Richmond Borough Schools Chat 8

[muminlondon2]

This thread follows on from Richmond Borough Schools Chat 7.

News and opinions on all the changes to schools in Richmond borough.

Chris I know I get a D for Mumsnet formatting, but hope people will focus on the content. Lifes too short :-)

I really did mess that up, the Nord Anglia site www.nordangliaeducation.com/

I think the City/London challenge was an example of individual consultants working effectively to coach individual teachers and teams - the fact that they were paid, or that they were from the ''private sector' was irrelevant. But the Nord Anglia takeover of Hackney school improvement services (linked to previously though there'd be other articles) and management of Jubilee High School didn't work. It's the idea of trying to impose private sector management practices on top of public sector services that hasn't worked, or at best hasn't been an improvement - either under Blair/Balls or under Cameron/Gove. Where do governments think the private sector consultants gained their experience in the first place? In state schools and LAs, of course.

'Edubusiness' does seem to be a merry-go-round - consultants, directors, head teachers moving from one organisation to another. I really don't know enough about Karen Lynch or the TH trustees to judge their track record - though there is undoubtedly evidence of good work, too - but I bet they know a lot of other people in the business or in high places (Westminster is John Nash territory, for example).

LProsser thinking about whether church schools have to group together in a MAT - if the church wants to influence such schools it (e.g. via a diocese) has to be a 'member' so it can appoint church trustees. If there are non-denominational schools in a MAT they would still be controlled by that religious organisation or diocese.

But if Nicky Morgan has a problem with parents as governors, why would priests and vicars make better managers? This Catholic chain in Oxfordshire is badly in the red, to the extent that informed commentators think it might have to close a school down or at the very least divert money from oversubscribed to lesser subscribed schools.

Up till now parents with children in church schools haven't experienced the downsides of forced academisation - in Richmond every single church school (apart from the tiny free school in Hampton) has been managed by the LA, including the secondaries.

I really can't see Lord True endorsing this plan given what he has done to support Catholic education in the LA.

Maths.
Every school locally is advertising for maths teachers. They advertise as 'maths teacher' but this disguises the fact that in many cases there are actually several vacancies per school.
There is a massive shortage countrywide - and with a shortfall in trainees, they can realistically only be sourced form other schools...
Are our schools attractive enough so that out Richmond Schools will have the vacancies filled for September?
Parents need to be asking schools hard questions about this, and what their contingency plans are to ensure their children will be taught appropriately.

This article suggests schools which have their own teacher training places may have advantages (e.g. Waldegrave) but others will be affected by the drop in recruits on university PGCE courses.

The CEO of the Harris chain said in yesterday's Guardian that tackling teacher shortages was a much more urgent priority than full scale academisation. One of the biggest problems in London is affordable housing - Richmond is hardly the cheapest borough even to rent.

The other alternatives for schools are:

1. Recruit from abroad.
2. Supply teachers and unqualified teachers.
3. Bigger class sizes.

We can't rely on ex pats if they're paid less than £35k - though even they changed the rules, there are also shortages in Australia and New Zealand.

Agreed, so parents need to ask their schools which of those actions they are taking - unless of course the school is one that has a full complement by September.

At the schools that do teacher training does that mean the kids are taught by unqualified teachers? While they're training I mean?

After training I suppose Waldegrave will have first pick of its succesful NQTs if they want to stay and the others will be encouraged to go to another school in the trust or maybe they'll all be shared equally across the trust if they have a shortage.

The kids will be taught by unqualified (training) teachers as they are in all schools that take PGCE or School Direct placements (which is most schools). If they are PGCE or SD Unsalaried they are supposed to be supervised by a qualified teacher - ie have them sitting at the back of the classroom. If they are School Direct Salaried - ie unqualified but learning on the job - they do not need to be supervised. It will usually be the easier classes - ie better behaved that get the trainee teachers as they are easier to manage than the worst behaved.
Most schools (not only Waldegrave) unless they are in SM will have trainees in school - worth asking the school if they are supervised or not. The supervising teacher does not intervene in the class, but gives feedback to the trainee so that they can improve in future lessons.
Having trainee frees up some teacher time - they can get marking/planning done while supervising and they may get paid by universities for taking placements so helps school funds.
Regarding getting the 'pick' of the trainees - the trainees can go wherever they like after training - they may decide to stay, but are not compelled to - so the school is still in competition with others - including independent schools - for the 'pick of the crop '

Having trainee frees up some teacher time - they can get marking/planning done while supervising

Mentoring trainee teachers requires additional training, lots of extra meetings 1-1 with the trainee and plenty of paperwork/red tape. Detailed lesson observation forms are required to be completed regularly as part of the trainee´s evidence towards their QTS. Regular meetings with trainees also have to have completed sheets for their files.

If a more senior teacher is involved in training they are taking on board extra work and not less. Mentors don´t get any extra pay for this unless they are leading mentoring within the school. Training schools get additional funding but I am not aware of additional payments to other schools per trainee they take on.

Are our schools attractive enough so that out Richmond Schools will have the vacancies filled for September?

I hope so. One way of recruiting and retaining high calibre maths teachers and other shortage subjects is to offer some extra incentives. It is not unusual in schools for the Assistant Heads/Deputies to be teachers of shortage subjects.

purge the deadwood

Maybe true, but my goodness that´s a blunt expression to describe those people.

Schools which have their own teacher training places may have advantages (e.g. Waldegrave)

If a school takes on a good trainee and the trainee likes the school it is a win-win situation. It is easier for the trainee than starting as a NQT in a totally new school and the school know that they have someone with potential. Schools can then recruit and start the contract from the end of the PGCE course in May. The trainee then receives salary during the summer months which is an added incentive. The alternative for the trainee is to start a job at a new school in September and have to wait until the end of September for the first salary payment. That´s a long time if there are bills to be paid.

In terms of recruitment in Richmond Borough it is an attractive area to live in but also relatively expensive.

The main pay range for qualified teachers in England and Wales is 22,224-32,831 and for outer London is 25,880-36,540. scales [[www.atl.org.uk/Images/School%20Teachers'%20Pay%202015-16%20Pay%20Scale%20Points%20-%20National%20Joint%20Advice.pdf]]

Is the extra 3-4k going to cover the extra expense of living in this area compared to other areas of the country? Probably not realistically. I can´t see it being all that attractive to teachers from abroad.

The range for unqualified teachers [[https://www.atl.org.uk/pay/pay-scales/unqualified-teacher-payscale.asp]] in outer London is 19-29K. Which is a fairly average salary really.

Sorry about the dodgy links.

article [[http://www.theguardian.com/teacher-network/datablog/2016/mar/22/60-hour-weeks-and-unrealistic-targets-teachers-working-lives-uncovered]] highlights the fact that teachers work long hours.

The new national living wage is 7.20 per hour. If a newly qualified teacher does 60 hours per week, that equates to a yearly salary of 22,464. That is almost exactly the starting salary for a qualified classroom teacher.

It is easy to see why there is a recruitment crisis. These are qualified graduates who have also completed postgraduate vocational training and being rewarded in their chosen career by working for minimum wage.

That's shockingly low put like that, whittonmum. I have absolutely no idea how so many parents afford private education for their children in this borough, but teachers would be lucky to afford a mortgage, let alone school fees on top.

Indeed muminlondon2. I don´t really know how new teachers would be able to manage living in Richmond Borough unless they already had a fortunate situation financially. Based on salary alone, I think they´d be lucky to rent something like a studio/small one-bed for 1K per month and take-home pay is probably around 1.5K. Probably the same for a lot of the London Boroughs and other poorly paid professionals.

I can see why having 'children of staff' as an admissions priority might help to attract teachers in an oversubscribed school, but at secondary level that assumes they are already in their thirties/forties. There must be a real squeezed middle in terms of age range - either very young teachers starting out who may even be living with family, or 50 somethings and above who got on the property ladder when it was affordable. But the teachers I know aged 50+ all without exception either moved into another job (consultancy?!) or retired early because they are so knackered by then.

The other massive problem is tuition fees. Students are choosing courses with a career in mind, and unless the government can introduce more bursary schemes at undergraduate level, maths, science or language graduates won't choose teaching. Not in London.

MuminLondon
Indeed, to do a PGCE now incurs fees of £9k, so people will go for prestigious places - eg Institute of Education, which can broker placements all over London in outstanding and independent schools , rather than spending the same £9k for somewhere like Roehampton.

I've seen golden hellos being advertised for training in subjects like science and maths which must help, as well as the 12 weeks holiday which is a lot more than any minimum wage job would have. And new grads in other professions complain of long hours too so that's not unique to teaching. I'm not saying there's no problem but I think the unions talk it up - for obvious reasons.

It's so completely different from an office job, though - on their feet, projecting their voice all day, dealing with bolshy teenagers... teachers are restricted to school holidays for their leave, even without having children themselves. And they often work through holidays - preparation, training, school trips, setting up classrooms. They can't do flexitime, work from home, check the news on the Internet or even wander off to the toilet when they need to. And after 12 hour days, I don't begrudge them a day of their holidays. Teaching requires a lot of stamina.

I've seen golden hellos being advertised

Really? Where have you seen that? I've seen training bursaries only, but agreed the bursaries would help attract good graduates into teacher training.

As well as the 12-weeks holiday

There is a big myth that teachers don't work during the school holidays because the students are not in school. They have plenty of work to catch up with during the holidays.

There is massive scope for negotiation now - if teachers are savvy they can name their price.

There must be a real squeezed middle in terms of age range - either very young teachers starting out who may even be living with family, or 50 somethings and above who got on the property ladder when it was affordable

Yes I think there must be. Plus, the 20-something's might not stay in those 60-hours a week jobs either once they settle down, want to buy a house and spend time with their own children.

There is massive scope for negotiation now - if teachers are savvy they can name their price

Except the schools are financially squeezed too.

I've seen them in newspapers, online etc. If you do a google there are bursaries listed on getintoteaching.education.gov.uk on the explore my options page. There's £30k tax free on offer to trainee physics teachers. £25k tax free for maths, chemistry, computing, languages. There are bursaries for lots of other subjects too.
I read an article somewhere about the White Paper introducing more bursaries and even part time university professorships for people going into teaching.