Easier for male primary teachers to get jobs-myth or fact?

MilkTheGroup

i know this could never be the official line andx its not pc but in reality do lads have a slight advantage?

ANXIOUS

Yeah one thousand percent, someone on a board of management said it also know a girl who was temp in a school for two years and when a permanent job came up she last to a man straight out of pats. A few years later shew final got the position.

byhookorbycrook

Not any more, used to be true when schools wanted a man to do the GAA,heaven forbid that a woman teach football.

ANXIOUS

I think its down to the maternity leave.

MilkTheGroup

ANXIOUS wrote: »

I think its down to the maternity leave.

sorry what do you mean by that? do you mean men won't be taking maternity leave so they'd be preferable...?

dambarude

I'd like the answer to be yes, fact :pac:.

ANXIOUS

MilkTheGroup wrote: »

sorry what do you mean by that? do you mean men won't be taking maternity leave so they'd be preferable...?

Yes cuts down on the hassle of having to get a sub in for anything up to five times to cover a womens maternity leave.

Feeona

I was working in a school before OP where one of the staff told me that the female principal doesn't like hiring men :eek: Seemed to be true, because there wasn't one male on the staff. I was surprised to be told this, it's not the sort of thing one goes around blabbing about.

I really don't think it's that much easier for men to be hired than women to be honest. There may be a slight advantage alright (ie redressing the balance in the staff room might be one reason), but I really wouldn't count on it. I know a good few female teachers who were hired ahead of men in jobs they went for.

ShamoBuc

Feeona wrote: »

I was working in a school before OP where one of the staff told me that the female principal doesn't like hiring men :eek: Seemed to be true, because there wasn't one male on the staff. I was surprised to be told this, it's not the sort of thing one goes around blabbing about.

I really don't think it's that much easier for men to be hired than women to be honest. There may be a slight advantage alright (ie redressing the balance in the staff room might be one reason), but I really wouldn't count on it. I know a good few female teachers who were hired ahead of men in jobs they went for.

Probably only had one toilet in the school:rolleyes:

Mary28

I think it's nothing to do with maternity leave or sports. There is a massive imbalance and shortage of men in primary school teaching. I think most schools will try to give the best person the job, if that person has a big sport or music or anything else interest that will add value it's going to be a bonus. However if two candidates are relatively equal in skill and one is male and one is female then I'd probably give the job to the male if the current ratio of male to female teachers was imbalanced in the school. It's def not a get out of jail free card but it's got to help.

gerryff

I am a male teacher and I know that some female principals don't want male teachers as they feel men don't take the job as serious as females. I have never found it easier than females to get a job.

dambarude

gerryff wrote: »

I am a male teacher and I know that some female principals don't want male teachers as they feel men don't take the job as serious as females.

It just shows that the whole area is full of broad generalizations. So it's best not to make any assumptions either way.

I'd be disappointed to have the same thought of myself as a job applicant.

jimstir

1): It is definately true that some female principals won't hire a male.
2): there are a lot of all girl convent schools where NO male has EVER gotten a job and NEVER will (fact)
3): if the job is specifically for an infant class the Principal will probably give it to a female

byhookorbycrook

jimstir wrote: »

1): It is definately true that some female principals won't hire a male.
2): there are a lot of all girl convent schools where NO male has EVER gotten a job and NEVER will (fact)
3): if the job is specifically for an infant class the Principal will probably give it to a female

:D:D:D:D:D

This is all down to deep and thorough research, no doubt.:rolleyes:
1)There are no principals that I know-or indeed any of my friends know -
(and that's a LOT of school covered) where this is true.
2)Sorry,that's horse manure.Do you have a crystal ball???
3)There are no longer jobs specific to a grade,even learning support jobs are advertised as "initially for".

Are you actually a primary teacher???

ShamoBuc

jimstir wrote: »

1): It is definately true that some female principals won't hire a male.
2): there are a lot of all girl convent schools where NO male has EVER gotten a job and NEVER will (fact)
3): if the job is specifically for an infant class the Principal will probably give it to a female

I subbed for 3 months ( about 5 years ago, 4th class) in a girls convent school - I was told I was the first Male teacher ever in that school - frightening really, but true.
The same school, currently, has an all female staff!

byhookorbycrook

But you DID work there and there is nothing to say a male teacher will not teach there in the future.

jimstir

byhookorbycrook wrote: »

jimstir wrote: »

1): It is definately true that some female principals won't hire a male.
2): there are a lot of all girl convent schools where NO male has EVER gotten a job and NEVER will (fact)
3): if the job is specifically for an infant class the Principal will probably give it to a female

:D:D:D:D:D

This is all down to deep and thorough research, no doubt.:rolleyes:
1)There are no principals that I know-or indeed any of my friends know -
(and that's a LOT of school covered) where this is true.
2)Sorry,that's horse manure.Do you have a crystal ball???
3)There are no longer jobs specific to a grade,even learning support jobs are advertised as "initially for".

Are you actually a primary teacher???

I am a very experienced primary teacher, I wouldnt dare comment on a topic if I didn't know alot about it. I'm shocked U even ask me that question. With regard to my 2nd point, it is a fact there are many convent schools in this country where no man has every worked, (and probably never will based on past practice, unless of course something changes) So it's not "horse manure" - that is such a rude way of describing my comment. I feel everyone is entitled to their opinions and I think its really rude that U were so dismissive. Can U PM me any primary school in the country where a woman has never ever been employed?

byhookorbycrook

You cannot say that it is a fact that no male would ever work in a particular school, so yes, it's manure.

I'd be interested to know of any female who won't hire a male as this would be a case for the Equality commission.

As you are a teacher should know that no job is advertised for a specific class anymore.

pooch90

I can see both sides to this.

I currently work in an all boys school with a large intake of Egyptian boys. A lot of these boys(not all) have been raised in a culture where they simply do not respect women. Any time any of the female staff correct/discipline them they will simply laugh in your face. A male teacher will be obeyed immediately. If I were the principal, taking that demographic into consideration, I would be all for a large amount of males on staff.

I have also worked in a convent, the principal scoffed at the idea of ever hiring a male teacher. There has never been a male member of staff or even a male TP student. This school would have a very high turn over of staff too.

A few years ago (still recessionary times but teacher job situation not so bad) I went for an interview in 2 teacher school. I had 3 years experience,multigrade experience etc. Basically perfect applicant (I know that sounds terrible) with references from well respected principal who was know to all on BOM. Did a really good interview and make a good connection with all on interview panel. Didn't get the job, was gutted.

Happened to have to call out to the school a few weeks later on an errand for above mentioned well respected principal. Got talking to principal of the school I interviewed in. She pulled me aside for a chat and said I did a fantastic interview and she really wanted me for the job. However, the PP point blank refused as he wanted the NQT boy to teach the boys hurling. Her words not mine. She was a new principal and tried to fight him on it but to no avail.

jimstir

pooch90 wrote: »

I can see both sides to this.

I currently work in an all boys school with a large intake of Egyptian boys. A lot of these boys(not all) have been raised in a culture where they simply do not respect women. Any time any of the female staff correct/discipline them they will simply laugh in your face. A male teacher will be obeyed immediately. If I were the principal, taking that demographic into consideration, I would be all for a large amount of males on staff.

I have also worked in a convent, the principal scoffed at the idea of ever hiring a male teacher. There has never been a male member of staff or even a male TP student. This school would have a very high turn over of staff too.

A few years ago (still recessionary times but teacher job situation not so bad) I went for an interview in 2 teacher school. I had 3 years experience,multigrade experience etc. Basically perfect applicant (I know that sounds terrible) with references from well respected principal who was know to all on BOM. Did a really good interview and make a good connection with all on interview panel. Didn't get the job, was gutted.

Happened to have to call out to the school a few weeks later on an errand for above mentioned well respected principal. Got talking to principal of the school I interviewed in.. . .

Pooch, FANTASTIC intelligent coments, I agree with everything U say. Thank U for READING my entire post and for posting an intelligent reply. To be a good teacher we need to be fair, calm, respectful to others views, articulate, well able to express ourselves clearly etc. From reading your short, balanced post You tick all these boxes. I hope U have found or will soon find, a permanent job.

MilkTheGroup

ok after that last post, im DEFINITELY volunteering to coach the kids on my local Gaelic and hurling teams!! that would be horrific to work really hard studying, preparing for teaching practice, trying to become a good teacher only to go for interview and not to get a job cos u have no connection or experience with the GAA!!

is there a priest on every board of management of a catholic school btw?? while im at it i think ill join the local church choir to have it on my cv and get in with priests on interview boards!

feck it, i dnt care if it gets me a job!!

melancholy blues

jimstir, I work near a school where there is a principal who does not hire male staff. If there is one, I'm sure there are others. Having said that, I've heard of ridiculous incidences of males getting jobs due to the aforementioned 'football teaching' desire, who turn out to be poor/poorly prepared teachers. So as mentioned, there are a lot of generalisations in the area, and it's really not fair to paint principals or male staff with one broad stroke.

pooch90

jimstir wrote: »

I hope U have found or will soon find, a permanent job.

Maybe next year, panel rights!

To be honest, I think the nepotism is out the door for permanent jobs anyway as they will all be panel filled from now on.

afkasurfjunkie

pooch90 wrote: »

Maybe next year, panel rights!

To be honest, I think the nepotism is out the door for permanent jobs anyway as they will all be panel filled from now on.

and how are you chosen off the panel?...
ever hear of a panel not clearing for months because one person is left on it?

byhookorbycrook

Panel managers were put in place so posts had to be filled, schools couldn't try to wait it out.

pooch90

What I was actually getting at with the comment amount the panel eliminating nepotism for permanent jobs was that it is now next to impossible for the Vice Principal's son straight out of Pats to get a permanent job.

eoinseoighe12

Hi all,

I'm in 6th Year will be going to college next year. Therefore, I am in the process of deciding what I plan on studying. I've been constantly thinking about what I would like to do since TY really. I have narrowed down my choices to (1) Primary Teaching St. Pats/ NUI Maynooth OR (2) Irish and French Trinity OR UCD OR NUI Maynooth with the plan to go on and do Secondary School Teaching. My points range is 355 - 470.

I have thought about this long and hard and I know that teaching at either level is what I am passionate about and something I would look forward to developing a career in.

I obviously know that the current climate isn't the best for entering the profession..... lower pay of new recruits, more hours a week etc.... However, it is what I really, really want to; the work life balance suits my desire to do lots of travelling and I can pursue other sporting and voluntary activities which I am interested in. I am also very lucky to be inspired by such wonderful, young teachers in my school who I really look up to as something I aspire to be like - likewise for the teachers I had in primary school.

I have worked out that if I were to pursue (A) Primary Teaching I would graduate in June 2017 from St. Pats or (B) Secondary Teaching June 2019 when I complete the 2 year PGDE.

Also, with regards Primary teaching, would I have an advantage applying for posts given that I am a man and the ratio of male to female primary teachers is so low? I suspect I may have a better chance applying for jobs in the new schools to be built around the country in the next 5 years or so....

With regard to the new schools being built at both levels between now and 2017, as a newly qualified primary/ secondary teacher of Irish and French, would I have a good shot at a post in any of these schools?

For Irish and French as a combination for teaching, are my job prospects good? I have spoken to three of my teachers in the last week, and they specifically mentioned how there is such a high demand for Irish teachers (thats not the only reason why I want to study it, I love doing it in school!) that I would find it relatively easy to get a job.

Thank you for taking the time to read this and answer my questions - I would really appreciate some feedback from teachers at primary/ second level...

Thanks a million!

byhookorbycrook

Primary and secondary are vastly different. I often hear primary teachers say they wouldn't touch secondary for any money and secondary teachers say the opposite!!

Have you done any observation in either sector?Primary has changed in almost every way you can think of over the last ten years.It's also very different to be sitting/standing at the other side of the classroom.

eoinseoighe12

byhookorbycrook wrote: »

Primary and secondary are vastly different. I often hear primary teachers say they wouldn't touch secondary for any money and secondary teachers say the opposite!!

Have you done any observation in either sector?Primary has changed in almost every way you can think of over the last ten years.It's also very different to be sitting/standing at the other side of the classroom.

Yes. In TY in I did a full week of work experience in a local Primary School of 100 students observing classes from Juniors up to 6th. I was also doing Yard supervision.

I know enough about Second Level through observing in my own school. Also, I did three projects in TY where I was assigned to fully prepare a class in a subject of our choice to teach to a 1st year class. I also did the same again with another 1st year class and and a 2nd Year Class. I also taught SPHE classes to 1st years from January to May as part of a Peer Education Project in TY also. * All of these gave me a fantastic insight into the work of a teacher.

byhookorbycrook

Great, so you have a bit of insight into what each involves. It's no longer easier for male teachers to get a job, in primary anyhow.

eoinseoighe12

byhookorbycrook wrote: »

Great, so you have a bit of insight into what each involves. It's no longer easier for male teachers to get a job, in primary anyhow.

Maybe I'm being slightly naive but when I look at the website educationposts.ie I see currently 249 primary posts advertised (143 of which are permanent).... So I disagree with the general line bandied about all of time that there are 'No Jobs' in teaching, it would seem to me there are, but, you have to really sell yourself and give yourself that extra advantage over someone else.... thats how I see it anyway from my perspective....

Also, given that I would be qualifying as a Primary teacher in 4 years time (2017).... what is the likelihood that things will have turned around in terms of teaching?

nice_guy80

supply and demand

there are so few qualified young male teachers out there that they are going to be in demand

byhookorbycrook

249 jobs in the entire country. Many of these schools will have temporary staff vying for these posts.I know of schools who have had over 500 applications for even a maternity leave.

The "wily factor" as we used to call it,is no longer an "edge" in getting jobs.
2017 ,we'd hoope things will have improved, but all the colleges continue to churn out large amounts of B. Eds and post grads, even though there are already thousands with no jobs.

Some quotes from educationposts:
"In my 6th year & got all the bells & whistles (TC no, stat declaration, updated vetting again, dip, plus lots of experience). nothing & more nothing."
"5th year out. no dip, no job, no clue, no hope"


I'm not trying to tell you that you mustn't go into teaching, but I'm telling you that it is going to be a hard road.

haulagebasher

MilkTheGroup wrote: »

sorry what do you mean by that? do you mean men won't be taking maternity leave so they'd be preferable...?

In fairness, its true. I remember when I was in school and college, practically every year there was some teacher or lecturer out on maternity leave. From the schools (or any employer FTM) perspective, that creates a whole lot of hassle arranging new sub in teachers not to mention the cost of having to pay two people for the work of only one.

Not only in teaching, it happens across the board routinely.

A big company could probably manage but in an SME a staff member going on the maternity could be enough to drive the company under. For a small company, one woman going on the maternity could mean a 25 or 30% hike in labour costs for 0% increase in productivity at best or usually a drop in productivity due to having to train up the new staff memeber.

Personally from a business perspective I'd like to see a voluntary opt out where at contract stage, the employer and employee would agree that no maternity would be paid until it was, say, 5 years into the job. Again for smaller businesses benefits like maternity can be a potential game over occurence for an otherwise functioing business.

Is it fair? No, it's not. But shure what can you do? It's just the way things are!

echo beach

haulagebasher wrote: »

Personally from a business perspective I'd like to see a voluntary opt out where at contract stage, the employer and employee would agree that no maternity would be paid until it was, say, 5 years into the job. Again for smaller businesses benefits like maternity can be a potential game over occurence for an otherwise functioing business.

At the risk of dragging the thread way off topic you obviously aren't aware that there is no obligation on any business to pay staff on maternity leave. The state pays maternity benefit. Some employers top it up as a 'perk' to reward and retain staff.

In an ideal world both parents would share the parental leave to care for the child.

It is easy to forget that men have time out of the workforce as well for all sorts of reasons. If one man breaks his leg doing some 'macho' activity nobody thinks it would be better not to employ any more men.:)

haulagebasher

echo beach wrote: »

At the risk of dragging the thread way off topic you obviously aren't aware that there is no obligation on any business to pay staff on maternity leave. The state pays maternity benefit. Some employers top it up as a 'perk' to reward and retain staff.

In an ideal world both parents would share the parental leave to care for the child.

It is easy to forget that men have time out of the workforce as well for all sorts of reasons. If one man breaks his leg doing some 'macho' activity nobody thinks it would be better not to employ any more men.:)

Ok My bad. It though the employer had to pay it.

Other than the leave itself, employers can see women as higher risk due to being absent due to pregnancy problems and then all the stuff with childcare and that. Anyway, it's not too many employers will be comfortable with an 8 or 9 month pregnant woman being present on the premises and interacting with customers.
At risk of sounding horrible and nasty, it sometimes can be seen as "unprofessional" to have heavily pregnant women waddling about in a professional setting or around high power clients. I know it's nasty, but it's an unfortunate reality .

Of course men can be absent too but with women it is a near certainty that the employer will have to deal with at some stage.

ahnowbrowncow

echo beach wrote: »

It is easy to forget that men have time out of the workforce as well for all sorts of reasons. If one man breaks his leg doing some 'macho' activity nobody thinks it would be better not to employ any more men.:)

That has to be one of if not the most ridiculous thing I've read on boards

haulagebasher

ahnowbrowncow wrote: »

That has to be one of if not the most ridiculous thing I've read on boards

Why? Are you anti maternity too? It's not too off the wall in fairness.

ahnowbrowncow

haulagebasher wrote: »

Why? Are you anti maternity too? It's not too off the wall in fairness.

Where did you pull anti maternity from??? I quoted a sentence that didn't mention maternity.

What I think ridiculous is echo beach suggesting men are likely to take time off work due to being macho, breaking a leg being an example. I would like echo beach to expand on these "all sorts of reasons" that men take off work and also why these reasons are seemingly restricted to males

byhookorbycrook

Can we get back on topic ,please?

eoinseoighe12

byhookorbycrook wrote: »

Can we get back on topic ,please?

Would you not agree that given in the primary education sector that given the few men in the profession in comparison to women, in a situation where a post is required to be filled in the school (and there are no temp staff already in that school who would go for that job)... if out of all the applicants would any men who applied not have a slight advantage as it would help create a gender balance in a school which is, in my opinion, hugely beneficial for the students, boys in particular, who really do need male role models in primary school who, from my point of view, have a greater understanding of how boys cope in school.....

what do you think?

ahnowbrowncow

eoinseoighe12 wrote: »

Would you not agree that given in the primary education sector that given the few men in the profession in comparison to women, in a situation where a post is required to be filled in the school (and there are no temp staff already in that school who would go for that job)... if out of all the applicants would any men who applied not have a slight advantage as it would help create a gender balance in a school which is, in my opinion, hugely beneficial for the students, boys in particular, who really do need male role models in primary school who, from my point of view, have a greater understanding of how boys cope in school.....

what do you think?

There should be a gender quota of 40%

byhookorbycrook

It depends on the needs of the school. Time was a man was thought to needed to do the football/hurling, but not so much anymore.

I agree that gender balance is important-but I'm not the one who would be hiring!

DDC1990

Disagree.

Male, Qualified, Unemployed! :P