Maths teachers should be paid more than PE teachers

[noblegiraffe]

Maths teachers should be paid more than PE teachers because there is a critical shortage of maths teachers and we have plenty of PE teachers.

What would people think of this? It was a topic that came up on the teacher polling app Teacher Tapp a while back, with mixed opinions.

I’m not saying that maths teachers are more important than PE teachers, or have a more difficult job (I’d rather teach bottom set Y9 than supervise rugby in the winter). But as a retention tool? Some say that it’s already happening with teachers of shortage subjects more likely to be waved up the pay scale, or hired on a higher point or given a meaningless TLR, but it’s all ad-hoc.

The DfE throw money at people to train in shortage subjects, but then there’s no extra money to retain them. Although in maths next year maths students will be getting a retention bonus after 3 and 5 years, the initial bursary has dropped significantly and NQTs could well still be starting on M1, and there is nothing for teachers already in the system.

What do people think? (Obviously I say maths because I’m a maths teacher, but the same argument would go for other serious shortage subjects). Should market forces determine subject pay scales?

I thought they did this already in academies and free schools?

It makes complete sense, if you need more Maths teachers you need to pay them more, its no different than any other job.

I thought this already happened informally as maths teachers were more likely to be promoted to deputy heads. There could be a gender factor to that too.

You have to be able to recruit them in the first place to pay them more! I am having to do two jobs at my current school (a prep in leafy Surrey) as they had no applicants to be head of maths, so I do that on top of being deputy head.

"Why don't teachers all run to work in private schools if market forces are so important. "

In central London they do. Certainly DCs private schools seemed to have fewer recruitment problems than the local state school. The latter really struggled to get anyone to teach science.

mousse not that fuckwitted. I have an arithmetic O grade :it's a thing in Scotland :or was at least when I was at school. Scotland as a country massively values numeracy.

That came from nowhere!!

Why don't teachers all run to work in private schools if market forces are so important.

Why do people with maths qualifications avoid teaching and go into more lucrative professions? Why does the DfE throw money at people with maths degrees to train to be teachers?

Clearly market forces are important. The constant question is ‘why would anyone want to be a maths teacher when they could earn more elsewhere?’

Of course they should, I can’t believe it’s even a question. Good quality maths teaching is vital for the country and those with the ability have many other more lucrative options, therefore there’s a shortage

Stop employing so many maths teachers. I've had a brilliant idea and they already do it in Scotland.

Arithmetic GCSE, half the number of maths teachers, money saved.

Anyone can teach a bit of adding up. We could then pay teachers on how good they are in the classroom. Let's be honest we all know most maths teachers are a bit shit. No personality.

Keep the good ones ditch the rest. Market forces.

No GCSEs in Scotland

There's a chronic shortage of primary teachers in London. It's hidden by the vast numbers of Australian/Canadian/Irish on long term supply. The turnover is phenomenal and affects morale, training and ultimately the education of the kids. My children have barely had a school year that hasn't seen several changes in personnel. I don't know what the solution is but all the PGCE courses missed their targets for recruitment so there definitely aren't people queuing up to train.

The idea is already in Scotland the GCSE would be in England.

All the maths teachers could move to Wales if they keep GCSE maths. See market forces.

The constant question is ‘why would anyone want to be a maths teacher when they could earn more elsewhere?’

Because the holidays are great and you save a fortune in childcare. That’s why I don’t leave teaching to get a better paid job elsewhere. Ultimately after 13 weeks of holiday clubs for 3 kids it wouldn’t be better paid.

Oh Mouse, your total lack of knowledge makes me glad to no longer be a maths teacher.

If there are significant recruitment and retention issues in maths or other STEM subjects, then of course those jobs should command significantly higher salaries. The public sector is not, and should not be completely isolated from market forces.

Surely this reduces us to seeing recruitment and retention issues as being all about salary? It really is not that simple.

Shortage teacher are paid more - it just isn't always obvious. Many schools don't follow the pay scales and when they do they add TLRs etc. So a main classroom match teacher will have a TLR with no associated responsibility.

@pestilentialboundary and your total inability to detect irony makes me glad we don't pay maths teachers more.

Surely this reduces us to seeing recruitment and retention issues as being all about salary?

Why is there a shortage of maths teachers and not a shortage of PE teachers, or primary teachers?

Reduce the need for maths teachers - arithmetic GCSE - reduce the need to pay them more.

Sack them. Pay them on results. Market forces.

Because PE teaching is more fun and PE types tend to be all about learning /coaching and teamwork? Primary teaching is seen as easier and more rewarding, less intellectually demanding (I know these things are myths!) . The myth would be that maths types aren't really people people and so aren't drawn to teaching....

I always worry that throwing money at recruitment attracts entirely the wrong people. And they have been doing it, in various guises , since about 1990... so it's not working!

I think it's quite a metropolitan view that maths graduates can always earn so much more : I am not sure this is true in the sticks... in the coastal towns, for example. And what about English graduates. They might not en masse earn the big bucks, but there are certainly higher paid jobs than teaching out there for an English graduate.

Why do you do it , for example, noble ?

mousse, you could say the same about English: anyone can teach a bit of spelling and punctuation. make it all about grammar. That's about as true as saying I could teach arithmetic (which was my lowest O grade result, by the way. ironically, I did better in maths!)

Mousse you appear to be unaware that the country needsmore maths-literate people, not fewer. The government is desperate to up the number of students taking maths post-16, at Core, A-level and Further Maths and will be shortly introducing bonuses to schools for doing this. This will require more maths teachers, and we already don’t have enough.

Never had any experience of GCSE PE, but what does a PE teacher in year 7,8,9 actually do? From the outside, they have no books to mark, no tests to stress over and they spend all day playing/refereeing games with children. I am not trying to put PE down, its easy, fun and good exercise, so am not surprised there are plenty of teachers wanting that gig. Maths on the other hand....

Obviously they also take a group of children who love football to a match every so often but if you love sports then its hardly a chore.

That's right @Piggywaspushed you could say the same about any subject. Each subject means something special to a student. Each subject has saved a student or changed a life.

I'm crap at art but art has meant the world to some students. Drama has changed lives. I know this and value this. I know schools are communities of individuals working together to bring the best out of young people. It's like stew what matters most the meat, the vegetables, the stock? Or do we work together?

I know maths is valuable, but I also know that PE is massively important to others. We work together, we support each other, we all add or bit to a bigger more important whole. We value the whole student, we turn out well rounded individuals who can support and contribute to society.

Or we look at the cash and grub for the money.

Market forces - or educating well rounded civilised individuals?