promotion on merit, what's your view?

jomama

From Independent July 19th:

http://www.independent.ie/education/latest-news/teachers-will-be-promoted-on-merit-in-shakeup-2275711.html

Personally, I think it is the way to go, but I do have some sympathy for longserving teachers who have been counting on it. However, in the private sector this is the norm, and promotion based on seniority alone is rare. For people working in the private sector, the existing situation must seem very peculiar.

spurious

In the VEC sector, service is (imo rightly) given some weight, but most promotions go to the most suitable candidate. The process is fairly transparent and you're entitled to see your marks from interview etc..
As a new teacher starting out many moons ago, I was quite shocked to hear that in some places you could just sit there, effectively do nothing and eventually get a post.
Good to see that the Indo rag is keeping up its usual standard of reporting.

**edit**
I found the VEC criteria:

Vocational Schools (CL PPT13/02)

Capacity of the applicant to meet the needs of the school 50 marks
Service to the VEC scheme 30 marks
Experience of a professional nature in the field of
Education and involvement in the school 20 marks

gaeilgegrinds1

Interesting times ahead. I really don't believe posts should just be handed out as they were based on service alone, not right.

TheDriver

Its actually even changing more to a bigger criteria. Its changing more so over the years and definitely with DP and P, seniority wasn't making a blind bit of difference

rainbowtrout

I got my post (special duties) after only 6 years experience. There were people going for the same post with 20 years experience but aside from experience were doing nothing else in the school other than their teaching hours. I think it was a surprise to the older staff at the same that I got it, but I put in the work. To date I'm the only one that has got one not based on seniority and that's the way it should be. There is a culture of entitlement out there for teachers who have served a long time and feel they should get a promotion simply because they turn up for work. They are outraged if they don't get it and immediately launch an appeal and keep appealing every post that they don't get.

implausible

I think the VEC system has been ahead of the pack on this one. There have always been teachers in ours who got posts on merit ahead of more senior staff.

Does anyone think that this sounds a bit off - "more than half of all teachers -- at least 30,000 -- had a promotional position at a total cost of €236m. These included principals, deputy principals and assistant principals in the country's 4,000 schools, as well as 17,400 teachers with special duties posts"? It surely can't be over half?

TheDriver

if you take a school with 600 students, thats about 38 PWT. Then you can have P, DP, 7 AP and I think 13 SDT hence about half.

implausible

TheDriver wrote: »

if you take a school with 600 students, thats about 38 PWT. Then you can have P, DP, 7 AP and I think 13 SDT hence about half.

Oh, well I suppose if you're working off PWT, you probably would get 1/2 alright. Thought it sounded a bit high myself.

looksee

I totally agree that promotion should be on merit. I think length of service in a particular school should be considered, but only as a minor point. One problem that does arise is that good teachers can become indifferent administrators, but I suppose that can be the case in any number of jobs.

rainbowtrout

deemark wrote: »

I think the VEC system has been ahead of the pack on this one. There have always been teachers in ours who got posts on merit ahead of more senior staff.

Does anyone think that this sounds a bit off - "more than half of all teachers -- at least 30,000 -- had a promotional position at a total cost of €236m. These included principals, deputy principals and assistant principals in the country's 4,000 schools, as well as 17,400 teachers with special duties posts"? It surely can't be over half?

I don't think principals and deputy principals should be included with the overall total. Every school has to have one of each and the people who fill those roles are in a management role not a teaching role so it is separate from the remaining posts. I'm not taking into account the fact that principals and deputy principals have some teaching hours in smaller schools.

TheDriver

I have some teaching hours as DP and we apparently have one of the bigger schools! Think the media likes to put the spin when it suits them, SDT is a nice idea where teachers have certain extra roles but public don't see it like that.
Service should have certain merit but then its unfair when one candidate has 13years and other has 14years and thats the crunch point.

rainbowtrout

TheDriver wrote: »

I have some teaching hours as DP and we apparently have one of the bigger schools! Think the media likes to put the spin when it suits them, SDT is a nice idea where teachers have certain extra roles but public don't see it like that.
Service should have certain merit but then its unfair when one candidate has 13years and other has 14years and thats the crunch point.

ya, didn't mean it to come across like that. DP in my school has 6-8 hours (not really sure) and we have about 400 students. I meant the schools with 120 kids where the DP is almost fulltime teaching.

Anyway regardless of size those managerial roles still need to be filled.

Eccles

Well as someone 'expecting' an 'A Post' after nearly two decades 'service'(yes I consider these posts long service/loyalty rewards !) I feel justifiably bitter at the prospects of having 'waited my turn' and now having the goal posts moved .Of course thats nothing towards the bitterness I would feel towards an individual staff member who would actually GO for 'my ' post ahead of me .
Now imagine that in every staffroom in the country!
Of course its easy to say Im 'bitter' ,if you try and stand up for yourself in this 'profession' (not any more?) you get labelled bitter,negative or 'disingenuous'...And of course there are thousands of young , 'eager ' unemployed or temporary teachers who can be manipulated by 'management'...Im sickened to see traits like 'interpersonal skills' being included in the criteria for selection ...could it be any more obvious that the principal's 'pets' are gonna get all these posts from now on ...
"Work harder for your pay cut "indeed!The 'Management Culture' has well and truly taken hold .It appears our conditions are set to be decimated in the decade to come ...

rainbowtrout

Eccles wrote: »

Well as someone 'expecting' an 'A Post' after nearly two decades 'service'(yes I consider these posts long service/loyalty rewards !) I feel justifiably bitter at the prospects of having 'waited my turn' and now having the goal posts moved .Of course thats nothing towards the bitterness I would feel towards an individual staff member who would actually GO for 'my ' post ahead of me .
Now imagine that in every staffroom in the country!
Of course its easy to say Im 'bitter' ,if you try and stand up for yourself in this 'profession' (not any more?) you get labelled bitter,negative or 'disingenuous'...And of course there are thousands of young , 'eager ' unemployed or temporary teachers who can be manipulated by 'management'...Im sickened to see traits like 'interpersonal skills' being included in the criteria for selection ...could it be any more obvious that the principal's 'pets' are gonna get all these posts from now on ...
"Work harder for your pay cut "indeed!The 'Management Culture' has well and truly taken hold .It appears our conditions are set to be decimated in the decade to come ...

Loyalty rewards??? This isn't Tesco we're talking about here. There are plenty of teachers who have notched up 20 years experience but because they have moved school several times during their careers, they end up bottom of the food chain when it comes to posts in their schools because they haven't worked up the seniority years in one place. Is that fair? Does that experience count for nothing, simply because they haven't stayed in one school for 20 years? You might argue that they are better suited for promotion as they have had a wider range of teaching experiences.

If you are applying for a position that generally doesn't involve teaching duties, and most posts are of that nature, be it disciplinary, administrative etc etc, then why wouldn't other skills be taken into account such as interpersonal skills?

One of the teachers that applied for a post at the same time as me was applying for the same post as me (PLC Co-ordinator). She knew nothing about PLC aside from the fact that it existed in the school. She didn't even know what courses we offered, but felt that she was entitled to it and should get it ahead of me simply because she was there longer. I got the job, and obviously I am biased towards myself, but I had put in the work for three years when we had no co-ordinator and know the system inside out. Which person would you put in charge??? I would also add that I'm not manipulated by management in any way whatsoever, far from it...

You should repost in After Hours and feel the vitriol there....

implausible

Eccles wrote: »

Well as someone 'expecting' an 'A Post' after nearly two decades 'service'(yes I consider these posts long service/loyalty rewards !) I feel justifiably bitter at the prospects of having 'waited my turn' and now having the goal posts moved.
<snip>

Im sickened to see traits like 'interpersonal skills' being included in the criteria for selection ...

Nobody should 'expect' a promotion, it should be earned! For too long, it's been a present for staying in the one place long enough. The result is often dead weight at the top of the system and people in positions of responsibility who are ineffective and disinterested.

I would have a certain amount of sympathy for those in your position Eccles, as you probably had no option to get a post before because you were waiting your turn. However, the system is changing and about time too. After 20 years most teachers should have amassed enough skills, interest, knowledge and experience to be ideal candidates for upcoming posts, so it's not like all senior teachers are going to be automatically excluded from getting them.

And as for the interpersonal skills, I would've thought they were be a must for someone in a management role. Presumably, interpersonal skills are a major factor in getting and keeping a teaching job in the first place. Do they desert teachers after a certain amount of years?:rolleyes:

ytareh

"simply because they haven't stayed in one school for 20 years?"

"For too long, it's been a present for staying in the one place long enough. "

This is a real bugbear of mine ! Take these two hypothetical individuals...

TEACHER A : Principal or Deputy Principal arrives in Scoil X and goes through the place like a dose of salts ...policies ,committees,'best practice'...'measurable change ' instituted for sure -grades increase -amongst some cohorts (Lies, damned lies and statistics !?),increases stress levels all around them from caretaker to teachers some of whom they as good as force to take early retirement (at a massive financial loss).Leaves after 3 or 4 years to take up a 'big job' further up the food chain .It IS all about furthering one's career after all!

TEACHER B : A simple 'foot soldier' has been in the school for decades ,trained the basketball team as long.Results ?Average ...Discipline ?Average ...Committee Membership and Policy Creation ?Below Average ...IT Skills ?Below Average...Commitment to Community and its Youth ?EXCEPTIONAL!

Give me TEACHER B every time!


"simply because they haven't stayed in one school for 20 years?"

"For too long, it's been a present for staying in the one place long enough. "

???

Why is long term loyalty and committment to a school and community automatically considered to be lack of dynamism ?Why are these 'dynamic' individuals not seen as selfish as they clearly put their careers ahead of the students,colleagues etc

rainbowtrout

ytareh wrote: »

"simply because they haven't stayed in one school for 20 years?"

"For too long, it's been a present for staying in the one place long enough. "

This is a real bugbear of mine ! Take these two hypothetical individuals...

TEACHER A : Principal or Deputy Principal arrives in Scoil X and goes through the place like a dose of salts ...policies ,committees,'best practice'...'measurable change ' instituted for sure -grades increase -amongst some cohorts (Lies, damned lies and statistics !?),increases stress levels all around them from caretaker to teachers some of whom they as good as force to take early retirement (at a massive financial loss).Leaves after 3 or 4 years to take up a 'big job' further up the food chain .It IS all about furthering one's career after all!

TEACHER B : A simple 'foot soldier' has been in the school for decades ,trained the basketball team as long.Results ?Average ...Discipline ?Average ...Committee Membership and Policy Creation ?Below Average ...IT Skills ?Below Average...Commitment to Community and its Youth ?EXCEPTIONAL!

Give me TEACHER B every time!


"simply because they haven't stayed in one school for 20 years?"

"For too long, it's been a present for staying in the one place long enough. "

???

Why is long term loyalty and committment to a school and community automatically considered to be lack of dynamism ?Why are these 'dynamic' individuals not seen as selfish as they clearly put their careers ahead of the students,colleagues etc

That's not what I meant in my post and I think I was quite clear. Some teachers move around simply because they have no choice, cutbacks, drop in pupil numbers, subjects no longer required, teachers moving to a different part of the country ... all of these things necessitate a change of job. It doesn't mean they shouldn't be eligible for promotion simply because they haven't spent all of their career in one school.

Rosita

ytareh wrote: »

"simply because they haven't stayed in one school for 20 years?"

"For too long, it's been a present for staying in the one place long enough. "

This is a real bugbear of mine ! Take these two hypothetical individuals...

TEACHER A : Principal or Deputy Principal arrives in Scoil X and goes through the place like a dose of salts ...policies ,committees,'best practice'...'measurable change ' instituted for sure -grades increase -amongst some cohorts (Lies, damned lies and statistics !?),increases stress levels all around them from caretaker to teachers some of whom they as good as force to take early retirement (at a massive financial loss).Leaves after 3 or 4 years to take up a 'big job' further up the food chain .It IS all about furthering one's career after all!

TEACHER B : A simple 'foot soldier' has been in the school for decades ,trained the basketball team as long.Results ?Average ...Discipline ?Average ...Committee Membership and Policy Creation ?Below Average ...IT Skills ?Below Average...Commitment to Community and its Youth ?EXCEPTIONAL!

Give me TEACHER B every time!


"simply because they haven't stayed in one school for 20 years?"

"For too long, it's been a present for staying in the one place long enough. "

???

Why is long term loyalty and committment to a school and community automatically considered to be lack of dynamism ?Why are these 'dynamic' individuals not seen as selfish as they clearly put their careers ahead of the students,colleagues etc

The problem for Teacher B in this example is that the area in which they excel is difficult to measure. In the areas that can be measured they're not so strong.

And why might "loyalty and committment to a school and community automatically be considered to be a lack of dynamism" - it does not necessarily have to be so but it might be a case that a teacher is not really at the level where they are able to move around and look for jobs elsewhere.

They simply might not be employable/good enough to move around. So their 'loyalty/commitment' might be a function of professional mediocrity rather than exceptional professional qualities. Being in a school a long time does not necessarily reflect loyalty and commitment. Such longevity can be governed by factors other than loyalty and commitment.

Not saying you don't have a point but there are other ways of looking at it.

ytareh

"Measure"!?It really is a nuisance that you cant 'measure' 'love'(maybe a committee could come up with a protocol to try ...)We're teachers for God's sake not sales reps ...By the sounds of it some of you more dynamic teachers probably tick off a little square in your teachers journal every time you see a student smile to monitor client satisfaction !!!Look you KNOW this new Posts allocation system is gonna cause WAR ...no two ways about it .The old system while far from perfect was much fairer ...You 'young uns' go on about how unfair it is that the princiapls niece gets the job well this will be the exact same !Those who rock the boat will be left out in the cold while it will be posts galore for principals' pets ...

Rosita

ytareh wrote: »

"Measure"!?It really is a nuisance that you cant 'measure' 'love'(maybe a committee could come up with a protocol to try ...)We're teachers for God's sake not sales reps ...By the sounds of it some of you more dynamic teachers probably tick off a little square in your teachers journal every time you see a student smile to monitor client satisfaction !!!Look you KNOW this new Posts allocation system is gonna cause WAR ...no two ways about it .The old system while far from perfect was much fairer ...You 'young uns' go on about how unfair it is that the princiapls niece gets the job well this will be the exact same !Those who rock the boat will be left out in the cold while it will be posts galore for principals' pets ...

I wouldn't necessarily class myself as a 'more dynamic teacher' by the way but it is a reality to a large extent this sort of stuff is a box-ticking exercise where things are measured. And the more measureable your talents are the better for you.

I have worked in a few different industries and am coming to teaching relatively late in the day but I have seen this stuff operating over time elsewhere. I agree with your reservations with that kind of system to be honest. But it is also hard to disagree with merit as a means of picking people. How one determines merit is another matter.

vallo

I find it amazing that this is even a topic for discussion.

Of course posts should be awarded on merit.

But, I would add, that if the public sector is seriously going to adopt such private sector policies, then the Dept of Ed must also ensure that principals are trained to be capable managers and administrators.

I really believe that in this day and age it is possible to root out obvious blatant nepotism.

gaeilgegrinds1

Two things, principals are essentially managers, but they are not well trained up in that area. At least the ones I've worked under have not been. Also, however, 'nice,' it is to have principals from inside the staff I think it's daft. They're OBVIOUSLY going to have favourites then anyway.

Secondly, if a teacher is in a school for 2X amount of years they should surely have made twice the impact, now this does not mean being loud and obnoxious, those people always get heard but I mean they should naturally have twice as much done as others. In our school there are some teachers hated as they've qualifications coming our their ears, always come up with and run new ideas and don't leave at five past four, surely these people should be rewarded, even if it is, 'before their time?' If a teacher simply slots in their hours and does nothing else they could be happy with that and be a good teacher but should not be given promotion over another person. End of in my opinion.

J.R.

rainbowtrout wrote: »

Loyalty rewards??? This isn't Tesco we're talking about here. There are plenty of teachers who have notched up 20 years experience but because they have moved school several times during their careers, they end up bottom of the food chain when it comes to posts in their schools because they haven't worked up the seniority years in one place. Is that fair? Does that experience count for nothing, simply because they haven't stayed in one school for 20 years? You might argue that they are better suited for promotion as they have had a wider range of teaching experiences.....

Under the new system time teaching in other schools will be considered as long as you were qualified. A person who has moved around can add up all of their years teaching ....add it to the year in present school and that will be their number of years teaching experience in the interview.

For the past number of years interviews for A posts (Assistant Principal) & B posts (Special Duties Teacher) were not granted on years experience alone in the school. One third of the marks was for experience in the school, one third for suitability to do the job and one third for capability to do the job.

The new system changes things slightly....now one fifth of the marks for years experience (which is teaching experience.....doesn't matter in how many different schools)

spurious

That's how it is already in VECs, teaching within the VEC counts, not just in the individual school, though now people will be able to add voluntary seciondary experience too.

jomama

I have to disagree with J.R that this apportioning has been in place for some years. Certainly in my school, (voluntary secondary) promotion has always been based 100% on seniority! Any posts coming up were announced at a staff meeting, and then the principal actually told us who was going ("due") to get it! (I kid you not!)

The notice then went up on the notice board in staff room, but that was the end of the matter. In fact, at some of these meetings, we gave a round of applause to the person who was "going to get the post".

Bizarre!

TheDriver

indeed i believe that would still happen in vol sec school but that day will be coming to an end soon enough. Just takes someone to alert the union to the matter and the school can get in trouble under the guidelines

J.R.

jomama wrote: »

I have to disagree with J.R that this apportioning has been in place for some years. Certainly in my school, (voluntary secondary) promotion has always been based 100% on seniority! Any posts coming up were announced at a staff meeting, and then the principal actually told us who was going ("due") to get it! (I kid you not!)

The notice then went up on the notice board in staff room, but that was the end of the matter. In fact, at some of these meetings, we gave a round of applause to the person who was "going to get the post".

Bizarre!

Some schools may have been operating the 'old system', when they were called A post & B post, basing criteria on experience in school only. Since the title was changed to Assistant principal & Special Duties Teacher the interview process was in place...quite a few years ago now.

While I cannot dispute that the old system is in place in some schools I think they are threading on very thin ice......if even one candidate appeals the decision then the interview marking & name of outside interviewer (selected from a specific list) will be examined.......very difficult to produce if post given on seniority only.

The outside interviewer is there to ensure that all was conducted according to the rules.......& sign off on such.......they have to be selected from a list of candidates approved for the interview process (most are usually principals of schools)

Stewie Griffin

J.R. wrote: »

Under the new system time teaching in other schools will be considered as long as you were qualified. A person who has moved around can add up all of their years teaching ....add it to the year in present school and that will be their number of years teaching experience in the interview.

For the past number of years interviews for A posts (Assistant Principal) & B posts (Special Duties Teacher) were not granted on years experience alone in the school. One third of the marks was for experience in the school, one third for suitability to do the job and one third for capability to do the job.

The new system changes things slightly....now one fifth of the marks for years experience (which is teaching experience.....doesn't matter in how many different schools)

Hey JR, do you know the breakdown of the new system? What are the different criteria and what %age for each one?

implausible

J.R. wrote: »

Some schools may have been operating the 'old system', when they were called A post & B post, basing criteria on experience in school only. Since the title was changed to Assistant principal & Special Duties Teacher the interview process was in place...quite a few years ago now.

While I cannot dispute that the old system is in place in some schools I think they are threading on very thin ice......if even one candidate appeals the decision then the interview marking & name of outside interviewer (selected from a specific list) will be examined.......very difficult to produce if post given on seniority only.

I didn't realise that the system was already supposed to have changed in voluntary secondary schools, I thought they were within their rights to do promotions this way. Still, it'll take a fair while to change this as younger staff are going to be too intimidated by the 'old guard' to start applying for these posts. In many staff-rooms, 'wait your turn' is law and I can foresee a lot of tension when this starts to change.

The marking is transparent in the VECs, you can request your interview marks after the post is filled. This is great as you can work on your weak areas for the next interview.

rainbowtrout

deemark wrote: »

I didn't realise that the system was already supposed to have changed in voluntary secondary schools, I thought they were within their rights to do promotions this way. Still, it'll take a fair while to change this as younger staff are going to be too intimidated by the 'old guard' to start applying for these posts. In many staff-rooms, 'wait your turn' is law and I can foresee a lot of tension when this starts to change.

The marking is transparent in the VECs, you can request your interview marks after the post is filled. This is great as you can work on your weak areas for the next interview.

It is better in VECs but is still slightly skewed. I think 30% of the marks goes for experience in the school or what is essentially seniority and this is awarded on a pro-rata basis. So out of all the applicants applying for the post the person with the most years of experience gets the full 30 marks and everyone else is awarded marks pro-rata based on that experience. So for example when I was going for my post there was a teacher also going for SDT who was there about 18 years. 30 marks for them. I was only there 6, so I only get a third of the marks....10, so before I got in the door I had to make up 20 marks just to break even with the other teacher. As it happened I got the post but even with this system if there is a large gap in years between two teachers it can be hard for a younger teacher to make up the difference in the other two sections even if they do an excellent interview and meet all the other requirements.

J.R.

Stewie Griffin wrote: »

Hey JR, do you know the breakdown of the new system? What are the different criteria and what %age for each one?

I have a copy of it but don't have it with me at the moment - on holidays....will search for it when I return.

Can't see how it's going to come in in Sept. ......principals were to receive in-service on it before it was to be introduced....that hasn't happened yet.

TheDriver

http://www.education.ie/servlet/blobservlet/cl0042_2010.pdf
Its in the appendix of the circular

implausible

rainbowtrout wrote: »

It is better in VECs but is still slightly skewed. I think 30% of the marks goes for experience in the school or what is essentially seniority and this is awarded on a pro-rata basis.

but even with this system if there is a large gap in years between two teachers it can be hard for a younger teacher to make up the difference in the other two sections even if they do an excellent interview and meet all the other requirements.

It is 30% and it's a balls! But at least there is some transparency. I loved the fact that I could see the exact marks I got, even if I lost out on the experience marks and 7 years didn't count (in another VEC). Hopefully the figures will add up next time around!

TheDriver

i remember my first post interviews and there were no marks back in 2003 I think. Its weird seeing marks nowadays and how close everyone is kinda the same.......

Stewie Griffin

Thanks, TheDriver. Much appreciated.