Unfair deal for NQTs

NQT (Newly Qualified teachers) must complete an induction year of three school terms in order to gain their QTS and can teach in mainstream schools. The problem is that many NQTs have found it difficult to obtain a post which will help them complete their induction year because of lack of posts. Cuts in education and teaching jobs will make the situation worse. Many have turned to supply teaching, but cannot complete their induction within the specified time limit as it is difficult to obtain three consecutive term time posts. 

According to new rules introduced on 7th May 1999, they must complete this induction year within three terms or if they do supply teaching in posts which last less than a term, this would be a maximum of four terms. If they fail to meet this requirement they will not be able to teach in mainstream schools, although they will not lose their QTS. Short term supply placements of less than a year do not count towards the induction year.  Once they start on a short term supply teaching, the clock starts ticking and then the pressure is on to find other long term supply teaching posts within four terms.

It seems a waste of time having a QTS and not be able to teach in a mainstream school, because they have not fulfilled the requirements of a statutory induction period will not be eligible to work in a mainstream school. There is major lack of long term teaching posts for NQTs. There are many qualified teachers out there who have not been able to teach in a school as they have been unable to complete their induction.

Why is this idea important?

NQT (Newly Qualified teachers) must complete an induction year of three school terms in order to gain their QTS and can teach in mainstream schools. The problem is that many NQTs have found it difficult to obtain a post which will help them complete their induction year because of lack of posts. Cuts in education and teaching jobs will make the situation worse. Many have turned to supply teaching, but cannot complete their induction within the specified time limit as it is difficult to obtain three consecutive term time posts. 

According to new rules introduced on 7th May 1999, they must complete this induction year within three terms or if they do supply teaching in posts which last less than a term, this would be a maximum of four terms. If they fail to meet this requirement they will not be able to teach in mainstream schools, although they will not lose their QTS. Short term supply placements of less than a year do not count towards the induction year.  Once they start on a short term supply teaching, the clock starts ticking and then the pressure is on to find other long term supply teaching posts within four terms.

It seems a waste of time having a QTS and not be able to teach in a mainstream school, because they have not fulfilled the requirements of a statutory induction period will not be eligible to work in a mainstream school. There is major lack of long term teaching posts for NQTs. There are many qualified teachers out there who have not been able to teach in a school as they have been unable to complete their induction.

Educate prisoners

If it costs the same for private school as it does for prison-educate prisoners-if they want money, empower them to earn it. If they were offered an exclusive education they would have to be REALLY stupid to refuse it. Begin by the aggressive acquisition of quality education services, whose funding is gradually taken up by the considerable reduction in OTT security measures. Some may say 'what about the drug problem…', well if you've read my other ideas, the legalisation of drugs would exponentially reduce the cost of security.

Why is this idea important?

If it costs the same for private school as it does for prison-educate prisoners-if they want money, empower them to earn it. If they were offered an exclusive education they would have to be REALLY stupid to refuse it. Begin by the aggressive acquisition of quality education services, whose funding is gradually taken up by the considerable reduction in OTT security measures. Some may say 'what about the drug problem…', well if you've read my other ideas, the legalisation of drugs would exponentially reduce the cost of security.

Restore power to the teachers

I am currently a sixth former at my local state school and am appauled daily by the lack of control the teachers feel they have over pupils who are consequently allowed to run riot. This needs to be stopped. Teachers should definately be given the moral highground once again, they need to know that the Government are backing them and giving them the power to enforce discipline properly, rather then sending for higher members of staff who recieve exactly the same treatment. The pupils know they can cause trouble without facing any real implications and therefore enjoy roaming the school doing as they please, with the occasional after school detention as their only punishment. The whole system needs to be looked into, and the nanny state needs to be clamped, pupils constantly use their human rights and the fact that 'they'll take you to court' if you as far as touch them, to acknowledge their power within the classroom and students who want to learn and are not at all disrupted find themselves recieving low quality education as a result of this. I'm not suggesting pupils should be smacked by a slipper everytime they speak out of turn, but for the teachers to regain control in the classroom and for constantly disruptive pupils to be secluded or excluded once and for all, as the current charges on schools that exclude pupils means that troublesome youngsters are being allowed back time and time again so that the school can escape the fine.

Why is this idea important?

I am currently a sixth former at my local state school and am appauled daily by the lack of control the teachers feel they have over pupils who are consequently allowed to run riot. This needs to be stopped. Teachers should definately be given the moral highground once again, they need to know that the Government are backing them and giving them the power to enforce discipline properly, rather then sending for higher members of staff who recieve exactly the same treatment. The pupils know they can cause trouble without facing any real implications and therefore enjoy roaming the school doing as they please, with the occasional after school detention as their only punishment. The whole system needs to be looked into, and the nanny state needs to be clamped, pupils constantly use their human rights and the fact that 'they'll take you to court' if you as far as touch them, to acknowledge their power within the classroom and students who want to learn and are not at all disrupted find themselves recieving low quality education as a result of this. I'm not suggesting pupils should be smacked by a slipper everytime they speak out of turn, but for the teachers to regain control in the classroom and for constantly disruptive pupils to be secluded or excluded once and for all, as the current charges on schools that exclude pupils means that troublesome youngsters are being allowed back time and time again so that the school can escape the fine.

Remove 16-Month Time Limit for New Teachers

Currently Newly-Qualified Teachers (NQTs) have a 16-month time limit within which they need to start their first year of teaching (first job).  This limit is too short – someone who graduates in June 2010 would, by November 2011, have become unqualified, even if they had done supply teaching as often this does not count.

In my case I completed my training in March 2010, and fortunately got a job to start in August.  Had I not got a job for the new academic year (and jobs that start at other times in the year being few and far between), I would have to had given up teaching as by July 2011 I would have rendered myself unqualified as I would not have started my first job.  In this situation I would not even have been able to work as an unqualified teacher as my teaching qualification rules this impossible.

Why is this idea important?

Currently Newly-Qualified Teachers (NQTs) have a 16-month time limit within which they need to start their first year of teaching (first job).  This limit is too short – someone who graduates in June 2010 would, by November 2011, have become unqualified, even if they had done supply teaching as often this does not count.

In my case I completed my training in March 2010, and fortunately got a job to start in August.  Had I not got a job for the new academic year (and jobs that start at other times in the year being few and far between), I would have to had given up teaching as by July 2011 I would have rendered myself unqualified as I would not have started my first job.  In this situation I would not even have been able to work as an unqualified teacher as my teaching qualification rules this impossible.

Scrap/modify CRB reports

I am a one term temporary teacher.  I have to apply for many CRB reports each year.  On noe occasion TWO reports arrived on the same day at a cost of £36 each.  The reports arrived TWO months after I had finished working at those schools.  This was 6 months after applying.  Any yet the police have their own computer which can provide a result in 10 days.

 

Scrap  the CRB.  With 12 million people working with 'vulnerable groups' why not just have EVERYONE registered and have the information available to RB is nothing short of a tax on workers and it doesn't seem to prevent the wrong sort of people having contact with children.  And if they wont register then take that as non-available for the profession.

Why is this idea important?

I am a one term temporary teacher.  I have to apply for many CRB reports each year.  On noe occasion TWO reports arrived on the same day at a cost of £36 each.  The reports arrived TWO months after I had finished working at those schools.  This was 6 months after applying.  Any yet the police have their own computer which can provide a result in 10 days.

 

Scrap  the CRB.  With 12 million people working with 'vulnerable groups' why not just have EVERYONE registered and have the information available to RB is nothing short of a tax on workers and it doesn't seem to prevent the wrong sort of people having contact with children.  And if they wont register then take that as non-available for the profession.

Scrap GTC compulsory membership

The GTC does not represent anyone and least of all the teachers.

Let us have a professional body run by the profession not by civil servants who think it appropraite ot suggest that teachers can lose their job for ANY offence simply because it reflects poorly on the profession.  You'll have no teachers left if drink does become zero tolerated and no other profession would stand for this. 

The GTC does not protect teachers or children.

Why is this idea important?

The GTC does not represent anyone and least of all the teachers.

Let us have a professional body run by the profession not by civil servants who think it appropraite ot suggest that teachers can lose their job for ANY offence simply because it reflects poorly on the profession.  You'll have no teachers left if drink does become zero tolerated and no other profession would stand for this. 

The GTC does not protect teachers or children.

Abolish Institute For Learning Registration Process

This new registration process by the IFL is a total waste of public money. All teaching staff have to pass a  criminal record check, so why do they need a register? we are told it is to record  individual teacher's  professional development, why?  When OFSTED monitor this element in their inspection process.

This registration has been free for the initial 2 years… but no doubt ALL teachers will have to pay for it in the near future…another TAX !!!!!!!!!   

Why is this idea important?

This new registration process by the IFL is a total waste of public money. All teaching staff have to pass a  criminal record check, so why do they need a register? we are told it is to record  individual teacher's  professional development, why?  When OFSTED monitor this element in their inspection process.

This registration has been free for the initial 2 years… but no doubt ALL teachers will have to pay for it in the near future…another TAX !!!!!!!!!   

Scrap sex laws that discriminate against teachers.

Relatively recent law changes now mean that a teacher can be prosecuted for having a sexual relationship with a 16 or 17 year-old. Yet the age of consent is 16! Why should there be special rules for the teaching profession? Doctors and nurses aren't barred from having relationships with people who have been patients in their hospital. Police officers aren't banned from having sex with people who live on their beat. Tax inspectors aren't banned from french-kissing taxpayers!

Now, if a teacher abused their position, that would be a different matter. If they said to a sixth-former, "I'll fail you unless you give me a blow job," then that would be a clear abuse of their position – but prosecutors should have to show that some abuse of authority has actually taken place. The state should not presume that a relationship is abusive just because one partner is a student and the other is a teacher!

A person could marry a 16 year-old and then become a teacher at their school. They could already have a child together. Surely we can't prosecute them or ban them from being at the same school! And if we don't prosecute married couples, why should we discriminate against other couples who choose not to marry?

Why is this idea important?

Relatively recent law changes now mean that a teacher can be prosecuted for having a sexual relationship with a 16 or 17 year-old. Yet the age of consent is 16! Why should there be special rules for the teaching profession? Doctors and nurses aren't barred from having relationships with people who have been patients in their hospital. Police officers aren't banned from having sex with people who live on their beat. Tax inspectors aren't banned from french-kissing taxpayers!

Now, if a teacher abused their position, that would be a different matter. If they said to a sixth-former, "I'll fail you unless you give me a blow job," then that would be a clear abuse of their position – but prosecutors should have to show that some abuse of authority has actually taken place. The state should not presume that a relationship is abusive just because one partner is a student and the other is a teacher!

A person could marry a 16 year-old and then become a teacher at their school. They could already have a child together. Surely we can't prosecute them or ban them from being at the same school! And if we don't prosecute married couples, why should we discriminate against other couples who choose not to marry?

Allow teachers to be ‘physical’

Power needs to be returned to teachers. Teachers need to be allowed to restore discipline, defend themselves and physically move kids who need to be moved (ie removed from class or in a fight). This is not a return to capital punishment, just – dare I sound like a Daily Mail reader? – common sense.

Why is this idea important?

Power needs to be returned to teachers. Teachers need to be allowed to restore discipline, defend themselves and physically move kids who need to be moved (ie removed from class or in a fight). This is not a return to capital punishment, just – dare I sound like a Daily Mail reader? – common sense.

Public sector pay linking

Very simple really, link all public sector pay rises to MP's pay rises.

If they vote themselves 5% all other public sector workers get 5%, no ifs, no buts and no exceptions.

Why should MP's be allowed to treat themselves as a special class of people that are not subject to the same rules and regulations as everybody else?

It's fair.

It's easy to understand.

Why is this idea important?

Very simple really, link all public sector pay rises to MP's pay rises.

If they vote themselves 5% all other public sector workers get 5%, no ifs, no buts and no exceptions.

Why should MP's be allowed to treat themselves as a special class of people that are not subject to the same rules and regulations as everybody else?

It's fair.

It's easy to understand.

Remove Classroom Support Teachers & Reintroduce the Cane

I was at school during the 60's when classroom sizes were well excess of 30 pupils and there was no such thing as support teachers. However, teachers were able to control such large classes because they were able to use reasonable physical punishment as a deterrent to bad behaviour. Therefore the Education Department could make savings by removing the support teachers and reintroducing the cane.

Why is this idea important?

I was at school during the 60's when classroom sizes were well excess of 30 pupils and there was no such thing as support teachers. However, teachers were able to control such large classes because they were able to use reasonable physical punishment as a deterrent to bad behaviour. Therefore the Education Department could make savings by removing the support teachers and reintroducing the cane.

Scrapping of CCTV Cameras in Classrooms in Schools

Since around about 2008 more and more classrooms throughout the UK have been installing CCTV survellience equipment under many forms of guises some claiming for monitoring behaviour others for teacher training. In my eyes this act is a step to far especially when cameras were installed in multiple rooms in my own school under the claim of teacher training. The information commissioner was not consulted nor was legal advice, it is a sickening invasion of privacy and goes only further to soften up our children to accepting a big brother state. To make matters worse the company that sells such equipment Class Watch was chaired by Tory MP and now Parliamentary Undersecretary of State for Children and Families Tim Loughton. If that is not a conflict of interests and a complete stain on his position then I'm not sure what is. Throughout the installation of these cameras no student was consulted or parental consent asked. I have campaigned rigourously against this gross invasion of privacy and our childrens right to an undisturbed education where they can freely speak their mind without the fear of who is watching or listening.

Why is this idea important?

Since around about 2008 more and more classrooms throughout the UK have been installing CCTV survellience equipment under many forms of guises some claiming for monitoring behaviour others for teacher training. In my eyes this act is a step to far especially when cameras were installed in multiple rooms in my own school under the claim of teacher training. The information commissioner was not consulted nor was legal advice, it is a sickening invasion of privacy and goes only further to soften up our children to accepting a big brother state. To make matters worse the company that sells such equipment Class Watch was chaired by Tory MP and now Parliamentary Undersecretary of State for Children and Families Tim Loughton. If that is not a conflict of interests and a complete stain on his position then I'm not sure what is. Throughout the installation of these cameras no student was consulted or parental consent asked. I have campaigned rigourously against this gross invasion of privacy and our childrens right to an undisturbed education where they can freely speak their mind without the fear of who is watching or listening.

Free pupils and teachers from ridiculous health & safety

My mum is a teacher and runs a lot of school trips. She is require by law for children up to the age of 18 (eg drama trips) to perform ludicrous health & safety checks.

Taking a group of year 13s (aged 17 to 18) to see a performance in the National Theatre last October she was required to:

-make sure none of the pupils touched the doors of the Underground carriages for fear of germs

-check there were no bombs under their seats in the Theatre, despite it having its own Bomb Removal and Safety team

-make sure that no pupils had to sit next to a (SHOCK HORROR) member of the regular public, placing herself between the defenseless student and the presumably menacing member of the public.

And that's just one example of one trip. She's also not even allowed to pat a pupil on the back when he had a breakdown in front of her and started crying (caused by A-Level stress, but that's a different kettle of fish).

REPEAL THIS NONSENSE!

Why is this idea important?

My mum is a teacher and runs a lot of school trips. She is require by law for children up to the age of 18 (eg drama trips) to perform ludicrous health & safety checks.

Taking a group of year 13s (aged 17 to 18) to see a performance in the National Theatre last October she was required to:

-make sure none of the pupils touched the doors of the Underground carriages for fear of germs

-check there were no bombs under their seats in the Theatre, despite it having its own Bomb Removal and Safety team

-make sure that no pupils had to sit next to a (SHOCK HORROR) member of the regular public, placing herself between the defenseless student and the presumably menacing member of the public.

And that's just one example of one trip. She's also not even allowed to pat a pupil on the back when he had a breakdown in front of her and started crying (caused by A-Level stress, but that's a different kettle of fish).

REPEAL THIS NONSENSE!

Trust the teachers – let them teach properly

The vast majority of teachers are qualified, motivated and knowledgable individuals who know their subjects and their pupils or students, as a group, better than anyone else. They should be allowed to teach the way which delivers the subject knowledge, in their educated opinion, the best way for each individual or group. They cannot do this when bogged down by an ever-increasing burden of paperwork, which takes away from their contact time with their class or group. Trust the teachers to do the job properly, and give them the time and freedom so to do. Less paperwork, fewer targets and decreased inspection will result in a better education for the country's children and students.

Why is this idea important?

The vast majority of teachers are qualified, motivated and knowledgable individuals who know their subjects and their pupils or students, as a group, better than anyone else. They should be allowed to teach the way which delivers the subject knowledge, in their educated opinion, the best way for each individual or group. They cannot do this when bogged down by an ever-increasing burden of paperwork, which takes away from their contact time with their class or group. Trust the teachers to do the job properly, and give them the time and freedom so to do. Less paperwork, fewer targets and decreased inspection will result in a better education for the country's children and students.

Allow teaching assistants to control classes

The National Union of Teachers says supply teachers are losing jobs because teaching assistants are being left in charge of classes, and that this is against the law.

 

Assuming they are accurate, the law should be repealed and Headteachers / Governers should be required to use their judgement about who to place in classes when teachers are absent. Their judgement must extend to costs to the tax payer and not be dominated by the NUT view which is regardless of tax payers' interests.

Why is this idea important?

The National Union of Teachers says supply teachers are losing jobs because teaching assistants are being left in charge of classes, and that this is against the law.

 

Assuming they are accurate, the law should be repealed and Headteachers / Governers should be required to use their judgement about who to place in classes when teachers are absent. Their judgement must extend to costs to the tax payer and not be dominated by the NUT view which is regardless of tax payers' interests.

Give Head Teachers back discretion on holidays in termtime

Head Teachers are currently unable to grant the odd day off for children to miss school for good reasons unless part of 'the main holiday'.  They can authorise up to 10 days in one block for a holiday, but not two one-day breaks in the same school year – whatever the reason and however little impact it may have on education.  This crazy!  Give heads back the discretion to authorise days off when they consider it appropriate.

Why is this idea important?

Head Teachers are currently unable to grant the odd day off for children to miss school for good reasons unless part of 'the main holiday'.  They can authorise up to 10 days in one block for a holiday, but not two one-day breaks in the same school year – whatever the reason and however little impact it may have on education.  This crazy!  Give heads back the discretion to authorise days off when they consider it appropriate.

Increase mobility for teachers that want to teach

We should review the pay structure for teachers and allow individuals and head teachers to exercise their judgement on how much to pay an individual, based on the current pay scales. This would encourage experienced teachers to move to more 'difficult' schools and allow them to stay in the classroom and fresh rather than forcing them to stay where they are or into management when that's not what they became teachers for.

Why is this idea important?

We should review the pay structure for teachers and allow individuals and head teachers to exercise their judgement on how much to pay an individual, based on the current pay scales. This would encourage experienced teachers to move to more 'difficult' schools and allow them to stay in the classroom and fresh rather than forcing them to stay where they are or into management when that's not what they became teachers for.

special educational needs-review policy better provision for dyslexia

I urge this government to review the current provision for children special educational need.

I ask that there be to seperate types of statement one for  physical disability and one for learning difficulties

I ask for schools to be more dyslexia friendly.

Currently all children with special educational needs can be put foward for statement there is a limited pot of money and no differentiation between children with physical dysability and those with learning difficulties. Statements are generally awarded to children with physical disability.

Children with dyslexia generally remain on the school action plus program. The wording of the current provision is that children on this program should be offered "up to" 15 hours support a week. In most cases these children barely get an hour a week .

Parents and teachers have to fight hard to get the funding to get children with learning difficulties support.

Teachers need better training to understand that children with dyslexia are not low achievers but highly intelligent individuals who cannot express themselves on paper in the way they can verbally. They need to be given the budjet for these children to have scribes and readers and I.T. equiptment.

The current system is failing our young people

Why is this idea important?

I urge this government to review the current provision for children special educational need.

I ask that there be to seperate types of statement one for  physical disability and one for learning difficulties

I ask for schools to be more dyslexia friendly.

Currently all children with special educational needs can be put foward for statement there is a limited pot of money and no differentiation between children with physical dysability and those with learning difficulties. Statements are generally awarded to children with physical disability.

Children with dyslexia generally remain on the school action plus program. The wording of the current provision is that children on this program should be offered "up to" 15 hours support a week. In most cases these children barely get an hour a week .

Parents and teachers have to fight hard to get the funding to get children with learning difficulties support.

Teachers need better training to understand that children with dyslexia are not low achievers but highly intelligent individuals who cannot express themselves on paper in the way they can verbally. They need to be given the budjet for these children to have scribes and readers and I.T. equiptment.

The current system is failing our young people

Scrap the ‘Institute for Learning’ Quango

This Quango is not needed.  It adds an unnecessary layer of regulation onto a sector that was doing well.  It prevents many people from teaching in the FE sector, for example those who simply taught a few classes a week.

Why is this idea important?

This Quango is not needed.  It adds an unnecessary layer of regulation onto a sector that was doing well.  It prevents many people from teaching in the FE sector, for example those who simply taught a few classes a week.

False accusations, which are unfounded, against teachers should be deleted and have a limited shelf life

Legislation that allows reports on false accusations, of teachers, that are classed as unfounded to be allowed to be kept until the teacher is 65 and needs to be stated during new job application by references infringe the rights of innocent teachers and should be removed, or ammended to state that such reports are deleted after 6 months – 1 year.

Why is this idea important?

Legislation that allows reports on false accusations, of teachers, that are classed as unfounded to be allowed to be kept until the teacher is 65 and needs to be stated during new job application by references infringe the rights of innocent teachers and should be removed, or ammended to state that such reports are deleted after 6 months – 1 year.

Scrap Ofsted.

Ofsted reports are largely meaningless. I've seen terrible schools get a glowing Ofsted report – all it means is that they've jumped through the hoops and produced the paperwork Ofsted need to cover their own backs. It says little or nothing about how well-educated the students are.

Teachers concentrate so much on impressing Ofsted – and following the Ofsted-supplied formula for what they consider to be "good" teaching, that there is little room for flexibility and innovation. Many of the very best teachers are mavericks who don't follow the rules – and many of them have already been driven out of the profession as it is.

Why is this idea important?

Ofsted reports are largely meaningless. I've seen terrible schools get a glowing Ofsted report – all it means is that they've jumped through the hoops and produced the paperwork Ofsted need to cover their own backs. It says little or nothing about how well-educated the students are.

Teachers concentrate so much on impressing Ofsted – and following the Ofsted-supplied formula for what they consider to be "good" teaching, that there is little room for flexibility and innovation. Many of the very best teachers are mavericks who don't follow the rules – and many of them have already been driven out of the profession as it is.