Teachers - help with target VA

[Postmanbear]

Hello. My department got a value added score of -0.17 last year. The head is saying this is below target so my department can’t progress through the pay scale. I am arguing that this is within normal tolerance levels. All other observations etc good.
How strict are they at your school?

Wow, that is harsh!
How do you compare to other subjects in your school or similar centres?

I need to find another department with a similar VA so I can ask people but I haven’t yet as I assumed we would get it. They’ve only just said no when the review was done in October! No one has received any written feedback so it’s very hard to challenge the differences. The whole thing is dodgy.

Speak to your union. They are sadly very experienced at dealing with this

Your union can advise.

Is this a small department or does the entire cohort take the exam? If it’s a tiny sample, then the measure is completely meaningless.

But apart from that, results should not form part of pay progression and penalising an entire department is outrageous.

Small department so roughly 50 students in total each year. 3 members of staff.
I’ve contacted my union about it and plan to appeal the decision.
My school basis the entire pay progression on results, nothing else is considered. A lot of staff are very upset and understandably we’ve had a large staff turnover recently.

Thank you for all your responses.
We all feel really demoralised and stressed by the whole thing. It’s not even about the money, we want to be treated fairly. I don’t want to work for an organisation that treats its staff like this.

Good luck, I’ve heard that lots of rejected pay progression cases actually get through on appeal so it’s definitely worth trying. Your union will be appalled. (I think there’s a limited time to appeal, so make sure you get in quickly).

-0.17 isn't even all that'bad'! Way to set a dept against each other as well
We should start naming and shaming these bloody awful schools. Although I realise we can't.

It's not MFL, is it?
Either way, so shoddy.

So a small update that’s not good news.
I decided I was going to appeal but the head asked me for a meeting before I did. During the meeting he pulled apart the data in various ways and said he was looking through my historic data. This made it clear that I was going to have a fight so when he offered to defer my pay increase and if my results were good this year it would be back dated I accepted to end the stress.

Since then he has had meetings with the two people I line manage and both of my line managers to specifically ask them questions about me. What support do I provide, how often do I observe etc etc. Some of the questions are not even about things that any of the line managers do!

I can only guess that they are looking for evidence. They certainly want me to know they are doing this.

I wish I hadn’t started with the whole pay progression thing as it’s not looking like I might be forced out. Feel so stressed 😥

Whether -0.17 is bad enough to warrant blocking pay progression really depends on the school context for me. If the school’s P8 is 0 or slightly below zero then it’s outrageous to single a department out like that. If the school’s P8 is above +1.00 then I think it’s slightly different. A progress score of -0.17 would stick out like a sore thumb in schools like that and suggest that questions needed to be asked. I still think automatic denial of pay progression is wrong but if there wasn’t any compelling reason for the difference (e.g. particular features of the cohort or staffing disruptions) then a department having a progress score that was significantly lower than any other would be a worry.

I’m really sorry to read your update. If your department’s results are roughly in line with the rest of the school then it’s awful for management to blame staff for their own failings. Just keep talking to your union and follow their advice. People can and do come out the other side of this.

And people wonder why teachers are leaving. It sucks to be constantly hounded rather than supported in this kind of role.