New teachers strike wtf

[Westy Carl]

Jeez, reading all this I'm pulling my kids out of school and teaching them at home. Didn't realise schools were such dangerous places run by lawbreaking blackmailing fraudsters

[Mr Snap]

fblm said:

graphene said:

State education is widely expensive too. If the costs of all bureaucracy and oversight was accounted for, then I believe it would be shown to be much higher than the private sector.

88bn a year, 8 million kids, £11,000 per kid a year including primary...

First off, I don't want to be pernickety, but this thread is about teachers striking and teachers aren't responsible for the bureaucracy. They may contribute towards it but they have little to do with its creation, you have to blame politicians for that. Part of what teachers are complaining about is the insufferable bureaucracy they have to go through. If you think your job is surrounded by red tape, you should try teaching. It isn't teachers who rewrite The National Curriculum every day before breakfast.

From a bureaucratic perspective, the private sector is also subsidised hugely by the state. Very few public schools opt out of the National Curriculum or Ofsted, for instance, but they don't contribute a directly towards the bureaucracy to run it. Nor the exam system. Some might argue that the private system runs parasitically on the bureaucracy run by the state.

Besides, running a group of public schools doesn't exactly represent the same bureaucratic challenge as running a vast state system for over 11 million kids does it? It's like comparing Sainsbury's to the village shop. Privatisation isn't the answer.

Dulwich College Prep costs start at £17,000 pa for a day student, clubs and afterschool probably pushes that up to over the £20,000 mark; part subsidised by the state bureaucracy and with lower overheads. They can afford to plough more into lower staff/student ratios.

[Rovinghawk]

Mr Snap said:

If you think your job is surrounded by red tape, you should try teaching. It isn't teachers who rewrite The National Curriculum every day before breakfast.

Is this truth or wild exaggeration?

Mr Snap said:

From a bureaucratic perspective, the private sector is also subsidised hugely by the state. Very few public schools opt out of the National Curriculum or Ofsted, for instance, but they don't contribute a directly towards the bureaucracy to run it. Nor the exam system. Some might argue that the private system runs parasitically on the bureaucracy run by the state.

Some might counter-argue that they relieve pressure on the state system to which they nevertheless pay tax.

Mr Snap said:

Besides, running a group of public schools doesn't exactly represent the same bureaucratic challenge as running a vast state system for over 11 million kids does it? It's like comparing Sainsbury's to the village shop. Privatisation isn't the answer.

Dulwich College Prep costs start at £17,000 pa for a day student, clubs and afterschool probably pushes that up to over the £20,000 mark; part subsidised by the state bureaucracy and with lower overheads. They can afford to plough more into lower staff/student ratios.

Standard excuse #2 The Comprehensive Schools excuse: It's only gone wrong because of heavy cuts in staff and budget which have stretched supervisory resources beyond the limit

[anonymous-user]

Mr Snap said:

...They can afford to plough more into lower staff/student ratios.

No argument from me. I was just putting some numbers on it. It's blindingly obvious small class sizes and personal attention gets better results. I thought the strikes were about pay and pensions; perhaps if they were striking to improve class sizes they might get a little more support.

[Munter]

Mr Snap said:

Bar workers have the advantage of being able throw awkward customers out on the street.

If you're a teacher, then if you get an awkward customer their Mum or Dad threatens to slap you (and the police won't be summoned because it'd look bad for the school).

Teachers in "unable to work phone on their own" shocker.

In a recent story it has been reported that only senior members of school staff have been taught how to use telephones. As such, crimes against most teachers often go unreported to the police, because senior staff will refuse to make the call.

When confronted with a telephone one art teacher was seen fainting at the complexity of pushing the same button more than once.
---
As far as I can see teachers are suffering from a large proportion of the population having been to school, and then to further and higher education. And as such have spent at least a decade assessing the skills of people who choose to teach. And found them on the whole to be lacking any ability to inspire. A few stand out as excellent and the rest...well...bless em, they do try. But they're really limited to just stating the facts of any given subject and hoping that the students behave enough that nobody gets hurt.

Quite how teachers forget that only a few of them will be good at it, based on their own teachers, I'm not sure. I guess it's one of those leap of faith things like religion.

Teachers of the world. Yes you are necessary. But based on the past the chances of you being any good are...slim. If I were you I'd stop drawing attention to it, and simply get on with the job in hand.

[Mr Snap]

fblm said:

Mr Snap said:

...They can afford to plough more into lower staff/student ratios.

No argument from me. I was just putting some numbers on it. It's blindingly obvious small class sizes and personal attention gets better results. I thought the strikes were about pay and pensions; perhaps if they were striking to improve class sizes they might get a little more support.

Sorry, I feel I'm repeating myself. My personal opinion is that I don't think the strikes have much to do with pay and pensions. My belief is that teachers represent an extremely unhappy workforce. The strikes are a symptom of this unhappiness. Unhappy people don't necessarily behave logically.

Being a teacher is a bit like being on the production line in British Leyland. The job is often ste, the management is ineffective, politicians keep interfering, the products are nasty and everybody hates you… You might as well go on strike...

[Johnnytheboy]

Mr Snap said:

Sorry, I feel I'm repeating myself. My personal opinion is that I don't think the strikes have much to do with pay and pensions. My belief is that teachers represent an extremely unhappy workforce. The strikes are a symptom of this unhappiness. Unhappy people don't necessarily behave logically.

So if they got all their demands except the pay and pensions stuff they'd be happy, right?

[anonymous-user]

Mr Snap said:

My personal opinion is that I don't think the strikes have much to do with pay and pensions.

It would seem especially dumb then to tell the world that you're stiking about about your extraordinarily generous pensions, pay in excess of most parents, and holidays no one else can even dream of. They could at least pretend they want smaller class sizes or fewer changes to curriculum or indeed anything that would actually improve education...

[Mr Snap]

Rovinghawk said:

Mr Snap said:

If you think your job is surrounded by red tape, you should try teaching. It isn't teachers who rewrite The National Curriculum every day before breakfast.

Is this truth or wild exaggeration?

Mr Snap said:

From a bureaucratic perspective, the private sector is also subsidised hugely by the state. Very few public schools opt out of the National Curriculum or Ofsted, for instance, but they don't contribute a directly towards the bureaucracy to run it. Nor the exam system. Some might argue that the private system runs parasitically on the bureaucracy run by the state.

Some might counter-argue that they relieve pressure on the state system to which they nevertheless pay tax.

Mr Snap said:

Besides, running a group of public schools doesn't exactly represent the same bureaucratic challenge as running a vast state system for over 11 million kids does it? It's like comparing Sainsbury's to the village shop. Privatisation isn't the answer.

Dulwich College Prep costs start at £17,000 pa for a day student, clubs and afterschool probably pushes that up to over the £20,000 mark; part subsidised by the state bureaucracy and with lower overheads. They can afford to plough more into lower staff/student ratios.

Standard excuse #2 The Comprehensive Schools excuse: It's only gone wrong because of heavy cuts in staff and budget which have stretched supervisory resources beyond the limit

Sorry, can't be arsed to defrag your parsing to respond properly (I hope it's not a ploy on your part).

No really, I'm not exaggerating, it's mind boggling. If you aren't aware of the bureaucracy involved, you can't have much current knowledge of education.

The numbers are too small to relieve serious pressure. Besides the presence of high numbers of overseas students in UK public schools creates an opposing pressure, effectively pushing UK residents out of the system (that's one for UKIP).

Standard Excuse for people who don't know much about teaching and don't care to know.

[Rovinghawk]

Mr Snap said:

Sorry, can't be arsed to defrag your parsing to respond properly (I hope it's not a ploy on your part).

No ploy, just responding to your comments one by one for clarity.

Mr Snap said:

No really, I'm not exaggerating, it's mind boggling. If you aren't aware of the bureaucracy involved, you can't have much current knowledge of education.

So you're not exaggerating & they genuinely rewrite the curriculum every day before breakfast. I suspect this to be untrue.

Mr Snap said:

The numbers are too small to relieve serious pressure. Besides the presence of high numbers of overseas students in UK public schools creates an opposing pressure, effectively pushing UK residents out of the system (that's one for UKIP).

Your statement is that private schools are parasites. My statement is that they aid the system, even if as you say it's only a small amount. Parasites do not contribute therefore you are telling other than the truth.

Mr Snap said:

Standard Excuse for people who don't know much about teaching and don't care to know.

Cheap shot from you there. It's from Yes, Prime Minister and is one of the five excuses reeled out as standard procedure when public bodies are criticised. You have used #2 and I was pointing this out.

What I know about teaching is that my teacher friends are retiring in their early 50s on very comfortable terms, they have holiday entitlements most of us can only dream about and the '3 A*' products of their educational efforts have been almost exclusively a waste of space who know little, care less and require a great deal of remedial work before I consider them fit to be let loose in my workplace without supervision.

[Westy Carl]

Mr Snap said:

Besides the presence of high numbers of overseas students in UK public schools creates an opposing pressure, effectively pushing UK residents out of the system (that's one for UKIP).

For the handful of the countries very top schools maybe, however of the 6 or so private schools in my area I be surprised if there are more than 1% or 2% of overseas students. (Stowe School is an exception with maybe approx a quarter from memory)

[scenario8]

A quarter at Stowe? Really?

Every day's a school day - in a manner of speaking.

[Mr Snap]

Rovinghawk said:

Cheap shot from you there. It's from Yes, Prime Minister and is one of the five excuses reeled out as standard procedure when public bodies are criticised. You have used #2 and I was pointing this out.

What I know about teaching is that my teacher friends are retiring in their early 50s on very comfortable terms, they have holiday entitlements most of us can only dream about and the '3 A*' products of their educational efforts have been almost exclusively a waste of space who know little, care less and require a great deal of remedial work before I consider them fit to be let loose in my workplace without supervision.

I'm sorry, I'll try to avoid exaggeration or irony when I correspond with you in future. (Would you like a smiley with that?(Oops!)).

The "Yes Minister" thing wasn't a cheap shot, then?

Judging by your last sentence, perhaps one of those teachers might be useful in providing remedial English lessons.

[Mr Snap]

Johnnytheboy said:

Mr Snap said:

Sorry, I feel I'm repeating myself. My personal opinion is that I don't think the strikes have much to do with pay and pensions. My belief is that teachers represent an extremely unhappy workforce. The strikes are a symptom of this unhappiness. Unhappy people don't necessarily behave logically.

So if they got all their demands except the pay and pensions stuff they'd be happy, right?

Dunno. Like I said, it's only my opinion. Nobody knows how disaffected workers will behave. The trick is not to get them disaffected in the first place.

[Westy Carl]

scenario8 said:

A quarter at Stowe? Really?

Every day's a school day - in a manner of speaking.

From my memory yes.

[turbobloke]

Mr Snap said:

Johnnytheboy said:

Mr Snap said:

Sorry, I feel I'm repeating myself. My personal opinion is that I don't think the strikes have much to do with pay and pensions. My belief is that teachers represent an extremely unhappy workforce. The strikes are a symptom of this unhappiness. Unhappy people don't necessarily behave logically.

So if they got all their demands except the pay and pensions stuff they'd be happy, right?

Dunno. Like I said, it's only my opinion. Nobody knows how disaffected workers will behave. The trick is not to get them disaffected in the first place.

Taking a wider perspective, would you say there was room for better career choices on the part of some graduates when entering the profession, and room for more courage to leave it when the context changes and seemingly for the worse from the teacherly perspective? The number of teacher training applicants went up in 2013 so there appears to be no shortage of inputs at NQT level. What will happen with SLTs in the next few years is a different matter but the same points may apply.

[Rovinghawk]

Mr Snap said:

I'm sorry, I'll try to avoid exaggeration or irony when I correspond with you in future. (Would you like a smiley with that?(Oops!)).

I'd prefer facts & truth if we're on a serious subject.

Mr Snap said:

The "Yes Minister" thing wasn't a cheap shot, then?

It was a reference to the bullst excuses that are routinely trotted out to cover incompetence, laziness and waste. They are so common that they have been listed and numbered.

Mr Snap said:

Judging by your last sentence, perhaps one of those teachers might be useful in providing remedial English lessons.

Whilst a long sentence, I cannot see any spelling or grammatical errors. Please point out any that you can see. If not, I might feel justified in using maximum rudeness in any future statements to you.

Oh-

[Mr Snap]

fblm said:

Mr Snap said:

My personal opinion is that I don't think the strikes have much to do with pay and pensions.

It would seem especially dumb then to tell the world that you're stiking about about your extraordinarily generous pensions, pay in excess of most parents, and holidays no one else can even dream of. They could at least pretend they want smaller class sizes or fewer changes to curriculum or indeed anything that would actually improve education...

Yes. Like I keep saying, disaffected workers make dumb, illogical, decisions. Just like me getting snappy with Mrs Snap when I missed the cheap venison at Lidl. I reckon that it's government's job not to make them even more disaffected for purely ideological reasons.

Teachers aren't like the 70's steelworkers working in a redundant industry, they'll be required for the foreseeable future. Going out of your way to make the key workers in a key industry unhappy is, as an action, just as illogical as the actions of the teachers.

[Mr Snap]

turbobloke said:

Mr Snap said:

Johnnytheboy said:

Mr Snap said:

Sorry, I feel I'm repeating myself. My personal opinion is that I don't think the strikes have much to do with pay and pensions. My belief is that teachers represent an extremely unhappy workforce. The strikes are a symptom of this unhappiness. Unhappy people don't necessarily behave logically.

So if they got all their demands except the pay and pensions stuff they'd be happy, right?

Dunno. Like I said, it's only my opinion. Nobody knows how disaffected workers will behave. The trick is not to get them disaffected in the first place.

Taking a wider perspective, would you say there was room for better career choices on the part of some graduates when entering the profession, and room for more courage to leave it when the context changes and seemingly for the worse from the teacherly perspective? The number of teacher training applicants went up in 2013 so there appears to be no shortage of inputs at NQT level. What will happen with SLTs in the next few years is a different matter but the same points may apply.

Hi Turbs,

I absolutely agree with the first bit. But, it's nigh impossible to assess potential at, say, PGCE stage. Looking at teaching qua teaching some of the 'soft skills' require years to develop. Nobody can 'teach' you how to deal with an unruly class, for instance. It depends too much on your personality and experience - you have to find your own way. Still, many NQT's don't get the kind of support needed to get beyond the first teething problems. Nobody knows how many people with great potential have failed due to the lack of appropriate support. Similarly, nobody can teach you to be 'inspirational', you either have it or you don't (but you can work on it).

What gets my goat, here on PH, is the people who haven't been in a classroom since they were at school themselves but who reckon teaching is a cushy number. Teaching is hard - intellectually, physically and emotionally.

As you know, I had to quit teaching because of health reasons (for those who don't, lung problems due to dust inhalation in school workshops). I didn't leave because I was failing emotionally or intellectually but because the sheer physical effort of having to maintain my voice at the appropriate, room filling, level for eight hours a day, 5 days a week. It was quite literally killing me, the doctor told me to stop. Since then, I've been perfectly able to run two successful (physically demanding) businesses, at the same time; become a 'name' in my field and feature writer on an international magazine.

I don't regret a minute of it but full time teaching is, physically speaking, completely beyond me, it's hard, hard, work and, if you aren't good at it, it's even harder. Anyone who thinks that it's cushy lacks real knowledge.

[Mr Snap]

graphene said:

Mr Snap said:

Sorry, can't be arsed to defrag your parsing to respond properly (I hope it's not a ploy on your part).

No really, I'm not exaggerating, it's mind boggling. If you aren't aware of the bureaucracy involved, you can't have much current knowledge of education.

The numbers are too small to relieve serious pressure. Besides the presence of high numbers of overseas students in UK public schools creates an opposing pressure, effectively pushing UK residents out of the system (that's one for UKIP).

Standard Excuse for people who don't know much about teaching and don't care to know.

Interested to know how long you were in teaching before you had enough of it, and how long ago it was that you were in the profession?

Fifteen years total in FT - mainstream secondary and special needs. I reached the bottom level of senior management, if you get what I mean. I left FT teaching in 96 for health reasons (see answer to Turbs) I'd have carried on if I could, I didn't leave at all willingly). I've done regular P/T stints in Further and Higher Ed since 96 and visiting lecturing in over 30 different institutions including post-grads. My partner is also a head teacher in a private pre-prep.