[Archived] Extra ! Extra ! Read All About It !

[joey_big_nose]

Just wait until after the next set of SATS are taken and the results get published - teachers will be the ultimate whipping boys again, there's absolutely no fear of that.

It is a tough job but unfortunately, the perception that teachers work 9am - 3pm and have a ridiculous amount of holidays is what sits with the morons who believe what the glorified titty mags tell them. 70 - 80 hours a week is the norm and to be honest, many people can't be bothered to educate the basics to the one or two kids they spawn, never mind 30 of them...but they are the ones to spout off the loudest.

What will start to change things is when there is a real recruitment crisis which I think we are beginning to see now. Who wants to be a teacher in today's environment? The government will have to throw money at the situation and approach how to manage teaching in a more mature way than ever more tests and bureaucracy.

Currently we spend 13% of the budget on education. That needs to go up.

[Steve Kean's Hypnotoad]

Just wait until after the next set of SATS are taken and the results get published - teachers will be the ultimate whipping boys again, there's absolutely no fear of that.

It is a tough job but unfortunately, the perception that teachers work 9am - 3pm and have a ridiculous amount of holidays is what sits with the morons who believe what the glorified titty mags tell them. 70 - 80 hours a week is the norm and to be honest, many people can't be bothered to educate the basics to the one or two kids they spawn, never mind 30 of them...but they are the ones to spout off the loudest.

Agree with the rest of your post but heard this type of thing so many times now and sorry but I don't buy it for a second. Does this 70-80 hours include travelling to and from work, break times, lunch times, free periods, making/having tea after getting home, going on Facebook/watching tv before or in between marking etc? I'd pretty much guarantee it does!

[Mike E]

Agree with the rest of your post but heard this type of thing so many times now and sorry but I don't buy it for a second. Does this 70-80 hours include travelling to and from work, break times, lunch times, free periods, making/having tea after getting home, going on Facebook/watching tv before or in between marking etc? I'd pretty much guarantee it does!

Break times don't exist anymore. Most days when I did full time hours last half term, I got 10mins for lunch and every other part of my 'breaks' was spent setting up the next lesson, or marking books to try and lighten the load (90 books marked per day).

I got in to school at half 7 every morning and often didn't leave until 6pm. After the 30mins commute and 30mins for tea, I'd quite often not stop marking (which involves a whole lot more than ticks, crosses and comments) until 10.30pm.

So 14hours every day. Some days I'd get to eat lunch, so on average I'll say 13hrs30mins per day. Times 5 days = 67.5hours.

That was without the responsibility of full assessment, weekly staff meetings, running a weekly club, or being a subject coordinator only because I was full time supply and not employed by the school.

70-80 hours is very realistic.

On top of that, we often have to work through illness as we aren't allowed personal days because of the wonderful 'holidays' we are afforded which are spent planning up to 3 weeks worth of lessons in advance, catching up on abandoned final-week marking, filling in assessment sheets and writing up pupil reports.

[Tyrone Shoelaces]

My last head of department was a really energetic young guy just thirty years old. He was a really fit bloke but during the week he'd be in bed at 9.00 because he was that tired.

A friend of my wife's was a Secondary School Headteacher over in Scunthorpe. My wife was under instruction not to phone her after 9.00 because she also would be in bed. She worked on school work thoughout Saturday and just put Sunday aside for her family.

I was a Technician so I had limited contact with the kids but some of them could really get to you. I could walk away if I needed to but the class teacher couldn't. Most kids are great and it was a pleasure to pass on my Engineering knowledge and skills but you don't need many morons in a class to spoil it for the rest.

One year the school had a financial crisis so the Technicians had to do dinner duty. One or two kids could really drive you mad, my blood pressure would be well up after a particular trying dinner time.

As I said earlier nothing would induce me to do the job. If the wages were doubled I wouldn't do it. I think I saw a stat the other day that 37% of young teachers don't complete their first year in teaching ! I'm not surprised. It's not just the salary it's the pressure.

[Tyrone Shoelaces]

Break times don't exist anymore. Most days when I did full time hours last half term, I got 10mins for lunch and every other part of my 'breaks' was spent setting up the next lesson, or marking books to try and lighten the load (90 books marked per day).

I got in to school at half 7 every morning and often didn't leave until 6pm. After the 30mins commute and 30mins for tea, I'd quite often not stop marking (which involves a whole lot more than ticks, crosses and comments) until 10.30pm.

So 14hours every day. Some days I'd get to eat lunch, so on average I'll say 13hrs30mins per day. Times 5 days = 67.5hours.

That was without the responsibility of full assessment, weekly staff meetings, running a weekly club, or being a subject coordinator only because I was full time supply and not employed by the school.

70-80 hours is very realistic.

On top of that, we often have to work through illness as we aren't allowed personal days because of the wonderful 'holidays' we are afforded which are spent planning up to 3 weeks worth of lessons in advance, catching up on abandoned final-week marking, filling in assessment sheets and writing up pupil reports.

I can agree with all of Mike's post and I've no axe to grind regarding this issue. . I've seen people come into school really sick, one colleague hurt her back last term. When she came in she was grey with pain and looked awful but she came in. In Industry the vast majority of people wouldn't do that.

[Steve Kean's Hypnotoad]

Break times don't exist anymore. Most days when I did full time hours last half term, I got 10mins for lunch and every other part of my 'breaks' was spent setting up the next lesson, or marking books to try and lighten the load (90 books marked per day).

I got in to school at half 7 every morning and often didn't leave until 6pm. After the 30mins commute and 30mins for tea, I'd quite often not stop marking (which involves a whole lot more than ticks, crosses and comments) until 10.30pm.

So 14hours every day. Some days I'd get to eat lunch, so on average I'll say 13hrs30mins per day. Times 5 days = 67.5hours.

That was without the responsibility of full assessment, weekly staff meetings, running a weekly club, or being a subject coordinator only because I was full time supply and not employed by the school.

70-80 hours is very realistic.

On top of that, we often have to work through illness as we aren't allowed personal days because of the wonderful 'holidays' we are afforded which are spent planning up to 3 weeks worth of lessons in advance, catching up on abandoned final-week marking, filling in assessment sheets and writing up pupil reports.

Ok so you said often you don't leave until 6 and then included it in your numbers as always don't leave until 6. And is it the case that throughout the entire year teachers don't get breaks, work through the full hour of every single free period, run after school clubs? Because I was always under the impression that during exams teachers had a significant lesson reduction and after exams lost Year 11 and Year 13 pupils completely.

In the vast majority of jobs these days sick days are stigmatised so that's nothing unusual. And regarding your comment on the "holidays", does that mean the entire 13 weeks each year are spent working at the same 70-80 hours a week rate?

This might all sound like being pretty pedantic but add all the little exaggerations together and it works out at a reasonably big exaggeration. I've no doubt teachers work hard and can totally buy 50-60 hours a week as a norm and 70-80 hours a week as a one-off. But all claiming these insane numbers as the norm does is make people think "that's rubbish" and has less effect than if the genuine numbers were stated.

If teaching was really as hellish as teachers constantly state, they wouldn't do it.

[Mike E]

Ok so you said often you don't leave until 6 and then included it in your numbers as always don't leave until 6. And is it the case that throughout the entire year teachers don't get breaks, work through the full hour of every single free period, run after school clubs? Because I was always under the impression that during exams teachers had a significant lesson reduction and after exams lost Year 11 and Year 13 pupils completely.

In the vast majority of jobs these days sick days are stigmatised so that's nothing unusual. And regarding your comment on the "holidays", does that mean the entire 13 weeks each year are spent working at the same 70-80 hours a week rate?

This might all sound like being pretty pedantic but add all the little exaggerations together and it works out at a reasonably big exaggeration. I've no doubt teachers work hard and can totally buy 50-60 hours a week as a norm and 70-80 hours a week as a one-off. But all claiming these insane numbers as the norm does is make people think "that's rubbish" and has less effect than if the genuine numbers were stated.

If teaching was really as hellish as teachers constantly state, they wouldn't do it.

The problem is that everyone who has never taught a lesson has this view.

When I sat often, I mean often. As in 4 days out of 5.

Holidays are most definitely taken up (especially for the inexperienced like myself) by a whole rigmarole of paperwork, to the point where I couldn't join my family for a Sunday Roast as my Head insisted self-reflection forms be filled in and on his desk by 8am Monday morning.

Only in the summer hols (which involve preparing the classroom for a new start with fresh displays and planning for a new class, sometimes a completely new year) do teachers get to set aside a good 2-week block.

The only people who think teachers exaggerate are those who've never taught.

FYI, I'm primary school.

[Steve Kean's Hypnotoad]

The problem is that everyone who has never taught a lesson has this view.

Why do I have it then?

Alongside some (admittedly limited) personal experience, I've plenty of friends who are teachers. Some make it out to be worse than going to Afghanistan, some say its a very tough job but there are exaggerations as to how tough.

Like I said, if it really is far tougher than any other job, why do people do it? Why don't they quit and get a management job in the private sector? Just speculating but possibly they fear that they won't enjoy it and it won't actually be that much easier? There's plenty of other jobs that require significant unpaid overtime work, in fact I'd say the vast majority once you get above the basic level.

Anyway this isn't an argument I enjoy having as I think it comes across as me having a go at teachers, which I'm definitely not doing. You all do a very good job. But you mentioned teachers complaints as becoming white noise for the government, which is what tends to happen when a Union complains about everything all the time and has a tendency to inflate problems.

[jim mk2]

If teaching was really as hellish as teachers constantly state, they wouldn't do it.

They don't - they pack it in. Read Tyrone's post. You should lay off teachers - you're just repeating the usual lazy right wing rhetoric about them.

[joey_big_nose]

Like I said, if it really is far tougher than any other job, why do people do it? Why don't they quit and get a management job in the private sector? Just speculating but possibly they fear that they won't enjoy it and it won't actually be that much easier? There's plenty of other jobs that require significant unpaid overtime work, in fact I'd say the vast majority once you get above the basic level.

Like nursing and doctors teachers join because they want to make a difference. This has allowed a certain level of exploitation as there was a decent supply of people happy to take lower pay for a more satisfying job. However as conditions and status have deteriorated supply has diminished and now in these professions we are facing a timebomb.

Realistically in a well functioning society teachers and medical staff should be near the top in terms of status and renumeration. However we live in a bizarre world where you can make multiple times the money a nurse or teacher can in private sector middle management. Fine you might say, that is the market. But issues arise when the factor you rely on to recruit - that teaching/nursing/medicine is a worthy and satisfying career - ebbs away under the weight of negative publicity like work hours, bureaucracy and pressure.

It will be interesting to see how the government responds to falling recruitment levels (also severely impacting the armed services). Its going to need to be very clever. Its going to need to inspire people. But this government's interraction with these services has been adversarial, negative and derogatory. Hardly the stuff a recruitment drive is made of.

[Steve Kean's Hypnotoad]

They don't - they pack it in. Read Tyrone's post. You should lay off teachers - you're just repeating the usual lazy right wing rhetoric about them.

You should go **** yourself. Calling me lazy then summing up my entire argument with an incorrect accusation that I'm having a go at teaching and then trotting out your usual offensive right-wing tag. That's one of the laziest posts I've seen on here, so how about you ignore me, and I'll ignore you and go back to discussing it with Mike.

In fact sod it completely. Tired of bothering trying to put forward an alternative view to the left-wing venomous dogma you and your slightly less extreme acolytes try to bully everyone into on this section of the board. I'll leave you to it from now on, you can talk to the wall and people who have exactly the same opinion as you on everything, let you bore yourself to death.

[Mike E]

No need for that Jim, we're grown ups on here.

I went into teaching because I had wonderful teachers through a very tough school life and want to make a difference where children's lives are getting worse by the year. More below the poverty line, more forces children, more children with dysfunctional or even abusive families.

I'm in it for the pastoral side of it as much as the education. I love learning new things and want to pass that enthusiasm on. It's a wonderful buzz when children suddenly understand something they've struggled with.

The thing is, I know what I want to teach, based on guidelines and objectives. But through my training and supply work, I've seen objectives 'fall down'.

I had to teach a yr5 class the different parts of the eye; something I learned in yr9. None of them understood it very well, but the Govt demands they do. Apparently it's bad teaching rather than trying to drill irrelevant knowledge into children's heads.

The issue as a whole is that the job isn't what it should be. It's about hitting targets instead of developing children at the pace they require.

The complaints about 70-80 hours work aren't about doing the work, but how futile and meaningless that work is. If it made a difference to children I would do it, no bother.

[Steve Moss]

If teaching was really as hellish as teachers constantly state, they wouldn't do it.

I've never taught. But Mike's recitation is exactly similar to what I see my wife go through, who is a teacher.

She stays because she loves the kids. She's like a second mom and one of the highest ranked teachers in the district. But she feels helpless to actually maximize instruction, with all the tests, forms, observations, etc.

[perthblue02]

A regular monthly allowance for everyone regardless of working status trialling in Ontario soon

http://www.techinsider.io/ontario-announces-basic-income-plan-2016-3

While searching to see if this had been reported elsewhere found this interesting piece on the pro's and con's of a scheme like the above

http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2014/12/23/minimum-income-basic-income_n_6370458.html

Also an article on a trial that took place between 1974 and 1979 in a Canadian Town using a similar scheme

http://motherboard.vice.com/read/the-mincome-experiment-dauphin

[Steve Kean's Hypnotoad]

I've never taught. But Mike's recitation is exactly similar to what I see my wife go through, who is a teacher.

She stays because she loves the kids. She's like a second mom and one of the highest ranked teachers in the district. But she feels helpless to actually maximize instruction, with all the tests, forms, observations, etc.

Yeah, you and Mike make some very good points to be honest. Like I said I've plenty of friends that do it so I've certainly nothing against teachers, and I fully admit they work hard and have long weeks. Its a sensitive topic for anyone to have someone else commenting on their job, but then you can't exactly let public sector professions decide their own resource allocation (short of the country going bankrupt). Somewhere along the line a non-teacher in the government has to stick their nose in and decide what can be allocated, so there'll always be conflict.

Anyway, come to the end of my tether now with a certain poster and no desire to make the mods job harder than it needs to be by keep kicking off so gonna take a break for good while. He's done me a favour actually on the subject of not procrastinating at work!

[Pedro]

Agree with the rest of your post but heard this type of thing so many times now and sorry but I don't buy it for a second. Does this 70-80 hours include travelling to and from work, break times, lunch times, free periods, making/having tea after getting home, going on Facebook/watching tv before or in between marking etc? I'd pretty much guarantee it does!

With the greatest of respect, you do need to believe it Steve, it is genuine and pretty much the norm.

My typical day consists of physically arriving at school at 7.50, I will mark, finish off preparing lessons, plan for four different groups within the class (for on average 6 - 8 lessons within each day). I'll also sort books, set up guided reading carousels and attend meetings before the children arrive at 8:45, at that point I'll become a glorified social worker/referee until all niggles are overcome. I have a class of 30, every book needs to be marked by me and all lessons have to be 'challenging' and inclusive, within this group I have a severely autistic boy who's only support is myself and his classmates, a boy who knows very little English and a number of VERY low ability kids. I work through every dinner and lunchtime (frantically marking mainly, otherwise I won't see my own children) if I have the time, I will eat a sandwich or bag of crisps.

The afternoon is similar to the morning and I start most afternoons dealing with problems before delivering two or three more lessons, plus any spelling tests etc. When the kids go, I mark or attend meetings. I leave the building at approximately 5.50pm. It isn't abnormal to then be doing marking, planning and assessments for anything between 2 and 3 hrs an evening and Sundays are often spent working (planning, marking, assessing again). On top of all of this, your average primary school teacher is made to lead a subject and provide after-school clubs to children and scattered throughout the week will be competitions, 'can you just...' , absorbing the workload of people off ill (mainly with stress), creating assemblies and dealing with the constant changes to the way we work.

It is a very poor profession to be part of, I wouldn't recommend it and I do have to bite my tongue when I hear or read people criticising teachers for standing up for themselves, like they did when that lunatic Gove was at the helm. I don't find it rewarding in the slightest and survival (in terms of getting everything done and meeting crazy targets) simply comes as a relief to be honest.

[Audax]

AC/DC singer risks deafness, halts tour

http://news.yahoo.com/ac-dc-singer-risks-deafness-halts-tour-003714685.html;_ylt=AwrXgiPUIt5WrREAN_LQtDMD;_ylu=X3oDMTByM3V1YTVuBGNvbG8DZ3ExBHBvcwMzBHZ0aWQDBHNlYwNzcg--

What the headline says basically.

[Tyrone Shoelaces]

Anybody who comes in to Education thinking it's a cushy number ( long holidays etc ) doesn't last very long. You've got to really want to do the job. Unless you make your way up the greasy pole the financial rewards aren't that great either these days. Something needs to be done to change the way things are going or the Education system in certain areas of the country will go the way of the NHS.

[ABBEY]

Just been watching watching the Syrian stuff on sky on the town that's been taken from Isis . It shows that these scumbags can't be talked to or sat down and reasoned with . The rape rooms wow I filled up .

Then it said 64 "British" names were on that recruiting list . Well they should swing in the tower and the rest of the family should be flown to Syria as a result .

[adopted scouser]

Just been watching watching the Syrian stuff on sky on the town that's been taken from Isis . It shows that these scumbags can't be talked to or sat down and reasoned with . The rape rooms wow I filled up .

Then it said 64 "British" names were on that recruiting list . Well they should swing in the tower and the rest of the family should be flown to Syria as a result .

Agree entirely, it's just a shame we can't starve them of the oxygen of publicity; I mean, what would be the point of them doing the things they do, if nobody knew about it ? Scruffy smelly bassturds.

As for the so called 'refugees' fleeing 'persecution' (err, all the way to Britain), tell them all in Calais to get stuffed. The French have got it right, bulldoze the camp and offer them basic but more permanent cover. (Whoops they don't look that desperate anymore, giving birth under a tarpaulin had more clout in the Guardian).

Merkel realised she'd dropped a bolllok waving them in and offering them flowers in a lame attempt to represent a more caring Germany and after two world wars, and what a cock up that was. The fences went back up faster than shyte off a shovel, and they are still hunting gangs of rapists.

There is a real and present threat here, hopefully Cameron will stand firm before the appeasers. Thatcher would have had him for breakfast.

[joey_big_nose]

Agree entirely, it's just a shame we can't starve them of the oxygen of publicity; I mean, what would be the point of them doing the things they do, if nobody knew about it ? Scruffy smelly bassturds.

As for the so called 'refugees' fleeing 'persecution' (err, all the way to Britain), tell them all in Calais to get stuffed. The French have got it right, bulldoze the camp and offer them basic but more permanent cover. (Whoops they don't look that desperate anymore, giving birth under a tarpaulin had more clout in the Guardian).

Merkel realised she'd dropped a bolllok waving them in and offering them flowers in a lame attempt to represent a more caring Germany and after two world wars, and what a cock up that was. The fences went back up faster than shyte off a shovel, and they are still hunting gangs of rapists.

There is a real and present threat here, hopefully Cameron will stand firm before the appeasers. Thatcher would have had him for breakfast.

Whenever I think to myself "how did the population of Germany get into a position where they stood by and allowed - in many cases actively encouraged - their government to systematically gas millions of Jews" I read your posts and I understand how it was possible then and how it will be possible again. So much hatred, so much dehumanisation.

[ABBEY]

Another hotel shooting in Ivory Coast

Evil @#/?s !!!!

[yoda]

Agree entirely, it's just a shame we can't starve them of the oxygen of publicity; I mean, what would be the point of them doing the things they do, if nobody knew about it ? Scruffy smelly bassturds.

As for the so called 'refugees' fleeing 'persecution' (err, all the way to Britain), tell them all in Calais to get stuffed. The French have got it right, bulldoze the camp and offer them basic but more permanent cover. (Whoops they don't look that desperate anymore, giving birth under a tarpaulin had more clout in the Guardian).

Merkel realised she'd dropped a bolllok waving them in and offering them flowers in a lame attempt to represent a more caring Germany and after two world wars, and what a cock up that was. The fences went back up faster than shyte off a shovel, and they are still hunting gangs of rapists.

There is a real and present threat here, hopefully Cameron will stand firm before the appeasers. Thatcher would have had him for breakfast.

And what is the EU doing in the meantime ?

Deciding on how many people to swop about the place with Turkey and Greece and paying 3 billion Euro's to Turkey for the privilege and giving their population freedom of movement in the EU. Instead of getting to the root course of the problem in case it upsets peoples sensibility's.

Couldn't run a @#/? up in a brewery the EU

[ABBEY]

and now a bomb in Turkey

[adopted scouser]

Whenever I think to myself "how did the population of Germany get into a position where they stood by and allowed - in many cases actively encouraged - their government to systematically gas millions of Jews" I read your posts and I understand how it was possible then and how it will be possible again. So much hatred, so much dehumanisation.

Hardly a valid comparison and if I might venture, a cheap shot at the same time. The Nazis inexplicably were hell bent on annihilating the jews, a race that were clean living, respectable and reverent, with family values. Their existence caused no threat to the rule of law, no mysogyny and low levels of crime or anti social behaviour; and for the record the German public had very little idea of what was happening in the camps.

This lot by comparison are a real threat. Do gooders should wake up. This wave of migrants needs to be refused entry into the UK, and in doing so reducing the chance of Islamic terrorists getting under the wire then disappearing into major conurbations like Birmingham and London. If they claim to be families fleeing terror why are the majority fit young men who seem to have left the family behind ?

Don't take my word for it, look at Germany, Hungary, Scandinavia. Hundreds of sexual attacks on women in Cologne, Dusseldorf, Dortmund and Bielefeld to name a few.

But hey, I'm full of 'hatred'. Damn right I am.