't know why you think there are "a lot of unemployed teachers who will happily take your place." In many subject areas there is a serious shortage of teachers. Why do you think Michael Gove is so keen to let schools employ unqualified people to teach? Another question to consider is, if teachers have it so easy, why do so many quit within 5 years of joining the profession? http://www.independe nt.co.uk/news/educat ion/education-news/c hief-schools-inspect or-blasts-national-s candal-that-causes-4 0-per-cent-of-teache rs-to-quit-within-fi ve-years-9061790.htm l[/p][/quote]The reasons people leave are quite complex, often related to a lack of support in their early years. It's also worth bearing in mind that for many people this is their first job and it's not unusual for young people to move on to other things. The reality is that in a number of subjects there is an abundance of new applicants for teacher training. And demographics mean that whilst the number of children is predicted to increase, this isn't spread evenly across the country. Birthrates are still static of falling in many parts of the country- usually the nice, rural or semi-rural areas. The big increases are in urban areas. Rocksalt
  • Score: 4

10:21am Wed 26 Mar 14

Schrodinger's Cat says...

Rocksalt - you would appear to have a more detailed knowledge of the education system than the average "person in the street." As such I can respect your views about strike action even if I don't agree with all of them. Do you believe that Michael Gove's proposals will lead to a stronger, better education system in the next 5 - 10 years? My fear is that, for largely ideological reasons, Mr Gove is doing significant damage to education in this country. And I don't mean that he's simply making life hard for teachers. I think he is going to leave millions of children educationally poorer.
Rocksalt - you would appear to have a more detailed knowledge of the education system than the average "person in the street." As such I can respect your views about strike action even if I don't agree with all of them. Do you believe that Michael Gove's proposals will lead to a stronger, better education system in the next 5 - 10 years? My fear is that, for largely ideological reasons, Mr Gove is doing significant damage to education in this country. And I don't mean that he's simply making life hard for teachers. I think he is going to leave millions of children educationally poorer. Schrodinger's Cat
  • Score: 2

10:33am Wed 26 Mar 14

MaidofDorset says...

I would rather my child was taught Maths by someone who had strong maths qualifications as well as being a trained teacher, than being taught by someone who was neither qualified to teach or an expert on Maths.

Also, whose to say that teaching in poor areas should be better paid? A newly qualified ambitious teacher can move rapidly upwards with promotions rather than wait for dead man's shoes in an affluent area.

Children from an affluent background can bring their own challenges especially if they consider a teacher is a lower life form in society and the parents re-enforce it.
I would rather my child was taught Maths by someone who had strong maths qualifications as well as being a trained teacher, than being taught by someone who was neither qualified to teach or an expert on Maths. Also, whose to say that teaching in poor areas should be better paid? A newly qualified ambitious teacher can move rapidly upwards with promotions rather than wait for dead man's shoes in an affluent area. Children from an affluent background can bring their own challenges especially if they consider a teacher is a lower life form in society and the parents re-enforce it. MaidofDorset
  • Score: -3

10:43am Wed 26 Mar 14

Rocksalt says...

I agree with you on Mr Gove. Unlike some Education ministers I think he is sincere and genuinely wants to improve things. And he is very effective in terms of driving through change

. Sadly, the actual ideas are usually wrong and/ or unsustainable. So in terms of the latter, we now have a plethora of academies run and supposedly monitored from the centre rather than LEAs. This is already starting to unravel in some areas where academy chains that have expanded too quickly are starting to underperform or are under investigation for financial irregularities.

In other areas a ludicrous amount of time and effort has been put into pet schemes, like the free schools. Some of which have been opened in areas where school rolls are declining, whilst other areas are crying out for more capacity to meet local population booms.

And then there are the issues around curriculum and exams. As is often the case, Gove is probably right that children in the UK are falling behind in some areas and something needs to be done. A return to 1950s methods and content hardly seems the answer. More Importantly this seems to be based on doctrine not evidence.

Finally, in other areas, he is simply repeating the errors of the last government. Both seem obsessed with getting children into school at the earliest opportunity. This seems odd when they often hold up Scandinavian systems as models, but choose to ignore that in those countries children often don't start school until they are 7 years old. They also ignore that private schools as we know them don't exist in Finland, the country both Labour and Coalition seem to admire in terms of their system.
I agree with you on Mr Gove. Unlike some Education ministers I think he is sincere and genuinely wants to improve things. And he is very effective in terms of driving through change . Sadly, the actual ideas are usually wrong and/ or unsustainable. So in terms of the latter, we now have a plethora of academies run and supposedly monitored from the centre rather than LEAs. This is already starting to unravel in some areas where academy chains that have expanded too quickly are starting to underperform or are under investigation for financial irregularities. In other areas a ludicrous amount of time and effort has been put into pet schemes, like the free schools. Some of which have been opened in areas where school rolls are declining, whilst other areas are crying out for more capacity to meet local population booms. And then there are the issues around curriculum and exams. As is often the case, Gove is probably right that children in the UK are falling behind in some areas and something needs to be done. A return to 1950s methods and content hardly seems the answer. More Importantly this seems to be based on doctrine not evidence. Finally, in other areas, he is simply repeating the errors of the last government. Both seem obsessed with getting children into school at the earliest opportunity. This seems odd when they often hold up Scandinavian systems as models, but choose to ignore that in those countries children often don't start school until they are 7 years old. They also ignore that private schools as we know them don't exist in Finland, the country both Labour and Coalition seem to admire in terms of their system. Rocksalt
  • Score: 1

11:06am Wed 26 Mar 14

The Fish says...

For information:

Starting salary for a newly qualified teacher is £21,804 (outside of london)

Teachers work 195 days a year at school, taking out weekends and days worked leaves 66 days (holiday?) - though a lot of teachers work during their holidays!

Teachers' pension – the second largest public sector pension scheme in the country
For information: Starting salary for a newly qualified teacher is £21,804 (outside of london) Teachers work 195 days a year at school, taking out weekends and days worked leaves 66 days (holiday?) - though a lot of teachers work during their holidays! Teachers' pension – the second largest public sector pension scheme in the country The Fish
  • Score: 5

11:28am Wed 26 Mar 14

peskykat says...

Like with any job you are aware of the work load you will be taking on when you go into a career, I was interested to hear on the news that some teachers are not striking because they are happy with the way the talks are going, I applaud them, with the way some children behave it is a wonder any one wants to teach but they made that career choice.
Like with any job you are aware of the work load you will be taking on when you go into a career, I was interested to hear on the news that some teachers are not striking because they are happy with the way the talks are going, I applaud them, with the way some children behave it is a wonder any one wants to teach but they made that career choice. peskykat
  • Score: 2

11:53am Wed 26 Mar 14

Rocksalt says...

MaidofDorset wrote:
I would rather my child was taught Maths by someone who had strong maths qualifications as well as being a trained teacher, than being taught by someone who was neither qualified to teach or an expert on Maths.

Also, whose to say that teaching in poor areas should be better paid? A newly qualified ambitious teacher can move rapidly upwards with promotions rather than wait for dead man's shoes in an affluent area.

Children from an affluent background can bring their own challenges especially if they consider a teacher is a lower life form in society and the parents re-enforce it.
Yes, I accept there are difficulties in teaching in better off areas, in the same way that there will be challenges for people working in social work, medicine etc. Are they as difficult as the challenges faced by their colleagues in poor areas? I don't think so and with some exceptions I think the recruitment and retention figures bear this out.

To give one practical example , the local primary school where I used to live had a first year intake of children who spoke 23 different languages. About half didn't speak any English and many came from families where neither parent spoke any English. This was on top of the usual learning difficulties and other social issues you might expect. It's a matter of opinion, but personally I would pay someone more for taking on that challenge.
[quote][p][bold]MaidofDorset[/bold] wrote: I would rather my child was taught Maths by someone who had strong maths qualifications as well as being a trained teacher, than being taught by someone who was neither qualified to teach or an expert on Maths. Also, whose to say that teaching in poor areas should be better paid? A newly qualified ambitious teacher can move rapidly upwards with promotions rather than wait for dead man's shoes in an affluent area. Children from an affluent background can bring their own challenges especially if they consider a teacher is a lower life form in society and the parents re-enforce it.[/p][/quote]Yes, I accept there are difficulties in teaching in better off areas, in the same way that there will be challenges for people working in social work, medicine etc. Are they as difficult as the challenges faced by their colleagues in poor areas? I don't think so and with some exceptions I think the recruitment and retention figures bear this out. To give one practical example , the local primary school where I used to live had a first year intake of children who spoke 23 different languages. About half didn't speak any English and many came from families where neither parent spoke any English. This was on top of the usual learning difficulties and other social issues you might expect. It's a matter of opinion, but personally I would pay someone more for taking on that challenge. Rocksalt
  • Score: 3

12:30pm Wed 26 Mar 14

MaidofDorset says...

Rocksalt wrote:
MaidofDorset wrote:
I would rather my child was taught Maths by someone who had strong maths qualifications as well as being a trained teacher, than being taught by someone who was neither qualified to teach or an expert on Maths.

Also, whose to say that teaching in poor areas should be better paid? A newly qualified ambitious teacher can move rapidly upwards with promotions rather than wait for dead man's shoes in an affluent area.

Children from an affluent background can bring their own challenges especially if they consider a teacher is a lower life form in society and the parents re-enforce it.
Yes, I accept there are difficulties in teaching in better off areas, in the same way that there will be challenges for people working in social work, medicine etc. Are they as difficult as the challenges faced by their colleagues in poor areas? I don't think so and with some exceptions I think the recruitment and retention figures bear this out.

To give one practical example , the local primary school where I used to live had a first year intake of children who spoke 23 different languages. About half didn't speak any English and many came from families where neither parent spoke any English. This was on top of the usual learning difficulties and other social issues you might expect. It's a matter of opinion, but personally I would pay someone more for taking on that challenge.
I was speaking to someone who has recently moved from a disadvantaged school such as you mentioned, to one of the well oversubscribed schools on the other side of town.

I said it must be nice to get into a good school. They replied that the satisfaction from the first school, the camaraderie and support of other teaching staff and the community had made it a much more satisfying job. They felt respected and valued.

So you see money isn't everything.
[quote][p][bold]Rocksalt[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]MaidofDorset[/bold] wrote: I would rather my child was taught Maths by someone who had strong maths qualifications as well as being a trained teacher, than being taught by someone who was neither qualified to teach or an expert on Maths. Also, whose to say that teaching in poor areas should be better paid? A newly qualified ambitious teacher can move rapidly upwards with promotions rather than wait for dead man's shoes in an affluent area. Children from an affluent background can bring their own challenges especially if they consider a teacher is a lower life form in society and the parents re-enforce it.[/p][/quote]Yes, I accept there are difficulties in teaching in better off areas, in the same way that there will be challenges for people working in social work, medicine etc. Are they as difficult as the challenges faced by their colleagues in poor areas? I don't think so and with some exceptions I think the recruitment and retention figures bear this out. To give one practical example , the local primary school where I used to live had a first year intake of children who spoke 23 different languages. About half didn't speak any English and many came from families where neither parent spoke any English. This was on top of the usual learning difficulties and other social issues you might expect. It's a matter of opinion, but personally I would pay someone more for taking on that challenge.[/p][/quote]I was speaking to someone who has recently moved from a disadvantaged school such as you mentioned, to one of the well oversubscribed schools on the other side of town. I said it must be nice to get into a good school. They replied that the satisfaction from the first school, the camaraderie and support of other teaching staff and the community had made it a much more satisfying job. They felt respected and valued. So you see money isn't everything. MaidofDorset
  • Score: 0

12:57pm Wed 26 Mar 14

Chalbury says...

Teachers salary.... Have a look at this

If you feel sorry for teachers... take a look at this. This will change your mind.

http://www.education
.gov.uk/get-into-tea
ching/salary/teachin
g-salary-ranges
Teachers salary.... Have a look at this If you feel sorry for teachers... take a look at this. This will change your mind. http://www.education .gov.uk/get-into-tea ching/salary/teachin g-salary-ranges Chalbury
  • Score: 0

1:18pm Wed 26 Mar 14

Schrodinger's Cat says...

So the main pay scale for teachers goes from £21,800 to a maximum of £31,870. That's supposed to change our minds about what?
So the main pay scale for teachers goes from £21,800 to a maximum of £31,870. That's supposed to change our minds about what? Schrodinger's Cat
  • Score: 1

1:24pm Wed 26 Mar 14

Schrodinger's Cat says...

Rocksalt. Thank you for your detailed response to my question about Michael Gove. As I suspected, we probably agree on many educational matters beyond the specifics of this strike action. Quite why anyone would give your well-explained comments a negative vote is beyond my comprehension.
Rocksalt. Thank you for your detailed response to my question about Michael Gove. As I suspected, we probably agree on many educational matters beyond the specifics of this strike action. Quite why anyone would give your well-explained comments a negative vote is beyond my comprehension. Schrodinger's Cat
  • Score: -3

4:01pm Wed 26 Mar 14

luffy22 says...

What a full and absolute joke, who are these people trying to kid, its not about the children its about the money.

If it was about the children they would be in the class rooms teaching not on a fun day out with their mates.

Its about the pension and having to work until 68 like the rest of us. If the job is that bad then they should go and find another. Whats that I hear, they can't find another with such a good pension, wage, benefits (both tangible and intangable) and time off.
What a full and absolute joke, who are these people trying to kid, its not about the children its about the money. If it was about the children they would be in the class rooms teaching not on a fun day out with their mates. Its about the pension and having to work until 68 like the rest of us. If the job is that bad then they should go and find another. Whats that I hear, they can't find another with such a good pension, wage, benefits (both tangible and intangable) and time off. luffy22
  • Score: -1

9:18pm Wed 26 Mar 14

Rocksalt says...

MaidofDorset wrote:
Rocksalt wrote:
MaidofDorset wrote:
I would rather my child was taught Maths by someone who had strong maths qualifications as well as being a trained teacher, than being taught by someone who was neither qualified to teach or an expert on Maths.

Also, whose to say that teaching in poor areas should be better paid? A newly qualified ambitious teacher can move rapidly upwards with promotions rather than wait for dead man's shoes in an affluent area.

Children from an affluent background can bring their own challenges especially if they consider a teacher is a lower life form in society and the parents re-enforce it.
Yes, I accept there are difficulties in teaching in better off areas, in the same way that there will be challenges for people working in social work, medicine etc. Are they as difficult as the challenges faced by their colleagues in poor areas? I don't think so and with some exceptions I think the recruitment and retention figures bear this out.

To give one practical example , the local primary school where I used to live had a first year intake of children who spoke 23 different languages. About half didn't speak any English and many came from families where neither parent spoke any English. This was on top of the usual learning difficulties and other social issues you might expect. It's a matter of opinion, but personally I would pay someone more for taking on that challenge.
I was speaking to someone who has recently moved from a disadvantaged school such as you mentioned, to one of the well oversubscribed schools on the other side of town.

I said it must be nice to get into a good school. They replied that the satisfaction from the first school, the camaraderie and support of other teaching staff and the community had made it a much more satisfying job. They felt respected and valued.

So you see money isn't everything.
Well, it's not for me to contest the feelings of the person you spoke to. Nor would I ever claim that money is everything. But the reality is that people still grow to resent what they see as an easier life in othe r locations. I can only speak from my own experience, but I have repeatedly seen people ultimately move from more challenging environments to 'easier' locations. My experience may be unrepresentative, but it is based on 30 years experience across various parts of the public sector. And yes, I did occasionally encounter people who had sought out the more exacting challenges of the poorer areas I have in mind, but the ratio compared to people going the other way was about 9:1, which tells it's own story.
[quote][p][bold]MaidofDorset[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Rocksalt[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]MaidofDorset[/bold] wrote: I would rather my child was taught Maths by someone who had strong maths qualifications as well as being a trained teacher, than being taught by someone who was neither qualified to teach or an expert on Maths. Also, whose to say that teaching in poor areas should be better paid? A newly qualified ambitious teacher can move rapidly upwards with promotions rather than wait for dead man's shoes in an affluent area. Children from an affluent background can bring their own challenges especially if they consider a teacher is a lower life form in society and the parents re-enforce it.[/p][/quote]Yes, I accept there are difficulties in teaching in better off areas, in the same way that there will be challenges for people working in social work, medicine etc. Are they as difficult as the challenges faced by their colleagues in poor areas? I don't think so and with some exceptions I think the recruitment and retention figures bear this out. To give one practical example , the local primary school where I used to live had a first year intake of children who spoke 23 different languages. About half didn't speak any English and many came from families where neither parent spoke any English. This was on top of the usual learning difficulties and other social issues you might expect. It's a matter of opinion, but personally I would pay someone more for taking on that challenge.[/p][/quote]I was speaking to someone who has recently moved from a disadvantaged school such as you mentioned, to one of the well oversubscribed schools on the other side of town. I said it must be nice to get into a good school. They replied that the satisfaction from the first school, the camaraderie and support of other teaching staff and the community had made it a much more satisfying job. They felt respected and valued. So you see money isn't everything.[/p][/quote]Well, it's not for me to contest the feelings of the person you spoke to. Nor would I ever claim that money is everything. But the reality is that people still grow to resent what they see as an easier life in othe r locations. I can only speak from my own experience, but I have repeatedly seen people ultimately move from more challenging environments to 'easier' locations. My experience may be unrepresentative, but it is based on 30 years experience across various parts of the public sector. And yes, I did occasionally encounter people who had sought out the more exacting challenges of the poorer areas I have in mind, but the ratio compared to people going the other way was about 9:1, which tells it's own story. Rocksalt
  • Score: 2

9:22pm Wed 26 Mar 14

Rocksalt says...

Schrodinger's Cat wrote:
Rocksalt. Thank you for your detailed response to my question about Michael Gove. As I suspected, we probably agree on many educational matters beyond the specifics of this strike action. Quite why anyone would give your well-explained comments a negative vote is beyond my comprehension.
You are most welcome. It is a pleasant change to have a grown-up exchange where one can agree to differ on some issues, but avoid vitriol and find some common ground.
[quote][p][bold]Schrodinger's Cat[/bold] wrote: Rocksalt. Thank you for your detailed response to my question about Michael Gove. As I suspected, we probably agree on many educational matters beyond the specifics of this strike action. Quite why anyone would give your well-explained comments a negative vote is beyond my comprehension.[/p][/quote]You are most welcome. It is a pleasant change to have a grown-up exchange where one can agree to differ on some issues, but avoid vitriol and find some common ground. Rocksalt
  • Score: 1

3:50pm Thu 27 Mar 14

Parkstreetshufle says...

This is the one touch phrase that most annoys me about the teachers striking.
This strike is not about the children and using it as if it were is a very cynical move on the part of the unions.
The teachers are extremely foolish if they think that the public will believe this eyewash for one minute. Strike for better pay. Be honest. Don't try and use emotional leverage of the children as it will simply polarise the feelings amongst parents.
If the unions believed what they were saying they would capitulate to better more comprehensive evaluation of teachers in the workplace. What we will end up with is years of strikes where the government won't back down. I would trust any child of mine to the current local education without a lot of backup and that is an extremely sad state of affairs. That headline is a shameful thing...
This is the one touch phrase that most annoys me about the teachers striking. This strike is not about the children and using it as if it were is a very cynical move on the part of the unions. The teachers are extremely foolish if they think that the public will believe this eyewash for one minute. Strike for better pay. Be honest. Don't try and use emotional leverage of the children as it will simply polarise the feelings amongst parents. If the unions believed what they were saying they would capitulate to better more comprehensive evaluation of teachers in the workplace. What we will end up with is years of strikes where the government won't back down. I would trust any child of mine to the current local education without a lot of backup and that is an extremely sad state of affairs. That headline is a shameful thing... Parkstreetshufle
  • Score: -1

10:28pm Thu 27 Mar 14

ksmain says...

Parkstreetshufle wrote:
This is the one touch phrase that most annoys me about the teachers striking.
This strike is not about the children and using it as if it were is a very cynical move on the part of the unions.
The teachers are extremely foolish if they think that the public will believe this eyewash for one minute. Strike for better pay. Be honest. Don't try and use emotional leverage of the children as it will simply polarise the feelings amongst parents.
If the unions believed what they were saying they would capitulate to better more comprehensive evaluation of teachers in the workplace. What we will end up with is years of strikes where the government won't back down. I would trust any child of mine to the current local education without a lot of backup and that is an extremely sad state of affairs. That headline is a shameful thing...
Of course it is - if it was for the children they would be in the classroom teaching the kids, preparing them for their exams (some of which are already going on - my daughter took her Maths GSCE in March). What have their personal salaries and pensions have to with my daughter's education? NOTHING!!!!! A 2 - 3% pay award is pretty good - I am in the NHS and not receiving any pay award this year while my colleagues are getting a maximum of 1% which is not even counting towards their pension.

If they cared about are kids they would be doing their job - which at times was simply not good enough in some cases. My daughter went to a school in the Weymouth area which had, so I understand, really good Ofsted results. Yet her Maths GSCE Education was so APPALLING that we had to engage a private tutor which made a difference between a C in her GCSE and a fail (D or below). Whenever I approached her Maths teachers they didn't really give a monkeys - so quite frankly I think they should have been sacked rather than given a pay rise.
[quote][p][bold]Parkstreetshufle[/bold] wrote: This is the one touch phrase that most annoys me about the teachers striking. This strike is not about the children and using it as if it were is a very cynical move on the part of the unions. The teachers are extremely foolish if they think that the public will believe this eyewash for one minute. Strike for better pay. Be honest. Don't try and use emotional leverage of the children as it will simply polarise the feelings amongst parents. If the unions believed what they were saying they would capitulate to better more comprehensive evaluation of teachers in the workplace. What we will end up with is years of strikes where the government won't back down. I would trust any child of mine to the current local education without a lot of backup and that is an extremely sad state of affairs. That headline is a shameful thing...[/p][/quote]Of course it is - if it was for the children they would be in the classroom teaching the kids, preparing them for their exams (some of which are already going on - my daughter took her Maths GSCE in March). What have their personal salaries and pensions have to with my daughter's education? NOTHING!!!!! A 2 - 3% pay award is pretty good - I am in the NHS and not receiving any pay award this year while my colleagues are getting a maximum of 1% which is not even counting towards their pension. If they cared about are kids they would be doing their job - which at times was simply not good enough in some cases. My daughter went to a school in the Weymouth area which had, so I understand, really good Ofsted results. Yet her Maths GSCE Education was so APPALLING that we had to engage a private tutor which made a difference between a C in her GCSE and a fail (D or below). Whenever I approached her Maths teachers they didn't really give a monkeys - so quite frankly I think they should have been sacked rather than given a pay rise. ksmain
  • Score: 3

11:54am Fri 28 Mar 14

Parkstreetshufle says...

ksmain wrote:
Parkstreetshufle wrote:
This is the one touch phrase that most annoys me about the teachers striking.
This strike is not about the children and using it as if it were is a very cynical move on the part of the unions.
The teachers are extremely foolish if they think that the public will believe this eyewash for one minute. Strike for better pay. Be honest. Don't try and use emotional leverage of the children as it will simply polarise the feelings amongst parents.
If the unions believed what they were saying they would capitulate to better more comprehensive evaluation of teachers in the workplace. What we will end up with is years of strikes where the government won't back down. I would trust any child of mine to the current local education without a lot of backup and that is an extremely sad state of affairs. That headline is a shameful thing...
Of course it is - if it was for the children they would be in the classroom teaching the kids, preparing them for their exams (some of which are already going on - my daughter took her Maths GSCE in March). What have their personal salaries and pensions have to with my daughter's education? NOTHING!!!!! A 2 - 3% pay award is pretty good - I am in the NHS and not receiving any pay award this year while my colleagues are getting a maximum of 1% which is not even counting towards their pension.

If they cared about are kids they would be doing their job - which at times was simply not good enough in some cases. My daughter went to a school in the Weymouth area which had, so I understand, really good Ofsted results. Yet her Maths GSCE Education was so APPALLING that we had to engage a private tutor which made a difference between a C in her GCSE and a fail (D or below). Whenever I approached her Maths teachers they didn't really give a monkeys - so quite frankly I think they should have been sacked rather than given a pay rise.
We want good teachers. The problem we face as the tax paying public is that the teachers unions are refusing to allow any reform of the pay and conditions, unless its across the board - which is highly contrary to the public interest.
Ofsted is the best that can be managed right now. You try and get something better in there and you face the unions and endless strikes. There needs to be better control of the state institutions by the public. A private company tasked to do what some schools do would be simply sack under performing teachers - as it should be. Nobody should have a job in which they are not constantly monitored for performance. If you don't hit the mark - your place is a bit further down the trough.
But you do have to reward those that do perform! or it will be a waste of time. The better you are the more reward you get - thats got to be a fundamental underpinning of all jobs ideally.
[quote][p][bold]ksmain[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Parkstreetshufle[/bold] wrote: This is the one touch phrase that most annoys me about the teachers striking. This strike is not about the children and using it as if it were is a very cynical move on the part of the unions. The teachers are extremely foolish if they think that the public will believe this eyewash for one minute. Strike for better pay. Be honest. Don't try and use emotional leverage of the children as it will simply polarise the feelings amongst parents. If the unions believed what they were saying they would capitulate to better more comprehensive evaluation of teachers in the workplace. What we will end up with is years of strikes where the government won't back down. I would trust any child of mine to the current local education without a lot of backup and that is an extremely sad state of affairs. That headline is a shameful thing...[/p][/quote]Of course it is - if it was for the children they would be in the classroom teaching the kids, preparing them for their exams (some of which are already going on - my daughter took her Maths GSCE in March). What have their personal salaries and pensions have to with my daughter's education? NOTHING!!!!! A 2 - 3% pay award is pretty good - I am in the NHS and not receiving any pay award this year while my colleagues are getting a maximum of 1% which is not even counting towards their pension. If they cared about are kids they would be doing their job - which at times was simply not good enough in some cases. My daughter went to a school in the Weymouth area which had, so I understand, really good Ofsted results. Yet her Maths GSCE Education was so APPALLING that we had to engage a private tutor which made a difference between a C in her GCSE and a fail (D or below). Whenever I approached her Maths teachers they didn't really give a monkeys - so quite frankly I think they should have been sacked rather than given a pay rise.[/p][/quote]We want good teachers. The problem we face as the tax paying public is that the teachers unions are refusing to allow any reform of the pay and conditions, unless its across the board - which is highly contrary to the public interest. Ofsted is the best that can be managed right now. You try and get something better in there and you face the unions and endless strikes. There needs to be better control of the state institutions by the public. A private company tasked to do what some schools do would be simply sack under performing teachers - as it should be. Nobody should have a job in which they are not constantly monitored for performance. If you don't hit the mark - your place is a bit further down the trough. But you do have to reward those that do perform! or it will be a waste of time. The better you are the more reward you get - thats got to be a fundamental underpinning of all jobs ideally. Parkstreetshufle
  • Score: 1

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree