Damian Hinds promises to cut teacher workload and hours to improve teacher recruitment and retention

[noblegiraffe]

He is going to make a speech today pledging to 'strip away” pointless tasks to allow teachers to “focus on what actually matters'

You might be reminded of the 21 admin tasks that it was agreed that we shouldn't do under the workload agreement (that were removed from the pay and conditions document and replaced with a vague statement saying we shouldn't do clerical work).

But this time the focus seems to be on measures that school put in place for accountability purposes, and excessive marking "Because that’s what endless data cuts, triple-marking, 10-page lesson plans, and, worst of all, mocksteds are: a distraction from the core purpose of education. And a costly distraction at that"

The government will pledge not to make any changes to the curriculum other than those already announced (times tables tests) in the rest of this parliament (so 2022) - but we've heard that before and then they have made necessary changes.

And he has promised to work with the teaching unions and professional bodies specifically on recruitment and retention.

I guess the shit is finally hitting the fan at the DfE and they can't stick their heads in the sand any more?

www.tes.com/news/school-news/breaking-news/damian-hinds-pledges-action-strip-away-teacher-workload

We've heard it all before, haven't we.

Going to address workload, recruitment, yadda yadda.

Reality is that very little changes. Even on 0.6 I'm working 40 hour weeks. It's madness.

What needs to happen is a reduction in data reliance and totally agree league tables and grading of Ofsted reports.

Either a school is fine or it's not. Nothing more needed. It just leads to SLT chasing ever more targets, requiring ever more data. We might even need fewer AHTs too, which would save a bit of cash....

What then?

Just hunted for the thread from a while back on retention. I suggested:

1. If any new initiative is seen to increase workload, then workload has to be decreased elsewhere to compensate. Always. That might focus a few minds on what is really necessary.

2. Ofsted are considering dropping the outstanding rating. This would have a huge impact, but they are being held back by the fact that parents like it. The views of education professionals should outweigh parents in this instance.

3. Scrap any notion that teachers' pay should be linked to individual student results or class results. Unions already advise against it, but Ofsted should ask to see appraisal objectives and any school that has results in there should be not allowed to get higher than requires improvement. Student and class results are too volatile to be used as a positive performance indicator. Cohort results for those with a cohort responsibility I'm not sure about...

4. Cap CEO of academy pay linked to how many schools they are responsible for. School funding should not be lining individual pockets. On top of that, increase base funding for schools so that they have enough money for sufficient TAs, support staff and so on.

5. Way more funding for SEN. Open more special schools, review the EHCP process, better training for teachers and so on (there are people way more knowledgeable than me with ideas about this).

6. Behaviour - do not make having a poorly behaved class increase the workload of a teacher to an unreasonable degree. Centralised detentions. On-call support that actually turns up. An escalating series of sanctions/intervention that is actually followed, and doesn't involve the class teacher doing anything once the kid fails to turn up to their lunch detention/persists in being a pain/is a pain across the school. This should be verified by Ofsted because otherwise SLT will get away with not doing it.

Lots of good suggestions on the thread. Damian doesn't appear to have read it. www.mumsnet.com/Talk/the_staffroom/3085036-What-could-be-done-to-stop-the-teacher-recruitment-and-retention-crisis

Low door it sounds good but before you know it it will be matched funding for one set of textbooks and the we will be told to cut planning all year 2 classes will be doing page 52 of the English book and page 47 of the Maths book on Monday 8th June and so on.

Personally, I think anything other than planning and marking is a drop in the ocean in terms of a classroom teacher's workload. I only speak from my experience of Primary.

Even if a teacher only spends 5 minutes planning each of 5 lessons a day and 2 minutes marking each of 60 books that is 2hrs and 25mins of daily work- and let's face it 5 mins per lesson and 2 mins per book would be cutting it fine. That is where the crushing daily grind is. Parents' evenings and staff meetings are just the straws that break the camel's back.

Just my opinion obviously.

Like @Missmarplesknitting I'm hugely skeptical about this. I've heard it before.

It would take a complete overhaul of the school system to get a real change and that costs money that I don't believe this government (maybe any government) is prepared to put in. It would also mean holding steadfast through bad press about reducing competitive judgements between schools /removing SATs/removing league tables /removing outstanding grade that I don't think there is political will to do.

Some of the issues around "social work" (referred to by PP) and SEND support will only be solved by putting more funding into other services - NHS, social services, family support, sure start etc etc

In order for me to return to the profession someone needs to seriously put their money where their mouth is.

We had work to rule instructions from the unions but it didn’t work because the nqt-bots did all the things we were not supposed to do because they were told it was expected. I can’t see anything changing but plenty will think that the lovely education secretary really understands and is doing all he can to help. Total twaddle

For what it's worth, I would like to see SATs abolished and therefore league tables removed.

I think the Ofsted judgement areas for Primary schools should be:

Development of Pupils' Learning Skills
Social and Communication Skills
Creativity and Innovation
School Community Health and Wellbeing

Imagine how Primary schools would change overnight if those were the foci.

We had work to rule instructions from the unions but it didn’t work because many of the things which I'm 'not supposed to do' (or rather many of the things which take huge amounts of time, effort and emotional energy) are for the benefit of my class, who i care deeply about.

So even if i don't put up displays, I do go to lots of meetings with pupils, parents, external bodies, the head, the SENCo etc because they are needed to keep my pupils safe and healthy - and in between times i will observe and record and worry about the highly vulnerable children in my class because even if you tell me 'it's not part of my job', it IS.

My last year teaching in a high-achieving state school I had sole responsibility for 90 students doing my sixth form subject (I was the only teacher of it) - the largest class size was 27, in year 13. As my timetable was somehow deemed to be light (because only contact hours were taken into account, not class sizes) I also had 9 hours a fortnight of KS3 classes, with 30 or more per class.

The workload was just ridiculous. And this was in a school with pretty reasonable marking policies and a nice enough SLT.

I agree about the behaviour etc but the govt will simply never get a grip on workload until they do something about class sizes. They need to choose quality or quantity (or accept that if they want both, teachers won't last very long).

I would actually say I did very little in the job I described above that wasn't a proper part of the job. The SLT weren't particularly into busy work for the sake of it and the students were mostly very nice - I would have felt bad if I'd not organised trips or supported them when they were having problems of whatever kind. The job was simply too big.

The other thing the govt needs to take into account is the distance a lot of teachers live from work, in the SE in particular. They don't seem to realise that some of us are factoring in 15 hours or so commuting a week, either. I really do think some (non-boarding) schools are going to have to start offering staff accommodation to get any applicants.

They also face serious competition from overseas. My inbox is constantly full of people trying to entice me to Asia/the Middle East. I don't want to go, but enough colleagues have that it is evidently attractive to a lot of teachers.

I have pretty much left school teaching now (I do KS4 so 4 hours per week, as a freelancer) and I run a full time 6th form course, which is pretty full on. But my workload has massively reduced. I now no longer do...
Meetings - no need as I am the sole teacher on the course.
Data - no spreadsheets, no meetings about spreadsheets, no interventions, no justification of why anyone isn’t meeting targets.
Duties.
Briefings.
Compulsory CPD.

Essentially, I plan, teach and assess. And that’s it. And my students are making brilliant progress.

Honestly, moving out of mainstream school has really made me understand how much time I used to spend on things which made no impact at all. If schools were brave enough to ditch all of those things, we’d all get our lives back.

FallenMadonna

I personally would like for schools to be able to get rid of pupils that physically attack/sexually assault teachers.

not so much to do with funding as schools not being allowed to protect their staff.

Came here to find the thread I'd knew would be here.

My concern is what would be defined as unnecessary tasks?

Everything I think is useless, someone can argue is useful.

Success criteria for art lessons is one that I'm sticking my heels in about (Primary) and I have the knowledge and understanding/ theory to say why.

They should have e come up with good quality qca type stuff as soon as they released the new curriculum. All I feel we've been doing for the last few years is spending far too much time writing our own.

I'm part time and in charge of 2 curriculum areas. I've written outlined lesson plans for a 2 year rolling programme for the whole school over the last 18 mo - in essence an entire qca plan for 2 years. It's taken an enormous amount of time - at the same time Ive recognised that staff are so unskilled in the areas I needed to do it. We are also Sen.

We've developed our own assessments- these helped me structure the planning and help anyone with a class working at a much lower level than my plans can accommodate but it's useless really as it's going to track experiences afai can see. Not really progress. And with foundation subjects, what's the point? And definitely not assessing each term. Ffs.

I agree that I personally feel designing your own resources is a good thing to be able to do; it's made me a better teacher to have survived without twinkl for 12 years of my career. At the same time, I'm aware there were times I made things for history for eg that took longer to make than the lesson took to deliver.

I agree it's not much use to follow another teachers plan and resources; I've struggled with twinkl science packs, and didn't understand the lesson I was delivering when I delivered it. But outlines of lessons are really helpful, alongside resources that are generic to the subject.

If the government knew how much time teachers waste on simply trying to work out how to best design data, structure systems etc simply to hit the 'outstanding' criteria...

I'd argue that a lot of 'initiatives' are unnecessary. Rights respecting schools award for eg. Awards generally. I can see they drive standards but at the same time it feels like we are being doubly judged by them and ofsted. Random 'weeks' really over load the calendar too.

But what can be seen as necessary or not?

A new teacher has been copying out a published scheme of work into our little boxes. Waste. Of . Time.

(For our own scheme of work to distribute to the school)

*I personally would like for schools to be able to get rid of pupils that physically attack/sexually assault teachers.

not so much to do with funding as schools not being allowed to protect their staff*

Boney that absolutely is to do with funding because to admit that those students cannot have their needs met in mainstream means providing them will full time alternative provision, which is very expensive. In my (large) county there is ONE SEMH school. Only 11-16. Only takes boys. Will not touch pupils with autism. That leaves a lot of young people who find mainstream school extremely difficult to manage with no other alternative. County won't open more alternative provision because of the cost.

Everything I think is useless, someone can argue is useful.

Which is why if something useful is to be asked of teachers, there needs to be a cost-benefit analysis. If it only has a minor impact on student achievement at a major cost to teacher time, then it shouldn't happen. If it's only done to please parents and has no educational impact, then it shouldn't happen. If it's genuinely useful and has an impact on student achievement then something else has to go for it to be implemented.

That's true tacky, I think I find in primary schools it's that different teachers feel different things are relevant.

For example, I value a good arts curriculum, especially art and dt lessons that explore and extend skills, are STEAM esque and inspiring, process led not by outcome (that drawing is 'good' - not helpful). I can see how aspects of art are mathematical and scientific. I know good music education effectively raises Iq levels.

Other teachers can't see the benefits and avoid paint as it's messy, and wouldn't put as much effort into focusing on the arts, taking on certain initiatives that are time rich as they don't value the outcome and the impact that creativity has on lateral thinking skills and problem solving.

I know of a secondary school that invests A Lot into their art dept as their pupils really achieve the high grades in that subject over some of the other subjects (deprived area).

That's true noble I mean.

The problem with cost-benefit anaylsis - so far, at least - is that 'cost' has been measured in terms of £. That, initially, seems to make sense BUT I think it has ultimately proved very unhelpful indeed.

Noble's point about extending 'cost' to include 'cost in terms of teachers' time' seems small but - I think - is pretty revolutionary.

Remember, if cost-benefit analysis has been done without looking at teachers' time, it actually under-calculates cost. Because things are brought in which are incredibly time-consuming and teachers are doing them in their own time, effectively subsidising the cost with free labour.

And, of course, that then turns into another kind of 'cost': psychological strain, burn-out.

And that then feeds back into a distantiated cost: teacher retention.

I could wibble on about this for hours but, in short, I think 'cost-benefit' analysis needs to be thought about less bluntly than it is at the moment.

Thinking about the teacher-time thing a bit further, I said that if something new is introduced, something else has to go. We need to be careful that if, in the current state of things, if something goes (triple marking is a good example) that something else isn't introduced to replace it.

I saw a comment by I think Becky Allen on twitter that this workload creep for teachers started with the introduction of PPA time. It was like 'oh, we're giving you all this time to do stuff in, so lets give you stuff to do in it'.

I think in primary school there's an issue with teachers having different strengths. It's not necessarily that a teacher is incorrect to ignore the benefits of getting the paint out, but that for them, they'd rather do more maths/English/history because art's not their strength. Forcing a weak art teacher to do more art may not be the best use of their time. So long as a student has a mix of teachers over the primary years, and that there is a minimum requirement for the curriculum which is being met each year, then things should even out.

I'm crap at making resources. Others in my department love making a good PowerPoint. Telling me that I have to make my own powerpoints or telling them they have to use purchased resources isn't good, we have to be allowed to be individuals.

Obviously whole-school policy needs to support minimum requirements to ensure every child is getting a good education. The problem is when additional extras put on by some teachers end up being the expectation.

As lowdoorinthewall says, exclusion absolutely is linked to funding. AP is expensive. Far cheaper to keep children in isolation/internal exclusion.