Who is/isn't striking among the NUT members here?

[lifeissweet]

Facing a dilemma. My beliefs about unions are based on the fact that united we have a voice. People fought to have the right to unionise. If a union calls a strike, then I believe all members have a responsibility to stand up together. Otherwise, we come across as divided, not united and it weakens us all.

Not for a long, long time has the teaching profession been under so much threat and we need to be united now more than at any time. Our terms and conditions are facing changes which will make teaching a far less stable and desirable profession (and not really a profession at all if unqualified teachers are allowed to take classes all over the place).

However, I am currently the only member of staff at my school who is prepared to strike on Thursday. Half of the other staff are NUT. Lots of the support staff are in striking unions, yet no one is striking (including the NUT rep). The Head has told me that if I strike I will be the only one and that he will have to close only my class that day and keep the rest of the school open, so everyone will know it is only me withdrawing my labour and am I 'prepared to take the flak for that?'

I'm not sure I am, but I believe really strongly in supporting the union. The thought of ignoring deeply held principles and breaking a strike sit uncomfortably with me.

My DS's school is closed on Thursday. Other local schools are too.

So is it just my school where there are no striking staff at all? And if you are NUT, why are you not striking? Is it just so as not to disrupt end of year activities, or because you think striking isn't helping? (I don't, incidentally, but will vote with my feet on that one and change unions when this is done.) How do you square that with yourself?

Not preaching. People have all manner of reasons for not striking. I just think I want to feel a bit less out on a limb!

[Philoslothy]

I also teach students who pass my A level course, that does not mean they are fit to teach GCSE, even with a degree in some spurious subject.

[LostInMusic]

No - but other posters have suggested that they'd rather have enthusiastic youngsters straight out of university. In many ways, I agree with your point - the art of Teaching is definitely the most important thing.

[LostInMusic]

But a specialist has surely always got to be the ideal aim?!

[Philoslothy]

" art of teaching" is misleading because it gives the impression that it is some kind if mystical talent that a select view have. I am only impressive in that I am quite mediocre, I started as a fundamentally crap classroom manager however I learned quickly.

I suspect it is easier to learn how to manage a classroom than to educate someone to the level of a 3 year degree at a 2:1 or above alongside their teaching. Of course there are a few people who will never get it, they are quite a small number though.

[noblegiraffe]

I think up to GCSE level, teaching ability is all.

Bollocks. I'm a good maths teacher. I am lousy at teaching subjects like PSHE where the kids sit around in a circle discussing their feelings or opinions. It takes different skills.

[JJsleeping]

I am shocked by the complete lack of regard that so many people seem to have for teachers - I think the public do not like the way teachers strike when they dont get what they want with very little mandate. Their increased politicization makes them often seem more like militant politicians than educators. In the private sector businesses find that children with good GCSE's just cant read, write and even speak properly. Parents know exams have been dumbed down for years yet teachers seem to live in a world of denial. Schools have fiddled inspections and manipulated exams to try and make themselves look better than they are. When the government try to improve standards teachers are against it.

Agree or disagree with these points that is how a lot of parents see teachers. So really its teachers that are their own worse enemy, they seem to to be on a suicide mission to drag their own profession through the mud and wonder when they are not respected.

[noblegiraffe]

Teachers don't get to decide the content of GCSEs, so not sure why you seem to be blaming them for that. In fact teachers have very little control of what they teach, and indeed how they teach it, and this is one of the reasons they are pissed off.

The education system is certainly not great, but teachers aren't in control of it.

[JJsleeping]

I am not blaming teachers for the content of GCSE's I am talking about the 'perception' of education. Over the past 2 decades I haven't heard of many teachers/unions/schools pushing for increased GCSE standards to the extent that they would strike if they weren't improved. But I have heard many teachers comments against them.

[noblegiraffe]

I can only speak for maths but there have been loads of complaints from teachers over the years about how shitty and unfit for purpose maths GCSE is. I expect you haven't been paying attention though.

However, we aren't allowed to strike over the contents of maths GCSE so suggesting that we should is a non-starter.

[ravenAK]

As repeatedly explained, there are rules governing strikes; it has to be about our T&C. GCSE content is not a thing we can strike over.

However, if it makes you feel any better about it all, last year's English Language marking fiasco, for example, is absolutely on the list of things that have convinced me that this government cannot be trusted with education.

[ravenAK]

& actually, I'll tell you why 'children with good GCSE's just cant read, write and even speak properly' - although I don't agree with that, there are certainly people out there with a grade C in English who have precious little natural aptitude with the written word.

It's because we drill them with the techniques they need to pass the exam. we put them in booster sessions, we run afterschool sessions, we send them on C/D borderline conferences out of school.

It's a bit like Strictly Come Dancing - it might be all right-ish on the night, but track down Anne widdecombe today & ask her to show you a few moves, & I imagine she'd tell you to foxtrot off.

[noblegiraffe]

Employers also moan that kids have a GCSE C in maths without being able to do mental arithmetic or perform calculations.

Well, if you can get a C in maths GCSE without being able to do mental arithmetic or basic calculations, is that the fault of teachers, or a problem with the qualification?

And given the massive focus on C grades, and the huge pressure of league tables, is it any wonder that teachers are teaching kids what will get them their GCSE instead of nice-to-have stuff on the side?

I think JJ was a fan of performance-related pay. Does she think that linking teachers' pay to getting kids a C grade would make teaching to the test happen more or less often?

[sanfairyanne]

the politicisation of education has been a massive disaster. if only MPs could resist the temptation.

[Viviennemary]

I think teachers these days are quite well paid. But people who always find an excuse as to why they can't strike are a bit irritating. If you are in a union that goes on strike then you should suppport the strike if the vote is for the strike. If you are not prepared to do this then join a non-striking union.

[ChillySundays]

I would be happy for anyone to teach my children as long as my children were learning and improving. If that means the excellent english teacher with an A level in maths so be it. Better than paying for private tuition for my DD who had a 'proper' maths (but useless) teacher

[SwiftRelease]

Yep, me too.

[noblegiraffe]

The excellent English teacher will be busy teaching English, no?

Perhaps you could take the excellent English teacher and make him a mediocre maths teacher (he's not going to be as good as someone trained to teach maths - take it from someone who has taught a subject they aren't trained to teach), but then English will be losing out.

[ravenAK]

Yes, speaking as an excellent English teacher who is also quite good at doing Maths, & has an A Level, this could theoretically happen.
I dunno about teaching it - I've never tried - but if I ever found myself timetabled to do so I'd have a bash & hope the department's noblegiraffe would hold my hand a bit...

However, we're struggling almost as much to recruit in English, so you'd be more likely to find an Arts or Geography teacher bodging away at Maths, I think.

Plural of anecdote not equalling data, etc, but our weakest teachers over recent years have tended to be in Maths (slightly iffy degree class & poor classroom management). It really is an issue re: recruitment & retention - we're having real difficulty putting competent warm bodies in front of classes.

This worries me, as my dd1 is all about the Maths G&T - by the time she hits secondary school she's going to need a teacher who can really stretch her. I can already see her outstripping a stage where I can help her with my 25yo 'good O Level, mediocre A Level' Maths, & she's 8 - so no, I don't think ChillySundays requirements are stringent enough.

[Philoslothy]

Excellent History teacher here with an A Level in English and Maths. I would not let myself teach my own children those subjects never mind anybody else's.

Why are people happy for mediocrity?

[Philoslothy]

Every school I have worked in or contact with the Maths department has had problems that can be traced back to recruitment and retention.

[BoneyBackJefferson]

"Why are people happy for mediocrity?"

I've noticed that people are happy for this when its not their children.

[ChillySundays]

I am not in education so my ideas are very much 'what if you did this or did that?' I picked an English teacher as it was the first subject that came into my head. What I meant was not a maths teacher. As I don't understand anything - I thought that a PGCE teaches you to teach and would be non subject specific. So the group of PGCE students would have a range of degrees.
A teacher with a good grade a level could teach the lower sets. Isn't that what PE teachers do? When I was at school they taught the lower sets for their second subjects. Imagine now with the advent of PE GCSE that there isn't so much call for a second subject. Not in education so don't know.

[noblegiraffe]

No, PGCEs are subject specific at secondary. My maths PGCE only involved teaching maths, although technically once you're qualified as a teacher you can teach anything, including switching to primary!

To get on a maths PGCE and be trained to teach maths, you are expected to have a degree with a major mathematical component, e.g. Economics or Engineering would do.

[ChillySundays]

I understand now - you see you learn something new everyday! What is a BEd then - is that for primary school teachers.

[rollonthesummer]

My PGCE was primary, covering from 3-11, but I'm still qualified to teach secondary.