Public sector watch

[turbobloke]

NPI said:

turbobloke said:

Not always, but usually. Ask a teacher in a school struggling to get out of Special Measures how easy it will be to get a promoted job until things improve. When applying for jobs, the only people who may well end up in sink schools out of choice are those who volunteer to be put there from programmes such as Future Leaders. At the NQT level a Good or Outstanding school will be very attractive to a good and ambitious teacher.

I don't think that's correct. For an "ordinary" teacher, experience in a bad school is very useful for future jobs - they're not considered responsible on an individual level for the school being crap.

For someone on the Leadership scale, the opposite is true - it is their fault.

In principle I agree, but in practice it doesn't work quite like that theoretical treatment suggests. The shortlisting process for just about any teaching post these days will, explicitly or implicitly, refer to the most recent Ofsted grading of the current employer, rightly or wrongly. Teachers are aware of this, those applying from a school in a category often include mention of their lesson grading, presumably where it's worth mentioning, but that may not be enough.

[5CylTurbo]

SpeedMattersNot said:

And again, it's not entirely true that top teachers always flock to top schools and poor teachers swarm towards the bad ones. As already mentioned, the largest variable is the student and in many cases, the best or the worst teachers can't help them. It's a far bigger problem than whether or not the teachers are any good - it's a massive problem with several areas of the country in all aspects of life, not just education.

Your last statement is entirely pointless (much like my efforts in replying, or indeed even reading this thread).

So if what you are saying was true, then once a school was poor it will never ever be improved, as apparently the staff make no difference according to you!

But we all know that isn't the case, a better head, get rid of some of the crap teachers and bingo the school starts to improve, same pupils, same location but it is turned around by, decent teachers!

A decent teacher will make the lessons interesting and the kids will want to attend and learn.

[turbobloke]

The supposedly moderate teaching union ATL has passed an emergency motion voicing concern over the “financial mismanagement” of free schools and academies. Not a rogue trojan horse or singleton maverick, but free schools and academies in general. When nonsense like that emerges from ATL there's little hope for moderation and realism in the state sector, given that it's expected to hear such rot from NUT et al. As pointed out by DfE in response, compared to council-run schools, academy category schools are subject to far tighter financial controls. ATL need to understand that they'd be better thought of concerning themselves with the quality of their members' teaching rather than the quality of their own spin.

[Fab32]

5CylTurbo said:

So if what you are saying was true, then once a school was poor it will never ever be improved, as apparently the staff make no difference according to you!

But we all know that isn't the case, a better head, get rid of some of the crap teachers and bingo the school starts to improve, same pupils, same location but it is turned around by, decent teachers!

A decent teacher will make the lessons interesting and the kids will want to attend and learn.

I see you have crawled out from under your rock to talk more rubbish, you have proved yourself to know nothing about teaching and teachers already when you had to back track and edit your previous posts when you were proved to be talking rubbish about OFSTED.

I’m still looking forward to you answering my questions, any chance?

[mph1977]

the anti grant maintained ( pre Bliar) and anti academy sentiments are the same kind of irrational male bovine excrement that is driving the the stuff from Uniscum et al about the changes in the way NHS services are delivered.

there is fundamentally no ideological issue in supporting services which are 'free at the point of delivery' being delivered by organisations other than a state owned (not actually but percieved as such by the un(der)informed public))monolithic nationalised provider.

[5CylTurbo]

Fab32 said:

I see you have crawled out from under your rock to talk more rubbish, you have proved yourself to know nothing about teaching and teachers already when you had to back track and edit your previous posts when you were proved to be talking rubbish about OFSTED.

I’m still looking forward to you answering my questions, any chance?

For the hard of understanding

I didn't edit anything about Ofsted you functational twit

[NPI]

5CylTurbo said:

A decent teacher will make the lessons interesting and the kids will want to attend and learn.

Yes, of course - boring lessons is the only thing that makes a school poor performing.

[anonymous-user]

5CylTurbo said:

Fab32 said:

I see you have crawled out from under your rock to talk more rubbish, you have proved yourself to know nothing about teaching and teachers already when you had to back track and edit your previous posts when you were proved to be talking rubbish about OFSTED.

I’m still looking forward to you answering my questions, any chance?

For the hard of understanding

I didn't edit anything about Ofsted you functational twit

'Functational'?

[V8mate]

REALIST123 said:

5CylTurbo said:

Fab32 said:

I see you have crawled out from under your rock to talk more rubbish, you have proved yourself to know nothing about teaching and teachers already when you had to back track and edit your previous posts when you were proved to be talking rubbish about OFSTED.

I’m still looking forward to you answering my questions, any chance?

For the hard of understanding

I didn't edit anything about Ofsted you functational twit

'Functational'?

You knows it, bro'

[FiF]

NHS chiefs' expenses: 'astounding' spending exposed

some highlights from linked editorial said:

The expenses culture at the top of the NHS has been exposed by figures showing that nine health officials spent almost £200,000 last year on fine dining, taxi fares and hotels at up to £500 a night.

Sir David billed taxpayers for a total of £32,000 during 2013-14, the figures show, including £6,700 on taxis. The 69 claims for taxis and cars include one fare of more than £500 for a journey from London to Preston.

The disclosures reveal that between them, nine officials on the board of NHS England spent £195,802 on travel, meals and hotels during 2013-14 — the first year since the organisation was launched.

The highest individual bill was for Tim Kelsey, national director for patients and information, who spent £46,000 during the year — including more than £21,000 on hotels and dining, with claims of up to £370 a night. Mr Kelsey, who is responsible for the troubled programme to centralise GP records, also spent almost £7,000 on air fares.

Cue apologists 3..2..1..




edited due to some numpty formatting by yours truly

Edited by FiF on Tuesday 13th May 07:27

[eccles]

How on earth do they get away with spending like that?

[Countdown]

eccles said:

How on earth do they get away with spending like that?

In my experience it's partially cultural, partly an "we're entitled" issue, and partially down to the fact that nobody dare challenge them. Also it's a relatively "new" organisation and governance issues can be quite weak.

[turbobloke]

FiF said:

Cue apologists 3..2..1..

Countdown said:

In my experience it's partially cultural, partly an "we're entitled" issue, and partially down to the fact that nobody dare challenge them. Also it's a relatively "new" organisation and governance issues can be quite weak.

And the effective (!) systems that were in place to pick up on this lavish waste of public money failed because...

[Rovinghawk]

Countdown said:

In my experience it's partially cultural............. Also it's a relatively "new" organisation and governance issues can be quite weak.

How can a 'new' organisation have an ingrained culture? It's one or the other, surely?

[Countdown]

Rovinghawk said:

Countdown said:

In my experience it's partially cultural............. Also it's a relatively "new" organisation and governance issues can be quite weak.

How can a 'new' organisation have an ingrained culture? It's one or the other, surely?

Although the organisation is new I would guess that most of the senior bods transferred across from other parts of the Public Sector and, in my experience of Central Govt, some think they should have the same pay'n'perks as the private sector. The others will think "Well, if he's doing it then it's OK for me to do it" and that attitude can cascade downwards. It can take time for Finance to start imposing tighter control but that usually only happens if there is pressure from the top to do so, and in this case, it appears it's the "top" that are troughing away.

[FiF]

Pay'n'Perks of the private sector.

Oh my sides are splitting. Not be long before someone comes along claiming that a company mobile phone and laptop are a perk when they are only allowed to be used for company business even if that business happens to occur at 11pm with someone ringing up from Seattle needing support.

Give me strength.

[mph1977]

FiF said:

Pay'n'Perks of the private sector.

Oh my sides are splitting. Not be long before someone comes along claiming that a company mobile phone and laptop are a perk when they are only allowed to be used for company business even if that business happens to occur at 11pm with someone ringing up from Seattle needing support.

Give me strength.

funny that i know people who are not monitored or restricted on their use of company IT equipment beyond the usual AUP stuff ...

also funny i know people whose company mobile no is their only mobile number and their employer really doesn't care about use for calls that are in the 'unlimited' bundle ...

[FiF]

Aaaaand another serial NHS apologist arrives on scene complete with a handy acronym.

[Rovinghawk]

mph1977 said:

stuff ...

Any comment on the extravagance of the NHS chaps mentioned above?

Do you support them or think they're troughing scumbags?

[mph1977]

Rovinghawk said:

mph1977 said:

stuff ...

Any comment on the extravagance of the NHS chaps mentioned above?

Do you support them or think they're troughing scumbags?

very few 'general ' managers in the NHS are worth anything , not many 'Nurse' Managers in the NHS are worth anything - odd isn't it that that Doctors as Managers right up to the Medicla Director maintain clinicla commitments when more and more Nurse 'Managers' from Ward levle band 7 upwards use it as an excuse to not touch a patient ...