to feel put out about pregnant teacher?

[SoChangingMyNameForThis]

I'm more after a reality check from your lovely ladies than a rant, honest. DD1 is in year 2 and her teachers have a job share, one Mon to Wed and the other does Thur to Fri. No major issues there but we've just learned that the teacher doing Thur & Fri is pregnant, baby due in April. I can't help feeling a bit put out because she knew she was pregnant when she started the job, but at the same time I feel IABU because such is life and teachers are entitled to have children too!!! So, whilst I battle with the different thoughts in my head, could you please help me put this into perspective? I mean, they're going to have a new part time teacher for just three months at the end of the year, it is SATS as well, what value can the children extract from this? Can this change affect their learning negatively?

spidookly

Are you serious?

I always taught my DCs that SATs measure the school and teacher not the children. They have zero impact on a child's life apart from theoretically contributing to a quality, improving environment.

Maternity cover and part time work. Agree with those saying get a grip.
Not a teacher myself but 2 DCs through school system plus parent and multiple siblings as teachers. One sister worked very successfully part time, currently acting as maternity cover (for the record, is in her 40s, very experienced and deemed to add great value to the school).
Both DCs lost teachers at key points to maternity leave. They survived. In any case what is the alternative? Ban women of child bearing age from becoming teachers?
YABU

I have many friends who job share and DS2 had two teachers last year, two different sets of strengths and both teachers did three days a week and so he was better off.

I know scurry - just thought it worth a mention that it was a bloke that decided that job share was the way to go to keep the good staff.

Who defines what a working week should be?

Oh yeah, men.

spidookly, please post your argument in the feminist section, it'll be hilarious.

scurry - I think that that's unlikely, spidookly is too far wrapped in his/own opinion to care or possibly even notice an alternative view.....

aargh 'his/her own opinion'

Agreed, I just like bloodsports, Clenched

I really hope Spidookly is taking the piss because otherwise that is just very

Best case scenario for OP is that the other teacher on the jobshare agrees to work FT for a little while. If not, obviously the kids will survive a change, they are resilient not that SATs mean anything (and that's assuming the school doesn't decide to boycot them which, if they have any sense at all, they will).

As an aside, if my child was sitting SATs this year then I would probably decide he was "ill" on those days as they are complete bollocks.

LOL I'm taking bets by which page they manage to drag breastfeeding into this btw. They've got every other woman-baiting cliche going in here now... I'm calling page 7

I think you are being a bit precious.

When DD was in reception the teacher was pregnant at the start of the year (she'd been at the school for a few years though) - supply teacher started in january and was fine.

In terms of YOUR child not really relevant whether she's been in the job for many years or a new teacher. Yes its a bit annoying but provided the school give reassurance that they will get a decent supply teacher not really sure why its such a worry.

TBH I also have the 3 days 2 days job share with my DS (when the reception teacher came back she came back as job share) and I find that more annoying than the maternity leave 2 years ago. But just one of these things.

Your DD will be fine. SATs are not important for children as individuals. Don';t let them become important to you or to DD. They are used to judge and asess schools. They are not supposed to be used to judge indivdual children like this. Ignore them. pretend they don;t exist.

Your DD's teacher is pregnant. She will be there til around Feb/March time, so at least half of the year. Whe she goes on mat leave a qualified teacher will step in. hey willbe given planning, or depending on how employed, do the planning - following exactly the same curriculum.

Why did your DD's teacher know she was pregnant when she took the job BTW?

Am curious about this one. She would have found out she was pregnant probably in the school holidays if due in Apri. So yes, she will have started school in September pregnant. However, was she not employed there before? Or was she only employed there after term started? I ask this because it is very unusual for a teacher to not have got the actual job several weeks or months prior to starting in September. Many posts ar applied for, and secure, for a September start between Easter and May half term. At that time the teacher would not be prenant.

I know this as the exact same thing happened to me. I secured a new post just afte Easter one year to start in September. I fell pregnany in June/July, found out first week of holidays and started in September a few week's pregnant. I went on mat leave mid February and had DD in April.

spidookly - do you not believe in PT work and flexible working arrangements in the workplace?

if you think about it, if she goes off 15th april for the easter hoilday and the start of her materninity leave..it will be 6th may till the new teacher takes over/ then there is 1/2 term...so by the end of term the new teacher would of onkly be teaching your child for 16 day (or less as july is normally fun days)...how much damage can that possible do

Baroque - that's why I wok in Y1 now rather than secondary!

Seriously though - I can spell but my ypos when typing fast are shocking. Very nearly COD bad at times

Why cant teachers plan to have their babies in the summer holiday?

They get miles more holiday than parents do as it is!

There's a reason teachers tend to come back to school in September pregnant btw... the summer holidays is the time they're not too knackered to just zonk out the second they hit the bedroom!

emptyshell - :o

BeenBeta - so teachers with DC aren't parents, then, they're still defined by their role as teachers? That line of thinking could send you to stand in the corner with spidookly......

@ the presumptionb that part time employees are people who can't commit to being a SAHM. i know lot sof part-time men and i also know lots of part-time people that have no children. what are their excuses spidookly?

I am a teacher and am currently on maternity leave. I felt incredibly guilty about leaving my Year 13 and Year 11 students when I was away and have missed out on a promotion that I have been being prepared for. I can understand that the parents of those students might have been rather concerned about my absence.

But you are talking about a Year 2 little girl. I would like to reassure you that SATs are NOT important, so don't worry about them. I am sure that the new teacher will be fantastic with your DD and even if they are not, then she only has 3 months to cope with it.

I did the whole not applying for jobs 'just in case' I got pregnant and now bitterly regret it.

BeenBeta....

That's a joke right?

It's about time that our society changed it's working practices to accommodate parents without damage to their careers. I'd vote for 18mths parent leave, to be taken by either/both parents.

I would prefer all primary teachers to jobshare. I know that's not possible because many teachers work full time, but perhaps it would be a good idea if some of the full time ones swapped classes midweek.