To think they could of at least given me an interview?

[taken4afool]

I have been volunteering at a school for 2 years while I completed my level 2 & level 3 teaching assistants course.

I qualified a few months ago and would love to work in the school, I have been working in reception year. On my course I needed to work 1 day a week in placement, but to get as much experience as possible I had been working 3, the teacher has been very vocal about how much she values me and that she would be lost without me, she has even asked (at least once a month) if I was not doing anything on a certain, if I could come in to help (which I always did willingly).

It is such a good school and due to my own children, working there would be perfect as no other school around for miles and I do not drive.

Jobs coming up are very rare, well one came up and my teacher told me about it, (it was in her class) I applied and the closing date was last Friday, and I have heard nothing. The post said that if the candidate has heard nothing by today, assume you have been unsuccessful. The teacher said that she would be a reference, but stated that the headteacher will make her own decision.

I am gutted as I have given a lot of time to the school, I have always helped extra when needed, I get on very well with the team and always being asked to help out in other classes.

My confidence has taken a real battering and I feel very low, my dh left me 3 months ago, but every time I went into school that was all forgotten as I loved what I was doing and built up good relationships with staff and the children. No one even suspected anything was wrong as I came alive in the classroom.

I appreciate there might have been better candidates for the job, but after giving 2 years volunteering, if I was not selected for an interview, I would of thought at least someone could of said to me, thanks for your application but you have not been selected.

Guess I am waffling now, sorry

"I've been told by more than one speech and language therapist that f instead of th is so common in this part of the country that it is considered dialect."

I wouldn't fink fat dialect is fe same fing as correct grammar.

In a previous job, I used to be involved in shortlisting applicants for roles within schools.

The number of people applying for TA roles far exceeded the number of people applying for any other role. We would often have 150+ people applying for a part-time TA job paying £8-9k!! Given the sheer number of forms to assess, we had to make some very blunt decisions about who to shortlist and, no doubt, some suitable candidates did not get selected who would have done an excellent job.

As for contacting people to let them know they've not been selected - having been on the other side of this, I will say that if a firm does not let you know, this will purely be due to lack of time. I used to write to / email all the people who hadn't been selected, but it took up so much time I had to stop. I simply didn't have a spare 8 hours to contact 150 people and then answer the queries it generated. Imagine if 10% contact you asking why they've not been selected, that's 15 application forms you have to dig out and analyse where their application fell short.

Having said that, if we decided not to shortlist someone who already worked or volunteered at the school, we would always let them know.

WiseKneeHair - a lisp or speech impediment is completely different from lazy speak. A H/Teacher or Deputy speaking "lazy speak" is inexcusable. This person in question did not have a speech impediment. So had you wanted to go into the teaching profession, you should not have experienced any obstacle. DS has an impediment whereby he can't pronounce his "r's" correctly. Not his fault. However, he CAN pronounce "th", but chooses instead to say '"f" because this is how all his friends say it. That is just silly, and annoys me beyond belief. Hoping it is a phase he will grow out of

If it is considered dialect, then in written form, does it become acceptable to write: fink, wiv, vat, etc? I wouldn't have thought so. In a written application form, surely it would have to be correctly spelled, with the 'th", not an 'f' or 'v' sound. Presumably, all those application forms would be discarded in the first round.

No she isn't.

"discriminate between those with good literacy and those with poor literacy" (2 sets of people, a perfectly valid thing to do if good literacy is necessary for the job spec)

"discriminate against those with poor literacy" (one group of people and you are treating them negatively because of their poor literacy)

Try substituting "black" and "white" for "good" and "poor" literacy. It might make it easier to understand.

I discriminate against black people.
I discriminate between black and white people. (ie I can tell the difference)

This happened in my DC's school recently. Lots of TA jobs came up, some current TAs were having to apply again for their own jobs as they were only on a years contract.

Not only did most of the current TAs not even get an interview, but almost all of the parent helpers/volunteers also didn't get an interview (many with degrees). One that did is a qualified teacher but she didn't get further than interview. Instead some people with degrees but no experience and some school leaver apprentices got the jobs.

I think much of the time they don't like too many parents being on the staff. Also I think sometimes they suspect (correctly) that many people want it for the good hours etc. My DC school lengthened the hours so that childcare would be required before and after school, probably to put those people off.

I would ask for feedback and try to improve your application for next time. Good luck.

I mispwonounce my 'r's dweadfully. As a previous poster says, that is because of a tooth / mouth malformation. This might perhaps have been correctable through serious dentistry and speech therapy in my youth, 30 years before I went into teaching, but is no longer addressable.

However, I never write 'r' as 'w', and should there be a possible issue (spelling tests with words with 'r' as a second letter are an obvious downfall of mine), I get someone else to speak the words for me. There is a difference between a speech defect and a lack of knowledge of correct grammar. If the OP said 'could of' (or could've) in informal conversation, but used the correct formation in formal speech and all writing, I would have no problem with it.

I can understand that, Teacher and agree with you totally. However, working in schools in this area, (I'm talking about primary and juniors) if they can't pronounce "th" and say instead "f" - that is what they write - because they are being taught to write by sound, or phonics. So they write "fink" and "fort" and vis and vat. Not saying it's totally wrong to have a teacher (or Deputy Head or H/Teacher) but in the same vein, what I'm trying to say, is it right to criticise a TA for doing the same, if the main teaching staff don't/can't always get it right?

What the fuck? There's been some unnecessary repeated criticism on this thread.

Feel for you, OP, it's tough out there.

Agree though that basic literacy vital for TA/teaching jobs, not for all maybe. I have also come across TAs and even teachers over the years who make basic mistakes. Never ideal but we're all human. Current job market can probably allow employers to be more picky however with new recruits.

ACheesePuff Really, on a thread 100 posts long, MUCH of it criticising the poor poster along the lines you mention, do you not think it a bit RUDE to arrive on a thread so late, barge in and criticise her, without having had the courtesy to check for updates or even have a quick skim to see if anyone, in over 100 posts, might have the same genius insight as you?

Sorry, but I get irritated with late thread crashers who just barge in and criticise the OP.

I think as a previous poster indicates people simply don't address the job specifications effectively when applying and that's often even more the case when they're already volunteering and think their work is already known and doesn't need explanation. I'm wondering if that may have happened here.

This happened to me they took on a ex teacher as the new assistant but I also didn't get told, I thought I might have done but they didn't when I asked it's because they now want teaching assistants to be able to teach alone if needed so want more qualifications basically a teacher for assistant wages :-( sorry you didn't get your job

It is amazing how competitive ta jobs are considering the pay is so tiny. If there is a secondary school near by the competition is often less.

F for th is a London thing (fing). Yes it should be held down when teaching children, esp phonics, but again this is snobbishness against people of a certain class; making presumptions about ability based on their accent. Does a posh accent mean a person is cleverer and more able? No. It just sounds like they are to a lot of people. Fanx for listening.

And thuck off.

Believe me, you meant discriminate between.

Would a linky convince you?

This is wrong, and really very patronising. You seem to have made the leap from the fact that some kinds of discrimination against people is unlawful to feeling that any kinds of discrimination against people is unlawful.

It's not. If you discriminate against someone for being black or muslim or female or whatever it is, then that's unlawful. But if you discriminate against them for not being qualified for the job that's fine.

I have never used the word "unlawful" so I don't know who is doing any leaping.

I also have no problem in learning more about my own SPaG and am always willing to say "blimey, I got that wrong" so show me a dictionary (or other) link that proves the OED definition (among others) is wrong and I'll admit my shortcomings.

Well the OED definition says that discrimination "against" people is "unjust" or "prejudicial". How can an interviewer not be prejudiced against people with bad grammar applying for teaching jobs?

Can you work as a ta through an agency op? I do and it's great. In your shoes I would learn to drive; I learned late but it means I can work.

When we select for a post in public sector we have to be scrupulously fair admittedly because there is the potential for the applicants to claim discrimination and sue us. We have to be able to justify why we have chosen some people but not others to interview for a post. We do get some applicants wanting to know why they have not been selected for interview and so far none have challenged our decision and I work in an area where competition for posts is fierce.

On our job descriptions we will have a specification for the job. There will be essential and desirable qualifications, skills and experience we will be looking for. Our first port of call would be to reject applicants who do not fulfil the essential criteria regardless of what else they have. Good communication skills are always an essential criteria and if there are basic punctuation, grammar, spelling mistakes made in the initial application I would surmise that the candidate does not meet the criteria.

On a more personal level I'm currently having to correct ds2 who regularly writes could of instead of could have. Apparently he says no one at school has picked him up on this yet

I've sat on many panels sifting through job applications. Spelling mistakes alone would not be a cause for rejection. Nor would an existing familarity with the role automatically guarantee an interview.

If the essential criteria are met, then applicant is invited for interview. If that results in too many people to interview, then the desirable criteria will be used to short list.

What were the essential and desirable criteria for this post, and did you meet them? Did you make that clear on your form, not just assume that the people shortlisting would be aware of your experience?

jellybeans I don't understand what is wrong with candidates wanting the job because of the hours. If they have the qualifications etc what on earth is the problem?