Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all,
Vanilla are planning an update to the site on April 24th (next Wednesday). It is a major PHP8 update which is expected to boost performance across the site. The site will be down from 7pm and it is expected to take about an hour to complete. We appreciate your patience during the update.
Thanks all.

Re-interviewing - should incumbency count?

Options
  • 08-08-2015 3:19pm
    #1
    linguist
    Registered Users Posts: 615 ✭✭✭


    I'm not directly concerned by this thankfully, but I've been following discussion here and on Voice for Teachers regarding those being reinterviewed after one year's RPT in line with the new circular. Quite a few people seem to have lost out.

    I believe that greater transparency is needed in teaching recruitment full stop, but I have particular sympathy for those who have lost out through absolutely no fault of their own. Interview panels - many of whom play no role in the day to day life of the school - seem to have favoured more experienced external applicants over the incumbent in quite a few cases. Whilst experience is important, I would question whether it is always the best outcome for students where the less experienced teacher has done a great job.

    In just about any other occupation, you prove yourself on the job through hard work and dedication and you reap the rewards in terms of tenure and prospects. NQTs are well supported by their experienced colleagues in schools anyway and by management. Meanwhile, the chances are they've built up excellent relationships with the school community and taken on extracurricular commitments.

    Surely there should be a basis for an incumbency score based on some form of appraisal towards the end of the year - maybe 15% max to simply recognise a good job done? Discuss:)


Comments

  • Options
    #2
    r93kaey5p2izun
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,962 ✭✭✭r93kaey5p2izun


    I agree that it's very tough to lose out if you have done well in the jo. Formally re-interviewing for your job as a matter of course is not done in many, if any, other sectors.

    This seems to have been brought in so that employers can easily get rid of teachers whose performance they are unhappy with before they effectively become eligible for permanency (of sorts). (Re)Interviews were always held for permanent jobs anyway as far as I know, so on that level it's fair enough.

    I may be very sceptical, but it would not surprise me one bit if incumbents losing out becomes a more widespread trend as certain employers continue their long term pattern of aoiding having to commit to decent contracts. This is an easy way out.


  • Options
    #3
    linguist
    Registered Users Posts: 615 ✭✭✭linguist


    True of course that people were generally re-interviewed for permanency. I was never involved in that and I've heard different stories. Numerous colleagues in voluntary secondary schools have told me that the Principal literally tapped them on the shoulder one day and said they were being 'made permanent'.

    Either way, CID has really replaced permanency now and thousands of people have gained CID by just sitting it out and effectively doing what I've advocated which is a good job and getting rewarded for it. I am concerned about this new barrier in the way of new colleagues, particularly very talented but inexperienced ones.


  • Options
    #4
    mirrorwall14
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,751 ✭✭✭mirrorwall14


    I know of at least one case where the incumbent wasn't even called for interview this summer which I think is extremely unfair


  • Options
    #5
    man_no_plan
    Registered Users Posts: 1,018 ✭✭✭man_no_plan


    mirrorwall14 wrote: »
    I know of at least one case where the incumbent wasn't even called for interview this summer which I think is extremely unfair

    I would say that that is very unfair really and that there should be a way to include them automatically even if shortlisting criteria don't suit the candidate.

    The new arrangements aren't perfect by any stretch. But I don't think that weighting their experience in the school on the marking scheme is fair either. The teacher needs to be able to say I did x, y and z this year with such a class and it worked well and show a bit if passion.


  • Options
    #6
    linguist
    Registered Users Posts: 615 ✭✭✭linguist


    Part of my rationale is the fact that stability in terms of teaching groups is seen as being a good thing by everyone involved in education ordinarily.

    Management always do their best not to change things around in 2nd, 3rd and 6th year if at all possible.
    Students hate it when a teacher they get along with doesn't continue with them and similarly parents who are happy with a teacher often ask at parent teacher meetings if the teacher will have their son/daughter the following year.
    The inspectorate also values stability. If you read inspection reports, you will regularly read observations such as: a new permanent teacher of the subject has now been appointed following the retirements of two senior members of staff in recent years and this development is to be welcomed.

    And yet, we are hearing of cases such as that outlined by mirrorwall above. I just think that it is human nature to work hard in the legitimate expectation of a fair reward. So fine, maybe not an incumbency score but the unions need to push at least for the right of the incumbent to be re-interviewed AND to discuss their contribution to the subjects and the school.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #7
    rainbowtrout
    Registered Users Posts: 15,381 ✭✭✭✭rainbowtrout


    man_no_plan wrote: »
    I would say that that is very unfair really and that there should be a way to include them automatically even if shortlisting criteria don't suit the candidate.

    The new arrangements aren't perfect by any stretch. But I don't think that weighting their experience in the school on the marking scheme is fair either. The teacher needs to be able to say I did x, y and z this year with such a class and it worked well and show a bit if passion.

    I'd agree. I think the returning teacher already has an advantage having worked in the school for a year; they know the staff, the students, the ethos. They may have been involved in extra curricular. They should know what the principal is looking for in comparison to a random applicant.

    I remember posting about this last year. Two year CIDs are great, but I was worried that some principals would use this re-interview process to prevent the award of CIDs by just having a constant revolving door of teachers in one year part time positions with no tenure.


  • Options
    #8
    Ucdstudent92
    Registered Users Posts: 6 ✭Ucdstudent92


    This happened to me. I think there should be marks going for it. A job well done merits points. Feel very hurt that all my hard work there resulted in nothing even though I was promised a position by the principal. Hate having to start off all over again (Got another job with less hours).


Advertisement