AP1 vs AP2

Dave0301

I have mainly taught in the UK since graduating, but I am trying to find more information on what are the differences between AP1 and AP2 roles.

I have found some information from the DES, but it does not specify what exactly one of these post holders would be in charge of e.g. what would a year head be?

What would being a department head come under? Or leading on something like literacy or a whole school initiative? I appreciate that it will be specific to the needs of the school as well.

evolving_doors

It's all a pig in a poke.

Ap1 post is advertised with no job spec. Nobody necessairily knows what the job will be. So there have been Ap1's thrown into Learning Support coordinator while other staff members with qualifications in SEN who assumed the job would be yearhead passed over.

Also the terms and conditions (whatever they are!... does anyone ever get contracts anymore these days)... they can be altered throughout the year. Similarly even if you get an AP post it can be rescinded at the end of the year.

Tldr AP1 AP2 ... only difference is the pay. The duties are decided by 'the school'. By that , I mean the staff also get to write on a piece of paper where they think the school needs the posts... and the paper is submitted... and duly disposed of in the bin.

I think they're doing away with department heads as posts. People just do the roll for free now.

solerina

It depends on the school. There is no defined set of roles for either. It is supposed to be decided at a whole staff level what roles are required, th e the duties are divided up between the various post holders, AP1 is almost double the time for an AP2, in vol secondary schools you get no time allocation for either, in ETB you get 4 hours timetable reduction for an AP1.

Dave0301

Thanks for the replies.

I thought it was just me that found the guidance from the DES to be vague and unhelpful :pac:

Inspector Coptoor

Most “heads of dept” in ireland don’t get any allowance.
It’s just more work for no more pay.

We call it “subject co-ordinator in our place and it’s on a two year cycle.

Some examples of roles of AP1/A posts that I’ve seen:

Year Head
SEN Co-ordinator
Teaching and Learning/AFL Coordinator
House Exams Coordinator

rainbowtrout

evolving_doors wrote: »

It's all a pig in a poke.

Ap1 post is advertised with no job spec. Nobody necessairily knows what the job will be. So there have been Ap1's thrown into Learning Support coordinator while other staff members with qualifications in SEN who assumed the job would be yearhead passed over.

Also the terms and conditions (whatever they are!... does anyone ever get contracts anymore these days)... they can be altered throughout the year. Similarly even if you get an AP post it can be rescinded at the end of the year.

Tldr AP1 AP2 ... only difference is the pay. The duties are decided by 'the school'. By that , I mean the staff also get to write on a piece of paper where they think the school needs the posts... and the paper is submitted... and duly disposed of in the bin.

I think they're doing away with department heads as posts. People just do the roll for free now.

Your sweeping generalisations are getting worse and worse. What do you mean by rescinded at the end of the year. AP1/AP2 are permanent positions.

There has to be an agreed list of duties that are attributed to the AP1/AP2 positions.

When a person is appointed to one of the positions, they are assigned one or more of duties on the agreed list by the principal. Examples would be year head, IT Coordinator, SEN Coordinator etc.

TheDriver

rainbowtrout wrote: »

Your sweeping generalisations are getting worse and worse. What do you mean by rescinded at the end of the year. AP1/AP2 are permanent positions.

There has to be an agreed list of duties that are attributed to the AP1/AP2 positions.

When a person is appointed to one of the positions, they are assigned one or more of duties on the agreed list by the principal. Examples would be year head, IT Coordinator, SEN Coordinator etc.

I agree with you, there is a review every 2 years whereby representatives of staff and post holders input their views and agree on post criteria. There is no job description because its unfair if someone is primed for a role through qualification vs ability.

evolving_doors

rainbowtrout wrote: »

Your sweeping generalisations are getting worse and worse. What do you mean by rescinded at the end of the year. AP1/AP2 are permanent positions.

Yes if you are permanent then it should be continuous. However this was queried at a recent union meeting and the answer was that it wasn't 100% certain that you would hold the post indefinitely. The circular is sufficiently ambiguous to leave room to terminate the role and post.

12.4. As the needs and priorities of the school continuously evolve, this review may result in re-assignment of the post holder’s role and responsibilities within the leadership and management team.

https://www.education.ie/en/Circulars-and-Forms/Active-Circulars/cl0003_2018.pdf

If your role is 're-assigned' within the team and no other role is reassigned to you then what?


And if you aren't permanent, then that AP role also isn't permanent

11.4 Where a fixed term teacher is successful in his/her application for a post of responsibility, the entitlement of that teacher to the post will lapse on the expiry of the teaching contract.

rainbowtrout wrote: »

There has to be an agreed list of duties that are attributed to the AP1/AP2 positions.


When a person is appointed to one of the positions, they are assigned one or more of duties on the agreed list by the principal. Examples would be year head, IT Coordinator, SEN Coordinator etc.

The agreed list of duties is always open to change and reassignment, so in a sense the list is just a guideline.

4.1 A review process shall occur at least once every two years or when the Board of Management/ ETB, as appropriate, determines that a significant restructuring is required.

In a similar vein you could be told that your a new role is being re-assigned to you and you have to now be present outside school hours (there are no restrictions on this outside time). This might be a change from your previous role where everything was allowed to be done within school hours.

11.3 Appointment to a post of responsibility will be conditional on the teacher being available to carry out the roles and responsibilities assigned to the post. The responsibilities of such posts may require the post holder to fulfill some of their responsibilities outside of school hours and/or over the course of the entire school week.

BTW. The agreed list of duties can come AFTER the appointment. So no, you don't necessarily know what role or duties you are going for before the interview... unless of course a candidate is informed ... and I have heard that other candidates weren't informed as to what the role would be!!! It's hearsay of course, but you could easily see it happening once there doesn't have to be a declaration beforehand.


Just to back up my point on the 'consultation with the staff' being open to the possibility of a charade...

4.3 The determination of the leadership and management needs and priorities of the school should, in so far as possible, be achieved by consensus between the Board of Management/ ETB and the teaching staff. However, if, following consultation, consensus is not possible, final decisions in the matter rest with the Board of Management/ ETB.

Am I generalising too much?

TheDriver

As with everything in a school, it could turn into a nightmare situation. I have heard of rare occasions of an unreasonable principal but equally there are stories of AP1 not doing much for their post. In vast majority of schools, everyone engages with the system and the review/assignment.

evolving_doors

TheDriver wrote: »

I agree with you, there is a review every 2 years ....

or when the Board of Management/ ETB, as appropriate, determines that a significant restructuring is required... or reassignment at the end of the year.

TheDriver wrote: »

whereby representatives of staff and post holders input their views and agree on post criteria.

Staff and post holders views can easily be discarded...

4.3 ...final decisions in the matter rest with the Board of Management/ ETB.

TheDriver wrote: »

There is no job description because its unfair if someone is primed for a role through qualification vs ability.

Well ok (although I think it's crazy to be going for any job without some type of job description) we can agree to disagree on the lack of a detailed job description. But to just simply advertise the job as "AP1" and that's all you're getting before you go in, I think is a bit Irish. If anything it's more likely the 'preferred candidate' will be primed for the intended role, hints only need to be very subtle, a simple general conversation in the corridor can alert a candidate as to what the 'mystery role' will be. Whereas if it were explicit then everyone equally knows the lay of the land.

All sounds fishy to me.

evolving_doors

TheDriver wrote: »

As with everything in a school, it could turn into a nightmare situation. I have heard of rare occasions of an unreasonable principal but equally there are stories of AP1 not doing much for their post. In vast majority of schools, everyone engages with the system and the review/assignment.

WEll yes there can be taking the mick on both sides.
My main gripe is that it's not being open from the outset.
you are applying for a middle management role of some sort with no clue as to what it entails.

The next step is where the paid middle management do what management do... manage down. So suddenly all the work is delegated on again to teachers (lets face it most of whom aren't permanent and can't say no) who didn't apply for any AP! or AP2, but yet are finding themselves on 'learning teams' attending lunchtime meetings, driving some SSE,AFL,LAOS,SEN,ICT,JCT,WSE department initiative for god knows what and getting paid diddly for it.

mirrorwall14

The complete lack of transparency as to what the actual role will be and poor payment is why I won’t be applying for one of these roles (despite being pushed to). The notion that I would apply for a job that can be changed on a whim is bonkers. Doing/preparing for a job interview for a post when the current list of potential duties has everything from ICT coordinator to Year heads to SEN coordinator to Lockers to Policy Development and everything in between is incredibly time consuming. And don’t get me started on the application form aka epic essay. What happened to a bloody CV? Add in that there isn’t even a senior management member from our school on the interview panel and honestly I think the whole system is insane (you know the people who know what roles are really most critical for the school to fill asap and who know if you are lying or exaggerating what you are doing in school.....)

System is farcical. I’ll stick to the classroom. Maybe at some stage in my career it will make more sense. Right now even if the role was decent under the current principal it could rapidly become a nightmare under different management. At least if I don’t have a post I can say ‘hell no’

And I don’t care what anyone says, if the school needs an ICT coordinator for example urgently, yes that favours a particular candidate and so it damn well should do?! What’s the point in making the system so open that everyone is on an equal footing (supposedly) and then at the end of the process not appointing someone capable of being the ICT coordinator because the panel picked two people who fulfilled some other job on the list?

Ahem. I didn’t realise this set up irritated me this much

Dave0301

mirrorwall14 wrote: »

The complete lack of transparency as to what the actual role will be and poor payment is why I won’t be applying for one of these roles (despite being pushed to). The notion that I would apply for a job that can be changed on a whim is bonkers. Doing/preparing for a job interview for a post when the current list of potential duties has everything from ICT coordinator to Year heads to SEN coordinator to Lockers to Policy Development and everything in between is incredibly time consuming. And don’t get me started on the application form aka epic essay. What happened to a bloody CV? Add in that there isn’t even a senior management member from our school on the interview panel and honestly I think the whole system is insane (you know the people who know what roles are really most critical for the school to fill asap and who know if you are lying or exaggerating what you are doing in school.....)

System is farcical. I’ll stick to the classroom. Maybe at some stage in my career it will make more sense. Right now even if the role was decent under the current principal it could rapidly become a nightmare under different management. At least if I don’t have a post I can say ‘hell no’

And I don’t care what anyone says, if the school needs an ICT coordinator for example urgently, yes that favours a particular candidate and so it damn well should do?! What’s the point in making the system so open that everyone is on an equal footing (supposedly) and then at the end of the process not appointing someone capable of being the ICT coordinator because the panel picked two people who fulfilled some other job on the list?

Ahem. I didn’t realise this set up irritated me this much

Your post sums up what I was able to find out online about it alright.

I was surprised by how the posts are advertised, interviewed for and appointments made.

It also explains why it was difficult to find a conclusive list of AP1 or AP2 posts. I have been looking at some applications for management positions in Irish schools and the application forms certainly do seem rather arduous.

The UK system has its flaws as well, but I will say that management and leadership posts are well defined from what I have experienced. It could be my inexperience with the Irish system that makes it seem more convoluted, but judging from the responses here...maybe not!