To expect a French teacher to be able to speak french

[SandyY2K]

Why would a school get a supply teacher to replace the French teacher who can't speak the language?

My DD mentioned that prior to her GCSEs last year, they had some lessons with a supply teacher and he didn't know a thing.

Same thing with my other DD. She's mentioned having a chemistry teacher and a teacher for another subject who didn't know the subject and just handed out worksheets. When anyone asked a question, the teacher said they didn't know the answer.

Would it be unreasonable of me to contact the school about this? Any teachers? What do you think?

Genuine question here for Noble. Could a really solid joined-up IT system reduce teacher workload significantly - the progress-tracking element.

No, because the data is largely junk. The emperor's new clothes.

In addition most SLT teams have a bunch of humanities and PE teachers who don't really understand data and totally misuse it. Computer generated FFT target grades for example should never be used against an individual pupil, yet they are more often than not.

I'm of the opinion that you do have to throw money at it! Why should teachers be expected to work for such low wages, it's vocation for sure but the public sector is not a charity!

Not voting Tory would help because the government is not doing anything to help either because they don't care or they are incompetent.

They are tinkering away for the few on vanity projects such as free schools and Grammar schools whilst Rome burn.

They are also endlessly pushing the lie that they are investing in educations.

It was their reforms on their watch that have caused the harm and a Tory vote is asking for more of the same.

I do think it's important that teachers are accountable and that schools and teachers don't become complacent. Rubbish teachers shouldn't be in the classroom.

Teachers should plan lessons to take into account what their pupils know and where they want to go. No point teaching something to children they already know and there's no point in going too far in a subject when they haven't got the basics

And there should be accountability - children should make progress and teachers and schools are accountable for this. But there are other factors that affect progress.

I wouldn't want a system where there was no accountability.

I think we have gone too far the other way - and the pressure and workload around accountability and high stakes assessment has pushed too many away.

More non contact time would help so much.

No, because the data is largely junk. The emperor's new clothes

Do you not think that tracking progress of an individual child / class can be useful to identify any potential issues with a child / teacher / system?

Obviously progress is not linear - but shouldn't someone track how a pupil is doing?

There is already lots of IT involved in data tracking. Lots of schools also have data managers that do the number crunching. Some schools have staff to input the data as well. However the stuff still needs marking - there also needs to be an acceptance that often the required intervention is that the student behaves, the parent needs to support the school or the student needs to work harder

instead of trusting them to do their jobs has the OPPOSITE effect to raising standards.

It's certainly having the opposite effect now. But when this bandwagon got started in the 80s, it was in response to some really dire teaching practices, and things did improve somewhat as a result.

But it's gone way too far now, especially since Ofsted suffered 'regulatory capture' and began enforcing counter-productive teaching strategies like group work in every lesson and 10 minutes maximum teacher talk. They've peddled back on that now, but it essentially legitimised senior management trying to micromanage teachers into complying with these ideas through bullying tactics.

Theresa May is on LBC this afternoon. I have sent in an education question. I hope others have

OFSTED actually doesn't ask for most of the things that SLT tell teachers they should be doing. Marking being a prime example. OFSTED look to see that students are making progress and that you are in line with school policy.

phoenixashes9 There are so many teachers with stories like yours.

Sorry Kesstrel you go on to say the same as me.

Tw1nset Ofsted don't ask for those things now. As I said, they've backed off, largely due to teacher social media campaigining. But they certainly did - or individual inspectors did - between around 2005 and 2013 or so, before Ofsted reorganised, ditched its externally contracted inspectors and took training and management of inspections back in house. That's when a lot of damage was done, and a lot of traditional teaching style teachers ended up managed out.

Tw1nset Oops! Cross-posted

I think you have to be careful with target setting - the rest of the management world know this - it has a tendency to produce unwanted outcomes....targets are so appealing and mindless, almost as crap as the constant testing - put them in place and watch the unintended consequence take hold.

I think you have to be careful with target setting

Yes...but if a child comes in who has done well at primary, isn't it reasonable to expect they should do ok at secondary and there should be a system to see if they are doing ok.

Targets can restrict. But in the old days, it was very lax.

Thanks kesstrel.

Someone upthread mentioned accountability for teachers?

I don;t think anyone has an issue with that.

But what about accountability for SLT and their sheer, buffoonish incompetence?

Id contact them. When taking my gcse in I.T the teacher was on maternity leave for the year and they kept putting science teachers and drama teachers on. We did nothing but the basics and all of us got E they even said the written exam would not ask what parts of a pc was what and guess what nearly all questions were. I will never send my children to the same school.

Yes...but if a child comes in who has done well at primary, isn't it reasonable to expect they should do ok at secondary and there should be a system to see if they are doing ok.

I went to a Grammar school - it's reasonable to expect that all the children that went there were at a reasonable educational standard at primary however there were 2 boys in my class that never did any work - you couldn't help but be aware of how little they were doing, no data was needed! - what should have happened? Would a target have fixed this? I think a lot of kids can get by in primary by just being present in class, coast if you like but at secondary more independent study is required and if they are too lazy to do it - how much teacher time should be spent on them?

The science teacher one is a real dilemma. A friend was all set to go down the teaching root until, they got their heads turned by the pharmaceutical's money

I agree teachers need some accountability. Everyone at my school - 30 years ago knew who the crap teachers were, targets and accountability be damned - there was no lack of awareness on this. The teachers knew, the parents knew and the pupils knew but nothing was done and it was wrong!

The science teacher one is a real dilemma. A friend was all set to go down the teaching root until, they got their heads turned by the pharmaceutical's money

Why would anyone with a STEM degree teach? - they can get paid so much more and have less hassle going into industry - so often the teachers either have to have a saintly vocation or have no other options! You don't want the teaching profession to become a dumping ground for those who lack talent to do nothing else.

Do you not think that tracking progress of an individual child / class can be useful to identify any potential issues with a child / teacher / system?

The tracking that goes on now is mostly bollocks. Meaningless drivel dressed up as science.

Even with exam results Ofqual have admitted these are volatile and cohort-dependent. The same teacher teaching the same material to two different groups of students of similar ability will get different results, because students aren't robots.
Teachers should be accountable for things that they can control, like planning lessons, teaching the right stuff, punctuality, setting and marking work. They should also be broadly responsible for getting kids through exams, so marking past papers, advising on grade improvements, helping with revision. But a student getting from a B to an A or dropping from a C to a D should never mean more to the teacher than the student.

Department heads know who their weak teachers are. Parents complain, kids complain, you can drop in and look at their books to see what's going on. What isn't needed is 6 data collection points a year of largely made-up data to be forensically analysed.

Ah Noble you do speak a lot of sense!

It's a wonder schools manage to staff MFL positions at all given that so few students do languages (compared to most european countries where two MFL are compulsory to age 18).