Educashun ain't wot it used to be...
Comments
-
My mistake, I apologise. Shouldn't dive in headfirst without paying attention again.0
-
(Cue the “but you do get long holidays and a gold-plated pension” comments)
We don’t get paid for holidays, our salary is spread over 12 months so we don’t have zero income in July/August. Pay is really not good - I have 30 years of experience, post-grad qualifications and lead a large department in a core subject and earn well below the equivalent in industry. But I love teaching so will trade that off for job satisfaction (although even that is being put under pressure).
The pension is good, yes. There’s a perk for you.
Summer holidays are good, I probably do manage to get a proper 4-week break. I work in every other holiday. Teaching 21 hours a week plus the leadership role means that strategic stuff has to wait for a time when I can think about it properly. That plus marking exams, which every school helpfully put just before holidays, usually takes up most of the other holidays.
And yes, I know other people work hard and put in long hours but on the other side of that, I don’t spend any time criticising them or claiming that I know their job better than they do. Seems ok to do that to teachers though, doesn’t it?0 -
Oh, and teaching 21 hours per week is the actual, in the class in front of kids teaching bit. There’s routine marking and preparation on top of that which adds another 15-20 hours plus meetings and other responsibilities. So a typical working week is more like 50-55 hours. Newer teachers are probably doing more like 60-65 hours. Every teacher’s contract specifies 1295 hours per year over 195 days (directed time, under the control of the head teacher). But every contract includes a clause about doing whatever else is needed for the efficient delivery of the role. Nobody works for 1295 hours per year.
Sorry, didn’t mean to rant.0 -
-
I was going to make a comment about Boris appointing a 'Tsar' then ignoring his recommendations but from what John has said maybe the requested £10 billion to help kids catch up really isn't needed. I only have a child in college (where they seem on track but with it being a performing arts course obviously missed out on a lot of the practical work) so have no idea how much students have or haven't fallen behind. My guess is more diligent students have thrived but those that require more support or those that lack the ability to motivate / organise themselves will have fallen behind (I suspect I might have fallen into that latter category, did well at school but always put in the minimum effort when not in an actual classroom).0
-
@Pross to an extent you’re right I think. A big part of the issue was that a significant minority couldn’t access online learning because they just couldn’t get the equipment or the internet access. The government was supposed to provide laptops and access but I don’t think they did a particularly good job of doing that. Even we had kids who were sharing one laptop between 5 kids so it’s no wonder that there’s a problem in some areas.
The money could be used to give youngsters access to the social stuff they lost access to along with some being spent to support some additional learning if that’s needed. My school will be running a summer school for year 6 pupils who are joining us in year 7 and that’s going to be expensive and will be repeated across the country. So £10billion is probably in the right ballpark0 -
It's interesting that the money tree has run out when it's needed for education. I guess no Tory donors stood to gain financially from the proposals.0
-
No offence, but what industry equivalent are you comparing yourself to? And what do you imagine the T&Cs are like in that industry?johngti said:(Cue the “but you do get long holidays and a gold-plated pension” comments)
We don’t get paid for holidays, our salary is spread over 12 months so we don’t have zero income in July/August. Pay is really not good - I have 30 years of experience, post-grad qualifications and lead a large department in a core subject and earn well below the equivalent in industry. But I love teaching so will trade that off for job satisfaction (although even that is being put under pressure).
The pension is good, yes. There’s a perk for you.
Summer holidays are good, I probably do manage to get a proper 4-week break. I work in every other holiday. Teaching 21 hours a week plus the leadership role means that strategic stuff has to wait for a time when I can think about it properly. That plus marking exams, which every school helpfully put just before holidays, usually takes up most of the other holidays.
And yes, I know other people work hard and put in long hours but on the other side of that, I don’t spend any time criticising them or claiming that I know their job better than they do. Seems ok to do that to teachers though, doesn’t it?
The issue teachers have is their unions, and the extent to which teachers appear to buy in to their rhetoric, I am afraid.
People as far as I can see are by default hugely grateful for teachers, but you have extremely vocal unions who are constantly in the news complaining about stuff that the rest of the population just sucks up. Such as working extra hours. And being paid to do management, then complaining about management...
I do not think anyone suggests that teaching is easy - I couldn't do it - but nor is it the worst job in the world. As you have pointed out yourself, you get a good break every year for starters. I have to work my ar$se off for a month to get a week clear in my deadlines. And again to clear the backlog when I'm back. 4 weeks off requires me to change employer. I am sure I'm paid quite a lot more than you, but then I had to train for much, much longer and get paid a pittance, and the cost of that salary is long hours and stress.
What you take as criticism is more a case of "just shut up please" from the rest of us.
0 -
Is it needed for education? Or, at least, the part of the education it is aimed at?Pross said:It's interesting that the money tree has run out when it's needed for education. I guess no Tory donors stood to gain financially from the proposals.
0 -
No need to get defensive.johngti said:Oh, and teaching 21 hours per week is the actual, in the class in front of kids teaching bit. There’s routine marking and preparation on top of that which adds another 15-20 hours plus meetings and other responsibilities. So a typical working week is more like 50-55 hours. Newer teachers are probably doing more like 60-65 hours. Every teacher’s contract specifies 1295 hours per year over 195 days (directed time, under the control of the head teacher). But every contract includes a clause about doing whatever else is needed for the efficient delivery of the role. Nobody works for 1295 hours per year.
Sorry, didn’t mean to rant.
If teaching were a doss there wouldn't be teacher shortages.0 -
This is how The Times describes it:First.Aspect said:
Is it needed for education? Or, at least, the part of the education it is aimed at?Pross said:It's interesting that the money tree has run out when it's needed for education. I guess no Tory donors stood to gain financially from the proposals.
What Collins wanted:
•Extend the school day by half an hour
• Fund 100 hours extra teaching a year for sixth formers
• Widen the number of disadvantaged children eligible for childcare/early years education
• Fund a recovery premium that schools could choose how to distribute
• Increase pupil funding for early years and disadvantaged sixth formers
•Hire more highly qualified early years practitioners
What he got:
•An extra year of teaching for teenagers who fail their A-levels
• Extra funding for training teachers, including early years teachers
•Extending tutoring to five million pupils by 2024
Which looks like the request was "we urgently need to do something now" and the response is, "here's some things that will happen over the next 3 years".0 -
Yes I know what he asked for. But was it needed?kingstongraham said:
This is how The Times describes it:First.Aspect said:
Is it needed for education? Or, at least, the part of the education it is aimed at?Pross said:It's interesting that the money tree has run out when it's needed for education. I guess no Tory donors stood to gain financially from the proposals.
What Collins wanted:
•Extend the school day by half an hour
• Fund 100 hours extra teaching a year for sixth formers
• Widen the number of disadvantaged children eligible for childcare/early years education
• Fund a recovery premium that schools could choose how to distribute
• Increase pupil funding for early years and disadvantaged sixth formers
•Hire more highly qualified early years practitioners
What he got:
•An extra year of teaching for teenagers who fail their A-levels
• Extra funding for training teachers, including early years teachers
•Extending tutoring to five million pupils by 2024
Which looks like the request was "we urgently need to do something now" and the response is, "here's some things that will happen over the next 3 years".0 -
None taken. Im a maths graduate with a good honours degree from a good university. I have a masters in innovation and leadership. I lead a maths department, have 11 staff that I’m responsible for. Huge level of responsibility and accountability. My pay is a lot better than average, that’s obvious. But if I’d gone into accountancy/insurance/energy/any number of other industries where mathematicians are needed, I would be earning more for an equivalent working week and at least 4 weeks holidays per year plus bank holidays etc.First.Aspect said:
No offence, but what industry equivalent are you comparing yourself to? And what do you imagine the T&Cs are like in that industry?johngti said:(Cue the “but you do get long holidays and a gold-plated pension” comments)
We don’t get paid for holidays, our salary is spread over 12 months so we don’t have zero income in July/August. Pay is really not good - I have 30 years of experience, post-grad qualifications and lead a large department in a core subject and earn well below the equivalent in industry. But I love teaching so will trade that off for job satisfaction (although even that is being put under pressure).
The pension is good, yes. There’s a perk for you.
Summer holidays are good, I probably do manage to get a proper 4-week break. I work in every other holiday. Teaching 21 hours a week plus the leadership role means that strategic stuff has to wait for a time when I can think about it properly. That plus marking exams, which every school helpfully put just before holidays, usually takes up most of the other holidays.
And yes, I know other people work hard and put in long hours but on the other side of that, I don’t spend any time criticising them or claiming that I know their job better than they do. Seems ok to do that to teachers though, doesn’t it?
But like I said, I’m happy enough with my lot in life I just resent (for want of a better word) people who don’t know the job complaining about it. I don’t criticise anyone else’s career choice.0 -
That's what the dude specifically appointed to answer that question says. I'm not an expert, but by all accounts he is.First.Aspect said:
Yes I know what he asked for. But was it needed?kingstongraham said:
This is how The Times describes it:First.Aspect said:
Is it needed for education? Or, at least, the part of the education it is aimed at?Pross said:It's interesting that the money tree has run out when it's needed for education. I guess no Tory donors stood to gain financially from the proposals.
What Collins wanted:
•Extend the school day by half an hour
• Fund 100 hours extra teaching a year for sixth formers
• Widen the number of disadvantaged children eligible for childcare/early years education
• Fund a recovery premium that schools could choose how to distribute
• Increase pupil funding for early years and disadvantaged sixth formers
•Hire more highly qualified early years practitioners
What he got:
•An extra year of teaching for teenagers who fail their A-levels
• Extra funding for training teachers, including early years teachers
•Extending tutoring to five million pupils by 2024
Which looks like the request was "we urgently need to do something now" and the response is, "here's some things that will happen over the next 3 years".0 -
The bloke Boris appointed to undertake a review seems to think so (after coming down to £10 billion from an initial £15 billion on the basis of delivery plan he could 'live with'). It seems totally pointless to ask an expert to undertake a review and then just ignore the recommendations although to be fair the current government are far from unique in that. It just seems odd the amount of money that has magically been found in the last 18 months and squandered but nothing can be found for education which every government claims is a priority (as it should be).First.Aspect said:
Is it needed for education? Or, at least, the part of the education it is aimed at?Pross said:It's interesting that the money tree has run out when it's needed for education. I guess no Tory donors stood to gain financially from the proposals.
0 -
If you'd gone into accountancy, you'd have needed to train as an accountant and earn f-all for several more years.johngti said:
None taken. Im a maths graduate with a good honours degree from a good university. I have a masters in innovation and leadership. I lead a maths department, have 11 staff that I’m responsible for. Huge level of responsibility and accountability. My pay is a lot better than average, that’s obvious. But if I’d gone into accountancy/insurance/energy/any number of other industries where mathematicians are needed, I would be earning more for an equivalent working week and at least 4 weeks holidays per year plus bank holidays etc.First.Aspect said:
No offence, but what industry equivalent are you comparing yourself to? And what do you imagine the T&Cs are like in that industry?johngti said:(Cue the “but you do get long holidays and a gold-plated pension” comments)
We don’t get paid for holidays, our salary is spread over 12 months so we don’t have zero income in July/August. Pay is really not good - I have 30 years of experience, post-grad qualifications and lead a large department in a core subject and earn well below the equivalent in industry. But I love teaching so will trade that off for job satisfaction (although even that is being put under pressure).
The pension is good, yes. There’s a perk for you.
Summer holidays are good, I probably do manage to get a proper 4-week break. I work in every other holiday. Teaching 21 hours a week plus the leadership role means that strategic stuff has to wait for a time when I can think about it properly. That plus marking exams, which every school helpfully put just before holidays, usually takes up most of the other holidays.
And yes, I know other people work hard and put in long hours but on the other side of that, I don’t spend any time criticising them or claiming that I know their job better than they do. Seems ok to do that to teachers though, doesn’t it?
But like I said, I’m happy enough with my lot in life I just resent (for want of a better word) people who don’t know the job complaining about it. I don’t criticise anyone else’s career choice.
Insurance - do you mean actuarial work? If so, the same.
And they are both in the private sector, so in addition to all the years earning nothing whilst qualifying in your spare time (while teachers do have a pretty high graduate salary starting point) you then have to hold down the job. Both are industries that actually fire people who don't perform.
You are also viewing things from the outside. Headline salaries can be quite high in a lot of professions. But then you hear of teachers earning six figures. Is that representative? Is it any more representative than the "you could earn X" as an accountant? Or is the median a lot more modest in both cases?
A better comparison would be what those professions earn in the public sector.0 -
Tory donors don't go to state schools. Many (most?) of the Tory leadership didn't go to state schools. They're not really interested in state schools apart from turning as many as possible of them into academies and out of control of local government.0
-
Sure, but what question was he asked?kingstongraham said:
That's what the dude specifically appointed to answer that question says. I'm not an expert, but by all accounts he is.First.Aspect said:
Yes I know what he asked for. But was it needed?kingstongraham said:
This is how The Times describes it:First.Aspect said:
Is it needed for education? Or, at least, the part of the education it is aimed at?Pross said:It's interesting that the money tree has run out when it's needed for education. I guess no Tory donors stood to gain financially from the proposals.
What Collins wanted:
•Extend the school day by half an hour
• Fund 100 hours extra teaching a year for sixth formers
• Widen the number of disadvantaged children eligible for childcare/early years education
• Fund a recovery premium that schools could choose how to distribute
• Increase pupil funding for early years and disadvantaged sixth formers
•Hire more highly qualified early years practitioners
What he got:
•An extra year of teaching for teenagers who fail their A-levels
• Extra funding for training teachers, including early years teachers
•Extending tutoring to five million pupils by 2024
Which looks like the request was "we urgently need to do something now" and the response is, "here's some things that will happen over the next 3 years".
Was he asked, "what should we do to boost education post covid and help kids catch up?" or "we want to spend some money on boosting education because it will go down well with voters, what would you suggest?"
I bet he wasn't asked, "We are a bit short of cash now, so is it more important to boost education post covid, or spend money on health?" (for example)0 -
That seemed to be the main critique: let's see where we are in the autumn, when that will have missed the best time to catch up.
Personally, I don't think my eldest lost very much, but am very aware that we were fortunate to have the space and equipment to make that possible. There was also a clear prioritising of her year. Provision for her younger sister was less thorough and that showed by the time schools were reopened despite us being 'on it'.1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
The argument put forward before was that the reason there couldn't be exams was that they hadn't been taught the full syllabus. I have no idea what is true, and you seem to have strong views on it.johngti said:
Why? We finished the curriculum, we’ve had six weeks of testing, the kids are exhausted as well as the teachers. We’re being asked to set grades for students with all of the checks and balances that come with that so the workload will be stupid over the next couple of weeks. And to top it off, in a normal year they’d have another 7-10 days of intensive exams and would be off school from around the 20th June anyway. They’re gaining very little.TheBigBean said:Sending kids home for study leave when there are no exams sounds like a bad idea.
We’ll be running various induction days for sixth form, students will have summer work packs to prepare for sixth form. What more do you think we can do?
0 -
I am sure Ric was quoting a figure of £60-70k for senior accountancy positions, so allowing for pension benefits that would be worth approx £50k for a teacher.First.Aspect said:
If you'd gone into accountancy, you'd have needed to train as an accountant and earn f-all for several more years.johngti said:
None taken. Im a maths graduate with a good honours degree from a good university. I have a masters in innovation and leadership. I lead a maths department, have 11 staff that I’m responsible for. Huge level of responsibility and accountability. My pay is a lot better than average, that’s obvious. But if I’d gone into accountancy/insurance/energy/any number of other industries where mathematicians are needed, I would be earning more for an equivalent working week and at least 4 weeks holidays per year plus bank holidays etc.First.Aspect said:
No offence, but what industry equivalent are you comparing yourself to? And what do you imagine the T&Cs are like in that industry?johngti said:(Cue the “but you do get long holidays and a gold-plated pension” comments)
We don’t get paid for holidays, our salary is spread over 12 months so we don’t have zero income in July/August. Pay is really not good - I have 30 years of experience, post-grad qualifications and lead a large department in a core subject and earn well below the equivalent in industry. But I love teaching so will trade that off for job satisfaction (although even that is being put under pressure).
The pension is good, yes. There’s a perk for you.
Summer holidays are good, I probably do manage to get a proper 4-week break. I work in every other holiday. Teaching 21 hours a week plus the leadership role means that strategic stuff has to wait for a time when I can think about it properly. That plus marking exams, which every school helpfully put just before holidays, usually takes up most of the other holidays.
And yes, I know other people work hard and put in long hours but on the other side of that, I don’t spend any time criticising them or claiming that I know their job better than they do. Seems ok to do that to teachers though, doesn’t it?
But like I said, I’m happy enough with my lot in life I just resent (for want of a better word) people who don’t know the job complaining about it. I don’t criticise anyone else’s career choice.
Insurance - do you mean actuarial work? If so, the same.
And they are both in the private sector, so in addition to all the years earning nothing whilst qualifying in your spare time (while teachers do have a pretty high graduate salary starting point) you then have to hold down the job. Both are industries that actually fire people who don't perform.
You are also viewing things from the outside. Headline salaries can be quite high in a lot of professions. But then you hear of teachers earning six figures. Is that representative? Is it any more representative than the "you could earn X" as an accountant? Or is the median a lot more modest in both cases?
A better comparison would be what those professions earn in the public sector.
I am struggling to come up with a number for the % salary cut I would take in exchange for August off on top of my other holiday entitlement. 8% would be the equivalent of unpaid leave so maybe as low as 5%.
Or go the full monty and what % off salary to take a job that gave you all the school holidays off (so not 13 weeks when you want). I am struggling to see this as being worth more than 10% but in another few years with less overheads that would look like a lovely wind down to retirement.0 -
is anybody else amazed that it would cost £15bn to provide and extra half hour of schooling for 3 years? If I had priced that up I would be with Boris on £1.5bn0
-
I did earn f-all for the first 5-6 years after I graduated, somewhere around 40% of what my starting salary would have been in industry and pitiful pay rises. Is it your contention that teachers don’t get training? One year post-graduate then one year on probation. The starting salary for inner London is good on paper but not for inner London.First.Aspect said:
If you'd gone into accountancy, you'd have needed to train as an accountant and earn f-all for several more years.johngti said:
None taken. Im a maths graduate with a good honours degree from a good university. I have a masters in innovation and leadership. I lead a maths department, have 11 staff that I’m responsible for. Huge level of responsibility and accountability. My pay is a lot better than average, that’s obvious. But if I’d gone into accountancy/insurance/energy/any number of other industries where mathematicians are needed, I would be earning more for an equivalent working week and at least 4 weeks holidays per year plus bank holidays etc.First.Aspect said:
No offence, but what industry equivalent are you comparing yourself to? And what do you imagine the T&Cs are like in that industry?johngti said:(Cue the “but you do get long holidays and a gold-plated pension” comments)
We don’t get paid for holidays, our salary is spread over 12 months so we don’t have zero income in July/August. Pay is really not good - I have 30 years of experience, post-grad qualifications and lead a large department in a core subject and earn well below the equivalent in industry. But I love teaching so will trade that off for job satisfaction (although even that is being put under pressure).
The pension is good, yes. There’s a perk for you.
Summer holidays are good, I probably do manage to get a proper 4-week break. I work in every other holiday. Teaching 21 hours a week plus the leadership role means that strategic stuff has to wait for a time when I can think about it properly. That plus marking exams, which every school helpfully put just before holidays, usually takes up most of the other holidays.
And yes, I know other people work hard and put in long hours but on the other side of that, I don’t spend any time criticising them or claiming that I know their job better than they do. Seems ok to do that to teachers though, doesn’t it?
But like I said, I’m happy enough with my lot in life I just resent (for want of a better word) people who don’t know the job complaining about it. I don’t criticise anyone else’s career choice.
Insurance - do you mean actuarial work? If so, the same.
And they are both in the private sector, so in addition to all the years earning nothing whilst qualifying in your spare time (while teachers do have a pretty high graduate salary starting point) you then have to hold down the job. Both are industries that actually fire people who don't perform.
You are also viewing things from the outside. Headline salaries can be quite high in a lot of professions. But then you hear of teachers earning six figures. Is that representative? Is it any more representative than the "you could earn X" as an accountant? Or is the median a lot more modest in both cases?
A better comparison would be what those professions earn in the public sector.
Also, what makes you think that teachers don’t get sacked if they underperform? The accountability systems in place are there for a reason. Do you believe that I’m muddling through my career, barely managing to keep on top of it all but happy because I’m on a cushy number knowing that I’m in it for life? Or that any teacher is?
Without exception, my peers who went into industry had training salaries higher than my starting salary, moved up in salary faster than me, bought a house before me, and were in no way busier or more stressed than me, nor did they work longer hours. Oh, and they were rewarded for doing a good job via extra pay rises and/or bonuses. I was lucky to get the odd “thanks sir”.
Three figure salaries apply to head teachers in the biggest schools. School business managers, who will generally come from the business world, get paid more than heads of department like me. Lots use it as a second career so are happy to take a pay cut. I’m yet to meet a mature trainer who says that they’re earning more. But my point is that people feel empowered to criticise teachers and teaching. I don’t generally do similarly for non-teaching professions. I love my job and get a lot of satisfaction from working with young people. Just bladdy stop having a go at us about it.0 -
Intrestingly, my only experience of professionals being sacked is a couple of teachers whilst I was at school.First.Aspect said:
If you'd gone into accountancy, you'd have needed to train as an accountant and earn f-all for several more years.johngti said:
None taken. Im a maths graduate with a good honours degree from a good university. I have a masters in innovation and leadership. I lead a maths department, have 11 staff that I’m responsible for. Huge level of responsibility and accountability. My pay is a lot better than average, that’s obvious. But if I’d gone into accountancy/insurance/energy/any number of other industries where mathematicians are needed, I would be earning more for an equivalent working week and at least 4 weeks holidays per year plus bank holidays etc.First.Aspect said:
No offence, but what industry equivalent are you comparing yourself to? And what do you imagine the T&Cs are like in that industry?johngti said:(Cue the “but you do get long holidays and a gold-plated pension” comments)
We don’t get paid for holidays, our salary is spread over 12 months so we don’t have zero income in July/August. Pay is really not good - I have 30 years of experience, post-grad qualifications and lead a large department in a core subject and earn well below the equivalent in industry. But I love teaching so will trade that off for job satisfaction (although even that is being put under pressure).
The pension is good, yes. There’s a perk for you.
Summer holidays are good, I probably do manage to get a proper 4-week break. I work in every other holiday. Teaching 21 hours a week plus the leadership role means that strategic stuff has to wait for a time when I can think about it properly. That plus marking exams, which every school helpfully put just before holidays, usually takes up most of the other holidays.
And yes, I know other people work hard and put in long hours but on the other side of that, I don’t spend any time criticising them or claiming that I know their job better than they do. Seems ok to do that to teachers though, doesn’t it?
But like I said, I’m happy enough with my lot in life I just resent (for want of a better word) people who don’t know the job complaining about it. I don’t criticise anyone else’s career choice.
Insurance - do you mean actuarial work? If so, the same.
And they are both in the private sector, so in addition to all the years earning nothing whilst qualifying in your spare time (while teachers do have a pretty high graduate salary starting point) you then have to hold down the job. Both are industries that actually fire people who don't perform.
You are also viewing things from the outside. Headline salaries can be quite high in a lot of professions. But then you hear of teachers earning six figures. Is that representative? Is it any more representative than the "you could earn X" as an accountant? Or is the median a lot more modest in both cases?
A better comparison would be what those professions earn in the public sector.
0 -
without going into personal details is it possible to post up pay scales for teachersjohngti said:
I did earn f-all for the first 5-6 years after I graduated, somewhere around 40% of what my starting salary would have been in industry and pitiful pay rises. Is it your contention that teachers don’t get training? One year post-graduate then one year on probation. The starting salary for inner London is good on paper but not for inner London.First.Aspect said:
If you'd gone into accountancy, you'd have needed to train as an accountant and earn f-all for several more years.johngti said:
None taken. Im a maths graduate with a good honours degree from a good university. I have a masters in innovation and leadership. I lead a maths department, have 11 staff that I’m responsible for. Huge level of responsibility and accountability. My pay is a lot better than average, that’s obvious. But if I’d gone into accountancy/insurance/energy/any number of other industries where mathematicians are needed, I would be earning more for an equivalent working week and at least 4 weeks holidays per year plus bank holidays etc.First.Aspect said:
No offence, but what industry equivalent are you comparing yourself to? And what do you imagine the T&Cs are like in that industry?johngti said:(Cue the “but you do get long holidays and a gold-plated pension” comments)
We don’t get paid for holidays, our salary is spread over 12 months so we don’t have zero income in July/August. Pay is really not good - I have 30 years of experience, post-grad qualifications and lead a large department in a core subject and earn well below the equivalent in industry. But I love teaching so will trade that off for job satisfaction (although even that is being put under pressure).
The pension is good, yes. There’s a perk for you.
Summer holidays are good, I probably do manage to get a proper 4-week break. I work in every other holiday. Teaching 21 hours a week plus the leadership role means that strategic stuff has to wait for a time when I can think about it properly. That plus marking exams, which every school helpfully put just before holidays, usually takes up most of the other holidays.
And yes, I know other people work hard and put in long hours but on the other side of that, I don’t spend any time criticising them or claiming that I know their job better than they do. Seems ok to do that to teachers though, doesn’t it?
But like I said, I’m happy enough with my lot in life I just resent (for want of a better word) people who don’t know the job complaining about it. I don’t criticise anyone else’s career choice.
Insurance - do you mean actuarial work? If so, the same.
And they are both in the private sector, so in addition to all the years earning nothing whilst qualifying in your spare time (while teachers do have a pretty high graduate salary starting point) you then have to hold down the job. Both are industries that actually fire people who don't perform.
You are also viewing things from the outside. Headline salaries can be quite high in a lot of professions. But then you hear of teachers earning six figures. Is that representative? Is it any more representative than the "you could earn X" as an accountant? Or is the median a lot more modest in both cases?
A better comparison would be what those professions earn in the public sector.
Also, what makes you think that teachers don’t get sacked if they underperform? The accountability systems in place are there for a reason. Do you believe that I’m muddling through my career, barely managing to keep on top of it all but happy because I’m on a cushy number knowing that I’m in it for life? Or that any teacher is?
Without exception, my peers who went into industry had training salaries higher than my starting salary, moved up in salary faster than me, bought a house before me, and were in no way busier or more stressed than me, nor did they work longer hours. Oh, and they were rewarded for doing a good job via extra pay rises and/or bonuses. I was lucky to get the odd “thanks sir”.
Three figure salaries apply to head teachers in the biggest schools. School business managers, who will generally come from the business world, get paid more than heads of department like me. Lots use it as a second career so are happy to take a pay cut. I’m yet to meet a mature trainer who says that they’re earning more. But my point is that people feel empowered to criticise teachers and teaching. I don’t generally do similarly for non-teaching professions. I love my job and get a lot of satisfaction from working with young people. Just bladdy stop having a go at us about it.0 -
-
M1-M6 is standard, usually start on M1 and so long as you meet appraisal targets you move up a point every year.
U1-U3 require lots of additional evidence to get to. Plus you need to have been on M6 for two years before you can apply for U1 and then it’s collecting evidence over subsequent two-year appraisal cycles to move up the upper spine.
Worst case is that it can take 12 years to get to U3 and then you have to maintain that performance to remain on it (in a growing number of schools you can be moved back down the pay spine if your performance drops).
In areas where recruitment is difficult, staff can be started at higher points on the main scale. Other relevant experience can be taken into account too, usually on a 3:1 basis. So if you were a trainer in whatever industry you came from for 6 years you’d gain two years on the pay scale.
If you want to teach a shortage subject like maths or physics, there are generous bursaries available these days. Nothing for other subjects like English from September this year though.
TLR payments are used for management/leadership roles.0 -
cheers - so as we are all in a metro, liberal elite bubble if we look at outer London a teacher would be on £30-40k and a HoD £45-65k?johngti said:M1-M6 is standard, usually start on M1 and so long as you meet appraisal targets you move up a point every year.
U1-U3 require lots of additional evidence to get to. Plus you need to have been on M6 for two years before you can apply for U1 and then it’s collecting evidence over subsequent two-year appraisal cycles to move up the upper spine.
Worst case is that it can take 12 years to get to U3 and then you have to maintain that performance to remain on it (in a growing number of schools you can be moved back down the pay spine if your performance drops).
In areas where recruitment is difficult, staff can be started at higher points on the main scale. Other relevant experience can be taken into account too, usually on a 3:1 basis. So if you were a trainer in whatever industry you came from for 6 years you’d gain two years on the pay scale.
If you want to teach a shortage subject like maths or physics, there are generous bursaries available these days. Nothing for other subjects like English from September this year though.
TLR payments are used for management/leadership roles.0 -
That was only part of the £15bn.surrey_commuter said:is anybody else amazed that it would cost £15bn to provide and extra half hour of schooling for 3 years? If I had priced that up I would be with Boris on £1.5bn
Across 9 million schoolchildren, an extra £500 per pupil per year is quite a lot, but doesn't seem a ridiculous number. A tenth of that feels like it's not going to do much at all.0 -
Oh, and the 1295 hours/195 days thing doesn’t apply to the leadership scale. If you’re on that, you work for as many hours/weeks as required so there’s no guarantee that leadership group staff get any decent holidays but the pay is supposed to make up for that.0
