1. Pensions
Clearly we need some reforms to our pension system. People
are living longer and we need a sensible solution. I am hugely concerned
however, by the idea of making teachers work in the classroom until they are
68, or even older. I am not for a minute suggesting that older people have
nothing to contribute, but you have to
be realistic about the physical demands of the job. Can you imagine someone
aged nearly 70 trying to teach a group of 32 challenging teenagers? We’re not
talking meek and mild children who will do whatever you say. But maybe you think the 70 year old person
could manage it for an hour. Then make that 5 hours a day, with break duties,
detention duties, marking, planning, meetings, phonecalls home..... It is just
ridiculous. It won’t be fair on the
teachers and it won’t be fair on the students.
2. Working
Conditions
The government have said that they want to see longer school days and
shorter holidays. A populist and ill thought through policy.
Many teachers will have come across people who are keen to tell us that the school holidays are too long and the school day too short. The reality however, is that time spent actually teaching classes represents perhaps a third of a teacher’s total workload. People outside the profession can easily (and understandably) underestimate the amount of time planning and marking take. So here is a rough example to give everyone some context: I teach over 200 hundred students. If I spent 5 minutes per week marking each book, that would take over 16 hours and if I spent just 20 minutes planning each lesson (I often spend longer) this would take over 6 hours. That’s an extra 22 hours a week, or 4 and a half hours per working day. I usually finish teaching/attending meetings at 4.30pm. Add the extra 4 and a half hours and my day finishes at 9pm. This is just a rough example, but bear in mind I haven’t factored in all the extras we do – particularly regarding pastoral work and contacting parents.
Many teachers will have come across people who are keen to tell us that the school holidays are too long and the school day too short. The reality however, is that time spent actually teaching classes represents perhaps a third of a teacher’s total workload. People outside the profession can easily (and understandably) underestimate the amount of time planning and marking take. So here is a rough example to give everyone some context: I teach over 200 hundred students. If I spent 5 minutes per week marking each book, that would take over 16 hours and if I spent just 20 minutes planning each lesson (I often spend longer) this would take over 6 hours. That’s an extra 22 hours a week, or 4 and a half hours per working day. I usually finish teaching/attending meetings at 4.30pm. Add the extra 4 and a half hours and my day finishes at 9pm. This is just a rough example, but bear in mind I haven’t factored in all the extras we do – particularly regarding pastoral work and contacting parents.
In general, the threat
to teachers’ working conditions is a threat to the quality of students’
education. Teachers have a demanding
job and if the school day becomes longer, this will result in a drop in
quality. We won’t be able to plan, mark and feedback in the same way we do now.
It’s just not physically possible.
3.Performance related pay
On the surface, performance related pay sounds like a great
idea -
“Pay good teachers
more!”
“Reward those who work hard!”
– it all sounds ideal.
Surely the only people who could disagree would be lazy teachers concerned that
they’ll miss out?
The reality is, as ever, more subtle than the soundbites
above would suggest. In fact, I am far more concerned about the impact it will
have on students than the impact it will have on teachers.
Firstly, performance related pay raises the stakes in terms
of test results. Teachers are already judged on their test results, but the new
system will place far more emphasis on them. This means that the culture of “teaching to the test” will
be strengthened, not weakened.
Secondly, it is clear that some schools are more challenging
to work in than others. What incentive will teachers have to go and teach in
the emotionally draining and physically demanding environment of a difficult
school when they know it is harder to reach performance targets in these
schools? The result will be that students
from disadvantaged backgrounds will not get the best teachers.
Thirdly, performance related pay may have a big impact on the
community of teachers, particularly
within schools. Teachers work at their best when they collaborate: when they
share ideas and resources, when they learn from each other’s experience and
when they feed off each other’s enthusiasm. Performance related pay could erode this by generating an atmosphere of
competition between individual teachers. Will every teacher be willing to share
their best resources with a colleague if they are in direct competition with
them? After all, the total sum of money for teachers' pay has not gone up.
Performance related pay means that for every teacher who gets paid more, some
will get paid less.
Finally, performance related pay could impact negatively on
set changes. In the system, “performance”
will be based on comparisons with target grades, which can be very erratic. My
current year 11 class has a student with a target of a D, who is clearly
capable of an A. In a subject like maths
where students are usually placed in ability groups, teachers may wish to “hang
on” to students who are performing above their target grades and stop them from
moving up to a higher set. Similarly, they may send underperforming students
down to the set below, without taking responsibility for improving that child’s
grade themselves.
I'd like to finish by saying that teachers are, in general, a very reasonable and caring bunch. Patience is a key characteristic of a successful teacher. But we also have integrity, passion and commitment to what we do. If we didn't think it was worth it, we wouldn't have gone on strike.
I agree with most of your analysis. I am sad to say that Australia is hell bent on the same path.
ReplyDeleteI particularly take your well argued point that this will not deliver the best outcomes for the most challenging schools and students.
in the early 70s Australia's most radical government led by Whitlam trod the idealistic path and poured money into challenging areas....no government has been brave enough tondo thus since.