Timetabling JC SLAR Meetings - MORE after school hours

deiseindublin

I'm looking at the FAQs on the ASTI site and I can't see how this will work in our centre/most centres. The timetable example says that all JC teacher timetables would blocked for 2 hours each Friday (arbitrary) but they would only need to be available for 3 or 4 of those days. The other 30/29 weeks of the year this would continue to be time off.

We don't have a timetabled half day and with a staff of 70+ it'd be very hard to build it into the timetable. Am I mis-reading this in some way?

http://www.asti.ie/fileadmin/user_upload/Documents/Campaigns/FAQ_questions_September_2015.pdf

Editing the title because it's clear now how/when SLARs will be!

deiseindublin

Think I found the answer on page 32, looks like more after school hours to me!

Another reason to vote NO.


Trying to get full departments together in a large school will be impossible unless classes are 'bundled' and all agree to stay back until 6 or so.

The 40-minute professional time period provided within the timetable is available to teachers on the understanding that they will use the allocated time flexibly. Such flexible use of the allocated time will include bundling time periods and carrying forward time to facilitate professional collaboration, particularly Subject Learning and Assessment Review meetings. Teachers may also use the time periods for individual planning, feedback or reporting activities relating to junior cycle. Since professional collaboration meetings can only be held when the relevant subject teachers can be present, a limited number of meetings may need to draw on teachers’ bundled time to run beyond normal school tuition hours for some of the duration of the meeting.

http://www.asti.ie/fileadmin/user_upload/Framework-for-Junior-Cycle-2015.pdf

Jamfa

deiseindublin wrote: »

Think I found the answer on page 32, looks like more after school hours to me!

Another reason to vote NO.


Trying to get full departments together in a large school will be impossible unless classes are 'bundled' and all agree to stay back until 6 or so.



http://www.asti.ie/fileadmin/user_upload/Framework-for-Junior-Cycle-2015.pdf

The 22 hours less teaching are to give time for planning & SLAR meetings which will only take place around Christmas & May. If a school doesn't have a half day I suppose the SLAR meetings will take place after class ends.

deiseindublin

that's more late days for a teacher in addition to CP. If you're 2 subjects, maybe 3 with CSPE or similar added you could end up there every 2nd or 3rd week.

Honestly, as a secondary school teacher, I don't appreciate being off for 40 mintues during the day and then this time bundled after class ends for me to stay on.

Jamfa

deiseindublin wrote: »

that's more late days for a teacher in addition to CP. If you're 2 subjects, maybe 3 with CSPE or similar added you could end up there every 2nd or 3rd week.

Honestly, as a secondary school teacher, I don't appreciate being off for 40 mintues during the day and then this time bundled after class ends for me to stay on.

The CBAs only happen twice a year so no need for every week SLAR meetings. The students will have 28 hours class contact still but we'll teach 40 mins less a week to compensate us. This was a major concession from the DES and is what the Unions argued for. Currently subject dept meetings take place after class so if you don't have a half day that's when the SLAR meetings will happen.

deiseindublin

In our school lots of teachers teach their 2 base subjects and CSPE. There will be a SLAR for each subject in 2nd and 3rd year so 6 x 2 hour meetings, and these will mostly be after school.

It's not 22 hours off like the union are spinning, it's 10 hours in which to do everything else in those 6 assessments so 1hr 40mins for each assessment.

How many of us think that we'll have all done for each assessment in 100mins?

Jamfa

The CBAs can replace 2nd year summer & 3rd year Xmas exams which we never received time off to assess. The CBAs are supposed to be part of the assessments we use as teachers to check and record student learning. The phased implementation of subjects means a teacher of history and religion for example won't have a SLAR meeting until 2021! They will get the time off from 2017 though so plenty of time to plan.

acequion

Jamfa wrote: »

The CBAs can replace 2nd year summer & 3rd year Xmas exams which we never received time off to assess. The CBAs are supposed to be part of the assessments we use as teachers to check and record student learning. The phased implementation of subjects means a teacher of history and religion for example won't have a SLAR meeting until 2021! They will get the time off from 2017 though so plenty of time to plan.

We do actually. Well those of us who bundle the house exams on the last week of the summer term. Any school I have worked in where that is done requires you to supervise about 50% of the time,with the other 50% off to correct your tests.

I,too,am not interested in a class off which falls during the day if I have to pay for it with more meetings. Also forty minutes less teaching time means less teaching and more admin so a little carrot to open the door to a more admin centred job down the line. As a relatively creative person I never signed up for a job with a load of admin which is definitely not a strong point with me.

No, No,No,No to the new JC!

Jamfa

In the English oral you'll be assessing it as it happens during your class & the collection is corrected as you would normally correct work during 2nd & 3rd year. The Assesament Task will be sent to the SEC so I don't see where you're finding tonnes of extra work from

deiseindublin

Be it 2017 or 2021, we're voting on it now, and if we vote Yes we're agreeing to be in school for possibly another 6 x 2 hour meetings. It's a red herring to say it doesn't start yet, it will start, that's all that counts.

We do the CP hours once a week so it'd be 6 weeks of the year when we're there 2 late nights, along with grads nights and open nights and awards nts etc etc.

Jamfa

Yeah it may well be but we still get 200 days off a year & 22 hours less teaching is some compensation. The original reforms required assessing the exams too & that's gone.
At this stage it looks like you'd resist any change. When do you have subject dept meetings currently?
I'd love to see how parents, students & the public will react to striking over not wanting to do a couple of these new meetings to discuss with colleagues our students work while getting 22 hours off to do it.

rainbowtrout

Jamfa wrote: »

Yeah it may well be but we still get 200 days off a year & 22 hours less teaching is some compensation. The original reforms required assessing the exams too & that's gone.
At this stage it looks like you'd resist any change. When do you have subject dept meetings currently?
I'd love to see how parents, students & the public will react to stroking over not wanting to do a couple of these new meetings to discuss with colleagues our students work while getting 22 hours off to do it.

22 hours teaching is being replaced with 22 hours admin work. Most of us did not sign up to be administrators. We signed up to be teachers. It's also extending the core working day which for most teachers is between 9 and 4. I might have an extra class off in the middle of the day, but I can't do department meetings in that time, so I'll have to stay behind after school to do them.

How is that improving my working conditions, when we already have to stay behind to do stupid CP hours?

deiseindublin

I'm sick of hearing of the time off we'll get. It's not time off, it's time allocated to the end of the working day and won't compensate for the extra work the JC reform will bring.

Jamfa

deiseindublin wrote: »

I'm sick of hearing of the time off we'll get. It's not time off, it's time allocated to the end of the working day and won't compensate for the extra work the JC reform will bring.

Your resistance to the reforms is clear so I doubt anything other than no change will please you. The JC reforms have been radically diluted and yet you're still going on about the mountains of extra work. Apparently we all assess our students all the time and the planned meetings are not to do admin but to have professional conversations about work our students have done. This year English teachers are to be released for 10 hours from timetabled classes to plan, have meetings & possibly 1 SLAR meeting. In 2017 the decision was to reduce every teachers hours by 40 mins a week so as not to affect students by having to arrange meetings during class time.

Education matters

I wonder will this help anyone. SLAR meetings are an effort to appease the government's insistence on teacher collaboration. The document states clearly that the SLAR meeting will take place and be of two hours duration but can I add this is to " share and discuss students' work and discuss standards" this is not a moderation meeting nor do we have any external monitoring or reporting to do. In my opinion this means we can hold the SLAR meeting when it is convenient for ourselves ...not necessarily after school. I know people will say that's an impossibility etc etc but this is as difficult as we make it. The 40 minute timetable allows for all schools to meet the circular on Time in School and fulfill the 28 hours tuition time. The course specs are to be less detailed and all state certified exams will be only two hours duration. As Jamfa has said the CBA for English will take place in school time as I presume will all other CBA s . All teachers will be timetabled for a 40 minute class less each year, is this not a huge concession? Paperwork will be minimal as templates are to be provided...and yes I know " this is how Croke Park hours began", but the newly established Implementation Committee is there to protect teachers. as for the nonsensical Croke Park hours that's the next fight!

acequion

Jamfa wrote: »

In the English oral you'll be assessing it as it happens during your class & the collection is corrected as you would normally correct work during 2nd & 3rd year. The Assesament Task will be sent to the SEC so I don't see where you're finding tonnes of extra work from

Assssing an oral as it happens during your class! And how on earth is that supposed to work effectively in a class of 30?

Have you not read the proposals? Do you not see that it's extra work because 1.Courses will be changing. 2.We now have to do two assessments which we didn't have before and ok,while these can replace some house exams I wouldn't hold my breath that it will be an exact switch. I guarantee you that some schools will still facilitate mocks. 3. We have to attend the SLARs which I can tell you from marking conferences in the summers,will be no picnic. 4.Members of each subject department will be appointed by rotation to coordinate the SLARs. Some schools have only 2-3 teachers in some subjects,so those teachers get caught every 2 to 3 years. That seem fair to you? Maybe it's not "tonnes" of extra work but certainly a considerable amount. And that is on top of what has already been heaped upon teachers in recent years. You ok with that,because I'm sure as hell not.

Jamfa wrote: »

Yeah it may well be but we still get 200 days off a year & 22 hours less teaching is some compensation. The original reforms required assessing the exams too & that's gone.
At this stage it looks like you'd resist any change. When do you have subject dept meetings currently?
I'd love to see how parents, students & the public will react to striking over not wanting to do a couple of these new meetings to discuss with colleagues our students work while getting 22 hours off to do it.

The original reforms were never going to get anywhere and Ruari Quinn knew that very well. It's the oldest trick in the book to start from the most extreme point so that anything looks like a great concession by comparison.

Fear of what people think and what will we say to the parents is precisely one of the things which has kept us from taking a stronger stand back when we should have.To me my desire to fight for decent working conditions and a decent education system is much greater than any misgivings over what the parents and public think. While I see your point and I think the unions really flunked it by not fighting this on all the issues rather than merely time and assessment,fear of the public is certainly not a reason to vote for this.

Jamfa wrote: »

Your resistance to the reforms is clear so I doubt anything other than no change will please you. The JC reforms have been radically diluted and yet you're still going on about the mountains of extra work. Apparently we all assess our students all the time and the planned meetings are not to do admin but to have professional conversations about work our students have done. This year English teachers are to be released for 10 hours from timetabled classes to plan, have meetings & possibly 1 SLAR meeting. In 2017 the decision was to reduce every teachers hours by 40 mins a week so as not to affect students by having to arrange meetings during class time.

It is not a question of being pleased. There is no urgent need to change the current JC at this point in time,other than a few change where programmes are clearly outdated such as in modern languages. The Government petulantly states that the reforms absolutely must pass. Why? Where's the urgency? I'll answer it for you. The urgency is to set in motion their cost cutting plan in the public sector and in so doing keeping the overlords in Europe happy and you're very naive if you can't see that that is what this is about. Well I don't care about their neo liberal agenda but I really do care,and care passionately about the profession of teaching and Irish education and that is why I'm voting no. Dr Travers even recognised that the timing of these reforms is poor. That teachers are demoralised from an avalanche of cuts. And teachers are struggling to cope. So I say scrap these reforms,let's see who forms the next Government, demand the reversal of the most stringent recent cuts in, addition to scrapping the CP hours. Then let's get back to the drawing board with all parties involved. That can be done and will have to be done if we all vote no.It requires courage,patience and a commitment to see it through.

The idea of being released for 10 hours from doing work I love and extremely important work at that such as JC and LC English, to do a pile of admin and meetings which I totally hate,makes me want to scream. How on earth can that be good??

And finally,why are you so in favour?

Jamfa

acequion wrote: »

Assssing an oral as it happens during your class! And how on earth is that supposed to work effectively in a class of 30?

Have you not read the proposals? Do you not see that it's extra work because 1.Courses will be changing. 2.We now have to do two assessments which we didn't have before and ok,while these can replace some house exams I wouldn't hold my breath that it will be an exact switch. I guarantee you that some schools will still facilitate mocks. 3. We have to attend the SLARs which I can tell you from marking conferences in the summers,will be no picnic. 4.Members of each subject department will be appointed by rotation to coordinate the SLARs. Some schools have only 2-3 teachers in some subjects,so those teachers get caught every 2 to 3 years. That seem fair to you? Maybe it's not "tonnes" of extra work but certainly a considerable amount. And that is on top of what has already been heaped upon teachers in recent years. You ok with that,because I'm sure as hell not.



The original reforms were never going to get anywhere and Ruari Quinn knew that very well. It's the oldest trick in the book to start from the most extreme point so that anything looks like a great concession by comparison.

Fear of what people think and what will we say to the parents is precisely one of the things which has kept us from taking a stronger stand back when we should have.To me my desire to fight for decent working conditions and a decent education system is much greater than any misgivings over what the parents and public think. While I see your point and I think the unions really flunked it by not fighting this on all the issues rather than merely time and assessment,fear of the public is certainly not a reason to vote for this.



It is not a question of being pleased. There is no urgent need to change the current JC at this point in time,other than a few change where programmes are clearly outdated such as in modern languages. The Government petulantly states that the reforms absolutely must pass. Why? Where's the urgency? I'll answer it for you. The urgency is to set in motion their cost cutting plan in the public sector and in so doing keeping the overlords in Europe happy and you're very naive if you can't see that that is what this is about. Well I don't care about their neo liberal agenda but I really do care,and care passionately about the profession of teaching and Irish education and that is why I'm voting no. Dr Travers even recognised that the timing of these reforms is poor. That teachers are demoralised from an avalanche of cuts. And teachers are struggling to cope. So I say scrap these reforms,let's see who forms the next Government, demand the reversal of the most stringent recent cuts in, addition to scrapping the CP hours. Then let's get back to the drawing board with all parties involved. That can be done and will have to be done if we all vote no.It requires courage,patience and a commitment to see it through.

The idea of being released for 10 hours from doing work I love and extremely important work at that such as JC and LC English, to do a pile of admin and meetings which I totally hate,makes me want to scream. How on earth can that be good??

And finally,why are you so in favour?

Well it's always been clear that you're fundamentally opposed to any type of JC reform so I'm not surprised you're not too keen on SLAR meetings. You oppose them during school time, after school and even when time is reduced elsewhere so you just oppose the very idea and will never be happy to do them. I personally like the idea of collaborating with colleagues and upskilling in assessment. It can be very affirming having colleagues support you in your work and as the exams are still being assessed by the SEC the pressure is far reduced. The facilitator will get two hours off per each SLAR for admin but there shouldn't be much admin for the other teachers other than bringing the student samples and grades.

acequion

Jamfa wrote: »

Well it's always been clear that you're fundamentally opposed to any type of JC reform so I'm not surprised you're not too keen on SLAR meetings. You oppose them during school time, after school and even when time is reduced elsewhere so you just oppose the very idea and will never be happy to do them. I personally like the idea of collaborating with colleagues and upskilling in assessment. It can be very affirming having colleagues support you in your work and as the exams are still being assessed by the SEC the pressure is far reduced. The facilitator will get two hours off per each SLAR for admin but there shouldn't be much admin for the other teachers other than bringing the student samples and grades.

I don't where you're getting that idea from. I am fundamentally opposed to reform for the sake of reform and reform for the sake of saving money.Nowhere have I stated that I oppose reforms.You are putting words in my mouth to suit your own agenda! I have been in teaching a long time and have seen many course changes in that time such as Inter Cert to Junior Cert,the new French LC course and the new English LC course and had no problem with any of them because they were done in the right spirit.

That's good if you are happy to collaborate with collegues. You could upskill in assessment by correcting the summer exams and being paid for the work. But you're entitled to your opinion and as entitled to be in favour or not as every other teacher. But don't forget that the bulk of the opposition to these reforms is because of complete mistrust of an increasingly cynical administration obsessed with lowering costs and who does not give a damn about the well being of the country's teachers,much less its students. Don't fool yourself that there is any positive motivation behind this.

Jamfa

Well we definitely don't agree and I don't share your cynicism of the motivation for the reforms. The JC reforms predate this government and it'll be interesting to see what a new government in 2016 will propose. The NCCA, the Inspectorate & DES won't be changing much in 2016 so what do you think a new government will do?

acequion

Jamfa wrote: »

Well we definitely don't agree and I don't share your cynicism of the motivation for the reforms. The JC reforms predate this government and it'll be interesting to see what a new government in 2016 will propose. The NCCA, the Inspectorate & DES won't be changing much in 2016 so what do you think a new government will do?

Yes you're right that reform proposals were on Brian Cowen's desk in 2008 so reform was on the way,recession or no recession. And I repeat what I said earlier that I don't oppose change. Change is inevitable and also desirable in a constantly evolving society.But it must be good quality change. Not change for the sake of of it and certainly not for the sake of saving money.And who knows what another administration would have done or will do. But I doubt few would have handled it as disastrously as RQ.

Jamfa how can one not be cynical? Just look at the long list of cuts and attacks since 2009! Name one favourable thing they have done? Just give me one! I get the impression that you are young and like the young in general,probably filled with hope and enthusiasm which is a wonderful thing. Many older teachers, like myself, are indeed cynical, but unfortunately cynicism is justified by the facts. I actually voted for Labour in the last election,was delighted like most people at the time, to be rid of Fianna Fail and happy to give a new Government a chance. And I would have supported them and tried to believe in them up to the HR agreement,though voting no to CP. But HR was when I completely lost faith.And the next administration? I have no idea what we'll be facing there but I feel very strongly that reforms should be deferred until a new administration is in place and that it is lunacy to rush them through just because O Sullivan is losing patience. She'll be losing her seat in a short while.

And as for the NCCA. There is increasing evidence that teachers are being less and less listened to there as well.

So I don't know Jamfa where all this will end. But I hope it won't be with teachers giving in and continuing down the slippery slope of disenchantment and disillusionment, which is exactly where many are right now. And what good is that to anybody?