Allocation of Post Duties

pandoraj09

So we're in the process of putting together a list of the needs of the school and prioritising what roles are more important than others. Our Principal told us that he does not know what way the duties for the posts are to be allocated under the new system ie should staff be called in by seniority to allocate duties, should it be in alphabetical order, should it be totally random?? I'd really appreciate if people could share what's happening in their school or if people know the official line on this, if there is one.

km79

pandoraj09 wrote: »

So we're in the process of putting together a list of the needs of the school and prioritising what roles are more important than others. Our Principal told us that he does not know what way the duties for the posts are to be allocated under the new system ie should staff be called in by seniority to allocate duties, should it be in alphabetical order, should it be totally random?? I'd really appreciate if people could share what's happening in their school or if people know the official line on this, if there is one.

Your principal is fobbing ye off
Randomly allocating duties ? In alphabetical order ?
Does any large organizitation really run like that ! Well anymore anyway ..........
The BOM/principal will assign duties "in consultation" with postholders

doc_17

It’s actually an interesting one. If 2 people get a B post then who gets to consult first? For example, say both want the post for looking after SEN. It will come me down to who gets the higher mark in the interview I’d imagine.

km79

doc_17 wrote: »

It’s actually an interesting one. If 2 people get a B post then who gets to consult first? For example, say both want the post for looking after SEN. It will come me down to who gets the higher mark in the interview I’d imagine.

Is it not up to the principal to look at the schools needs first and then do their best to assign people to the posts whose skill sets best match ?

And of course some posts will be rotated anyway due to more regular review .......

solerina

We have drawn up a list of things we would ideally love to have a post for. The reality is the list is way longer than the amount of posts we have, including the new ones yet to be filled, however the principal seems intent on allocating every last role on the list to someone. The current post holders roles have all been deemed as still necessary and the P seems to be going to vastly increase the duties of each person. Are others funding this ??

doc_17

km79 wrote: »

Is it not up to the principal to look at the schools needs first and then do their best to assign people to the posts whose skill sets best match ?

And of course some posts will be rotated anyway due to more regular review .......

Yes it is. But it’s in consultation with the staff member I think.

km79

doc_17 wrote: »

Yes it is. But it’s in consultation with the staff member I think.

But at the end of the day the BOM/P will ultimately decide

doc_17

km79 wrote: »

But at the end of the day the BOM/P will ultimately decide

Yes. But if two people wanted the same job and both felt they were suitable for it and finished on the sameness pints interview wise then how the principal picks is very interesting. One of the posts could be handy and the other could be a dog’s dinner.

But it’s hardly worth worrying about as it’s unlikey to happen

km79

doc_17 wrote: »

Yes. But if two people wanted the same job and both felt they were suitable for it and finished on the sameness pints interview wise then how the principal picks is very interesting. One of the posts could be handy and the other could be a dog’s dinner.

But it’s hardly worth worrying about as it’s unlikey to happen

I think the OP is on about a diff scenario though ?
Where there is a whole school review of existing posts and reassignment of roles. There would not be interview scores available for vast majority of the incumbents so BOM/P would decide who is best suited to role.
Talk of calling in alphabetical etc is nonsense
The duties are prioritized and those with most suitable qualities assigned to them imo .

The days of people just getting posts based on length of service and remaining in it till end of career are quite rightly over . It’s no harm also to move around in a post .
But teachers just hate change of any kind !

evolving_doors

Shouldn't it be the case that 6 AP1's should go to the year heads first? Especially in schools with over 500 students

Drag00n79

There is a focus by the inspectorate now that AP1s are not only year heads and that certain posts in areas of planning are also at that level, e.g. SSE coordinator.

TheDriver

doc_17 wrote: »

It’s actually an interesting one. If 2 people get a B post then who gets to consult first? For example, say both want the post for looking after SEN. It will come me down to who gets the higher mark in the interview I’d imagine.

Is Sen still a post in schools? With hours off for coordination etc, I don't see how it needs to be a post anymore

evolving_doors

TheDriver wrote: »

Is Sen still a post in schools? With hours off for coordination etc, I don't see how it needs to be a post anymore

It's a grey area, is the easiest way of putting it.
As far as I'm aware there are allocated ex-quota hours; somewhere!. But how the school decides what's teaching and what's admin varies widely.
At a recent Learning Support meeting with different school teachers one of the main complaints was that these hours were being squirreled away for other teaching posts, so there were examples of subject teachers being put in to resource admin with little or no experience and zero time off for it ( it was assumed to be part of their resource teaching duties... i.e. on top of their 22 hours).
There was an official from the department who said they were taking the matter very seriously and we should report it to the department, everybody laughed and welcomed the comic relief.
Believe it or not there were pleas for more department inspectors to come in to schools to see what's going on.

feedthegoat

The DES state that some of the hours allocated to the school under the GAM can be used for co ordination. It does however state that they should be kept to a minimum. In my opinion this SEN co ordination should be kept out of the posts as ideally you need a specialist in this area to run the show.

ggg16

Any advice on filling in this application form or the interview? Am trying to do it and finding it difficult.

pandoraj09

Thanks for all who have contributed to my thread. I'm talking about a whole school review of posts and the duties assigned to each one. I've had an AP1 post for years. The principal is talking about reassigning duties to each post holder, in consultation with each person involved. So my question is, who gets to go in first for the post review? He was talking about doing it randomly, which I think is very unfair. Or in alphabetical order. But that's even more unfair. I've held the most senior A post for many years. Say I don't get to have my meeting until after others. Do I just take whats left??? If any principals post here, how are you going to allocate the "new" AP1 and AP2 duties? Will you see people by seniority?

evolving_doors

pandoraj09 wrote: »

Thanks for all who have contributed to my thread. I'm talking about a whole school review of posts and the duties assigned to each one. I've had an AP1 post for years. The principal is talking about reassigning duties to each post holder, in consultation with each person involved. So my question is, who gets to go in first for the post review? He was talking about doing it randomly, which I think is very unfair. Or in alphabetical order. But that's even more unfair. I've held the most senior A post for many years. Say I don't get to have my meeting until after others. Do I just take whats left??? If any principals post here, how are you going to allocate the "new" AP1 and AP2 duties? Will you see people by seniority?

I was of the understanding that this only applies to new posts available (I.e. if someone retires or leaves ETc). I'd also imagine that those already in situ wouldn't be affected.
If you already have an AP post then your terms and conditions should be laid out somewhere or agreed upon during /after the interview. So this should constitute a contract which can't be changed at a whim.
Did people get a contract when they take up an AP post?

km79

evolving_doors wrote: »

I was of the understanding that this only applies to new posts available (I.e. if someone retires or leaves ETc). I'd also imagine that those already in situ wouldn't be affected.
If you already have an AP post then your terms and conditions should be laid out somewhere or agreed upon during /after the interview. So this should constitute a contract which can't be changed at a whim.
Did people get a contract when they take up an AP post?

No
And I think it applies to everyone
Whole school reviews
Priority areas identified and duties assigned to these posts
Postholders with most suitable skill set assigned to relevant post
That’s my understanding of it anyway

Who goes in first or last will make no difference because at the end of the day the P/BOM will decide what’s best for the school.
The only true consultion is during the whole school review imo

pandoraj09

Who goes in first will make a huge amount of difference!!! That person has the pick of all the duties, or nearly all anyway, given that ICT Coordinator and others need a particular skill set that everyone doesn't have. We've been told we all need to take on extra duties, at AP1 level anyway. So say I'm happy to add exam secretary to my duties, or am willing to be year head to 2 year groups. If I get in to have my meeting after 10 others, those duties may well be taken. Many people are "suitable" to be year heads or do the admin associated with being exam secretary. My question is: How are other schools dealing with this situation? Has anyone got to that stage? After our first review staff meeting last week, its apparent that there will be a race to grab some posts....

km79

pandoraj09 wrote: »

Who goes in first will make a huge amount of difference!!! That person has the pick of all the duties, or nearly all anyway, given that ICT Coordinator and others need a particular skill set that everyone doesn't have. We've been told we all need to take on extra duties, at AP1 level anyway. So say I'm happy to add exam secretary to my duties, or am willing to be year head to 2 year groups. If I get in to have my meeting after 10 others, those duties may well be taken. Many people are "suitable" to be year heads or do the admin associated with being exam secretary. My question is: How are other schools dealing with this situation? Has anyone got to that stage? After our first review staff meeting last week, its apparent that there will be a race to grab some posts....

You are missing the point
Postholders will not get to pick the post
It will be assigned to them as it always has been but there will now be movement between posts every few years

Don’t forget there is supposed to be “consultation “ on CP hours too and the reality is there is very little. Management ultimately decide them and return date in most schools

doc_17

TheDriver wrote: »

Is Sen still a post in schools? With hours off for coordination etc, I don't see how it needs to be a post anymore

The union would differ on that. Hours off aren’t the proper way to do that. Where are those hours coming from? Who is losing out? Hours aren’t given by the dept the way there are given for say the new Junior Cycle. A school in my town has an A post holder with the role of SEN Coordinator and that’s her post. Hours was a management tool, probably necessary, to get people to do the role of SEN coordinator when there weren’t any posts being replaced.

pandoraj09

km79 wrote: »

You are missing the point
Postholders will not get to pick the post
It will be assigned to them as it always has been but there will now be movement between posts every few years

Don’t forget revue is supposed to be “consultation “ on CP hours too and the reality is there is very little. Management ultimately decide them and return date in most schools

Perhaps things have been done that way in your school. In ours duties were never "assigned" to us, we met with the Principal and discussed what we hoped to do as our post. My reason for posting this thread was because last week at our first post review meeting the Principal told us he was not sure what way to go about starting the discussions about the duties each post holder was going to fulfil after the whole school review ie who he would speak to first. I just thought someone here might know. Thanks for your input.

km79

pandoraj09 wrote: »

Perhaps things have been done that way in your school. In ours duties were never "assigned" to us, we met with the Principal and discussed what we hoped to do as our post. My reason for posting this thread was because last week at our first post review meeting the Principal told us he was not sure what way to go about starting the discussions about the duties each post holder was going to fulfil after the whole school review ie who he would speak to first. I just thought someone here might know. Thanks for your input.

Let us know how it goes and I'll do the same whenever it gets done !

ethical

Some employers are a law unto themselves.I've experienced a situation where a number of posts became available and there was a healthy interest in same.As one person was doing a post for 2 years ,and doing a damn good job,according to her colleagues,it was assumed that she may get the post.She was not successful at interview,or so she was told! The appeal was a joke,a legal expert representing the employer,a non-descript union official who did damn all representation for the appellant and a "known" (yes,it was ETB),YES person on the panel.Good points were made,the Chair was a fair person but was only there to chair the appeal.The appeal was not successfull. This same employer has messed around with "placing" candidates in positions from posts in second level schools to CEOs appointments for at least the past 6-7 years and have not been answerable to anyone for their behaviour.You can bring out as many new circulars as you like but you will not stop the stuff that goes on when backs need scratching.Its a fcuking disgrace and is embezzlement of Government money but no one in authority wants to clean up the excrement that is giving the teaching profession a bad name.I have a feeling that this new Posts review will have been broadly decided already.I've heard a colleague,(I use the term very loosely!) saying that the post it is in at the moment is not suitable so no doubt it will be changed (as it is a very much required and important position that the school cannot do without).Only problem is the post is an assistant Principal position with the €8000+ and a nice timetable,I do not see a Special Duties teacher doing same for €3000 and a full timetable!!! And dont give me the line that its all in the line of gaining experience for progression of career as some managers are using!!.My colleague ,mentioned above,told the ETB that they can stick the next post up their proverbial hole as she will not be applying!

evolving_doors

km79 wrote: »

You are missing the point
Postholders will not get to pick the post
It will be assigned to them as it always has been but there will now be movement between posts every few years

Don’t forget there is supposed to be “consultation “ on CP hours too and the reality is there is very little. Management ultimately decide them and return date in most schools

Remember the 'consultation' on what constituted CPD too! There was a whole spectrum of responses from teachers being requested to unnecessary out of hours CPD, to teachers being refused ANY CPD (even refusing to recognise very relevant CPD at the teachers expense).

I really don't see the movement between AP posts taking place.

IT, SEN, Exams Officer, JCT, TY ---- They're all pretty specialised, just when someone is getting a handle on it then they've to resign!!! And then be expected to train the next person in.

If this lumping of duties together is going to happen then it's going to be a mess.

How does this 'relinquishing of posts' come about? Are you hauled in to the office and told that your services are no longer required... or are you told you'll be moved from year head into IT+SEN.

evolving_doors

doc_17 wrote: »

The union would differ on that. Hours off aren’t the proper way to do that. Where are those hours coming from? Who is losing out? Hours aren’t given by the dept the way there are given for say the new Junior Cycle. A school in my town has an A post holder with the role of SEN Coordinator and that’s her post. Hours was a management tool, probably necessary, to get people to do the role of SEN coordinator when there weren’t any posts being replaced.

Hours off are the only way to carry out an AP1 I'd imagine.
22hrs + S&S ....and then Start making phonecalls to parents and arrange meetings as a yearhead.

doc_17

evolving_doors wrote: »

Hours off are the only way to carry out an AP1 I'd imagine.
22hrs + S&S ....and then Start making phonecalls to parents and arrange meetings as a yearhead.

You’ve misread my post I think. Some schools give somebody who doesn’t have a post hours off their teaching timetable so that they can coordinate SEN. And I’m saying that’s not proper because as far as I’m aware those hours will mean some students are missing out either through resource hours or reduced subject choice.

TheDriver

doc_17 wrote: »

You’ve misread my post I think. Some schools give somebody who doesn’t have a post hours off their teaching timetable so that they can coordinate SEN. And I’m saying that’s not proper because as far as I’m aware those hours will mean some students are missing out either through resource hours or reduced subject choice.

It's within the circular that the general allocation model allows for a certain number of hours off to coordinate. Hence no one looses out. Reduced subject choice shouldn't come into it as these hours don't come from main school allocation

evolving_doors

doc_17 wrote: »

You’ve misread my post I think. Some schools give somebody who doesn’t have a post hours off their teaching timetable so that they can coordinate SEN. And I’m saying that’s not proper because as far as I’m aware those hours will mean some students are missing out either through resource hours or reduced subject choice.

It would depend on the school. In the case of a small secondary school with few students needing support then it mightn't be that much paperwork.
In a larger school with high incidence of needs then it simply can't (or shouldn't be done) by someone already teaching 22 hours. This is what we were told by a department inspector.

Also see here: https://www.sess.ie/sites/default/files/inline-files/Guidelines-for-Post-Primary-Schools-Supporting-Students-with-Special-Educational-Needs-in-Mainstream-Schools.pdf

When deploying teaching resources, schools need to maintain time for co-ordinating, planning and reviewing activities to ensure effective and optimal use of supports. Co-ordination time should, however, be kept to a minimum in order to ensure that teaching time is maximised.
Additionally, flexibility in terms of resource allocation is required to allow for emerging needs during the school year. School leaders should also take into account the professional development record and acquired expertise of teachers when allocating teaching roles and supports.

Pg. 19

The new allocation model is changing. Before you got so many hours depending on disability (and then a global allocation).
Typically there were hours left over (the grey area ). This came about because a student who might be entitled to say 3 hours might only want/or be able to come out for 1.5 hours (due to timetables). Similarly 2 students in one class might be entitled to 1 hour each but come out at the same time (so 1 hour left over).
Any hours left over could be used by the school. e.g. for students not entitled to hours but having a need , and .... in some lucky schools : for resource co-ordination time.

Now a new model:
Dept. looked at all the hours over the years given to a school and used some strange formula to come up with a set quantum of hours from 2018 onwards . So a school will be given a set averaged-out amount, with the ability to appeal if you are up for a fight with the dept.
So now schools should have enough for a resource co-ordinator (if their numbers demand it) + 'special' teaching.

As an aside... it has copper-fastened the inequality whereby very wealthy schools who could afford to get an ed-psych report always got tonnes of hours.. Now these hours have been guaranteed every year without question. I know of one fee-charging school who had an ed-psych in the employ of the school on the grounds. Meanwhile the schools where they couldn't afford ed-psych reports had to keep going with the hours they were always getting, although extra allocations are now being made due to gender, socio economic etc.


In short, it's still discretionary. If you want my opinion it should be ex-quota like the career guidance. Nothing to do with AP1's or Ap2's.
But then again, the department are saying we're all special education teachers now. So that'll solve that.

That's my understanding of it. I think we've all heard of legacy cases where extra teachers were paid out of resource hours to teach their own subject.