to think that 121 tuition in school time is a bit off?

[porkypoo]

A teacher at our school is giving one to one tuition to a teaching assistants child, during lunch break and after school. I paid for my daughter to have private tuition and feel this is really off. Should it not have to be offered to all children?

I am doing the One to One Tutoring in a school, it is a government initiative. The school applies for the funding and the DCs have to fit certain criteria-forms have to filled in. I have no choice-I take 11 pupils a week that have been nominated. Some schools will have less-I don't know-but I think it is a fairly narrow criteria. They all get 10 sessions with me over 10 weeks.
I don't think you can make judgements OP without knowing the details. When I was a class teacher I took DCs who needed extra help in my lunch time (i.e. free time), it was the only way I could fit them in. As it happened it wasn't a TA's DC- but I can see that it might have been-I can see that people might say it was a PTA member's DC-I don't know if it was, it was merely a DC in need of extra help.

I know one school where they are sharing it out and they didn't get someone like me in,as Feenie says, the teacher gets the extra money. All schools do it differently.

Feenie - sorry, but it is from the school/initiative - not from parents, non? And is because it's on top of a normal working day? Because we only have outside teachers doing our 1:2:1 I haven't fully understood how it can work in other schools.

As a full time teacher, if I stayed to mentor pupils after school etc, I wouldn't get any extra pay from the school - only if I went in on Saturdays or in the holidays.

What I'm trying to say is that non of it would be the teacher playing the system and getting extra private pay from parents!

nonE

I tutor 1-1 at the school that I work in, I get paid 'overtime' for it, fill in a timesheet etc. This is year three and four children as part of a pilot initiative that the government fund. The children are very specifically and carefully chosen from tracking grids as those who have not made the required progress for the last couple of years. Two of the chosen children are more able children who have hit a bit of a standstill and could do with a boost the other four children on the scheme are all middle achivers who, without a bit of extra help, may fall back to the less able end of the class. The children were chosen in conjunction with the literacy co-ordinator, the year three and four teachers (all four of them) and the head. They then had to be approved by the local authority and data provided for them to show where they are in terms of achievement, where they have come from and at the end of the ten week course, whenre they have got to. No chance at all of any favouritism. Yes, it runs in the school building, yes I'm paid for doing it but the very thought that I've been engineering it for the last couple of years so that they underachieve I can be paid more to tutor these children is frankly ridiculous!

Whether the teacher is getting paid or not is irrelevant - what s/he chooses to do with their free time is up to them. If there are issues with favouritism in the classroom then that is a different matter altogether and one that you might want to raise with the teacher. Don't please go to the head until you've spoken to them - it's a guaranteed way to get people's backs up if you go over their heads before you've spoken to them

I M DOING ONE TO ONES OUTSIDE OF THE SCHOOL DAY/MY WORKING DAYS
payment from government as over timepay not from parents

specific criteria

I do 1-1 in school, the only rule is that the child should not be in your own class. The other yr 6 teacher and I tutor kids from the paralell class. Our criteria was essentially children that had made below expected progress year on year, mainly it was a chance to target the 'average' child who sliped through the net, neither SEN or G&T but still requiring extra help to meet their targets.
It sounds to me like it' s afavour between friends and I'm afraid there's nothing wrong with that. Teachers are not paid in their lunch hour and are free to do as they please. Helping a child is hardly breaching their contract and no teacher would e silly enough to charge for lunchtime suppport in school.
The only possible result of you complaining is this child losing their extra support because the teacher feels under fire. The teacher will not take on your daughter and cannot be expected to give up unpaid time to benefit everyone. Will it make you happy really to take away the support this child gets? Is it making any real difference to you? Another time it may be your child benefiting whilst others don't get over the course of her schoold career. Making it exactly the same for all often means EVERYONE loses out. There are lots of things I'ce done over the years for individual childrent that I simply can't give to everyone, lending laptops, extra support after school, lending textbooks even giving the odd lift to children who can't otherwise attend off premise events. I do this as and when I can to children who need it or really deserve the extra mile when I can. I'd hate to stop doing it all because I can't offer it all to everyone who wants in because of finite resources just because of accusations of favourism. Teachers do as much as they can and children normally have a turn, be it in high school, infants or juniors to be given that bit extra.

I heard you popsycal But tbh, even if you weren't being paid by the government to do overtime, surely it's up to you what you spend your lunch hours/after school doing? If you want to spend it giving time to a friend's child then you can. Equally if you want to paint each of your toenails a different colour, you could do that too.

There's no rule that's specific to the scheme which prohibits children being in your class - it might be an individual school rule, strawberrykate. As I said, I find it invaluable knowing the children's specific attainment/gaps already.

I must correct myself, 121 is supposed not to be within teaching hours - sorry! It is really benefitting the children participating in it.

RustyBear I am not saying a teacher WOULD do this-just that a conflict of interests exists and therefore it can't be regarded as good practice.

Pixieonaleaf my child is not taking the 11+ as I dont think that she would pass. The insight into the 121 scheme is very interesting and I am glad that children are benefitting from this initiative. But unless you know about things like this, it is unfortunately very likely that assumptions will be made, especially because of the favouritisms in the classroom already. Im not sure I am comfortable with approaching the teacher on this issue. Surely I am just going to make things worse for DD. That is why I needed to vent on here!

Sounds like there are other "ishoos" going on here. Complicates things.

I think to qualify as a conflict of interests it has to be something that might actually happen in reality....

And you think going to the head is going to help?

I have 'ishoos' with TA's/Teachers working at the same school as their children full stop, but that's a whole other thread!!!!

That would wipe out a third of our workforce, RollOn!

true!

What other options do I have LadyBiscuit? How on earth do you approach this subject without people being defensive?

Why would you even need to bring it up with the head? It is nothing to do with you.

But what do you actually want to happen Porky? You can obviously afford tuition, or you wouldn't be paying for it. How far behind is your dd, according to the school?