Disparity in Quality of Teachers

seriouslysweet

Just something I have noted but how is it I've a chemistry teacher who is constantly ten minutes late, talks to other teachers at the door, answers texts, puts on lipgloss etc while we simply read the book. Never answers our questions and does not care.

Then...my Irish/English teacher is always early (no idea how!) looks amazingly fresh, is doing a PhD, runs half marathons (I've seen her run!) and when we are asking a question she's pulling notes out of thin air for us! Also she emails us notes and links to youtube pertaining to our subject.

Now how do these two possibly get paid the same? I know the chemistry teacheris permanent, the other lady lost hours this year, why?!!

Serious overhall of the system needed.

spurious

Some people learn their subjects inside out for the Leaving, other learn off notes and regurgitate. Some people would never dodge a fare, others laugh at the 'fools' who pay every time. People in life have different standards in their lives.

I agree the system needs overhauling, badly, and there are many people in teaching who should never have been allowed train as teachers, but the easiest way to do this would be by results. Which teacher gets better results?

Who would you pay more, the person who helps a non-reader pass Foundation JC or the person who helps a B1 LC student get the A2 on repeat?

The life lesson you are getting by watching a dosser in action might override it all, who knows?

Aoifums

I know. I've had the same problem.

My old Home Cc teacher used to come to class 10-15 minutes late every day and spend 10 minutes in class giving out to us. That was half the class wasted a day. She was out at least once every two weeks too.

I had a Physics teacher who did everything he could for us and was an amazing teacher too. He stayed behind for 15 minutes after class to help me with something I was having trouble with.

My Home Ec teacher had a Phd. She got paid more for doing her job poorly :mad:

dan_d

Because the system we use to train secondary school teachers is....sh*&e.

Primary school teachers go to Pats/Mary I, wherever. They do 3 years intensive training including psychology/sociology etc, so they actually have some understanding of the workings of a child's mind, and how their backgrounds and home lives affect them. They do teacher training once or twice (may be 3 times?) a year, where they've to go out to a school, sit in on a class and teach a number of hours a day, AND THEY ARE INSPECTED!! An inspector comes out, watches them teaching, and grades them on it. They've to prepare lesson plans and submit them and they are taught HOW to teach. Once they get into the schools, they are inspected every couple of years by Dept of Ed and St Pat's inspectors...possible more often (the arrival of " The Inspector" strikes fear in the heart of every primary teacher!!)

Secondary school teachers normally do a BA and head for teaching. To do that, you need to work up hours in a school. In other words Ms X could do her LC, think " I really like English", go do Arts in UCD for 3 years in English, then do a HDip. But to get into the HDip, she has to have a certain number of hours of teaching done, so she goes to the local secondary school and asks the principle to let her supervise classes and act as a substitute when possible. Note there is no teacher training whatsoever involved in this. Then she gets into the HDip, spends 18 months specialising in English and whatever other subject, has a small amount of teaching practice, where she's inspected, and then off she goes. No methods of how to teach or control a class, nothing.No inspections, once she's out of the hDip.Can't be fired/let go from a school once she's made permanent no matter how bad she is..that's it.

It's a crap system. And worse, you have those who do English, and then decide they'd like to teach a second subject, and think "ah sure, I did LC history, I'll do that"...and off they go.

I know it's being tightened up a good bit more but to be honest there's just no comparison between how secondary school teachers are trained and monitored throughout their careers, and how primary school teachers are.

And in answer to your question - that's why!

Chuchoter

They can't fire anyone once they are made permanent For example we have one guy who has been there for years and he is not only a terrible teacher but a belligerent, mean man and he's permanent so they can't get rid of him, and then you have another lovely teacher who they can't/won't make permanent because its too expensive.

seriouslysweet

I just don't think they are monitored well enough. Part of me thinks, although I know it isn't in me personally, but fair play to Ms.Lip-Gloss, she gets paid the same as the other lady, more in fact cos she's teaching longer. Who checks up on teachers?! I just wonder sometimes. As for saying it's cos their training is crap, surely my fab teacher was trained the same way as my crap one? No?I wouldn't blame that system now really.

Mona Olsen

Is it possible to make a complaint to your principal? And I mean just an informal chat that you're worried about your chemistry (or get your parents to do it). Are you behind in terms of subjects covered etc? Let your principal know that you're considering getting grinds in the subject as you'll fail based on teaching in the school alone. Schools hate their students getting grinds so this may spur some action.
Unfortunately it's not just teachers that get away with this. It's pretty much most civil service positions. Once you're permanent, that's it. Promotion and pay rises are due to length of service, not performance. There's no motivation or reward whatsoever to be a better employee, in fact you're more likely to be penalised for any initiative as it's not 'procedure'. (And I say this from experience). It's life in the public sector, and dramatically needs an overhaul.

jomama

dan_d wrote: »

Secondary school teachers normally do a BA and head for teaching. To do that, you need to work up hours in a school. In other words Ms X could do her LC, think " I really like English", go do Arts in UCD for 3 years in English, then do a HDip. But to get into the HDip, she has to have a certain number of hours of teaching done, so she goes to the local secondary school and asks the principle to let her supervise classes and act as a substitute when possible. Note there is no teacher training whatsoever involved in this. Then she gets into the HDip, spends 18 months specialising in English and whatever other subject, has a small amount of teaching practice, where she's inspected, and then off she goes. No methods of how to teach or control a class, nothing.No inspections, once she's out of the hDip.Can't be fired/let go from a school once she's made permanent no matter how bad she is..that's it.

Now Dan, this part of your message doesn't merit discussion. Please check your facts.

Aoifums

Mona Olsen wrote: »

Is it possible to make a complaint to your principal? And I mean just an informal chat that you're worried about your chemistry (or get your parents to do it). Are you behind in terms of subjects covered etc? Let your principal know that you're considering getting grinds in the subject as you'll fail based on teaching in the school alone. Schools hate their students getting grinds so this may spur some action.
Unfortunately it's not just teachers that get away with this. It's pretty much most civil service positions. Once you're permanent, that's it. Promotion and pay rises are due to length of service, not performance. There's no motivation or reward whatsoever to be a better employee, in fact you're more likely to be penalised for any initiative as it's not 'procedure'. (And I say this from experience). It's life in the public sector, and dramatically needs an overhaul.

I doubt they'd do much. We pretty much held a campaign against a terrible teacher last year. Everyone in the class signed a letter stating we weren't happy with the standard of teaching and we were all concerned weither we would even pass the leaving cert if we continued to have her as a teacher. Parents wrote in and complained.
Know what happened? Nothing!

My principal told my mam to get me grinds in the subject when she went in to complain. It clearly wasn't a problem with the teacher, it must have been my fault :mad:

paulcarroll

i donno just the luck of the draw it realy isnt fair tbh that the grades u get are only as good as the ppl that give you the imformation im lucky enough to have mostly gr8 teachers but i wasnt as lucky for jc and got 2 horrible onesmaby if u have another chemistry teacher in the school the whole class could complain (and if u say it wont work it worked 4 the 6th years at my school who complained about a certain useless teacher so he got replaced)

gaeilgebeo

dan_d wrote: »

Because the system we use to train secondary school teachers is....sh*&e.

Primary school teachers go to Pats/Mary I, wherever. They do 3 years intensive training including psychology/sociology etc, so they actually have some understanding of the workings of a child's mind, and how their backgrounds and home lives affect them. They do teacher training once or twice (may be 3 times?) a year, where they've to go out to a school, sit in on a class and teach a number of hours a day, AND THEY ARE INSPECTED!! An inspector comes out, watches them teaching, and grades them on it. They've to prepare lesson plans and submit them and they are taught HOW to teach. Once they get into the schools, they are inspected every couple of years by Dept of Ed and St Pat's inspectors...possible more often (the arrival of " The Inspector" strikes fear in the heart of every primary teacher!!)

Secondary school teachers normally do a BA and head for teaching. To do that, you need to work up hours in a school. In other words Ms X could do her LC, think " I really like English", go do Arts in UCD for 3 years in English, then do a HDip. But to get into the HDip, she has to have a certain number of hours of teaching done, so she goes to the local secondary school and asks the principle to let her supervise classes and act as a substitute when possible. Note there is no teacher training whatsoever involved in this. Then she gets into the HDip, spends 18 months specialising in English and whatever other subject, has a small amount of teaching practice, where she's inspected, and then off she goes. No methods of how to teach or control a class, nothing.No inspections, once she's out of the hDip.Can't be fired/let go from a school once she's made permanent no matter how bad she is..that's it.

It's a crap system. And worse, you have those who do English, and then decide they'd like to teach a second subject, and think "ah sure, I did LC history, I'll do that"...and off they go.

I know it's being tightened up a good bit more but to be honest there's just no comparison between how secondary school teachers are trained and monitored throughout their careers, and how primary school teachers are.

And in answer to your question - that's why!

You're way off the mark there with the training and inspection of second level teachers. I don't know where you found your "facts". :rolleyes:

randylonghorn

paulcarroll wrote: »

i donno just the luck of the draw it realy isnt fair tbh that the grades u get are only as good as the ppl that give you the imformation im lucky enough to have mostly gr8 teachers but i wasnt as lucky for jc and got 2 horrible onesmaby if u have another chemistry teacher in the school the whole class could complain (and if u say it wont work it worked 4 the 6th years at my school who complained about a certain useless teacher so he got replaced)

Hi Paul, welcome to Boards!

Please note that textspeak is not welcome on this site.


Dan, as a couple of others have pointed out, there are a lot of inaccuracies in your post.

seriouslysweet

I'd never mention it to the principal, it just seems so unfair. I'm lucky in that my parents can help me in that subject but most are not that lucky. Also after doing a hard day at work my parents should not have to teach me. A letter to the dept could be in order perhaps? After all we pay her wages. Regardless, seems so unfair the other teacher on part-time hours and this one the full whack and so lazy.

TimeToShine

I honestly think at the end of our LC year we should be given a CONFIDENTIAL evaluation form for EACH of our teachers. For the 7 LC subjects I did I'd say about two or at a push three of them were good. I don't give a fúck about what grade a student gets. Subjects like Physics and Chemistry are usually taken by A1 standard students and would get it regardless of their teacher, but it's the weaker students who are desperately trying to develop some interest in these horrificly study-orientated subjects (at LC level) that are constantly put down by these miserable oxygen wasters we call teachers, and when they come back with a D1 or something the teacher goes "sure they deserved it, they did no work", Then these ignorant cúnts can say "Well one chap got an A1, so clearly I did my job right". Fúcking imbeciles. The sneakiest was my Chemistry teacher, didn't have a clue about anything. She starts 5th year with Stoichiometry deliberately to get rid of the weaker students who see numbers and run, she makes it out to be all maths based and doesn't give a **** about anyone who needs help.

I could write an in depth bítching essay about all my teachers, but in short all I have to say is that it is in absolutely no way fair that one teacher who's willing to stay back after class and during lunch to help students is getting paid the same as another who comes in, puts up a powerpoint, tells everyone to take it down, gives a load of questions from papers (which incidentally everyone copies from marking schemes for fear of being wrong) and fúcks off. Absolute joke.

ILA

The Department of Education Inspectorate is responsible for the standard of currently employed teachers and their effectiveness. However they probably don't do enough inspections regularly to actually make any difference, and like most public sector workers, teachers have strong and active trade unions to protect their employment and conditions.

It's really the luck of the draw when it comes down to it, however if you do enough study yourself you should be alright, even in a Science subject. While the Leaving Cert is important, it's no where near as difficult as it's made out to be. I winged mine in June and now got what I wanted in College so it's highly possible to do reasonably well by just having a general knowledge of the subject.

Like being a Garda, Civil Servant, Nurse, Doctor, Politician, being a Teacher is one of those certain jobs where it's hard to get kicked out if you behave within reason it's very hard to get dislodged. Once you're in, you're generally sorted for life with three months off in Summer to travel or take up a temporary job.

How do I know? A good lot of my relations are/were teachers both in primary and second level. One of them is actually an Inspector now.

Nead21

dan_d wrote: »

Because the system we use to train secondary school teachers is....sh*&e.

Primary school teachers go to Pats/Mary I, wherever. They do 3 years intensive training including psychology/sociology etc, so they actually have some understanding of the workings of a child's mind, and how their backgrounds and home lives affect them. They do teacher training once or twice (may be 3 times?) a year, where they've to go out to a school, sit in on a class and teach a number of hours a day, AND THEY ARE INSPECTED!! An inspector comes out, watches them teaching, and grades them on it. They've to prepare lesson plans and submit them and they are taught HOW to teach. Once they get into the schools, they are inspected every couple of years by Dept of Ed and St Pat's inspectors...possible more often (the arrival of " The Inspector" strikes fear in the heart of every primary teacher!!)

Secondary school teachers normally do a BA and head for teaching. To do that, you need to work up hours in a school. In other words Ms X could do her LC, think " I really like English", go do Arts in UCD for 3 years in English, then do a HDip. But to get into the HDip, she has to have a certain number of hours of teaching done, so she goes to the local secondary school and asks the principle to let her supervise classes and act as a substitute when possible. Note there is no teacher training whatsoever involved in this. Then she gets into the HDip, spends 18 months specialising in English and whatever other subject, has a small amount of teaching practice, where she's inspected, and then off she goes. No methods of how to teach or control a class, nothing.No inspections, once she's out of the hDip.Can't be fired/let go from a school once she's made permanent no matter how bad she is..that's it.

It's a crap system. And worse, you have those who do English, and then decide they'd like to teach a second subject, and think "ah sure, I did LC history, I'll do that"...and off they go.

I know it's being tightened up a good bit more but to be honest there's just no comparison between how secondary school teachers are trained and monitored throughout their careers, and how primary school teachers are.

And in answer to your question - that's why!

^^^ this is why
a) some people think anyone can teach
b) people complain that teachers get paid for doing nothing

randylonghorn

TimeToShine wrote: »

I honestly think at the end of our LC year we should be given a CONFIDENTIAL evaluation form for EACH of our teachers. For the 7 LC subjects I did I'd say about two or at a push three of them were good. I don't give a fúck about what grade a student gets. Subjects like Physics and Chemistry are usually taken by A1 standard students and would get it regardless of their teacher, but it's the weaker students who are desperately trying to develop some interest in these horrificly study-orientated subjects (at LC level) that are constantly put down by these miserable oxygen wasters we call teachers, and when they come back with a D1 or something the teacher goes "sure they deserved it, they did no work", Then these ignorant cúnts can say "Well one chap got an A1, so clearly I did my job right". Fúcking imbeciles. The sneakiest was my Chemistry teacher, didn't have a clue about anything. She starts 5th year with Stoichiometry deliberately to get rid of the weaker students who see numbers and run, she makes it out to be all maths based and doesn't give a **** about anyone who needs help.

I could write an in depth bítching essay about all my teachers, but in short all I have to say is that it is in absolutely no way fair that one teacher who's willing to stay back after class and during lunch to help students is getting paid the same as another who comes in, puts up a powerpoint, tells everyone to take it down, gives a load of questions from papers (which incidentally everyone copies from marking schemes for fear of being wrong) and fúcks off. Absolute joke.

Rein it in about twenty notches there. Everyone is entitled to their opinion, but this forum at least expects people to behave with a bit of cop-on and courtesy, and not to be abusive towards others.

Teachers like every other group in society range from the excellent to the poor; tarring them all with the one brush is ridiculous.

A number of teachers give of their free time to help and advise students in this forum, there is no requirement on them to do so, they get nothing for it only an occasional "thanks" when people remember! How do you think they will feel reading that?

Nor is there any need for that kind of language ... I don't get all fussed over the odd f__, I'm probably guilty myself, but that's way over the top.

Only reason I'm not imposing a ban is because you're relatively new around here ... do not tempt my patience again.

rainbowtrout

dan_d wrote: »

Secondary school teachers normally do a BA and head for teaching. To do that, you need to work up hours in a school. In other words Ms X could do her LC, think " I really like English", go do Arts in UCD for 3 years in English, then do a HDip. But to get into the HDip, she has to have a certain number of hours of teaching done, so she goes to the local secondary school and asks the principle to let her supervise classes and act as a substitute when possible. Note there is no teacher training whatsoever involved in this. Then she gets into the HDip, spends 18 months specialising in English and whatever other subject, has a small amount of teaching practice, where she's inspected, and then off she goes. No methods of how to teach or control a class, nothing.No inspections, once she's out of the hDip.Can't be fired/let go from a school once she's made permanent no matter how bad she is..that's it.

Did you get your facts off the back of a cornflakes box by any chance? To give you at least one example of how far wrong you are: I did a BSc in Science Education (us science people tend not to do BAs for starters). Teacher training was part of the degree. I studied psychology, history of education, pedagogy, curriculum studies, teaching methodologies and the teacher as professional to name but a few of the modules. So do the students taking the PGDE only they have to do the whole lot in one year.

I did teaching practice in a primary school, and two blocks in secondary school. Each was inspected many times and graded.

The fact that you think the HDip is about specialising in English just shows your ignorance. HDip stands for Higher Diploma in Education. The clue is in the name. It has fcuk all to do with English/any subject you care to mention, it's a qualification in teaching.

I also seem to remember all the geography and Irish teachers being in a tizzy last year in my school when their subject inspections were coming up. They had inspectors sitting in their classes seeing what was going on and going through everything with a fine tooth comb.

As for teachers being made permanent. For most currently they have more chance of winning the lotto, there isn't much job security there anymore I'm afraid.

Brussels Sprout

I could have written this opening post 10 years ago when i did my leaving cert and in 10 years time some other 18 year old will be writing the same thing. That is unless there are drastic changes made. Unfortunately I can't see it happening because the reason that bad teachers are tolerated is the same reason why there are incompetent workers in a lot of government institutions. Namely, they can't be got rid of easily even when it's quite obvious that they are not up to the job and are milking it.

Even if the department was able to sack teachers, I don't even know how you'd go about doing it to be honest. I mean how do you prove a teacher is incompetent. And if a teacher was sacked would that mean that their career was over or do they get another chance in another school if they can find one?

I'd be interested in seeing how they do it in other countries. I know that in Finland teaching is up there with medicine as one of the most prestigious professions that attract the best and brightest students despite the fact that it is not well paid. Schools also receive a high rate of funding from the government.

In Ireland it seems that a disproportionate amount of the education budget goes to the wages of the teachers as opposed to capital spending. We therefore have the bizarre scenario of teachers earning 50K a year teaching 30 students in a prefab.

I won't be holding my breath on any dramatic overhauls anytime soon (especially since so many of our politicians are teachers themselves).

lctake2

I hate the way that teachers can't be fired and can't be replaced with better teachers. There was a teacher in my old school that was completely incompitant. She couldn't control the class, taught things that weren't on the coursse, left out parts of the course, got us to go pick up rubbish instead of learn. Over the year 100s of people have complained but nothing can be done. Why do government jobs have to be so special? If any other worker didn't do their job properly they would last 5 minutes, let alone 20+ years! There are too many capable qualified teachers without a job that won't get one for a long time as some dreadful teachers will never be sacked