6500 extra teachers....

[noblegiraffe]

This was one of Labour's main headline pledges. They were a bit vague on the details - is this 6500 more than the amount of teachers that are currently needed, or 6500 more than the Tories managed to recruit, which was well below the amount currently needed? I don't know.

Anyway, where are we at?
Teachers were awarded a 5.5% pay rise as recommended - good.
Ofsted single word judgements scrapped immediately - good.
PPA can now be taken from home - meh, maybe good for primary
Performance related pay scrapped -good

The situation:
Teacher trainee recruitment targets were massively missed again for this September so schools will continue to have unfilled vacancies next September.

The projected fall in pupil numbers due to decreasing birth rates won't be as big as expected so more primary teachers will be needed (and this will impact school funding as fewer pupils meant there was going to be potentially spare cash in the system).

Potentially more pupils in the state system from private could be balanced out by returning private teachers to state schools. That will take some time to shake out.

PGCE mentors are now expected to do 20 hours of training this year to be a mentor, and lead mentors 30 hours, regardless of how experienced they are. This is putting people off being mentors so PGCE providers are struggling to find placements for what few trainees they have.

Workload for teachers is increasing due to lack of funding, and lack of teachers, so they have less time to devote to training teachers. The lack of experienced teachers available to train them is also a problem. At the same time, the demands of training new teachers on schools has increased (e.g. the NQT year is now two years of support and reduced timetable and schools also need to provide PGCE students with 4 extra weeks of intensive training and practice).

This is an extremely urgent issue, and a key government pledge, so why all the airtime about anything to do with education is being taken up with bloody VAT is beyond me.

The impact of the lack of teachers in the system is huge. Inability to recruit teachers means kids have supply and cover teachers which affects their learning, but also their behaviour across the school as they become disaffected in those subjects. Experienced teachers are not only having to plan lessons for the supply teachers and sometimes mark for them too, they are having to pick up the pieces and fill in the gaps when they teach the classes the next year. Heads of Department are spending huge amounts of time fielding legitimate complaints about the quality of teaching. Advertising for positions that cannot be filled is expensive.

What do Labour need to do to turn this around?

It's recruitment onto teacher training courses starting this September. So if the target was to recruit 100 students onto computer science PGCEs for this September, they only actually managed to get 25 to start the course.

For classics, it means that they started with 2.5 times the number of students needed and will actually end up with an oversupply of classics teachers next September (most of them will go straight to private schools).

Maybe the classicists can teach maths, physics and comp sci instead since we can't get anywhere near enough of those.

No, they definitely go to the private schools. We have to have PE teachers teaching maths, physics and comp sci instead because otherwise they can't get jobs.

The massive oversupply of PE teachers is appalling. It's disgraceful to take the money knowing they won't get jobs.

@noblegiraffe

I don’t know what the answer is beyond more funding. I chair the finance committee; budgets the last 3-4 years have been nothing short of a shit show for all the reasons we know.

I’m also a link governor for wellbeing. I challenge our HT to cross initiatives off the list - not more piling on. My observation is the to-do list just gets bigger for teachers. Inevitability some of those activities add less value than others, and at some point something needs to give. Everyone is burnt out, can’t recruit and need to keep those you have. It was interesting to see the HTs face.

I also think teachers should feel more empowered and supported to manage behaviour.

I’m also a link governor for wellbeing

This actually made me laugh. There is not one member of SLT in my school who gives a shiny shit about well-being.

I’m also a link governor for wellbeing

Easiest job in the world as HT and SLT don't give a shit about staff wellbeing.

So you don’t think the HT and SLT should even have to answer questions about wellbeing? Maybe if you have a governor who challenged them on being shit they wouldn’t be?

Don’t really appreciate the snarky comments given I’m the link governor for finance and spend hours of my time advocating for school funds and teachers.

Poor governor. She is passionate enough to give up her time for free for education. Passionate enough to pick wellbeing as her link, and people are a bit down on her.

Maybe she has made staff where she volunteers have a better time of it.

Our SLT lead for wellbeing was ready pissed off that not only did she have to do the training for being mental health lead which was something like 20 hours (it might have been more?!) of training in her own time, for no additional money, but is also seemingly now responsible for the mental health of every pupil and staff member in the building.

Not great for her own wellbeing all in, really.

Snarky comments?

Of course they should have to answer questions about well-being. But the fact of the matter is that the staff come a very very long way down the list of priorities for heads.

We used to have a counsellor accessible to staff.
We used to have a staffroom.
We used to have an SLT member responsible for well-being.

We now have none of that. It's because of shit funding, and of course the money should be spent on the kids.

But when the head asks "are you okay?" and then glazes over, perhaps you'll understand why I believe my SLT don't give a shit. And that's one of the reasons why I've stopped giving quite so much of myself too.

Its not "snarky".
It is my experience of HTs and SLT.

So you don’t think the HT and SLT should even have to answer questions about wellbeing?

Of course they should, but I have never seen them answer for it. but I have seen them talk a good game, but that doesn't mean that they give a shit.

Maybe if you have a governor who challenged them on being shit they wouldn’t be?

Maybe it would be, but I suspect that any governor that did so would be forced out by the HT and their happy band of puppet governors.

Don’t really appreciate the snarky comments given I’m the link governor for finance and spend hours of my time advocating for school funds and teachers.

Not something that I have an issue with, where as well being, you can figure that out.

My head likes to talk about the fact that we only have one union rep - me - because the staff are all really happy.

No, it's because everyone is afraid of what he does to people who stick their heads above the parapet.

Take a breath. It was a bit snarky. You told her that her link role was 'the easiest job in the world'

it's unpaid volunteer work and presumably very challenging if the people you are holding to account don't give a shit.

You may well have every right to feel aggrieved with your slt but it wasn't a great thing to say to a volunteer trying to help.

Thank you for the work you do! Governors who actually challenge headteachers instead of just rubber-stamping whatever they want are very valuable.

What I've noticed with staff wellbeing initiatives is that they can often be along the lines of 'cake in the staffroom' which mainly gives teachers the opportunity to get together to moan about how terrible things are, while eating cake. What is really wanted is things that make our jobs a tiny bit easier. Something like a guillotine next to the photocopier might not seem like a big deal, but now, having thought of it, I'm actually daydreaming about it.

Centralising detention systems is massive for behaviour management. If your school hasn't got a centralised system, do that. Anything with behaviour management that, if correctly implemented creates more work for the teacher, then it won't be correctly implemented.

Something like a guillotine next to the photocopier might not seem like a big deal, but now, having thought of it, I'm actually daydreaming about it.

That is such a good idea 😂

How can I bring it up at school now without someone potentially going 'hey, are you noblegiraffe?' 🫣

Argh. The guillotine of my dreams is slowly slipping from my grasp.

We actually have this. And a person to do both things.

Its called being honest, if the poster can't take it from someone on the net then she is going to struggle with how staff feel IRL.

Most SLT and HTs pay staff wellbeing little more than lip service, and will often use it as a measure to know which teacher to show the door to when they complain about something.

The poster may well be very good at the job that she volunteered for, but it doesn't change my experience.

I'm assuming that lack of regard for your wellbeing is why you quit?

I started off in secondary. Moved to primary for 15 odd years and have recently moved to an all-through school with a reprographics room and full time reprographics person. Id forgotten reprographics was even a thing working in primary and, my god, I'm glad to be able to use it again!

What I've noticed with staff wellbeing initiatives is that they can often be along the lines of 'cake in the staffroom' which mainly gives teachers the opportunity to get together to moan about how terrible things are, while eating cake

I'm retired now, but in my Australian school, we got so pissed off with well-being equated with muffins at morning tea.

Centralising detention systems is massive for behaviour management. If your school hasn't got a centralised system, do that. Anything with behaviour management that, if correctly implemented creates more work for the teacher, then it won't be correctly implemented.

This. My school did this and it was life-transforming.

So many thoroughly unpleasant sounding teachers on here. To paraphrase NobleGiraffe's point about whether we'd rather a qualified teacher that's a bit crap or an unqualified one.... well I think I'd rather have an unqualified but pleasant human being to be honest.

So many examples of snapping back at people, of dismissing their point out of hand, even when it's been given with careful thought and from personal experience.

Examples of absolute intransigent thinking: There is no way teachers performance can be measured and it influence pay rises (like almost every other job everywhere), centralised lesson plan materials are no use (because reasons).

Examples of glorifying never marking homework, constant references to workload despite the 13 weeks holidays per year which apparently don't count.

Out of interest, what qualifications are needed to become a teacher these days? Back in the mid 1990s it was 2Es at A level. I can't help but conclude (based on the pages and pages of contributions on this and other similar threads) that many people who choose teaching aren't cut out for it and in fact they'd do better with a 9-5 less people-facing job.

NobleGiraffe appears to spend more hours complaining on Mumsnet than she does completing her part time teaching hours each week. If I was her I'd get a hobby instead. The obsessing about the dreadfulness of it all isn't changing anything.

As to what can be done:

• What do successful private schools do? Do that.
• What do countries with successful education systems do? Do that.
• How do other countries successfully address the impact of SEN and poverty? Do that.

It's going to cost a lot by means of tax - but I wouldn't recommend VAT on private school fees - we don't want to be looking to Greece as a shining beacon of how to run a successful education system - that particular experiment was an unmitigated disaster.

And there’s a great example of someone who doesn’t know what they’re talking about presuming to know more than teachers about their jobs but not even being willing to listen to them.

What do successful private schools do? Select the easiest possible pupils to teach and then teach them in classes half the size of those in state schools with far more resources.. I don’t think we can do that.

Recruiting 6.5k but not addressing the real issue which is teachers mental health, working conditions and stress leading to teachers quitting in droves, I would expect the issue will worsen given an expected 20% will quit the independent sector which means at least 120,000 more children, using our tax payers money, will suddenly need government funding (the figure I keep on seeing is £8,000 of government funding per student). This policy will not increase the number of teachers - we will get increased class sizes, increased teacher stress and mental health issues. It’s silly as the independent sector has so far relieved pressure from the state sector - now more people will be competing for the same resources. Imagine us taxing the private health (which is in the pipeline) - I can only imagine the NHS getting worse not better with increase waitlist, demand for resources and doctors etc.

Back to teacher stress - Why would anyone want to do teaching if they have better options especially the best and brightest? If the government can pledge £22 billion for carbon, why can’t they fund education better instead of making it worse off for all - everyone agrees that state education need to be funded but it should be via increased funding to education as a whole.

Also I have recently found out that some state schools receive up to 300k in donations per annum from rich parents - how about following the Nordic system where all this donations to the state gets pooled into a central fund and distributed evenly across the schools. I went to visit a top state school (in a super wealthy London neighbourhood) and they have wasted money on unnecessary things like fancy cladding and fancy technology (because they can) whilst other state schools are broke.