16 month rule for supply teaching
I would like to see the abolishment of the 16 month limit for non-inductible supply teaching. The current rule means that newly qualified teachers may only work for 16 months as a supply teacher before they must take up an induction post of at least 1 school term.
Unfortunately there are not enough jobs for the number of teachers looking to secure an induction post. Many teachers who have gained lots of invaluable experience as supply teachers following their qualification are forced to leave the profession because of this ridiculous ruling. Many of these teachers have received grants in order to complete the training and some will have received additional funding to help with living expenses. What a waste of taxpayers' money if they have to give up their dream!
There is no justification for this 16 month ruling particularly as teachers can complete their training, go and do a completely different job for several years and still be allowed to teach. Where is the logic in that?
Why does this idea matter?
My idea is important because far too much money is being wasted in training new 'batches' of teachers every year when the jobs just aren't there. Surely reducing the number of places in university and allowing those already trained to find work will help towards reducing the national deficit. At the moment the whole situation feels like a money making business for the universities to the detriment of the trainees. Money could also be saved in reducing the amount of publicity put out by the TDA. Surely there can't be a shortage of teachers now?!
It is important to allow NQTs to continue doing supply as in this way many will secure long term posts in schools where they have taught. The last thing we want is to spend money training these people only for them to have to resort to claiming jobseekers' allowance.