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?

So one of the conundrums about teachers pay is: Lots of them (especially on MN) want collective bargaining so they are all paid the same, but the same teachers individually also want to be able to move schools to get a promotion and be paid more.

Now surly that is double standards? "I dont like the market, I should be paid more but I am quite happy to use the market to be paid more".

Which is it? Would teachers accept a contract for a pay rise contingent on staying with the same school for x amount of years?

The young graduates I’m referring to aren’t going to other schools, rather they’re getting out of teaching. I am 49 and I’ve been teaching close to 30yrs and I’ve never known such low staff morale. I’ve never seen so many NQTs offered just a 1yr contract, nor so many young teachers leave within the first 5yrs post qualification. Here, in SE commuter belt, we struggle with both recruitment and retention in no small part due to house prices. Incidentally, despite the national picture, this LA also struggles to recruit primary teachers. We are heavily reliant on supply cover across the ages and there’s always lots of advertised vacancies.

Salary tends to rise and fall with demand in other areas so why not teaching?

walking being paid more because of a promotion is an entirely different thing!

I think the issue here angharad is that people are arguing paying more to some people for doing the exact same job with the same contract, the same hours ... not entirely ethical?

And, as usual, this ahs turned into a 'STEM is so important' thread. Just like to point out there is a growing shortage of English teachers and an absolute crisis in MFL. And I don't think those two are necessarily about professionals who could be paid £££££ elsewhere.

So one of the conundrums about teachers pay is: Lots of them (especially on MN) want collective bargaining so they are all paid the same, but the same teachers individually also want to be able to move schools to get a promotion and be paid more
I don't think you get how a promotion works.
Your actual job changes.
Promotion is not a pay rise.
Would teachers accept a contract for a pay rise contingent on staying with the same school for x amount of years?
So in order to be paid properly and not have a real terms cut year on year, I'd have to sacrifice applying for promoted posts for a number of years?
Ummm no thanks.

Why not do the revolutionary thing which is get a handle on workload, increase PPA time a little and then move the pay scales up in line with inflation?
Only speaking for myself, I'm not bothered about megabucks and anyone entering teaching for the money is doing the wrong thing. They need to make the career more attractive.

I don't necessarily think some subjects should be paid more than others.... you'd have to pay me a million to teach pe outdoors in northern Scotland in the winter. I do think that contact time should be subject based. The making workload for English is much greater then maths no matter what my colleagues say 😂

people are arguing paying more to some people for doing the exact same job with the same contract, the same hours ... not entirely ethical?

It already happens with the teaching bursaries? Or is that considered differently because it’s a bursary?

Would you accept a national ‘retention bonus’ for shortage teachers instead of a separate pay scale?

And, as usual, this ahs turned into a 'STEM is so important' thread.

Tbf that’s because I posted it with that title. If you’d posted it, you could have posted an English-based title. The same argument could be used for more pay for English teachers, as I said in my OP.

I’m not arguing that maths is more important than English. I’m arguing that something seriously needs to be done about shortage subjects and throwing money at bursaries for trainees isn’t doing anything for retention.

It’s already happening

Well that makes it ok then. If everyone else is doing it or saying it then I can. As teachers don't we discourage this type of thinking in our students.

As you correctly identify this is a national problem that is reaching crisis point. The government needs to address this nationally. It is not just maths and science as other posters identify English and MFL are also facing recruitment crises.

If we firefight with short term destructive measures we will weaken the whole system. This is a government issue that needs addressing by the government. Sticking plaster solutions will not work in the long term.

We need to use platforms like MN to make wider society aware of the absolute necessity to fund education properly if people want their children educated by professionals. The government must address this issue.

Rushing to apply market forces where they are not relevant or useful and will cause long term damage is short sighted and ultimately very harmful.

Yes, agreed noble, I just think people took the bait. But I would still argue that money, therefore, is not a full solution. I do think as soon as it becomes known that some people are being paid more for doing the same jobs as others, discontent rises ,and a potential retention problem is created in another subject area.

But, let's face it, it is already being addressed in many schools by making heads of Eng, ma and Science AHTs by default.

I am not getting this.

Teachers want wage parity, because they feel work loads are roughly equal. Fine. Except like many policy decisions, equality has a cost.

The maths teacher, like other teachers, is fed up with pay and conditions. They see a job offered at the local private school/sixth form college advertised on better terms, with plenty of high ability sets. Even if the idea was to always teach in state, the teacher feels the choice is to switch or leavin teaching altogether, or at least have a break for a few years.

As for the PE teacher. Unfotunately the private school asked the maths teacher if they had an interest in a sport. Ahh badminton. The school reached the Independent Schools badminton finals last year. Would they be willing to supervise the sixth form girls badminton team supported by a high level peripatetic coach? Sounds interesting says the maths teacher (or no as the case may be) but is that not the job of PE staff. No says the school, we take our sports seriously so only employ a Director of Sport. Lending our facilities to sports clubs after school means that high level sport is well intergrated, with us using their staff during the day and our pupils accessing competitive clubs at other times. We currently have five pupils in national teams.

So a state school with no maths teacher but school games run by a demotivated PE teacher who sees no way out, not least because they are aware that they are on far better terms including school hours and pension, than local high level sports coaches. A private school with maths teacher and high level sport. And parents asking grandparents to help them take up a bursary for their bright and sporty 10 year old, because the opportunities are so much better.

Its fine wanting one outcome, but only if the probable consequences are thought through.

I don't think money is the issue. I think workload is the issue. I worked in a school for 15 years where students might have 20+ maths teachers by the time they got through to Year 11. The issue wasn't money. I think the issues include:

• Student attitude to Maths - it must be disheartening teaching kids who go on about how boring your subject is, or how difficult, or how they can't do it (obvs as a drama teacher I don't get this

• Parent attitude - it's still totally fine to say "ooo, I could never do maths" in a flippant way, whereas very few parents say "oooo, I never bothered to learn to read".

• General cultural response to maths - see above.

• The assumption that half of what you teach will have no application in real life ("I'm never going to need algebra! Why can't you just teach me the stuff I need know..." "I have a calculator on my phone. I always have my phone with me. Why do I need to do this stuff?")

• New GCSEs (not just in Maths, of course, but they've made things harder)

• Progress 8

• Performance tables in general

• The emphasis on STEM - not the cry that it's more important than everything else, but the fact that so much press says that we, as a country, are failing our young people in these areas - can't do much for your self-esteem.

The answer to none of these things is to pay maths teachers more. It won't fix any of the above issues. Retention is a issue but I don't think it's because Maths teachers feel that they can't afford to live. Why do any of us leave mainstream teaching (like I did)? Workload. The pointless shit we have to do that has literally no impact on learning but takes time.

Twins, money is not everything, but is part of it. I have seen plenty of teachers , state and private, leave London with their young families. Private schools respond offering higher salaries, additional responsibilities (eg science teacher responsible for medical school applications) or accomodation. And indeed on the job training for maths and science grads. State schools are stuck on national wage scales with a London weighting that does not cover additional accomodation and commuting costs. Guess who has a fighting chance of retaining.

Needmoresleep You have a point, but I don't think it's the most significant element. Plenty of state school teachers don't consider the independent sector as a matter of principle.

Twins. They do when it is a case of move or quit. In particular we came across several maths and science teachers, perhaps confirming to a stereotype, who appeared to have struggled to control classes in the state sector. The pupils attitude you describe. Often they were some of the most inspirational teachers DC had. They may not have quite had the organisational or parent communication skills you might want (a surprising number of physics teachers admitted to DD that they were also dyslexic so understood the challenges she faced) but they were able to convey their own enthusiasm for their subject to their pupils.

In my experience (and I include myself here) plenty of state school teachers object, in principle, to independent education. I left mainstream school last summer for a variety of reasons (money wasn't one of them) and never even considered looking at the independent schools in my area, despite the fact that in my subject, independent schools have amazing resources and facilities.

Twins I dont disagree. However private schools do provide a refuge for a number of teachers who enjoy teaching but find some of the ancillary stuff, like complex classroom control, difficult. I suspect it may be particularly true of talented mathematicians who love sharing their enthusiasm for the STEP/FM stuff but who find the "must get a GCSE pass" teaching unrewarding. And obviously those who are struggling to survive on national pay scales but can command better pay/conditions in other sectors. (Not just independent, but also tutorial colleges and overseas.)

My DH works in a private school. they aren't all like the ones (in London) that you describe. The amount he gets paid more than a state school teacher on mainscale is actually negligible nowadays. He has a few more free periods than a state colleague would but works later. All staff are expected to do some sort of extra curricular activity , the unions have no presence at all, and he does loads of cover. the grass is not greener. He constantly complains about behaviour. They can be faddish , too. The one thing he has less of is data tracking and the pressures arising from that.

True, people tend not to leave in droves, perhaps out of fear of what they hear about the state sector , but they also have terrible trouble recruiting. Frequently, there is one applicant for a maths post.

Piggy, I don't disagree. Pressures on teacher recruitment and retention are more acute in London, but exist everywhere. There are also different pressures in the private sector. (A good privae school head in London really earns their salary.) The grass is not always greener. However I have observed two key trends.

1. Movement from state to private. Rarely the other way round.
2. Movement of teachers out of London once their second child is born. Or to non teaching jobs.

The one thing though is that private schools have more flexibility to recruit (schools we know have been willing to train new maths and science teachers on the job, often sucessfully) and to retain. I assume the reduced Union presence allows what is an effective switch from PE staff to specialised sports coaches. Effectively the question asked by OP.

Different approaches, different outcomes. The state sector may retain things teachers find important, but the private sector can be better placed to deliver high quality maths and sport.

I have read this thread with interest, from the perspective of someone considering training as a maths teacher in the near future (2019 start).

If I go ahead with this plan, it will not be for the money. I am currently a 40-something SAHM and privileged in that we do not depend on my earnings. I could take my abilities and qualifications elsewhere and earn much more than teachers.

Despite thinking I would really enjoy teaching maths, I am not sure if I should go for it though. I am decidedly not interested in martyring myself. All the money in the world would not entice me to martyr myself. Increasing maths teachers' payscale would not make it more likely for me to take up a PGCE, nor would it make it more likely for me to stay in teaching long-term once qualified.
If I do start a PGCE, my mid-term plan would be to work part-time, cherry-picking my jobs (e.g. not too much commute, and hours that work for me/our family). If I couldn't find a job that suited, I would just not work (or not as a maths teacher). A higher pay scale would not make me stay in/take a job. The workload/conditions would.

Definitely in the summer. In the winter when it's cold, I'm not sure that the PE teachers don't deserve more. :D

Well that makes it ok then. If everyone else is doing it or saying it then I can. As teachers don't we discourage this type of thinking in our students.

A PP said that their school is down five maths teachers. Are you saying that you would say to the head on principle that they shouldn’t try offering a bit more money even if the other local schools do?

The last school I taught in couldn't hold onto Maths teachers. In the end they asked staff if anyone wanted to do a training course and change subject. Several staff did - Science teachers mostly but one Business Studies teacher and one History teacher. Then they got a bit of Maths on their timetables. It seemed to work quite well. Also, every member of SLT can teach Maths without training right At least, that seems to happen in most places...

That then creates more work for the qualified staff, and makes for a more difficult department to work in. People are desperate.

Are they not already? Shocking!