32.5 paid hours comes from the ‘standard’ teaching contract of 1265 hours of directed time per academic year.
So what does the contract say about duties outside of "directed time"?
They don’t. First year teacher gets around the same as a newly qualified doctor, science graduate etc. They go up to 28-30 pretty quickly. Most I ever got on a undergraduate pay scale was 26k and that was the very top.
First year Doctor 27k.
First year teacher just under 24k.
Median starting salary for those with a postgraduate qualification (so PGCE in education terms) reported to be 32k,but admittedly this looks like it varies wildly depending on field.
Lazy moaners who spend all day on forums. Well enough of the private sector back to the teachers.
From union guidance on the 1265...
28. The STPCD provides that the employer ‘must not determine’
the amount of time for professional duties beyond the 1265
hours of directed time, nor when these hours will be worked.
29. It is up to the teacher to decide the number of additional hours
necessary and where and when such duties will be performed.
30. Neither the place where the work is undertaken nor the
number of hours required to discharge the teacher’s
professional duties outside the 1265 hours of directed time
can be determined by the head teacher, the governors, any
relevant voluntary body or the local authority.
31. The duties undertaken in additional hours will be those that are necessary for the individual teacher and which can be undertaken by that teacher alone. They include marking and
preparation, which relate solely to the teacher’s own teaching,
and will exclude activities which require the involvement
either of staff or pupils. They will exclude duties that the
teacher is required to undertake at a time determined by the
head teacher, which would be part of directed time.
32. This element of the STPCD is not a licence for head teachers to
require teachers to undertake additional work or activities
outside directed time. Though, evidently, this is work done as
part of the teacher’s whole job, and is a consequence,
therefore, of general direction by the head teacher, the time
spent on professional duties cannot be subject to the head
teacher’s specific direction. All work undertaken in this period of
non-directed time must be determined by, and be relevant to,
the teaching commitments and duties of the individual teacher.
And you're right, in all sorts of ways this is not great. Problem is...
(a) whatever the public might perceive, nearly all teachers do care and any form of industrial action harms the students and doesn't work as intended - parents don't get behind it to get the kids back in school ASAP, they just resent it as they have to organise childcare.
(b) there isn't the money in the system to address the issue thanks to government policy.
(c) any action by teachers and unions would require wholesale public support to work, and we don't have that. I sadly have a suspicion that the not-particularly-positive attitude towards the profession still stems from the 80s strike and 00s work to rule.
That’s way below what most claim on here.
There was a thread a while back where 80 hrs a week/16 hrs a day or so was being stated.
Really, do you have a link? Teachers on this thread seem broadly in agreement. I reckon now I do about 40-44 on average. Until last year when I ditched my extra responsibility it was more like 45-50. I rarely work at weekends now beyond an hour. Back then I used to do a good 4 hours each weekend.
This isnt willy waving either, I think its a shit situation and is the main driver behind people leaving the profession.
the not-particularly-positive attitude towards the profession still stems from the 80s strike and 00s work to rule.
I think you're probably right here. Teaching, like many public sector jobs is often harmed in terms of public perception by very vocal union leaders/activists who (at least publicly) seem more interested in causing disruption to service & throwing their weight around than entering into meaningful negotiations. As a result, the sector gets a reputation for being heavily unionised by the wrong type of union. And to a private sector business, industrial action hampering operations is lost profits at best, a failed business at worst.
So getting back on point, I'd suggest finding a GOOD recruitment consultant to work with, talk through everything from your aspirations, your reasons for wanting out of teaching etc, how to break free of the preconceptions of what a teacher's mindset is. They in turn will help you with how to frame your achievements in the right way for private sector applications, as well as how to handle interview questions, present yourself, and generally sell yourself to a new employer in the private sector.
Really, do you have a link?
Apologies, the main claim was for 60 not 70 hrs per week but there are claims of teachers getting to school at 7.00am and working at home until 11.00pm, 5 days per week.
the not-particularly-positive attitude towards the profession still stems from the 80s strike and 00s work to rule.
Not so for me. My negative attitude towards the profession comes from the lazy, sadistic psychopaths, who taught me in the 1980's.
TBH honest 60 is not outrageous. I regularly meet my sons teachers leaving school at 5.30-6 when I get him from after school club. Primary does seem to have longer hours.
Me two years ago"
I’d say I do around 50-55.
Me now:
. I reckon now I do about 40-44 on average. Until last year when I ditched my extra responsibility it was more like 45-50
At least my numbers overlap 😁
Maybe I have forgotten how bad it was. I did used to spend a lot of time working at weekends. Taking a pay cut and demotion was the best thing I ever did!! Used to work a lot in the "holidays" too, including days in school teaching kids.
My negative attitude towards the profession comes from the lazy, sadistic psychopaths, who taught me in the 1980’s.
Not dismissing the impact of your own personal experience, but you truly therefore believe that to be true of all teachers?
the not-particularly-positive attitude towards the profession still stems from the 80s strike and 00s work to rule.
I think you’re probably right here. Teaching, like many public sector jobs is often harmed in terms of public perception by very vocal union leaders/activists who (at least publicly) seem more interested in causing disruption to service & throwing their weight around than entering into meaningful negotiations. As a result, the sector gets a reputation for being heavily unionised by the wrong type of union. And to a private sector business, industrial action hampering operations is lost profits at best, a failed business at worst.
There is so much within the above quotation with which I disagree; but since I’m on holiday I’ll just hope that someone else will provide a suitable retort.
you truly therefore believe that to be true of all teachers?
Of course not.
However, IME there were a significant number who fitted that description. I am pretty sure that their behaviour would not be tolerated for a second nowadays.
The only experienced teacher I have spoke to recently told me she goes to work at 8.30 and leaves at 4.00, so about a 6 - 7 hour working day, after lunch etc. She has been doing for over 25 years and isn't a HOD or anything.
Lunch? I do duty most lunch times.
Teachers, like police and medical staff - especially doctors - spend their working lives telling members of the public what to do. They are accustomed to being obeyed and not questioned. They are trained for this and in many ways it is necessary in their professional lives.
However many of them cannot switch off from this mode when not on duty. This gives all of them a reputation for being dictatorial loudmouths. Prospective employers do not want new staff to come in and start giving out orders and disrupting existing working arrangements.
I've had first hand experience of this and it never ends well. Sad, but true.
Lunch? I do duty most lunch times.
So you don't eat during the day?
Lazy moaners who spend all day on forums. Well enough of the private sector back to the teachers.
🙂
I eat on duty, walking around site.
Teachers, like police and medical staff – especially doctors – spend their working lives telling members of the public what to do. They are accustomed to being obeyed and not questioned. They are trained for this and in many ways it is necessary in their professional lives.
However many of them cannot switch off from this mode when not on duty. This gives all of them a reputation for being dictatorial loudmouths. Prospective employers do not want new staff to come in and start giving out orders and disrupting existing working arrangements.
Absolute nonsense.
Absolute nonsense
Yeah you just needed to look at who posted to know that.
Absolute nonsense.
Absolute nonsense.
I eat on duty, walking around site.
Why? Are you the only member of staff who can walk?
Sets a rather poor example to the children as well.
Sets a rather poor example to the children as well.
Yeah it'd be much better to leave them unsupervised to smash things and knock lumps out of each other! Oh and the idea of a lunch "hour" is very outdated.
Oh and the idea of a lunch “hour” is very outdated.
Unless you live somewhere like France of course; but then they’ve got those pesky union types - it’s all very confusing.
Oh and the idea of a lunch “hour” is very outdated.
Interestingly, most forward looking organisations encourage taking a proper lunch break, away from your desk as it's proven to improve productivity. But then, forward thinking companies recognise that output is the correct success metric, not input measurements like time at desk, hours worked etc.
My partner is a primary school teacher, she did a full teaching degree which is 4 years. Left with a debt of £20k after 15 years in the profession she is now capped at under £36k. The only scope for more money is take on a headteacher role.
I'd like to share a week in the life of primary school teacher:
• 50+ hours is the norm. You have to be in school from 8:00am for morning briefings and
organise your staff. Yes you have staff to manage, every teacher does. Teaching
assistants, trainee teachers and special need carers all need attention. If you manage
people you'll understand how much you have to be "on it" with them. She currently has 2
TA's, one trainee and special needs carer to manage.
• Her class size is 32. Have you ever had to manage 32 children?
• 35% of them do not speak English as first language - lessons must be tailored to account
for this. This requires extra planning each week.
• The children are split into 4 sets of ability. Each lesson must be tailored for these 4
sets so that they are either challenging enough or not too difficult because…
• A large part of her week is dealing with parents, angry parents, passive aggressive
parents, "I'm going to the governors" parents. Because they feel their child isn't
getting the attention they deserve or they've read a blog about a new teaching technique
they want her to try. Everyone is an expert because they went to school once. Believe me,
if you're one of these parents, you are getting slagged off in the various teaching
Facebook groups that exist. Go find one, have a read - see how difficult you're making an
already hard job.
• Marking, Marking, Marking - it never ends. She comes home and marks for 2 hours each
night. It's a really important part of teaching. Without it you can't gauge how well
children are doing to ensure they get the right education.
• Her free time consists of planning, planning and more planning of lessons. It's all she
seems to do. Lessons for 9 year olds have to be engaging and relevant to the curriculum.
The curriculum changes each year so there is no opportunity to re-sue materials.
• 2 of the children have severe disabilities and require extra care and specialist
lessons. No they are not packed off to a "special school" - the funding doesn't exist.
• A handful of children are under "Safe Guarding" which means they have troubled home
life's. This could be suspected sexual abuse or they are full time carers for disabled
parents. These children display emotional issues in the school from physical violence to
full emotional violence. Could you deal with feeling helpless to help these children -
her hands are tied by red tape and over stretched Social Services. She does the best she
can for them.
• She is constantly monitored by Offsted visits, peer reviews and governor reviews. Does
someone come and watch you work once every two weeks? If standards aren't met the school
is put into special measures, funding is cut and people start to lose jobs. The pressure
is immense and never ending.
• Spending our money on school equipment. There is no money left in the system. She easily
spends up to £1k a year on books, materials and even furniture for her class. How much
of your pay do you spend on your job?
• Extra responsibilities - you're expected to take on extra responsibilities. This could
be sports clubs after school to being the coordinator for a topic. She is the literacy
coordinator which means she has a responsibility to ensure all the teachers in the
school (25 of them) are meeting government targets and guidelines. This requires peer
reviews, sitting in on classes and 2 hour meeting each week in her own time. No extra
pay is given for these extra responsibilities.
• She is constantly ill, the school is germ breeding ground.
• You're not allowed time off. It's an un-written rule that you go in no matter how ill
you are. The school cannot afford to bring in stand in teachers.
• Training - after hours training is the norm. New government guidelines, new policy, how
to disarm a 12 year old with a knife (no joke), how to spot if a child is being abused.
You're expected to be an expert in everything.
No one supports you. As this thread has clearly demonstrated teachers are perceived as
overpaid baby sitters, lazy, failures at securing a proper degree or even paedophiles!
But hey, you know… "you get summer holidays you lazy sod". By the time half term rolls around she is burnt out. We're already talking about how she moves out of the profession because she can't maintain this pace into her 50's and 60's. They took on 6 trainee teachers this term. 4 of them have quit the course as the work load is too much.
The average graduate’s starting salary is around £30,000
http://www.educationbusinessuk.net/features/long-and-short-%C2%A0-uk-teacher-crisis
Teachers start at 23-24 I think, would take 4 or 5 years to get to 30k I think by then most have left teaching.
The article is wrong. It is £30k for the 'top 100 graduate employers'. It real average is £19-22k. Compare that to the £24k starting salary for teachers, with £2k (?) yearly increases. It is not the case that teachers are paid less than the average graduate.
When I looked at teaching, it seemed very difficult to gain the classroom experience needed to get a place at uni, unless it was a career you were focused on before doing your undergrad.
But then, forward thinking companies recognise that output is the correct success metric, not input measurements like time at desk, hours worked etc.
And who would look after the kids during this long lunch hour?
When I looked at teaching, it seemed very difficult to gain the classroom experience needed to get a place at uni,
If phoning a local school and saying can I come and have a look is too hard for you it was probably for the best!
Average grad salary £19-22k. Source here:
https://www.graduate-jobs.com/gco/Booklet/graduate-salary-salaries.jsp
From experience recruiting graduates (media sales/marketing), starting salary £22kish.
It worries me seeing that Education Business piece - they either have very poor research due diligence processes before publishing or are trying to see false information as part of an agenda. Either way, the net effect is that young teachers are falsely led to believe they're hard done by in terms of the wider job marketplace and salary expectations.
I’d like to share a week in the life of primary school teacher:
While I recognise some elements of that example of a teaching job, in my experience its in no way typical or average. It obviously depends on the area of the country and demographic of the school but that is pretty much a worst case scenario. I'd be looking at moving schools if that was my situation.
Beicmodur.
Whilst I do sympathise, it’s not exactly a gravy train in the private sector either.
I too work 45-50hours per week (40 in the office, 10 at home) over 4 days, manage a team of engineers and have approximately 20-30 undergrads, PhDs and post-docs working on upwards of 10 different research projects. In addition, I have my own technical responsibilities/objectives and have to prepare new projects for submission, review research and publish. Failure to meet my objectives means my customers displeasure and significant costs for my employer, all of which would be laid at my feet.
I too (like many others) don’t get extra money or credit for working extra (our hours are recorded, but only for funding reclaim against projects)but do get to do the job in the way I like it.
I like my job, and this is the price I pay. My salary is not substantially more than your wife’s and my holidays are substantially less.
What I don’t have are the special needs and I can imagine the struggle there.
May I ask why new lessons need to be planned each year? Surely unless there’s a change in curriculum, you should have the previous years material and just deploy it at the correct time and level for each group?
And who would look after the kids during this long lunch hour?
Can't kids look after themselves these days, part of development is it not? Don't remember any supervised play when I was at school. Maybe the janny or one of the teachers took a quick walk around once in a while but that was it.
The Graduate Market in 2016, the median starting salary for UK graduates in 2016 is £30,000. However, graduate-jobs.com estimates the average starting salary for graduates is £19,000 - £22,000.
What utter garbage of a paragraph. Do they mean mean? Is a graduate job different from jobs graduates get? So many unknowns.
Can’t kids look after themselves
No, if little Johnny gets hurt and I was supposed to be supervising I go to court.
No, if little Johnny gets hurt and I was supposed to be supervising I go to court.
Why not take your employer to court for breaching employment law?
Is a graduate job different from jobs graduates get?
I'd say that a graduate job is one where a degree is a condition of offer. And from my experience recruiting grads for media sales/marketing positions, it's about right at low £20k's.
That in turn would make the phrase "median" correct as it's talking mid point not average.
But as you correctly allude to, so e graduates take lower paid first jobs for whatever reason is their motivator at that moment in time.
May I ask why new lessons need to be planned each year? Surely unless there’s a change in curriculum
With all the huge staff turnover I expect few primaey teachers are teaching the same year twice. At secondary the curriculum at A level and GCSE changes everyv5 years and had a massive change about 3 years ago. Last years Science GCSE's were the first year through these changes. So to summarise, yes it changes all the time.
I’d say that a graduate job is one where a degree is a condition of offer.
Indeed, I wasnt saying the stuff is wrong just its rubbish writing.
We should also not forget a PGCE is a postgraduate degree.
With all the huge staff turnover I expect few primaey teachers are teaching the same year twice.
Why? Sounds like very poor management. Say a Year 3 teacher leaves, why would you move a Year 4 into their place? Surely the new teacher coming in would fill the gap left by the other?
changes everyv5 years
and
change about 3 years ago
Does not mean "it changes all the time."
Why? Sounds like very poor management. Say a Year 3 teacher leaves, why would you move a Year 4 into their place?
You put your most experienced teachers in the most important places.
Does not mean “it changes all the time.”
Thats just GCSE. If KS4 changes so does KS 3. Then KS5 changes out of step with KS4. By which time the government will make changes to KS3 which will mean changes to 4. Then the courses will expire and it starts again. In the meantime there has been a 75% turnover in staff over the last 4 years anyway.
Are we at 3 pages already? Not going to read it but I bet it's mostly people saying that teaching can't be all that bad and that the pay is good and whatnot.
ANyway, in answer to the OP - I just tried to think of all the folk I know who've left the profession. All the ones I can think of have either gone back to something they have experience in from before teaching, retrained significantly or become self-employed. Not sure how helpful that is for you.
Has no one mentioned the view that male teachers being covert paedophiles?
I think the female teachers have taken over paedo duties these days. Seems like every other day there's a new story about one getting caught with a pupil.
RE teachers should get less because they aren't teaching a real topic.IMHO
Haha, Mick, that should be PE teachers 😉
Haha, Mick, that should be PE teachers 😉
I only learned this on another thread on this here forum.
Thanks AA. That explains a lot. I’ve had to deliver a lecture series with little/no warning and it is a complete PITA.
You put your most experienced teachers in the most important places.
This is absolutely correct. You'll find year groups vary in ability and behaviour. My partner will be moved to a different age group depending on where her skills are needed (she's rated as outstanding by Offsted so gets moved to problem year groups). She very rarely gets to use the same materials twice. Those questioning it are just displaying the usual traits of "i'm an expert because I went to school once".
Those comparing it to the private sector. Yep I get it, I work in the private sector: long hours, unpaid hours at, constant stress is the norm. However in my job if I'm not on the ball one day there is no danger of child being hurt, or missing the tell signs of abuse.
