Is it unreasonable to be asked to produce a scheme of work?

[Redgreentractor]

The scheme of work being asked for is a set of resources, around 6 weeks. We have been asked to do this in our own time.

It’s not gone down well and people have contacted the union, but the response is a bit unclear. Does anyone here know?

you should have schemes of work in place for all your teaching, surely?

resourcing a scheme of work is a different issue. Some departments divvy up the scheme of work and share resources centrally, others might expect staff to do their own resourcing although there will undoubtedly be sharing amongst colleagues.

Having a scheme of work in place should really be the job of a head of department or a lead in primary. It might be that the job is shared out by the HoD. What exactly is it that’s being objected to?

I’m a bit confused. Surely we design / make / edit schemes of work all the time? It’s a core part of the job, no?

I literally have to write my whole curriculum in primary. Small primary, no one to share with, two year cycle (previously 4 😮). When the new curriculum came out and there weren't any resources yet this involved researching loads of things first, such as the Stone Age to the Iron Age or Ancient Greeks or whatever. I don't understand why you wouldn't expect to plan a scheme of work?

I find this odd that you think this is unreasonable and your colleagues have been to the union. Has everyone been asked to plan a part of the curriculum, so you're essentially sharing the workload? If so, I can't imagine why that's a problem, it's saving you work in the future, when you use the plans other people have resourced. Usually a HOD would write a skeleton SOW, and teachers would then plan their own lessons anyway. Do you have a skeleton SOW? The only reason why I can think that teachers may have a problem with this, is that if you teach in one of these places with centralised planning, workbooks etc. If you do, be careful what you complain about. If you're complaining about planning, given that it's a core and completely normal part of teaching, the SLT may decide they're better off replacing you with a load of unqualified teachers who can read from a script, if the qualified teachers that they employ aren't even going to plan. It's all part of the de-professionalisation of teaching. I wouldn't want to play a part in that.

I purposefully haven’t given my personal view @Hayliebells

Union response is:

You are being asked to write schemes of work for 25 lessons which is normally a duty that will be undertaken by the Head of Department in receipt of a TLR. If the HOD is delegating parts of his/her responsibilities to teachers within the Department then this is sometimes that may need to be challenged.

That has been interpreted to mean we do not have to do it, it should only be TLR holders. I’m not totally sure it is as clear cut as that.

Certainly is the expectation in primary.

Do secondary teachers not plan schemes of work? What do you do then?!

Oh, usually sit around drinking tea, occasionally we may have a biscuit too.

I think whether this is reasonable or not depends on what a SOW constitutes. Is it just an outline, with learning objectives for each lesson? If so, then yes, that's normally a HOD's job. Class teachers would then flesh that out when planning their lessons. If it's actual lesson plans with resources, then I'm not quite sure why the union rep has concluded that's a HOD's job, as opposed to the teachers'. If teachers are being asked to plan lessons they won't teach, or if they're not going to be able to use any of the lessons planned by others, then it's unreasonable. But if it's shared fairly, it's an odd stance for the union rep to take. Is there a back story? Poor relationship between SLT and union reps? Excessive workload generally?

Can you clarify exactly what you're being asked to produce? What resources already exist?

How would these resources be used?

What timeframe is expected?

To me, a scheme of work and a set of resources are very different things. Is there a reason you can't use existing resources for this task?

The topics are completely new. Do you mean why can’t we use existing resources from say internet or similar? I don’t think we can’t but they’d need to be suitably adapted (school has a bit of a stringent way of planning.)

This would be a gained time task at my school, not an 'in your own time' one.

I actually don't think this is such a daft question. What are you doing, that takes up all the time? Clearly the department don't think they have time, or they wouldn't be complaining to the union rep. Does the union rep's response come from a place of frustration that lots is asked if staff that has very little educational value? Because I can't think of much that has more educational value than a well planned lesson. I'd encourage the members of your department to focus on what else can be cut to reduce workload tbh, because surely there must be something. Onerous marking policy, with written feedback every two weeks? I'd question that sort of thing, as there's no evidence it's beneficial. Workload can be cut with things like whole class feedback and mini white board use. Yes ideally this sort of thing would be done in gained time, but in the absence of that, you'd have to plan the lessons anyway, right? So why not do it collectively, share the work? Or do you work in a school where HODs usually do all the planning? If I was a HOD in that school I'd leave sharpish, as that's an unreasonable job for one person. Maybe the HOD has threatened to quit?

I actually don’t have any personal objections to it, @Hayliebells , but it’s not the first time I’ve seen primary teachers say or heavily imply that secondary are somehow ‘inferior’ in terms of workload. Marking one hundred and twenty mock exams was - time consuming shall we say. Let’s start with that. I am sure you can imagine a few of the other things that we have to do, just as I know reception teachers have a heavy workload despite not having that particular task.

I know just what Secondary teachers have to do, I am one. Mock exam marking is very time consuming yes, but they happen relatively infrequently. What are the teachers doing at other times of the year? That's a serious question, I'm not trying to point score, because if it's not planning lessons, what ARE they doing? Extensive written reports? Excessive (other than mock) marking with written feedback? Holding detentions? Covering? All this can be cut with better policies, with no negative impact on learning. My point is that properly planning lessons is probably the most useful thing a teacher can do outside of lesson times. If they don't have time for that, what are they doing instead, because it's likely to be something that should go so that they can plan.

I'm not doubting that the teachers have a high workload, I can imagine that they do. I taught through the 2010's, the era of triple marking, and all signing and dancing lesson observations. Some schools haven't moved on much, and still ask too much of their staff, on tasks that are not helpful for learning. It's those things that the staff should be looking to ditch. Asking the SLT, what can we cut, so we can do this planning well? It might take a bit if a root and branch approach, so taking this up with the Teaching and Learning lead is probably a good idea. If they're not amenable to ditching time consuming stuff that doesn't add value, so planning can be done, that suggests that they're not following good evidence based practice, and I'd probably leave for a different school that does.

No implication of workload inferiority, just you chose to interpret it that way. Must have hit a nerve.

FWIW I've also "sat around and drunk tea" in secondary, but it did involve planning a SOW for a unit whilst my department colleagues did the same for other units. So it was a a genuine question, as @Hayliebells rephrased, what are you doing that takes up all your time?

I've sat around and drank tea in KS2, KS1 and currently EYFS. My longest hours and heaviest workload all year round have definitely been in EYFS.

I feel a bit like I’m on trial at the stand here.

I am honestly not wanting to sound snippy but some of the responses are pretty belligerent in tone despite me explaining I’ve no issue with the SOW. What I’d like to know is how others interpret the response from the union.

It's not a reasonable response from the union, planning is a part of a teacher's job. They're incorrect that it's a HODs job because they have a TLR, if following STPCD. If however, that is in the HODs contract, and the teachers have contracts that state they don't need to plan, then the union rep is correct. I'd have thought it highly unlikely that's the case though, and based on STPCD the union rep is incorrect. Sounds like the staff are unhappy with their workload though, if they're going to the union about this in the first place.

Your original question was whether it is unreasonable to be asked to produce a scheme of work.

No, it is not.

Like @Hayliebells, I remember the days of triple marking, etc. In light of this, it is more germane to consider not so much what one is being asked to do but in what form is required to be done. Nobody could disagree that planning a lesson is necessary but having to complete a handwritten A3 size lesson plan proforma with attached photocopies of all worksheets and other resources for each lesson does not make planning any more effective!

It could be that what is being asked in designing an SOW is onerous BS, possibly caused by the school penny-pinching by not buying into online resource providers.

Digging a grave is much easier with a JCB than it is with a teaspoon!

I think in secondary, writing a SoW is usually a HoD job, sometimes with input from others. By this, I mean deciding what is taught when etc- I think it is a) a big responsibility and b) if it's written by another teacher the temptation is sometimes for individuals to not follow it and go rogue and teach in a different order etc, which can lead to students missing topics especially if they move groups.

I also think the HoD has more oversight of who is available to teach what, especially if students rotate between teachers (coming at this from a science perspective).

I have written (with one other member of staff) a full scheme of work as a classroom teacher in gained time but it took me hours- And this was literally lesson titles and objectives. Part of the issue was that we did not have enough teaching time so I had to decide what could be cut or crammed into one lesson.

And for science there is foundation/higher/triple to contend with too.

I couldn't have done it whilst teaching a normal teaching load.

I think if you’d have worded your question differently OP, you might have got slightly different responses. It’s still pretty unclear what you’re actually asking about, or what the issue is in your school.

In my school, teachers in the dept are often asked to revamp or create SOW during "gained time" when Y11/Y13 go. Otherwise, it is down to TLR holders. I do work in a large school though so there is a lot to go around. I wouldn't mind writing a new SOW if everyone was doing the same and ultimately it would reduce individual planning. I'd expect some time to do it though, i.e inset days or perhaps if I was undertimetabled. Presuming you're a small department OP?

In response to some of the other replies, I've worked in both primary and secondary and primary definitely seems to involve a lot more rigorous planning but secondary has all the behaviour management and follow ups, more parents evenings (you may teach 7 different year groups), open/information evenings, emails, new policies to implement every 5 minutes, fill in round robins, marking seems to be more full on, especially in a subject like English where the answers can be up to 8 pages long. You're also a form tutor and that creates a lot of work, admin, parental emails and follow ups etc. Department and pastoral meetings take up a lot of time too. Your PPA is also so spread out you don't use it as productively or you end up speaking to kids/hosting detentions/interventions etc during this time. I found in primary, you generally got a whole afternoon off a week and there was some fantastic joint planning opportunities.

I don't think either has it worse, but I always preferred secondary for the variety. Anyway, went a little off topic there!

I've done loads over the years. Especially with lots of curriculum changes.
One way we did it was that everyone took a scheme each. Yes, it was pain when you were doing it, but the payback was that the other schemes were then already done.
Another way was to have ks3 and ks4 teams and to split the lesson planning. Again, you got more back than you put in.
Ks5 you're always on your own. But to be fair, I don't want to teach someone else's stuff there.