Current Affairs The Conservative Party

[abelard]

All Michael Gove’s doing this.

The Conservative Party.

Tough on Reason, Tough on the Causes of Reason.

 

[Mutzo Nutzo]

The Conservative Party.

Tough on Reason, Tough on the Causes of Reason.

I have some good friends who are teachers and I’ve seen them physically and mentally worn down over the years.

I genuinely fear for them personally and our education system as a whole. The government attempt to run it like a private sector enterprise but with strict centralised controls and it’s simply not working.

Let teachers teach and inspire..they’re actually quite good at that.

 

[peteblue]

I have some good friends who are teachers and I’ve seen them physically and mentally worn down over the years.

I genuinely fear for them personally and our education system as a whole. The government attempt to run it like a private sector enterprise but with strict centralised controls and it’s simply not working.

Let teachers teach and inspire..they’re actually quite good at that.

They used to be. I blame the teaching profession for many of today’s ills......

 

[Mutzo Nutzo]

They used to be. I blame the teaching profession for many of today’s ills......

That’s because the teachers of yesterday were not subject to the myriad of controls and the mountain of bureaucracy that they are forced to deal with every single day.

It’s now all about statistics and KPI’s. Children are now taught (programmed) to pass exams for the benefit of the Tory rats running our country. They used to be broadly educated and embedded with a thirst and a love of knowledge and learning, sadly now that’s a thing of the past.

So don’t blame the teachers Pete, they are following the mantra dictated to them by the bellends in Whitehall.

Blame your own blessed Tory party.

 

[catcherintherye]

They used to be. I blame the teaching profession for many of today’s ills......

How so mate?

 

[orchard]

How so mate?

Most Conservative voters only have a very basic education?

 

[peteblue]

How so mate?

Goes back to the days when they became a left wing organisation and did away with corporal punishment. It changed the whole behaviour pattern (or lack of behaviour pattern) of two generations. The profession changed and is now mostly female, certainly at infants and junior level, which in turn removed any male role model for many kids. I’m not advocating the beating of children with a ‘it didn’t do me any harm’ slant, but when I was a school governor you could see the total lack of discipline......

 

[zzr45]

Most Conservative voters only have a very basic education?

Hu R U CAlin Fick?

 

[zzr45]

The problems are trifold that are creating these conditions - obviously the big one is austerity which has had all the directly linkable effects - bigger classes, less resources etc. There’s also teachers having to pick up non classroom stuff due to the cuts to social workers - recently a Friend of the family who’s a teacher had to attend a child custody hearing to give evidence on a girls welfare, she noted that years ago that would have been a social workers job.

Secondly, there’s a huge philosophical sh*tstorm going on within education that’s really creating problems. ‘The way to teach’ shifts from week to week depending on what’s popular on social media - one week it can be learning by doing is the definite way to go, then the next week kids should be dictating what lessons should look like. I know when I worked as a lecturer we had to attend CPD on 'Learning Styles' which less than six months later was thoroughly debunked as biggest load of garbage going. So teachers have plenty of garbage thrown at them without it ever really being tested. There are still professional development companies pedalling out Dweck's garbage for christsake, which teachers are then scrabbling to implement The classroom seems to be this mixing pot of political, untested academica and ideological garbage that comes out with teachers unable to develop their own style and doesn't do anyone any favours.

Finally, teachers themselves - I know plenty of teachers, but only one went to university first time round to actually study teaching. The rest are johnny come latelies riding in on PGCE's after either flunking their bachelors degree to the point it's useless, or generally being unsuited to work in industry so end up teaching - 'Those that can't, teach' was a pretty common mantra round universities when I was finishing degrees. There needs to be something that pulls people in to education and that's clearly missing in this country at present - it needs to be far less politicised for one.

 

[catcherintherye]

That’s because the teachers of yesterday were not subject to the myriad of controls and the mountain of bureaucracy that they are forced to deal with every single day.

It’s now all about statistics and KPI’s. Children are now taught (programmed) to pass exams for the benefit of the Tory rats running our country. They used to be broadly educated and embedded with a thirst and a love of knowledge and learning, sadly now that’s a thing of the past.

So don’t blame the teachers Pete, they are following the mantra dictated to them by the bellends in Whitehall.

Blame your own blessed Tory party.

The issue you have with teaching is from the top down everything has just become a game of manipulating data. Those who are most proficient generally succeed. Those who either can't or won't do so just get swallowed up and kicked out. It doesn't take a genius to work out those who are able to manipulate stats are not really those with the best skills to convey knowledge to others.

You are also in a position with teaching where it is a complete lottery. And if you make a wrong call early on you are done.

In my first school I took over a class who had gone through 3 experienced teachers in a year, it was like a zoo. It took me over a term to get them back calmer. Looking back a remarkable achievement (in honesty, given my age and that it was my first job my best achievement by some distance). They essentially told me they'd appoint me as a SENCO (which would have led me made). For whatever reason they delayed and an actual SENCO applied for the job. I'm told we were level on scores, but they favoured her (which was understandable as it would have saved them an enormous amount of money in the training costs involved).

I had 3 weeks to source a new school. Had to take any offer really so had 4 interview lined up, took the first job before getting to the 2nd interview (which was only a 1 year contract maternity cover). End of the year, same scenario ended up going to a school in RI. I remember went on strike early on and refused to yell at kids (one who had ASD) as it wouldn't help and was told to consider my future at the school in November and left. Kids were gutted to be fair, lots of tears. I think they got cold feet and needed someone with greater experience.

The only jobs them available to you are in schools in SM (or at best RI). The good outstanding schools teachers don't leave and they are not taking on someone who is so inexperienced and who has gone through so many schools so quickly.

So you go into a school in SM/RI. That means that the school monitoring means that at least 50% of the staff have to be graded as RI/SM otherwise the school management are deemed to not be doing their job properly (as how could the teachers be good if OFSTED have said they are not kind of thinking?) If you are a school with say 6 teachers (standard for primary schools) in each key stage you will have a key stage leader so they cannot be found RI/SM as they are part of the SMT. So you normally have 4 left, 3 of which when observations are done have to essentially failed as RI/SM. As the newest member of staff, who generally won't be a maths co-ordinator or literacy etc you just automatically take one of those spots.

Alongside this the Tories did away with the rule of 1 observation per year. So they can come in as often as they like. If you have consecutive RI lessons you are into Special measures and going down complacencies whereby you lose your job. Once that happens, rinse and repeat into the next school, even less chance of ever getting into a good/Outstanding school. Often the heads writing the reference will go out of the way to point out you were deemed inadequate too. By the end I'd be doing 10/11/12 interviews to get a job.

I remember around that time being terrified constantly. Every 2-3 weeks they'd come in to observe, keep telling you your inadequate at your job. It would be re-enforced in staff meetings by keynote speakers from Councils (in my case Conserative run) councils telling you that we need to get value for money, and lazy unprofessional teachers will be rooted out. It stays with you, the idea that you are working yourself into the ground, for around 20k a year but you're the problem of ruining kids chances.

Around the same time, oddly when people observed from outside of the school/HMI/Ofsted I would be given very favourable reports. Two practitioners gave me an "outstanding" observation (which is the highest grade). Another (ed psychologist) suggested I took up child psychology as the idea I was implementing were indicative of a skill set beyond teaching. Another said they hadn't seen such ideas and practices in even the best schools. That was always positive.

I could go on, there's lots of stuff I could put, there's corruption and embezzlement I could talk about. I lasted about 3/4 of a year in the final stage above. Just going from school to school. They'd have 2-3 regular staff members and the rest had all been teaching 1-2 years and would just be there to be given the terrible observation marks and be moved on. Every 5-6 weeks you're just moved on as you reach competencies pretty quick.

It was a terrible system and one which set people up to fail if their first job was not in a particular school. If you're stuck on the conveyor belt outside of that you're pretty much done. That is deliberately how they set it up too. A system whereby they allowed powerful older people to bully and humiliate newer, younger teachers to the point of at times quite acute mental difficulties.

I'm very grateful I made it out in one piece.

 

[Mutzo Nutzo]

The issue you have with teaching is from the top down everything has just become a game of manipulating data. Those who are most proficient generally succeed. Those who either can't or won't do so just get swallowed up and kicked out. It doesn't take a genius to work out those who are able to manipulate stats are not really those with the best skills to convey knowledge to others.

You are also in a position with teaching where it is a complete lottery. And if you make a wrong call early on you are done.

In my first school I took over a class who had gone through 3 experienced teachers in a year, it was like a zoo. It took me over a term to get them back calmer. Looking back a remarkable achievement (in honesty, given my age and that it was my first job my best achievement by some distance). They essentially told me they'd appoint me as a SENCO (which would have led me made). For whatever reason they delayed and an actual SENCO applied for the job. I'm told we were level on scores, but they favoured her (which was understandable as it would have saved them an enormous amount of money in the training costs involved).

I had 3 weeks to source a new school. Had to take any offer really so had 4 interview lined up, took the first job before getting to the 2nd interview (which was only a 1 year contract maternity cover). End of the year, same scenario ended up going to a school in RI. I remember went on strike early on and refused to yell at kids (one who had ASD) as it wouldn't help and was told to consider my future at the school in November and left. Kids were gutted to be fair, lots of tears. I think they got cold feet and needed someone with greater experience.

The only jobs them available to you are in schools in SM (or at best RI). The good outstanding schools teachers don't leave and they are not taking on someone who is so inexperienced and who has gone through so many schools so quickly.

So you go into a school in SM/RI. That means that the school monitoring means that at least 50% of the staff have to be graded as RI/SM otherwise the school management are deemed to not be doing their job properly (as how could the teachers be good if OFSTED have said they are not kind of thinking?) If you are a school with say 6 teachers (standard for primary schools) in each key stage you will have a key stage leader so they cannot be found RI/SM as they are part of the SMT. So you normally have 4 left, 3 of which when observations are done have to essentially failed as RI/SM. As the newest member of staff, who generally won't be a maths co-ordinator or literacy etc you just automatically take one of those spots.

Alongside this the Tories did away with the rule of 1 observation per year. So they can come in as often as they like. If you have consecutive RI lessons you are into Special measures and going down complacencies whereby you lose your job. Once that happens, rinse and repeat into the next school, even less chance of ever getting into a good/Outstanding school. Often the heads writing the reference will go out of the way to point out you were deemed inadequate too. By the end I'd be doing 10/11/12 interviews to get a job.

I remember around that time being terrified constantly. Every 2-3 weeks they'd come in to observe, keep telling you your inadequate at your job. It would be re-enforced in staff meetings by keynote speakers from Councils (in my case Conserative run) councils telling you that we need to get value for money, and lazy unprofessional teachers will be rooted out. It stays with you, the idea that you are working yourself into the ground, for around 20k a year but you're the problem of ruining kids chances.

Around the same time, oddly when people observed from outside of the school/HMI/Ofsted I would be given very favourable reports. Two practitioners gave me an "outstanding" observation (which is the highest grade). Another (ed psychologist) suggested I took up child psychology as the idea I was implementing were indicative of a skill set beyond teaching. Another said they hadn't seen such ideas and practices in even the best schools. That was always positive.

I could go on, there's lots of stuff I could put, there's corruption and embezzlement I could talk about. I lasted about 3/4 of a year in the final stage above. Just going from school to school. They'd have 2-3 regular staff members and the rest had all been teaching 1-2 years and would just be there to be given the terrible observation marks and be moved on. Every 5-6 weeks you're just moved on as you reach competencies pretty quick.

It was a terrible system and one which set people up to fail if their first job was not in a particular school. If you're stuck on the conveyor belt outside of that you're pretty much done. That is deliberately how they set it up too. A system whereby they allowed powerful older people to bully and humiliate newer, younger teachers to the point of at times quite acute mental difficulties.

I'm very grateful I made it out in one piece.

I hope @peteblue has taken note of this following his put down of modern teachers.

 

[peteblue]

The issue you have with teaching is from the top down everything has just become a game of manipulating data. Those who are most proficient generally succeed. Those who either can't or won't do so just get swallowed up and kicked out. It doesn't take a genius to work out those who are able to manipulate stats are not really those with the best skills to convey knowledge to others.

You are also in a position with teaching where it is a complete lottery. And if you make a wrong call early on you are done.

In my first school I took over a class who had gone through 3 experienced teachers in a year, it was like a zoo. It took me over a term to get them back calmer. Looking back a remarkable achievement (in honesty, given my age and that it was my first job my best achievement by some distance). They essentially told me they'd appoint me as a SENCO (which would have led me made). For whatever reason they delayed and an actual SENCO applied for the job. I'm told we were level on scores, but they favoured her (which was understandable as it would have saved them an enormous amount of money in the training costs involved).

I had 3 weeks to source a new school. Had to take any offer really so had 4 interview lined up, took the first job before getting to the 2nd interview (which was only a 1 year contract maternity cover). End of the year, same scenario ended up going to a school in RI. I remember went on strike early on and refused to yell at kids (one who had ASD) as it wouldn't help and was told to consider my future at the school in November and left. Kids were gutted to be fair, lots of tears. I think they got cold feet and needed someone with greater experience.

The only jobs them available to you are in schools in SM (or at best RI). The good outstanding schools teachers don't leave and they are not taking on someone who is so inexperienced and who has gone through so many schools so quickly.

So you go into a school in SM/RI. That means that the school monitoring means that at least 50% of the staff have to be graded as RI/SM otherwise the school management are deemed to not be doing their job properly (as how could the teachers be good if OFSTED have said they are not kind of thinking?) If you are a school with say 6 teachers (standard for primary schools) in each key stage you will have a key stage leader so they cannot be found RI/SM as they are part of the SMT. So you normally have 4 left, 3 of which when observations are done have to essentially failed as RI/SM. As the newest member of staff, who generally won't be a maths co-ordinator or literacy etc you just automatically take one of those spots.

Alongside this the Tories did away with the rule of 1 observation per year. So they can come in as often as they like. If you have consecutive RI lessons you are into Special measures and going down complacencies whereby you lose your job. Once that happens, rinse and repeat into the next school, even less chance of ever getting into a good/Outstanding school. Often the heads writing the reference will go out of the way to point out you were deemed inadequate too. By the end I'd be doing 10/11/12 interviews to get a job.

I remember around that time being terrified constantly. Every 2-3 weeks they'd come in to observe, keep telling you your inadequate at your job. It would be re-enforced in staff meetings by keynote speakers from Councils (in my case Conserative run) councils telling you that we need to get value for money, and lazy unprofessional teachers will be rooted out. It stays with you, the idea that you are working yourself into the ground, for around 20k a year but you're the problem of ruining kids chances.

Around the same time, oddly when people observed from outside of the school/HMI/Ofsted I would be given very favourable reports. Two practitioners gave me an "outstanding" observation (which is the highest grade). Another (ed psychologist) suggested I took up child psychology as the idea I was implementing were indicative of a skill set beyond teaching. Another said they hadn't seen such ideas and practices in even the best schools. That was always positive.

I could go on, there's lots of stuff I could put, there's corruption and embezzlement I could talk about. I lasted about 3/4 of a year in the final stage above. Just going from school to school. They'd have 2-3 regular staff members and the rest had all been teaching 1-2 years and would just be there to be given the terrible observation marks and be moved on. Every 5-6 weeks you're just moved on as you reach competencies pretty quick.

It was a terrible system and one which set people up to fail if their first job was not in a particular school. If you're stuck on the conveyor belt outside of that you're pretty much done. That is deliberately how they set it up too. A system whereby they allowed powerful older people to bully and humiliate newer, younger teachers to the point of at times quite acute mental difficulties.

I'm very grateful I made it out in one piece.

It is a disgrace really. I remember when, as governors, we had to start writing policies for every buzzword they could think of and the one that pushed me over the edge came with Risk Assessments. Now I have spent a career directing very large and complex projects and I actually understand the benefits of assessing risks, both positive ones and negative ones, but the bureaucracy being forced upon small village schools was totally over the top. Quite a few heads really seemed to like it, as it kept them in their nice cosy offices and away from the kids.......

 

[peteblue]

I hope @peteblue has taken note of this following his put down of modern teachers.

Not of individuals, but of the wider profession.....

 

[catcherintherye]

Goes back to the days when they became a left wing organisation and did away with corporal punishment. It changed the whole behaviour pattern (or lack of behaviour pattern) of two generations. The profession changed and is now mostly female, certainly at infants and junior level, which in turn removed any male role model for many kids. I’m not advocating the beating of children with a ‘it didn’t do me any harm’ slant, but when I was a school governor you could see the total lack of discipline......

Thanks for response mate! I have to say corporal punishment was before my time so can't really comment either way on that!

 

[catcherintherye]

It is a disgrace really. I remember when, as governors, we had to start writing policies for every buzzword they could think of and the one that pushed me over the edge came with Risk Assessments. Now I have spent a career directing very large and complex projects and I actually understand the benefits of assessing risks, both positive ones and negative ones, but the bureaucracy being forced upon small village schools was totally over the top. Quite a few heads really seemed to like it, as it kept them in their nice cosy offices and away from the kids.......

No you are right about all of that mate. People have become completely obsessed with the bureaucratic processes.

I remember one lesson plan of mine being "failed" (despite that not being the dictate but hey ho) because I put Quality first Teaching instead of Quality Teaching First. Apparently those two things were completely different and so different an entire plan would go from being good to being inadequate. I remember thinking I was disappearing into a Kafkaesque world.

People like it though. And the problem is, the people who like it and are good at it are the ones who progress.