How many teachers are unemployed??

chunli_boom

Just wondring if there is any definite figures for the amount of unemployed teachers out there?

Or better yet the number of unemployed NQTs? I'm just feeling so down that I've worked so hard last year in the P.G.D.E course and I haven't even gotten an interview....boourns!

dambarude

800 at primary level according to Sheila Nunan on the News at One.

It's unbelievable that she's defending retired teachers taking up subbing positions. Almost 10% of all subs in primary schools (302 people) are retired teachers apparently.

Rapunzels

7 years teaching and this year I have 13 hours 20 mins..

starre

6 years teaching and have worked two weeks total in the last 17 months. 0 days in the last 11. No interview since summer 2009.

gaeilgegrinds1

We had two part-time positions this year, since those have been filled we have received over 600 CVs in to the office. I asked the secretary today. She also said she's been told to shred them all as we have more than enough part-time teachers and ex-Dips. She does tell them that though so they can take them home. It's so sad as I'd say it's impossible to break into these days.

dambarude

Any chance this thread could be locked?! It's very depressing:(.

Quandary

Just out of interest, would the people posting here mind indicating whether they're primary or secondary teachers and also how far they are prepared to travel for subbing work?

dambarude

Quandary wrote: »

Just out of interest, would the people posting here mind indicating whether they're primary or secondary teachers and also how far they are prepared to travel for subbing work?

I'm no good to you, I'm a primary teacher in training. Ask me again in two years time when I'm sure it'll be even worse... Judging by the budget announcements at any rate.

Quandary

dambarude wrote: »

I'm no good to you, I'm a primary teacher in training. Ask me again in two years time when I'm sure it'll be even worse... Judging by the budget announcements at any rate.

Im a primary teacher in training too :pac:

I was thinking that when im qualified ill give myself a driving radius of 1.5 hours to do subbing or if very lucky get a place for my dip yr. Im based in Dublin but I do have the option of moving home to Kerry if prospects are better down there...

dambarude

There's definitely an advantage to being foot loose and fancy free in this environment. I'd be willing to work in any county really, but I won't get too ahead of myself.

The one consolation for primary teachers is the huge numbers of babies being born the last few years- they have to be taught by somebody. An increase to the PTR in the budget would have disastrous consequences in terms of standards in the clasroom and employment levels though. And unfortunately that's quite like something that would happen when the Greens leave government.

maynooth_rules

dambarude wrote: »

800 at primary level according to Sheila Nunan on the News at One.

It's unbelievable that she's defending retired teachers taking up subbing positions. Almost 10% of all subs in primary schools (302 people) are retired teachers apparently.

This is a pet hate of mine. Retired teachers on pensions coming back to do subbing is nothing short of scandalous. It shouldnt be tolerated and I really wish the unions would attempt to do something about it.

BTW, im an unemployed teacher by the way. 4 years experience and still cant get a jiffy

chunli_boom

Im a secondary teacher with History and C.S.P.E. I might as well just have History I guess! I'm willing to work in Dublin. Partner needs to stay in Dublin. I'm down with certain schools as a sub but have heard nothing since September. I'v handed out so many CVs to so many schools but I'm barely even getting any replies.
God if teachers with so much experience can't even get anything I don't know how NQTs have a chance. I'm just so worried that without some real classroom experience this year that I'm going to lose everything I'v learnt and my confidence with students.

TheDriver

All i can say about retired people subbing is that if you are in a poor location and have literally one or two days short notice, retired people are very reliable whereas younger teachers, you need to usually ring a good few and be told about they have ajob, hours elsewhere etc. I agree retired people shouldn't be used for longer term stuff but sometimes theres a lot more to the story than mere stats

maynooth_rules

TheDriver wrote: »

All i can say about retired people subbing is that if you are in a poor location and have literally one or two days short notice, retired people are very reliable whereas younger teachers, you need to usually ring a good few and be told about they have ajob, hours elsewhere etc. I agree retired people shouldn't be used for longer term stuff but sometimes theres a lot more to the story than mere stats

You are trying to justify the completely and utterly unjustifiable. Retired teachers on pensions should never be let near a classroom. If they go back, they don't deserve their pension.
It is not hard for the Teaching Council to set up a registrar of qualified unemployed teachers. Any principal that needs a teacher in short notice looks up this registrar and contacts unemployed teachers from that area. Simples.
Retired teachers are called back because of cushy relationships with principals. It is typical Ireland. It should not be tolerated, it is very easy to be stopped, and it would not be accepted anywhere else.

Rosita

maynooth_rules wrote: »

You are trying to justify the completely and utterly unjustifiable. Retired teachers on pensions should never be let near a classroom. If they go back, they don't deserve their pension.

In fairness to The Driver I think it more a matter of explaining why schools do it (what motivates a Vice-Principal at 8.25am when a sub is needed at 9am) rather than justifying it (saying it is right and ideal).

And like many other things we believe are unique to Ireland, I'd be surprised if something as explainable in practical terms as this is not happening anywhere else other than Ireland.

Lord TSC

The thing is, the way TheDriver paints it, it looks like a short term, once off thing, or something that's rare. I know in my ex-school, there are two teachers who "retired" but are still in the school every day, with a small handful of classes on a fulltime basis.

TheDriver

Thanks Rosita, I am not justifying it but rather explaining that when a teacher rings in sick at 8:50 (which does happen), last thing I want is to be ringing a register where half don't want to come to you because its not enough work or they won't make it out on time, we are not in a city so we don't have loads of people waiting around. Also remember most people would be 30 mins at least away not to mention getting ready for us.
Hence why the easier option will be contacted!

maynooth_rules

Im surprised if some teachers turn you down Driver because of its not enough work. Id bite someones hand off for just a day teaching now. I wasn't having a go in my reply to you on the last page though, but having retired teachers who are already getting a tidy sum a week getting subbing hours while there are 100s of NQTs crying out for work is very very disheartening and I really think it is an issue that unions should be pushing hard to have stopped.

TheDriver

thing is we would never have a days work because there are part time teachers who will cover some of the hours but naturally there are gaps in the day. even full hours some days is only 5 classes and Teachers might take an hour to get to you, they have no idea of the school and you spend more time showing them around etc. Hence why its much much easier getting the local retired person. I know its not all that fair and many other factors but we don't have all day to be getting new subs in and showing them around etc.
P.S. You would be shocked at being turned out, it happens alright unfortunately.

maynooth_rules

Well id actually drive up to an hour to get subbing of an hour or more. It shocks me to hear people turn it down.

rainbowtrout

I'd agree with TheDriver on the short notice thing. Two years ago our physics/honours maths teacher went on maternity leave. Her job was advertised twice and the school couldn't get a single suitable applicant for her job. They ended up taking on a guy straight out of college with a physics degree with no teaching experience whatsoever. And that was for a 6 month contract.

So imagine what it is like when there's only 10 minutes to spare in the morning and 5B will be swinging from the rafters if there isn't someone there to teach them or supervise them at 9am.

One of the teachers I work with started out subbing with us, she dropped in her CV, lived locally and told the principal she would be available within 10 minutes of getting a phonecall regardless of what hours were available or what time of the morning it was. They were delighted to have someone they could ring at 8.45 who could be there for 9 if necessary. She subbed the last two months of the school year about 5 years ago, a job came up the following year and she got it.

Having said all that, we have had a lot of subs in since the start of September and almost every one of them have been NQTs. Most live within 30 minutes of the school and are willing to work any hours at the drop of a hat. That's what's getting them the work in my school.

dambarude

During the week there was much talk of the thousands being spent by the government training nurses, when there are no jobs for them.

Why is the same not being said about teachers? I realise that a lot of the teaching programmes are funded at least in part by those taking them (the PGDE for instance), but there are hundreds graduating from B.Ed programmes every year which are funded entirely by the government. The DES controls the numbers entering these programmes so I can't see why the numbers aren't being cut. 400+ primary teachers graduated from the B.Ed programme in Mary I just today and yesterday, and that's not including those who did the grad dip in teaching in the college.

Between the B.Ed and Grad Dip in established colleges, and the Grad Dip in Hibernia it seems there are 1500+ being trained in primary teaching every year. Hibernia College will take in as many as it pleases as long as it's making a profit, but the numbers in other colleges seems ridiculous to me.

anneh2010

I am desperate for work, have interviewed in Cavan, Dublin, Meath, Westmeath I really am willing to go where the work is. I cant afford to set up in England and have some experience.

Work seems to go by who you know not what you know.... I know of 2 jobs that went to a principals daughter and she has a permanent job now. I am desperate. I do not know what else I can do.

Its so bad out there and i think people in authority do not realise how bad it is.

I feel like a failure

maynooth_rules

anneh2010 wrote: »

I am desperate for work, have interviewed in Cavan, Dublin, Meath, Westmeath I really am willing to go where the work is. I cant afford to set up in England and have some experience.

Work seems to go by who you know not what you know.... I know of 2 jobs that went to a principals daughter and she has a permanent job now. I am desperate. I do not know what else I can do.

Its so bad out there and i think people in authority do not realise how bad it is.

I feel like a failure

You are not a failure, you are an all too common occurance. I am in your boat, there are literally hundreds in the same boat. Your case brings me back to the annoyance of letting retired people with very nice pensions back into the classroom.
Keep the chin up is all I can say, but **** i know its hard:(

Dionysus

anneh2010 wrote: »

I am desperate for work, have interviewed in Cavan, Dublin, Meath, Westmeath I really am willing to go where the work is. I cant afford to set up in England and have some experience.

Work seems to go by who you know not what you know.... I know of 2 jobs that went to a principals daughter and she has a permanent job now. I am desperate. I do not know what else I can do.

Its so bad out there and i think people in authority do not realise how bad it is.

I feel like a failure

Just get it together, anneh. Cut the self-centred melodrama. With thinking like the above you're being the artist of your own downfall. You're also making other people more despondent. You need to calm down, look at things more rationally and keep knocking on doors. One will eventually open. It's basic common sense: the more doors you knock on the more likely you are to get some work. Self-flagellating yourself will get you nowhere; it's a luxury you can't afford. It's time to grow up. And if things are really bad, talk to MABS and rearrange any loans you may have. Downsize.

And if you've been called to that many interviews, your cv can't be that bad. But let's not allow a positive, realistic thought into all that self-created misery between your ears.

anneh2010

Dionysus wrote: »

Just get it together, anneh. Cut the self-centred melodrama. With thinking like the above you're being the artist of your own downfall. You're also making other people more despondent. You need to calm down, look at things more rationally and keep knocking on doors. One will eventually open. It's basic common sense: the more doors you knock on the more likely you are to get some work. Self-flagellating yourself will get you nowhere; it's a luxury you can't afford. It's time to grow up. And if things are really bad, talk to MABS and rearrange any loans you may have. Downsize.

And if you've been called to that many interviews, your cv can't be that bad. But let's not allow a positive, realistic thought into all that self-created misery between your ears.

I think that is a little harsh, I graduated in 2009 and have had very little work in between, if your trying to payback student loans and live its very difficult. I doubt your in a similar position to me, i live at home and still struggle to pay back what i owe. Time to grow up??????? I'm sorry thats just rude.

Being called to interview and getting a job are two very different things. I have being round nearly every school with CV'S looking for subbing and spoken to many many principals.

I think I am entitled to feel down as the situation isnt good. How dare you be so rude and insulting. I can help how I feel and all thats between my ears is getting up and applying for teaching jobs and other jobs to tide me over, to which im told i am overqualified.

Infact I think its time you got into the real world and noticed how difficult it is to stay positive, in a profession where it is who you know not what qualifications and experience you have and that is very very sad.

marylou85

I'm a NQT (post - primary) and one of the lucky few who are currently employed. I believe that the subjects that you are qualified to teach (registered with the teaching council) play a HUGE factor on employment. This year there were a lot of jobs advertised during the summer for qualified maths and irish teachers and the majority of my PGDE class with these subjects are now working. Other subjects were not as desirable. The combination of subjects you can teach play a huge factor too.... English and French may be advertised often but if you are qualified to teach English and History you would be restricted by your combination. Trying to find a teaching job when your subject combination hasn't appeared in the paper in two weeks can be so disheartening and I can understand the level of frustration being expressed here.

Lord TSC

Being called to interview and getting a job are two very different things.

At least you're getting called to interviews though. Some of us would love to just get some word back from a school at all <_<

anneh2010

I can understand that, its not like I'm getting them all the time, its few and far between. I wrote to a Senator regarding the lack of feedback/contact and nepotism that happens in schools. The senator wrote to the Minister for Education and he sent me a copy of the letter, by the looks of things there are hundreds of people doing the same thing.

starre

Dionysus wrote: »

Just get it together, anneh. Cut the self-centred melodrama. With thinking like the above you're being the artist of your own downfall. You're also making other people more despondent. You need to calm down, look at things more rationally and keep knocking on doors. One will eventually open. It's basic common sense: the more doors you knock on the more likely you are to get some work. Self-flagellating yourself will get you nowhere; it's a luxury you can't afford. It's time to grow up. And if things are really bad, talk to MABS and rearrange any loans you may have. Downsize.

And if you've been called to that many interviews, your cv can't be that bad. But let's not allow a positive, realistic thought into all that self-created misery between your ears.

That's far too harsh on the OP. In fact the comments about nepotism are quite realistic. It's also basic common sense that 100 applicants into one job don't go.

rainbowtrout

anneh2010 wrote: »

I can understand that, its not like I'm getting them all the time, its few and far between. I wrote to a Senator regarding the lack of feedback/contact and nepotism that happens in schools. The senator wrote to the Minister for Education and he sent me a copy of the letter, by the looks of things there are hundreds of people doing the same thing.

While nepotism does exist in schools and I've seen it first hand, I don't think graduates are getting the message. There are no jobs out there. Schools are inundated with applications/CVs and simply do not have the space to store them let alone reply to them all.

I started teaching 10 years ago when there were jobs in teaching and schools weren't swamped in applications and there were plenty who didn't bother replying to me.

You can write to all the Senators in the world about it and they won't be able to do a thing for you.

But the way things are now, that would be the least of my worries if I was in your position. Can't remember if it was in this thread or another where one teacher posted that her school had received 600 CVs!!! No principal has the time or will spend the time wading through such a mountain of paperwork or justify the cost (both financial and time wise) in replying to each and every one of them.

There are new threads in this forum every day from people enquiring about getting into the PGDE/choosing subjects/getting into teaching and the message needs to be repeated over and over again.

There are no jobs in teaching.

If the veiled comments about the budget being detrimental to education are anything to go by there aren't going to be many for a long time. I was talking to someone in the last few days who had heard (from someone in Dept) that Transition Year could be for the chop nationally in the budget. I thought about it for a few minutes and realised that it's totally possible.

• It's essentially an independent program run within schools.
• It doesn't effect the 2 year cycle to Leaving Cert.
• It will reduce (over 2 years) the number of teachers employed because the numbers will drop in each school, particularly in schools where it is compulsory. According to http://ty.slss.ie/aboutus.html 27000 students do TY each year, take that number of students out of the education system 27000/20 = 1350 teaching jobs.
• It will reduce capitation to each school and reduce things like guidance hours, number of posts, resource hours etc, etc.
• The knock on effect (aside from teacher job losses) would be that in some schools where TY is compulsory there will be a massive fifth year for one year where TY go into fifth year and so do third year at the same time and that LC year will be bigger than normal nationally, which means an even tougher race to get into college.
• This last one is pushing it a bit, but children's allowance is only paid for students over 16 and under 18 who are in full time education. Getting them out of secondary school a year earlier will have a small effect on this, particularly if they can't all get into college as there won't be enough places.

Anneh: you can keep trying and making your face known in the local schools and but do continue to keep trying to find other work, because it's not going to get better in schools any time soon.

gollem_1975

1) I didn't realise there were so many NQT teachers unemployed , I thought during the boom times the unions were complaining that they couldn't get people to become teachers -however during the same period I noted several women leaving IT jobs to do the PGDE.

2) in addition to the retired teachers getting the subbing roles would you agree that part of the problem with new teachers entering the profession is that the incumbents are getting paid too much relative to what their equivalents in the other OECD countries and relative to the budget schools have to pay teachers ( i.e. same budget + lower pay = more teaching jobs )

3) I'm on a WPP i.e. I don't get paid by the provider of the "work experience" but I get to keep my Job seekers benefit.
Is there a demand among schools and teachers to have placements / jobs fo voluntary teachers ? I am sure that there are some teachers that might want assistants to help out with their classes. better for aspiring teachers to be getting some experience than none at all and i'm sure the kids would benefit from the extra support and tuition ?

dambarude

Wow rainbowtrout... It really tells how bad things are when measures as drastic as that are being considered.

Depressing isn't really strong enough a word.

starre

gollem_1975 wrote: »

1) I didn't realise there were so many NQT teachers unemployed , I thought during the boom times the unions were complaining that they couldn't get people to become teachers -however during the same period I noted several women leaving IT jobs to do the PGDE.

2) in addition to the retired teachers getting the subbing roles would you agree that part of the problem with new teachers entering the profession is that the incumbents are getting paid too much relative to what their equivalents in the other OECD countries and relative to the budget schools have to pay teachers ( i.e. same budget + lower pay = more teaching jobs )

3) I'm on a WPP i.e. I don't get paid by the provider of the "work experience" but I get to keep my Job seekers benefit.
Is there a demand among schools and teachers to have placements / jobs fo voluntary teachers ? I am sure that there are some teachers that might want assistants to help out with their classes. better for aspiring teachers to be getting some experience than none at all and i'm sure the kids would benefit from the extra support and tuition ?

I don't think the level of pay is really an issue any more due to the economy. If pay was slashed the government would consider that a saving in general, not as a way to give more teachers jobs - the budget will be that tight.

Volunteers in schools = more excuses to cut staff numbers, so staff would be unhappy with this. There would also be a huge turnover in staff, as far as I understand these are short term contracts, which can be quite disruptive. While it might look good on paper, I don't see how much sense it would make in giving teachers experience in a field where there will not be jobs for a long, long while. It might be more beneficial to provide unemployed teachers with other skills.

Rosita

gollem_1975 wrote: »

2) in addition to the retired teachers getting the subbing roles would you agree that part of the problem with new teachers entering the profession is that the incumbents are getting paid too much relative to what their equivalents in the other OECD countries and relative to the budget schools have to pay teachers ( i.e. same budget + lower pay = more teaching jobs )

In theory this is not unreasonable but as we are continually - if not continuously - reminded these days; "we are where we are". The time when this argument might have held sway is a foreign country.

Shellhegs

chunli_boom wrote: »

Im a secondary teacher with History and C.S.P.E. I might as well just have History I guess! I'm willing to work in Dublin. Partner needs to stay in Dublin. I'm down with certain schools as a sub but have heard nothing since September. I'v handed out so many CVs to so many schools but I'm barely even getting any replies.
God if teachers with so much experience can't even get anything I don't know how NQTs have a chance. I'm just so worried that without some real classroom experience this year that I'm going to lose everything I'v learnt and my confidence with students.

You'd be suprised, I have heard of a couple of people from the Dip (UCD) last year picking up a bit of work. I was very lucky, had one interview and got the job (15hours). I have heard of two girls getting jobs this week over the midterm so keep looking away, a subbing contract might turn up. The other option is to apply for SEN positions. I know its not a teaching job but keeps in the school environment anyway and it wont leave year gap on the CV!

Capt'n Midnight

rainbowtrout wrote: »

If the veiled comments about the budget being detrimental to education are anything to go by there aren't going to be many for a long time. I was talking to someone in the last few days who had heard (from someone in Dept) that Transition Year could be for the chop nationally in the budget. I thought about it for a few minutes and realised that it's totally possible.

• It's essentially an independent program run within schools.
• It doesn't effect the 2 year cycle to Leaving Cert.
• It will reduce (over 2 years) the number of teachers employed because the numbers will drop in each school, particularly in schools where it is compulsory. According to http://ty.slss.ie/aboutus.html 27000 students do TY each year, take that number of students out of the education system 27000/20 = 1350 teaching jobs.

getting rid of TY would mean 27,000 more people on the dole in three years time because there won't any extra jobs/ 3rd level places for them

even our government aren't quite that stupid to believe that huge additional costs are worth the savings ( though they did screw up the figues on the tax relief on public service pension )

keeping them in school is the cheapest option and IMHO one of the reasons why TY was started in the first place

gollem_1975

starre wrote: »

I don't think the level of pay is really an issue any more due to the economy. If pay was slashed the government would consider that a saving in general, not as a way to give more teachers jobs - the budget will be that tight.

surely level of pay is an even bigger issue now due to the economy. my understanding is that a huge proportion of the expenditure on education (and health) goes on salaries.

there seems to be a baby boom going on at the moment(the popes children are now starting to have their own kids) so there is going to be increased demand for more teachers in the future.. unfortunately the pot from which to pay these teachers is going in the opposite direction.

All government's throughout history have an interest in creating jobs. and jobs for new teachers is no different.

starre wrote: »

Volunteers in schools = more excuses to cut staff numbers, so staff would be unhappy with this. There would also be a huge turnover in staff, as far as I understand these are short term contracts, which can be quite disruptive. While it might look good on paper, I don't see how much sense it would make in giving teachers experience in a field where there will not be jobs for a long, long while. It might be more beneficial to provide unemployed teachers with other skills.

Surely the schools are not run for the benefit of the staff though. voluntary staff would be good for the end users i.e. the children. even if it was to have volunteers monitoring lunch breaks. instead of one teacher going around helping students in a class you could have 2 or 3. classes of 30 could be broken up into "breakout sessions". there is a lot of good that could be provided by "volunteers"

the work placements on the WPP scheme are 9 months long. a 9 month placement would cover most of the school year ( they are not contracts )

as to providing unemployed teachers with other skills. the country has already funded the education of these teachers. there is a demand for teaching staff, there just isn't the money to pay them unfortunately.

Rosita

gollem_1975 wrote: »

surely level of pay is an even bigger issue now due to the economy. my understanding is that a huge proportion of the expenditure on education (and health) goes on salaries.

Surely the schools are not run for the benefit of the staff though. voluntary staff would be good for the end users i.e. the children. even if it was to have volunteers monitoring lunch breaks. instead of one teacher going around helping students in a class you could have 2 or 3. classes of 30 could be broken up into "breakout sessions". there is a lot of good that could be provided by "volunteers"

the work placements on the WPP scheme are 9 months long. a 9 month placement would cover most of the school year ( they are not contracts )

as to providing unemployed teachers with other skills. the country has already funded the education of these teachers. there is a demand for teaching staff, there just isn't the money to pay them unfortunately.

You are missing the point on salaries. The point being made is that a reduction in salaries will not lead to more teachers being employed (which is what had been claimed here) because contrary to your remarkable claim that the government wishes to create teaching jobs the practcial policy is to cut positions in school rather than add to them.

It is also naive to disregard the signifiance of disruption in schools. Many students have little enough regard for their regular teacher supervising around the school yard but imagine how someone temporary who might be gone the following week would be treated? Pointing to this sort of reality is not to suggest schools are run for the benefit of staff. It just implies that the nature and appearance of staffing is actually quite important in a school. Telling us that schools are not run for the benefit of staff is quite unhelpful especially when it hasn't been suggested.

starre

Rosita wrote: »

You are missing the point on salaries. The point being made is that a reduction in salaries will not lead to more teachers being employed (which is what had been claimed here) because contrary to your remarkable claim that the government wishes to create teaching jobs the practcial policy is to cut positions in school rather than add to them.

It is also naive to disregard the signifiance of disruption in schools. Many students have little enough regard for their regular teacher supervising around the school yard but imagine how someone temporary who might be gone the following week would be treated? Pointing to this sort of reality is not to suggest schools are run for the benefit of staff. It just implies that the nature and appearance of staffing is actually quite important in a school. Telling us that schools are not run for the benefit of staff is quite unhelpful especially when it hasn't been suggested.

yes, I meant that cutting salaries won't create new teaching posts. I remember my primary classroom of 40+ students, (1980s) so baby boom kids will probably have this to look forward to. I have seen LCA, TY and some non-traditional subjects being removed/reduced from local schools already. For example where there were once places for everyone who wanted to do TY it is now an interview for 20 spots.

Also, re volunteer teachers - no demand in schools for the reasons Rosita mentioned. Also it would lead to a loss of expertise in the schools. Someone who has 10 years of experience, but no permanent or cid, might find themselves out of a job and their workload picked up by someone doing volunteer work or WPP, who would in turn be replaced the following year. The students would be at a disadvantage. The government might like the number crunching, but the demand would not be coming from the schools, which is what I thought was originally being asked.

I think the government would prefer teachers to leave for the UK/Oz so they wouldn't have to pay them anything.

As for TY - by the time these kids do the leaving, the dole available to them will probably be a pittance so emigration will be the only real option - much cheaper for the government again.

Rosita

starre wrote: »

yes, I meant that cutting salaries won't create new teaching posts. I remember my primary classroom of 40+ students, (1980s) so baby boom kids will probably have this to look forward to.

Indeed. Not sure it's much down the road either. I know a girl with 43 in her second year Irish class whch I thought was incredible until I met another person at an in-service recently who has 46 (!) in a Leaving Cert Irish class.

gollem_1975

Rosita wrote: »

You are missing the point on salaries. The point being made is that a reduction in salaries will not lead to more teachers being employed (which is what had been claimed here) because contrary to your remarkable claim that the government wishes to create teaching jobs the practcial policy is to cut positions in school rather than add to them.

It is also naive to disregard the signifiance of disruption in schools. Many students have little enough regard for their regular teacher supervising around the school yard but imagine how someone temporary who might be gone the following week would be treated? Pointing to this sort of reality is not to suggest schools are run for the benefit of staff. It just implies that the nature and appearance of staffing is actually quite important in a school. Telling us that schools are not run for the benefit of staff is quite unhelpful especially when it hasn't been suggested.

I agree with your point - its highly unlikely that the department will hire more teachers when the salary bill is reduced. it is unlikely that there will be any redundancies either.

disruption - perhaps.

however am I really that naieve in thinking that additional teaching resources ( and I'm suggesting placements of 9 months - not that volunteers can come and go as they please - there would need to be some rules ) would not provide a NET benefit for the end-users (i.e. the kids ) ? considering also that these placement teachers would most likely be highly motivated and straight out of college.

i'm not even suggesting that there is a government scheme put in place to manage the volunteers. I'm suggesting that these NQTs go to their local schools and offer their services voluntarily. just a suggestion....

gollem_1975

starre wrote: »

Also, re volunteer teachers - no demand in schools for the reasons Rosita mentioned. Also it would lead to a loss of expertise in the schools. Someone who has 10 years of experience, but no permanent or cid, might find themselves out of a job and their workload picked up by someone doing volunteer work or WPP, who would in turn be replaced the following year. The students would be at a disadvantage. The government might like the number crunching, but the demand would not be coming from the schools, which is what I thought was originally being asked.

but if the NET benefit to the children is better then wouldn't it make the initiative worthwhile ?

I'm suggesting that placement person is an assistant to the teachers and provides (whatever)assistance is required by the school.. not that they will displace a good teacher already working in the school. tbh if they are a good teacher with 10 years experience is it really likely that a principal will let them go in favour of a recent unexperienced graduate ??

Rosita

gollem_1975 wrote: »

however am I really that naieve in thinking that additional teaching resources ( and I'm suggesting placements of 9 months - not that volunteers can come and go as they please - there would need to be some rules ) would not provide a NET benefit for the end-users (i.e. the kids ) ? considering also that these placement teachers would most likely be highly motivated and straight out of college.

i'm not even suggesting that there is a government scheme put in place to manage the volunteers. I'm suggesting that these NQTs go to their local schools and offer their services voluntarily. just a suggestion....

There is an inherent contradiction in what you suggest. On the one hand you are calling these arrangements 'placements' which implies some kind of broadly organised 'work experience' system for which you say 'there would need to be some rules'. Yet, on the other hand you are 'not even suggesting that there is a government scheme put in place to manage the volunteers' (who makes the rules then?) just that 'these NQTs go to their local schools and offer their services voluntarily' which implies a much looser less predictable arrangement.

Now either it's a voluntary thing where people can by definition come and go as they please if they are fortunate enough to get a paid opportunity elsewhere, or it's a formally organised arrangement where they are essentially bound to it for the duration.

The former is reasonable enough up to a point but potentially would be of a very fluid and disruptive nature for schools I would think with 'volunteers' coming and going and maybe getting quickly tried of being exploited as some might see it. The latter -where NQTs are put into a government scheme to work for nothing for nine months - sounds suspiciously like some kind of holding pen for dole recipients. It does surely have some political attraction - no work payments/dole payments to the people involved for a year while being capable of being dressed up as 'additional teaching resources'.

I would say in all sincerity that it is not without merit but whether enough people would be willing to put all potential income on hold for a year only to find themselves in the very same boat a year down the road and a further year down the road again is another matter. Personally I would love to have some of the brilliant and enthusiastic NQTs I trained with available to work with me. Whether it is reasonable that they should have to do it for nothing while other people can work and still draw all manner of supplementary income from the state is another matter.

gaeilgebeo

Rosita wrote: »

Indeed. Not sure it's much down the road either. I know a girl with 43 in her second year Irish class whch I thought was incredible until I met another person at an in-service recently who has 46 (!) in a Leaving Cert Irish class.

How is this possible? It's going against union policy of 30 students per class. Yes, this situation has cropped up in our own school but under no circumstances will we go against the union on it. If the Dept. see this kind of thing happening, they'll take the attitude of " ah sure they're managing fine with 45 in a class as it is, let us up the teacher/pupil ratio".

Rosita

gaeilgebeo wrote: »

How is this possible? It's going against union policy of 30 students per class. Yes, this situation has cropped up in our own school but under no circumstances will we go against the union on it. If the Dept. see this kind of thing happening, they'll take the attitude of " ah sure they're managing fine with 45 in a class as it is, let us up the teacher/pupil ratio".

Not sure of the circumstances of one of the people but in the case of the other it is an Honours Irish class where there is an assumption many will drop down and they will not countenance Honours and Pass in the same class. Obviously the ASTI holds less sway in some schools.

gollem_1975

Rosita wrote: »

There is an inherent contradiction in what you suggest. On the one hand you are calling these arrangements 'placements' which implies some kind of broadly organised 'work experience' system for which you say 'there would need to be some rules'. Yet, on the other hand you are 'not even suggesting that there is a government scheme put in place to manage the volunteers' (who makes the rules then?) just that 'these NQTs go to their local schools and offer their services voluntarily' which implies a much looser less predictable arrangement.

Now either it's a voluntary thing where people can by definition come and go as they please if they are fortunate enough to get a paid opportunity elsewhere, or it's a formally organised arrangement where they are essentially bound to it for the duration.

The former is reasonable enough up to a point but potentially would be of a very fluid and disruptive nature for schools I would think with 'volunteers' coming and going and maybe getting quickly tried of being exploited as some might see it. The latter -where NQTs are put into a government scheme to work for nothing for nine months - sounds suspiciously like some kind of holding pen for dole recipients. It does surely have some political attraction - no work payments/dole payments to the people involved for a year while being capable of being dressed up as 'additional teaching resources'.

I would say in all sincerity that it is not without merit but whether enough people would be willing to put all potential income on hold for a year only to find themselves in the very same boat a year down the road and a further year down the road again is another matter. Personally I would love to have some of the brilliant and enthusiastic NQTs I trained with available to work with me. Whether it is reasonable that they should have to do it for nothing while other people can work and still draw all manner of supplementary income from the state is another matter.

I am not contradicting myself . I am laying out 2 different approaches (thought not coherently perhaps.. i'm supposed to be working at the moment )

option 1 is the placement route - which would be like a WPP for teachers
- the WPP means you can "work" while still claiming whatever state benefits apply to you. this would be self-regulated - i.e. the placement teacher and the school have to be relied on to not feck eachother about.
"the carrot and the stick" for the person on the placement would be the reference they get from the school. if the placement person was to get a paid job in the meantime they would not be obliged to stay in the unpaid position.

option 2 is the personal voluntary route - this could be implemented as you say through personal networks. i.e. you know some qualified teachers that are on the dole, you say to them you're looking for assistants, are they interested ? alternatively unemployed teachers approach their employed teacher friends and say "I'm available, let me help"

gaeilgebeo

Rosita wrote: »

Not sure of the circumstances of one of the people but in the case of the other it is an Honours Irish class where there is an assumption many will drop down and they will not countenance Honours and Pass in the same class. Obviously the ASTI holds less sway in some schools.

I'm actually TUI, but regardless of which union we're in, as teachers, I feel very strongly that we should stand firm on this. It is scandalous that schools are allowing such practices.

Rosita

gaeilgebeo wrote: »

I'm actually TUI, but regardless of which union we're in, as teachers, I feel very strongly that we should stand firm on this. It is scandalous that schools are allowing such practices.

I don't disagree. In fact I think 30 is a ludricous number for a really effective class never mind higher than that.

rainbowtrout

gaeilgebeo wrote: »

I'm actually TUI, but regardless of which union we're in, as teachers, I feel very strongly that we should stand firm on this. It is scandalous that schools are allowing such practices.

The problem is that class size numbers are directives from the unions. The Department have not put down a figure on maximum class sizes anywhere on paper, nor will they do so, as that would set a precedent. So the reality is that it depends how strong the union is in your school and how supportive the principal is working with the union directives.

rainbowtrout

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

getting rid of TY would mean 27,000 more people on the dole in three years time because there won't any extra jobs/ 3rd level places for them

even our government aren't quite that stupid to believe that huge additional costs are worth the savings ( though they did screw up the figues on the tax relief on public service pension )

keeping them in school is the cheapest option and IMHO one of the reasons why TY was started in the first place

I don't doubt your logic but I do doubt the ability of our government to make a sensible decision.:(