Do you resent being inspected by the inspectorate of the DES?

Peter Flynt

Ireland has one of the most comprehensive system for inspecting teachers anywhere in the world (as opposed to Finland who have no teacher or school inspectors).

Inspections are becoming so routine for each teacher that they are now, in some ways, losing their potency as teachers, weary with an ever increasing workload and less and less pay, are seemingly becoming ambivalent to the whole process.

I open this thread as I am due to be inspected shortly - and, quite frankly, as time goes on I'm beginning to have more and more contempt for the process.

Most inspectors have absolutely no idea of the pressures [both inside and outside school] that teachers face as a result of the "reform" (that is cuts) to their wage and terms and conditions of employment.

All 120 or so inspectors have been appointed pre-2008 and some have not taught in a classroom for over ten years. . . they are literally claiming "experience" from a by-gone era. Their "experience" is nothing more than a memory - it's that long they've taught.

There also appears to be quite a hypocrisy from the inspectorate - seeking teacher self-evaluation forms whilst conveniently forgetting that there appears to be no evaluation forms from inspector to teacher [One group of inspectors told my entire staff three years ago that a confidential online system would be setup for teachers. . . which, of course, has never happened]

So what are your opinions and experiences?

RealJohn

To be honest, I'm fine with it. I don't care if they want to inspect me as long as the inspector doesn't disrupt my teaching. We had a WSE two years ago (I think) and I decided more or less straight away that I'd be doing nothing different for the inspector. Whatever class they inspected would be taught as normal with nothing special or different for the occasion and that's what I did.

Now I'll grant you, I have the luxury of permanency so I knew the inspector was no threat to me but to be honest, that's the way it should be. If you're good at your job, who cares who's watching? Obviously you could have a bad day which might reflect badly on you but if that happens, so what? Learn from it and be better next time. Just don't put yourself under undue pressure.

There are lots of things I resent about how I'm treated by the various authorities but inspections are a long way from the top of the list.

ahahah

Now I'll grant you, I have the luxury of permanency so I knew the inspector was no threat to me but to be honest, that's the way it should be.



Come on..what's the point of an inspector then? They are there to inspect teachers and there are plenty of permanent ones who are not good enough.:eek::eek:

RealJohn

ahahah wrote: »

Now I'll grant you, I have the luxury of permanency so I knew the inspector was no threat to me but to be honest, that's the way it should be.



Come on..what's the point of an inspector then? They are there to inspect teachers and there are plenty of permanent ones who are not good enough.:eek::eek:

What I meant is that a teacher shouldn't feel threatened by an inspection and went on to qualify that by saying that if you're good at your job you have nothing to fear. By leaving that next part out you've very much quoted me out of context.

seavill

I agree with others. If you are doing your job properly you have nothing to worry about. They will always find something wrong, or something to say at the end of it regardless of how good or bad you were. Your name is not attached to any inspection published. Locals may know, or if you are the only teacher there in a subject it will be obvious but if you move schools it won't follow you.

In reality if you are doing your schemes, have good control of your class and are making a good attempt to engage your class, then you cover all bases.
If you have no plans, no resources and just chalk and talk for every class then there may be an issue from the inspectors point of view but whatever way you do it if you are getting results your principal will be happy and so will the kids and parents.

Some inspectors are very nice people and have a lot of cop on. Some not so, but you could say the same about your classroom. I know one inspector that believes they should all have to go back into the class for a few years every now and then because like you said they know themselves they are removed to a certain extent.

acequion

RealJohn,I wouldn't bother defending myself to the teacher bashers. These people's attitude is so predictably one sided,it doesn't even dignify an answer.

I think some of the posters replying to this thread are slightly missing the point. The question the op asked is not if inspections worry us,rather if we resent them. Most unfortunately,in the top down business model currently being applied in Irish education,the modus operandi is indeed to worry and frighten teachers with frequent heavy handed inspections.Somebody up there is deciding how and what we teach and the purpose of the inspections is to ensure that we're doing exactly as we're told.

Do I resent it? Absolutely! Don't get me wrong. I'm all for transparency and realise that occasional inspections are necessary to ensure that the curriculum is being properly delivered by competent teachers. I would have no problem whatsoever with the odd drive by visit from an open minded and realistic inspector. What I resent, is the excessive frequency of these inspections,the narrow mindedness and downright incompetency of some of the inspectors, and the false window dressing that goes on for WSE's and notified subject inspections.In the case of the latter nothing of any value is achieved,loads of time is wasted and the most important aspect of our job is neglected while the circus is in town, ie our students.

I have been inspected twice in the last three years and escaped a drive by last year because I was out at the orals. The first was a subject inspection by an inspector who has also been giving talks in schools around the country on school self evaluation, and who has been thoroughly criticised by many,including posters here, for poor presentation and communication skills.This is who I was inspected by! Enough said!

Two years ago we had a WSE and my other subject was on the list to be inspected.The inspector was downright arrogant,took many of us to task because we weren't dotting t's and crossing i's exactly as the DES wanted.Needless to say this inspector was very much resented by teachers and more interestingly by pupils.Teenagers certainly don't suffer fools and are hugely intuitive.

Last year we had a drive by,which I don't have a problem with in theory,but I resent the patronising idea of a feedback session afterwards.

I pretty much learned my craft on the ground,with real kids, in real classrooms,with many real hours of study and research.If I feel I need to upskill in any way,I will do it. I basically don't need these guys telling me how I should be doing the job I've been doing very successfully for the past 20 years.

The Fins realise that good teaching is not about box ticking,that it's very much a talent honed by spontaneity and creativity. They trust their teachers to do an excellent job and Finish teachers do just that. The Irish, on the other hand are all about what looks good on paper,while all the while cultivating a climate of fear and mistrust.

seavill

acequion wrote: »

Last year we had a drive by,which I don't have a problem with in theory,but I resent the patronising idea of a feedback session afterwards.

I pretty much learned my craft on the ground,with real kids, in real classrooms,with many real hours of study and research.If I feel I need to upskill in any way,I will do it. I basically don't need these guys telling me how I should be doing the job I've been doing very successfully for the past 20 years.

.

OK maybe it wasn't made clear but I certainly didn't miss the point. No I don't resent the inspections because of what I set out above.

can I ask if you don't see a problem with the drive bys what would the point in them be if there was no form of feedback afterwards, are they not just pointless otherwise.

Maybe you have been doing your job successfully for 20 years but others have not and are still doing it the same way. We all know of our colleagues that are not up to it. Maybe not in every school but in all the ones ive been in so far there has been one or two. Even if you have been doing it successfully for 20 years a new idea here and there isn't necessarily a bad thing surely.

There has been inspections in my school but I have not been inspected in 7 years out of college. A previous school of mine had its first subject inspection EVER in my subject area this year. We have had a MILL and a review of it also, along with subject inspections. Again my school has never had a drive by (I will probably be hit with one Monday morning we come back now just for saying that:))

losullivan

I resent the box ticking exercise employed by many inspectors. I have been inspected as part of a WSE, a 'drive by' incidental and a subject inspection. I actually found the incidental inspection the least stressful as the inspector was only interested in the teaching and learning that took place in the classroom,no interest in mind numbing paperwork. The feedback was very positive and realistic.I still feel that teachers should be given more notice of these inspections as a mark of basic courtesy.
The subject inspection was farcical. A huge emphasis was placed on paperwork and ticking the right boxes with fancy buzz words.I found the weeks leading up to the inspection to be stressful and resented the show we were forced to put on. The inspector interrogated/interviewed students during my lesson and some of the kids later commented on her rudeness and disrespect. The feedback was laughable...I was told that I had 'ticked the numeracy box' as I had written the date on the white board! This individual was completely out of touch with the realities of teaching in a typical over crowded classroom.I believe that all inspectors should have to go back into the classroom themselves for at least one year every 6/7 years.

acequion

seavill wrote: »

OK maybe it wasn't made clear but I certainly didn't miss the point. No I don't resent the inspections because of what I set out above.

can I ask if you don't see a problem with the drive bys what would the point in them be if there was no form of feedback afterwards, are they not just pointless otherwise.

Maybe you have been doing your job successfully for 20 years but others have not and are still doing it the same way. We all know of our colleagues that are not up to it. Maybe not in every school but in all the ones ive been in so far there has been one or two. Even if you have been doing it successfully for 20 years a new idea here and there isn't necessarily a bad thing surely.

There has been inspections in my school but I have not been inspected in 7 years out of college. A previous school of mine had its first subject inspection EVER in my subject area this year. We have had a MILL and a review of it also, along with subject inspections. Again my school has never had a drive by (I will probably be hit with one Monday morning we come back now just for saying that:))

Yes,totally see your point seavill. I was just giving my opinion from my perspective as an experienced teacher,but of course I'm always open to constructive suggestions and new ideas. Nobody should ever think they've got it all totally sussed,things are always changing anyway. And you're right that an inspection would be pointless without feedback. However as long as it's not patronising and tunnel visioned. My own experience with inspectors, so far, leaves me very much less than impressed with their own credentials to be passing comment on teachers much better and more clued in than they are.

I can also see where a good inspector could be very helpful to young teachers learning the ropes. I suppose the fact that myself and teachers of my vintage had to learn the ropes ourselves, makes us intolerant of these officious box tickers.

Overall though,I feel that with funds being so scarce, a big saving could be made if they cut down on all the inspections.I would actually cut out the subject inspections and keep the WSE's [once every ten years is plenty] and occasional drive bys. The drive by appears to be the least stressful for the teacher and the most authentic of all the inspections.

Pwpane

acequion wrote: »

Most unfortunately,in the top down business model currently being applied in Irish education,the modus operandi is indeed to worry and frighten teachers with frequent heavy handed inspections.Somebody up there is deciding how and what we teach and the purpose of the inspections is to ensure that we're doing exactly as we're told.

This is why I do, indeed, resent the inspections.

Bananatop

I think it depends on the inspector. I was lucky to have been inspected by a practical, down to earth inspector last year. He gave me constructive criticism which I took on board. His advice was far more valuable than box-ticking 'advice' on how to do DES friendly short/long term plans which I never, ever refer to once I have them done.

I am a much more effective teacher when I jot down what I'm going to do/have done. I'm not as stressed because I don't follow the unwieldy short/long term templates prescribed by the DES. As a result, my students pick up on my enjoyment of the job I do, and they're far more eager to learn. There is a side to me that believes however that the DES want a production line style of education, the reason being that the public clamour for figures/numbers with regards to student progress etc, and production line education lends itself very well to spouting figures.

Very unfortunate in my opinion. Box ticking leads to stressed/apathetic teachers, which in turn leads to students who have no interest in learning and a feeling of general malaise overall. But the band plays on, because nobody wants the responsibility of shouting 'STOP'.

byhookorbycrook

We will have a WSE shortly, doesn't bother me, to be honest.I am teaching for many years and keep abreast with developments and try to use the best ideas/strategies. I'm doing my best and if there is a better way, then I'd like to know what I should be doing. Otherwise, meh, don't let the door hit you on the way out, inspector.

Delphi91

In relation to the OP's question, I have no problem with being inspected. If I'm doing a good job, then the odd bit of affirmation doesn't go astray . If I'm making a balls of it, then constructive criticism is always welcome too.

I've gotten some feedback from other Principals and DPs lately in relation to their experience of recent inspections - it would appear that Assessment for Learning (AFL) is high on the list of things the inspectors are looking for evidence of. One principal was saying that his teachers were a bit miffed at the draft report. One of his teachers, who was doing an excellent job (demand for their class always exceeded supply), got excellent results each year, etc, etc yet they were picked up on the lack of AFL in their classes. I'm not saying this is right or wrong, I'm just saying that it is high of the Inspectorate's agenda at the moment. So for all of you out there who are expecting inspections, it's one of the things that they will be looking for.

In relation to the box-ticking, I guess they have to have some sort of metric to compare schools with. Certainly when we were subjected to a WSE about 7 years ago, all the questions asked by the inspectors were the questions featured in the "Looking at Our School" booklet produced by the DES. Our recent DEIS inspection didn't seem to have the same structure, although it did focus on the pillars of DEIS. Given the vastly different types of schools, school populations, socio-economic background of pupils, parental involvement, etc, etc there would have to be some sort of commonality in the areas examined in each school if any sort of comparison were to be made. Yes, it's not ideal by any means, but is there any other way of doing it??

doc_17

Last time I was inspected was in the dip 10 years ago. What I would resent though is being inspected by say, an English teacher when I'm teaching a Maths class. What do I know about teaching English? What do they know about teaching maths? That's how you know it's a box ticking exercise at times.

"Oh you wrote the learning outcome on the board! You're a model teacher." What a pile of rubbish it can be at times.

acequion

Delphi91 wrote: »

I've gotten some feedback from other Principals and DPs lately in relation to their experience of recent inspections - it would appear that Assessment for Learning (AFL) is high on the list of things the inspectors are looking for evidence of. One principal was saying that his teachers were a bit miffed at the draft report. One of his teachers, who was doing an excellent job (demand for their class always exceeded supply), got excellent results each year, etc, etc yet they were picked up on the lack of AFL in their classes. I'm not saying this is right or wrong, I'm just saying that it is high of the Inspectorate's agenda at the moment. So for all of you out there who are expecting inspections, it's one of the things that they will be looking for.

This AFL malarky infuriates the hell out of me! Isn't that the three stars and a wish codology? That is a typical example of the powers that be deciding exactly how we dot the i's and dare we deviate! The story above typifies why inspectors are so often resented. An excellent teacher taken to task because he wasn't doing things their way! As far as I'm concerned, giving feedback to students is an individual thing and the how is not important,so long as the feedback is given and the student learns.

AFL is one of a number of buzz words being bandied about and everyone is expected to scuttle off and make sure they're doing it. I,personally,have no intention of using something just to keep the inspector happy.

byhookorbycrook

We do AFL all the time, as teachers, but some inspectors seem to think we should slavishly follow the English system of ticking boxes very time a child picks up a pencil or opens their mouths. We need to be left teach, not drowned in pointless paperwork. Of course I need my notes/plans /reviews, but ones that help me teach, not ones to please an inspector who may not have taught a class in 10 years.

endakenny

byhookorbycrook wrote: »

We do AFL all the time, as teachers, but some inspectors seem to think we should slavishly follow the English system of ticking boxes very time a child picks up a pencil or opens their mouths. We need to be left teach, not drowned in pointless paperwork. Of course I need my notes/plans /reviews, but ones that help me teach, not ones to please an inspector who may not have taught a class in 10 years.

Can you give examples of the questions that you are asked in AFL that you answer by ticking boxes?

What form of redress is there for teachers who believe that inspectors are subjecting them to harassment?

byhookorbycrook

Harassment?? Ticking boxes refers to the English system where kids have to marked as reaching targets/objectives in minute detail.

worseforwear

I've no problem with the inspectors themselves, any I have dealt with I have found to be very helpful with either their criticism or affirmation. I do have some issues with the inspection process however. Inspection reports are too general. Some subject departments suffer a poor report because some individual performs very poorly and tarnishes their colleagues expert work. Sometimes the inspection will identify or highlight where there may or may not be a problem of an under-performing staff member, but it can't supply any support in resolving that problem. I understand why posters find the inspectorate frustrating in how it champions a certain model for a period and, suddenly changes direction when there is a new fad in town. Like everything else in life it's not all good and not all bad. I also think that the standard of education in Ireland would be worse overall without the Inspectorate. As much as we dislike the notion, we are a branch of public service, and like other public services we need a watchdog. Would anybody have more confidence in the health system, without HIQA?

Peter Flynt

worseforwear wrote: »

I also think that the standard of education in Ireland would be worse overall without the Inspectorate. As much as we dislike the notion, we are a branch of public service, and like other public services we need a watchdog. Would anybody have more confidence in the health system, without HIQA?

It's a fair point. . . However there's no inspection system in Finland.

I find it very interesting that in a time of never-ending austerity that there appears to be money for 120 or so inspectors whilst some children are losing their SNAs, class sizes are rising and teachers are doing more with less.

The same cannot be said for the inspectorate.

HRA21

Peter Flynt wrote: »

It's a fair point. . . However there's no inspection system in Finland.

I find it very interesting that in a time of never-ending austerity that there appears to be money for 120 or so inspectors whilst some children are losing their SNAs, class sizes are rising and teachers are doing more with less.

The same cannot be said for the inspectorate.

Yes I agree.
Can't see why they have avoided the knife. I would think that their workload has increased a fair bit in the last couple of years with Sse and drive by etc. Their expectations of what schools could and should provide in the last few years is something that certainly should have been trimmed in line with the cuts in resources. Schools are still being criticised for not providing a full guidance programme when everybody knows that schools are on their knees.

Peter Flynt

HRA21 wrote: »

Yes I agree.
Can't see why they have avoided the knife. I would think that their workload has increased a fair bit in the last couple of years with Sse and drive by etc. Their expectations of what schools could and should provide in the last few years is something that certainly should have been trimmed in line with the cuts in resources. Schools are still being criticised for not providing a full guidance programme when everybody knows that schools are on their knees.

To what extent are inspectors in touch with reality?

Teachers are providing 88 extra hours per year (one month) unpaid on top of an ever increasing array of cuts and demands.

NONE of the inspectors have any experience in dealing with such a scenario.

They don't obtain credibility by hearing about what goes on.

Earlier this year my school had a Special Needs Inspection. The inspector demanded why each special needs teacher did not have an individual lesson plan for each individual child requiring special needs (not each individual class. . but each child)

She didn't really want to know when it became apparent that this would have meant about 4000 lesson plans per year for one particular teacher. She was also asked if she had such individual plans when she was a teacher . . . to which she claimed she did (over ten years ago) - a claim no one believed.

Such Inspectors discredit the inspectorate.

acequion

Very much agree with the last three posts. I would also say that before this rather recent increase in the number and type of inspection,the education system was certainly no less effective.

Whatever about the minority that under perform,a good teacher is self motivated and works well anyway. The omnipresent watchdog has little effect on that

endakenny

Peter Flynt wrote: »

It's a fair point. . . However there's no inspection system in Finland.

I find it very interesting that in a time of never-ending austerity that there appears to be money for 120 or so inspectors whilst some children are losing their SNAs, class sizes are rising and teachers are doing more with less.

The same cannot be said for the inspectorate.

I haven't come across anything that suggests that vacancies left by the retirements of school inspectors are exempt from the recruitment moratorium.

Peter Flynt

endakenny wrote: »

I haven't come across anything that suggests that vacancies left by the retirements of school inspectors are exempt from the recruitment moratorium.

There are 120 inspectors NOW. . .I haven't come across anything that suggests that their workload has increased over the past 6 years or so.

None have experience of what it is like to be a teacher in Ireland post-austerity : that was the point

byhookorbycrook

Individual education plans (IEPs) we're snuck in as part of Epsen . We have never been resourced to do them and they are not legally required yet the DES continue to demand them .

In primary there is a move by the DES to remove inspectors from inspecting students for the dip, not sure about secondary

Peter Flynt

byhookorbycrook wrote: »

Individual education plans (IEPs) we're snuck in as part of Epsen . We have never been resourced to do them and they are not legally required yet the DES continue to demand them .

In primary there is a move by the DES to remove inspectors from inspecting students for the dip, not sure about secondary

Removing Inspectors from inspecting students from the DIP?. . . I thought that was the case already. DIP students have their own college inspectors.

derb12

I think we should be provided with a forum for assessing the inspectors. I've had two brilliant inspectors over the past 10 years who gave me very useful feedback and suggestions that I would not have thought of myself. It can be very useful to get input from a different perspective.
However, I've also experienced the opposite - as part of whole-school rather than subject inspections - where the inspector just made everyone uncomfortable and criticised niggly stupid things like not having the date on the board. Not to mention the SSE expert who bored the pants off the entire staffroom for more than two hours, taking over one of our much needed staff meetings with her poorly prepped presentation. That was an absolute disgrace - 50+ people ... 100+ wasted hours. As far as I know our principal didn't complain but he should have.
I'd like to be able to give positive or negative feedback so that the inspectors who have got something genuinely useful to contribute to the profession get the recognition they deserve and those who don't get shuffled on to something else - perhaps the DES mailroom.

byhookorbycrook

Peter Flynt wrote: »

Removing Inspectors from inspecting students from the DIP?. . . I thought that was the case already. DIP students have their own college inspectors.

Sorry, it's different for secondary of course, but in primary there is a move towards principals having to act as dip inspector for primary NQTs. A real disaster in the making.

gammy_knees

Peter Flynt wrote: »

To what extent are inspectors in touch with reality?

Teachers are providing 88 extra hours per year (one month) unpaid on top of an ever increasing array of cuts and demands.

NONE of the inspectors have any experience in dealing with such a scenario.

They don't obtain credibility by hearing about what goes on.

Earlier this year my school had a Special Needs Inspection. The inspector demanded why each special needs teacher did not have an individual lesson plan for each individual child requiring special needs (not each individual class. . but each child)

She didn't really want to know when it became apparent that this would have meant about 4000 lesson plans per year for one particular teacher. She was also asked if she had such individual plans when she was a teacher . . . to which she claimed she did (over ten years ago) - a claim no one believed.

Such Inspectors discredit the inspectorate.

There is no way anyone would believe that claim but the obvious question was: Is that the reason why you left teaching to become an inspector?

endakenny

derb12 wrote: »

I think we should be provided with a forum for assessing the inspectors. I've had two brilliant inspectors over the past 10 years who gave me very useful feedback and suggestions that I would not have thought of myself. It can be very useful to get input from a different perspective.
However, I've also experienced the opposite - as part of whole-school rather than subject inspections - where the inspector just made everyone uncomfortable and criticised niggly stupid things like not having the date on the board. Not to mention the SSE expert who bored the pants off the entire staffroom for more than two hours, taking over one of our much needed staff meetings with her poorly prepped presentation. That was an absolute disgrace - 50+ people ... 100+ wasted hours. As far as I know our principal didn't complain but he should have.
I'd like to be able to give positive or negative feedback so that the inspectors who have got something genuinely useful to contribute to the profession get the recognition they deserve and those who don't get shuffled on to something else - perhaps the DES mailroom.

So why don't you and your colleagues in that school join forces to stand up to these inspectors? They're not going to have you and your colleagues struck off the Teaching Council register for refusing to do something insignificant such as ticking a particular set of boxes or writing the date on the board. After all, pupils and parents would be outraged if inspectors took such action. Not all parents agree with Emer O'Kelly.

I am baffled by the apparent inability of many teachers to stand up for themselves. There are laws against harassment, including in the workplace. Neither a school inspector nor anyone else is above the law.

derb12

Because, as I said in my opening line - there is no such forum. When you get the inspector's report you can make comments and these may be added to the report, but as far as I know this is at the discretion of the inspector. I agree that it is baffling - but this is the Dept of Education for you!

endakenny

derb12 wrote: »

Because, as I said in my opening line - there is no such forum. When you get the inspector's report you can make comments and these may be added to the report, but as far as I know this is at the discretion of the inspector. I agree that it is baffling - but this is the Dept of Education for you!

They could go to:

https://www.ombudsman.gov.ie/en/About-Us/The-Ombudsman%27s-Office/

At present, the public bodies whose actions may be investigated by the Ombudsman are: all Government Departments, the Health Service Executive (HSE) (and public hospitals and health agencies providing services on behalf of the HSE), and Local Authorities.

School inspectors are civil servants. There's nothing that says that they're exempt from the Ombudsman's remit. There's also nothing to say that teachers cannot make complaints to the Ombudsman.

evolving_doors

byhookorbycrook wrote: »

Individual education plans (IEPs) we're snuck in as part of Epsen . We have never been resourced to do them and they are not legally required yet the DES continue to demand them .

In primary there is a move by the DES to remove inspectors from inspecting students for the dip, not sure about secondary

Indeed, definitely be careful of these IEP's, One part of the EPSEN act was to ensure that the school play its part in the inclusion and education of students with an SEN to which the schools towed the line as much as possible. HOWEVER the other part of the EPSEN act was that the dept. was to also provide the appropriate resources which they have reneged on.... I cant find a source but to my knowledge the unions at the time had a ruling against IEP's until the dept. played their part. That'll never happen.

Secondly, some schools jump in feet first to create extensive IEP's for students and make a selling point of this in their SEN policy. While I agree that the intention is genuine, it's what actually happens that counts rather than a box ticking exercise. I know of a situation where a school had legal action taken against it because of a student's poor results. Guess what was picked apart ? The extensive IEP the school had done,, and it was a case of what the school failed to do according to what they said they'd do in the IEP. Be very careful about doing out IEP's, keep them very general as they do become a legal document.

If an Inspector asks for these then tell them that due to a union ruling IEP's are on hold until the full EPSEN act is implemented, they are not a statutory document.

byhookorbycrook

We do IPLPs, which are kind of poor man's IEPs, but work well for us and for the children. It annoys me to hear of inspectors looking for things teachers aren't even supposed to be doing.

I met an inspector who wanted new targets every 4 weeks at one stage and meetings with OTs/ SLT/psychologists/psychiatrists each time. Shows how out of touch that that particular inspector was!

evolving_doors

byhookorbycrook wrote: »

We do IPLPs, which are kind of poor man's IEPs, but work well for us and for the children. It annoys me to hear of inspectors looking for things teachers aren't even supposed to be doing.

I met an inspector who wanted new targets every 4 weeks at one stage and meetings with OTs/ SLT/psychologists/psychiatrists each time. Shows how out of touch that that particular inspector was!

That's gas, I'd just agree and tell them to coordinate the meetings by emailing info@education.gov.ie or failing that to contact everybody involved on (090) 648 3600 :eek:

Anyhow, back to inspections. We had one recently and I was impressed enough at the insight the inspector had despite the fact that they openly admitted they hadn't taught in a while. They followed ongoing concerns raised in meetings over the last few years, related them to aspects of our current teaching (from what they had observed in class) and gave some tips in addressing it. The advice was based on what they had observed in other schools. From that point of view I think it was a worthwhile exercise and wasn;t too put out by the inspections. Although that's just one case.

Peter Flynt

The issues that are ongoing in teaching are due to the QUANGOcracy which has developed over the last 10 years or so.

There are literally thousands of extremely well paid civil servants who need something to do in order to justify their existence (and huge salaries). . . So, lo and behold, they invent things for themselves to do.

Examples:

1 - Inspectorate visit schools. Extend the scope of the inspections to keep teachers on their toes . . . Thereby creating more inspections - and all from the DES where the inspectors originate from. Meanwhile Finland continues to reach the top of the PISA rankings without inspectors.

2 - You want to be a teacher?. . . Well let the Teaching Council Judge whether your course is suitable. . . At a price to the teacher of course.

3 - You want to become a fully recognised Qualified teacher (even after graduation)? - then attend the 10 post graduate teaching council lectures and ensure you've obtained 200 hours post graduate teaching qualification (you may have to do many of these hours for free. . . of course)

4 - You want to remain a teacher? . . .Then pay the mandatory €65 per year to do so.

5 - There's an incompetent teacher suspected somewhere. . .Well the Teaching Council is on its way.

6 - The Junior Cert needs overhauling. . . Up steps the NCCA with 7/8 years of work provided to this QUANGORACY.

7 - A student absent for more than 20 days? . . .Up steps the NEWB.

8 - Schools close for safety issues. . . Well the National Parents Council must have their view on RTE 6-1 news.

9 - Huge indiscipline in schools? . . .Well the DES releases a PDF file whilst cutting the number of career guidance teachers.

10 - Parents complain about education costs? - Up steps the DES/Minister with ideas of school uniform "surveys"

etc. . .



Is this not all a bit of a circus with the teachers in the middle?

endakenny

Peter Flynt wrote: »

9 - Huge indiscipline in schools? . . .Well the DES releases a PDF file whilst cutting the number of career guidance teachers.

The abolition of the special allocation of guidance counsellors doesn't necessarily mean that a school loses that counsellor. It may just mean that the counsellor has to take ordinary classes in addition to career guidance.

endakenny

It's possible that the increase in inspections is motivated by the understandable mistrust of some parents towards teachers. Here are some examples.

In the Comments section of the following link, Mary Lynch said on Jan 3 at 6:47 PM:

http://www.thejournal.ie/teaching-council-regulations-1246429-Jan2014/

In my experience in school, the vast majority of teachers were bad teachers. My physics teacher forced me to take ordinary level so she could focus on less higher level students and left us at the back of the class to teach ourselves. I got an A and have always hated her for that cos I loved physics and wanted a career in it. My maths teacher called me stupid on front of everyone cos I corrected him when he have us a wrong answer. I got an A in higher maths.

Paedophile Donal Dunne had no sexual interest in girls but....:

http://www.offalyexpress.ie/news/local-news/parents-reluctant-to-challenge-paedophile-offaly-teacher-1-2012445

However, there have been numerous descriptions from women who attended the Sacred Heart School at the time of his violent assaults and humiliation of the teenage girls. On one occasion, in the early 1980s, Gardai were called to the school following a complaint of an assault on a girl, but no prosecution followed.

A male teacher who overheard shouting was advised by the ASTI not to make a statement to Gardai.

PS: I might be accused of being off-topic but I referred to the above cases to explain the mistrust that some parents have of teachers.

Delphi91

Peter Flynt wrote: »

...Meanwhile Finland continues to reach the top of the PISA rankings without inspectors...

But you're not comparing like with like. Finland took the decision 40 years ago to change its education system. Have a look here for examples of differences.

Interestingly, in the latest PISA results, Finland's position has dropped - from 6th down to 12th in maths, 2nd to 5th in science and 3rd to 6th in reading ( incidentally we're only 1 point behind in reading!). It's worth having a look at this article: http://www.businessinsider.com/why-finland-fell-in-the-pisa-rankings-2013-12

Pwpane

endakenny wrote: »

The abolition of the special allocation of guidance counsellors doesn't necessarily mean that a school loses that counsellor. It may just mean that the counsellor has to take ordinary classes in addition to career guidance.

Instead of - not in additional to.

If the teacher can no longer counsel students, the students have lost a counsellor.

endakenny

Pwpane wrote: »

Instead of - not in additional to.

If the teacher can no longer counsel students, the students have lost a counsellor.

The guidance counsellors can still do counselling. It's just that they are available to do counselling less often than they used to be.

Pwpane

endakenny wrote: »

It's possible that the increase in inspections is motivated by the understandable mistrust of some parents towards teachers.

Some parents have always distrusted some teachers. Sometimes with good reason.

But inspections didn't start when the mistrust started and the inspections have not changed parents' perceptions of teachers.

If anything, the mistrust has increased as the trustworthiness of teachers has increased.

Inspections have increased the street cred of teacher bashing without assuaging the anger some people feel against the teacher they hated while growing up. In a sense, this increases their anger.

So in my opinion, due to the negative impact on schools and the general public, this policy of excessive inspection is developing into a negative spiral.

endakenny

Pwpane wrote: »

Some parents have always distrusted some teachers. Sometimes with good reason.

But inspections didn't start when the mistrust started and the inspections have not changed parents' perceptions of teachers.

If anything, the mistrust has increased as the trustworthiness of teachers has increased.

Inspections have increased the street cred of teacher bashing without assuaging the anger some people feel against the teacher they hated while growing up. In a sense, this increases their anger.

So in my opinion, due to the negative impact on schools and the general public, this policy of excessive inspection is developing into a negative spiral.

School inspectors are civil servants and are thus accountable to the Ombudsman. Why don't teachers make complaints to the Ombudsman about the hard time that they are getting from inspectors?

Peter Flynt

Delphi91 wrote: »

But you're not comparing like with like. Finland took the decision 40 years ago to change its education system. Have a look here for examples of differences.

Interestingly, in the latest PISA results, Finland's position has dropped - from 6th down to 12th in maths, 2nd to 5th in science and 3rd to 6th in reading ( incidentally we're only 1 point behind in reading!). It's worth having a look at this article: http://www.businessinsider.com/why-finland-fell-in-the-pisa-rankings-2013-12

I know very well I'm not comparing like with like - Especially when I read your link stating that 16 students per Science class is what occurs in Finland. . . as opposed to the 27 I have in one of my classes due to the cutbacks - Try running a Lab with 27 students in it.

I'm not the one comparing like with like. . . the useless Minister and senior civil servants in the DES (who know nothing about teaching) are the ones at that.

Only it appears they're taking an À la carte approach.

You cannot compare a country which has a history of a lack of investment in Education (Ireland) with Finland.

evolving_doors

endakenny wrote: »

School inspectors are civil servants and are thus accountable to the Ombudsman. Why don't teachers make complaints to the Ombudsman about the hard time that they are getting from inspectors?

You are inferring above that teachers feel they are getting unfair treatment from inspectors. From following this thread I think that teachers feel that the treatment they receive is more irrational and illogical than anything else. Talking about the ombudsman for unfair treatment is all well and good, but you can't really go to the ombudsman on the basis that the Inspector is daft in the head! e.g.

byhookorbycrook wrote: »

I met an inspector who wanted new targets every 4 weeks at one stage and meetings with OTs/ SLT/psychologists/psychiatrists each time. Shows how out of touch that that particular inspector was!

Personally I'm not against inspection. What I am concerned with though is to what end they are being conducted. Is it to drive home an agenda of AFL and measuring outcomes (new JC anyone!) which 'could' lead to box ticking exercises which in turn will be linked to performance management a la UK(which was being bandied about the start of this year by 3 govt TD's). If your class doesnt get the required grades - according to the almighty bell curve - then you are 'advised' to remark them again (as has been done with the project maths results by tinkering with the marking scheme post event). I know it's a big leap but looking at where the UK has ended up is it fair that a school can be rated like the Ofstead inspections from 1-5 or whatever.

Then again it could be a valuable process of consultation based on an inspector's experience of other schools and good international practice backed by extensive longitudinal research. Doesn't appear that way from this thread though!

endakenny

Armelodie wrote: »

You are inferring above that teachers feel they are getting unfair treatment from inspectors. From following this thread I think that teachers feel that the treatment they receive is more irrational and illogical than anything else. Talking about the ombudsman for unfair treatment is all well and good, but you can't really go to the ombudsman on the basis that the Inspector is daft in the head! e.g.

Fair enough. Then teachers should, in meetings with inspectors, say what's on their minds. There's nothing stopping the teachers of a school from telling the inspectors that they'll refuse to draw up individual lesson plans for every special needs pupil on the grounds that they already have enough work to do. The inspectorate is not going to have them struck off the Teaching Council register for that due to the public outcry that sacking teachers for refusing to carry out unnecessary bureaucratic exercises would have. Believe it or not, the general public is not anti-teacher.

By the way, signing up to HRA doesn't mean that they've surrendered the right to take industrial action.

http://www.rte.ie/news/2014/0220/505625-colaiste-chiarain-action/