Haddington Road Discussion ASTI/TUI/Non Union at Second Level

MouseTail · 28-11-2013 12:37AM

1967, INTO lobbies for the abolition of the Primary Certificate, an outdated State exam.
2013, ASTI lobbies for the retention of the Junior Certificate, an outdated State exam.

seavill · 28-11-2013 12:51AM

MouseTail wrote: »

1967, INTO lobbies for the abolition of the Primary Certificate, an outdated State exam.
2013, ASTI lobbies for the retention of the Junior Certificate, an outdated State exam.

Where does it say the asti want to keep the jc. They want consultation and proper reasons for changing it.

Not the current reason for Quinn to leave a legacy. Quote taken from the rte fly in the wall documentary he did.

amacca · 28-11-2013 12:57AM

MouseTail wrote: »

1967, INTO lobbies for the abolition of the Primary Certificate, an outdated State exam.
2013, ASTI lobbies for the retention of the Junior Certificate, an outdated State exam.

Nice neat catchy and unfortunately woefully inaccurate summary of the situation.

Peter Flynt · 28-11-2013 12:59AM

MouseTail wrote: »

1967, INTO lobbies for the abolition of the Primary Certificate, an outdated State exam.
2013, ASTI lobbies for the retention of the Junior Certificate, an outdated State exam.

Who says either were "outdated"?

Are we, as a society, not to expect assessment and state certificate of children until after 14 years in the system. . . by which time they've become adults?

Now switch off your cheap DES Dell laptop and go to bed.

Pwpane · 28-11-2013 01:14AM

km79 wrote: »

Well I think that is more appropriate !
We are also meeting him Monday.
First question I'd ask him is to confirm that all CP hours will have to me made up between jan -may . They are keeping very quiet on this for obvious reasons.

Can you ask him why, in ASTI public statements (including his), there is no mention of the long standing policy of the ASTI of opposition to teachers assessing their own students?

Is it that the union leaders assume that when it is actually worked out, that teachers will assess students in other local schools?

So that the other worry of the invalidity and unreliability of project work and group work being used for certification purposes loses ground, and must be accepted?

seavill · 28-11-2013 01:27AM

Pwpane wrote: »

Can you ask him why, in ASTI public statements (including his), there is no mention of the long standing policy of the ASTI of opposition to teachers assessing their own students?

Is it that the union leaders assume that when it is actually worked out, that teachers will assess students in other local schools?

So that the other worry of the invalidity and unreliability of project work and group work being used for certification purposes loses ground, and must be accepted?

Is there a long standing policy on this.

Asti members already correct their own students work in construction studies and ag science I think and have done so as far as I know since the introduction of the course in 1986

Pwpane · 28-11-2013 01:56AM

seavill wrote: »

Is there a long standing policy on this.

Asti members already correct their own students work in construction studies and ag science I think and have done so as far as I know since the introduction of the course in 1986

There are anomalies, I know, and I don't understand them. But google it.

From the ASTI website: [URL="[url]http://www.asti.ie/?id=418[/url]"][/url]http://www.asti.ie/?id=418

ASTI Directive on oral exams assessment
It is ASTI policy that members do not provide marks to their own students in the state certificate examinations. ASTI members are directed not to assess their own students or students in their own school in state certificate examinations. This policy applies to all Junior Certificate oral examinations including Gaeilge.The ASTI policy on assessment is based on the principle that the state certified examination system should be valid, objective and equitable. There should be a variety of techniques of assessment to evaluate the student’s level of skills and test the student’s knowledge of the various syllabi. Teachers should not, however, assess their own pupils for the purpose of awarding them a mark in the state certificate examinations.

There is plenty more. The policy has been reaffirmed at several Conventions.
The following is from May 2013: http://www.asti.ie/index.php?id=38&no_cache=1&tx_ttnews%5Btt_news%5D=1538

The NCCA is currently seeking input from English teachers on the new curriculum specifications for the new Junior Cycle Framework. The new English subject specification will be radically different from the current syllabus in terms of content, learning outcomes, relationships to statements of learning, key skills and assessment.
The ASTI wishes to alert members to the following ASTI policy relating to the Junior Cycle Framework and, in particular, ASTI policy in relation to teachers’ grading their own students for the purpose of State examinations.
ASTI Policy on State Examinations
It is ASTI policy that members do not provide marks to their own students in the state certificate examinations.

teacherhead · 28-11-2013 08:23AM

Historically, the ASTI have been opposed to teachers marking the work of their own students for several reasons including the erosion of the relationship between students and teachers.

The position of TUI has traditionally been that assessment by teachers would be acceptable once there was training, payment and external moderation.
I am aware oc many asti teachers who do not mark the construction projects for their own students.

spurious · 28-11-2013 08:30AM

teacherhead wrote: »

Historically, the ASTI have been opposed to teachers marking the work of their own students for several reasons including the erosion of the relationship between students and teachers.

The position of TUI has traditionally been that assessment by teachers would be acceptable once there was training, payment and external moderation.
I am aware oc many asti teachers who do not mark the construction projects for their own students.

The problem is not the marking of our own students' work. We already do that daily. The problem is there is that there is no plan for external checking or moderation. A system of teachers assessing their own students with the work then being double checked to ensure national standards already exists in a number of subjects and the sky has not fallen in.

The only reason the DES do not want the same system to be extended to all subjects is that is costs money.

Money is ALWAYS the bottom line in Irish educational 'policy'.

2011abc · 28-11-2013 12:10PM

Well the gloves are well and truly off now that Quinn has said he definitely won't pay ASTI teachers who vote No money DUE in January for S&S already done . And if you vote Yes you're IN HRA and have been doing it for free since July . Or is he going to literally try blackmail teachers ?! Time this schoolyard bully got his nose bloodied ...Vote No !

Peter Flynt · 28-11-2013 12:16PM

2011abc wrote: »

Well the gloves are well and truly off now that Quinn has said he definitely won't pay ASTI teachers who vote No money DUE in January for S&S already done . And if you vote Yes you're IN HRA and have been doing it for free since July . Or is he going to literally try blackmail teachers ?! Time this schoolyard bully got his nose bloodied ...Vote No !

Big tactical mistake from Quinn. . . He just couldn't help himself and wait for the possibility of a YES vote.

What a muppet.

km79 · 28-11-2013 12:59PM

So what now ....
Thinkng about the timing of it there. Seemed strange at first BUT maybe he is hoping teachers will fear a strike and drop in wages pre Xmas and a backlash from parents for disrupted Xmas tests ?

lachin · 28-11-2013 01:08PM

So I went to the meeting and I'm completely disillusioned now. I felt that king was pushing for a yes the way he went on. I said this to him and he stated he's just relaying the facts.

He said that the levy to opt out of s&s is all legal and above board, he said that even if we vote no that fempi will enforce s&s anyway. I actually came out feeling that I should vote yes.

Please can anyone restore my faith in our weak union and tell me why I should vote no. My reasons all along were about conditions, but seemingly now we lose our conditions either way.

km79 · 28-11-2013 01:44PM

Last week in the snotty email I received from Pat King he informed me S and S was to be paid even in the event of a No vote.
I have emailed him asking him if the situation has changedand if so to inform members as a matter of priority AND to inform of us of the unions response

Peter Flynt · 28-11-2013 02:04PM

So Ruairi has threatened ya. . . .If you vote NO you won't get paid for Supervision & Substitution and if you vote YES you won't get paid for Supervision & Substitution but you might be one of the lucky ones who gets to pay €1769 for the privilege of not doing Supervision & Substitution.

acequion · 28-11-2013 03:13PM

lachin wrote: »

So I went to the meeting and I'm completely disillusioned now. I felt that king was pushing for a yes the way he went on. I said this to him and he stated he's just relaying the facts.

He said that the levy to opt out of s&s is all legal and above board, he said that even if we vote no that fempi will enforce s&s anyway. I actually came out feeling that I should vote yes.

Please can anyone restore my faith in our weak union and tell me why I should vote no. My reasons all along were about conditions, but seemingly now we lose our conditions either way.

lachin,I hope you can see that King has a vested interest in getting people to vote yes. Just as did the general secretaries of INTO and TUI and indeed other PS unions, who, unashamedly frightened and in many cases, bullied members into voting yes. So there is obviously some terrible corruption going on in high places with union bosses and NO WAY should that be tolerated. Apart from all the other good reasons for voting no,voting yes ensures the cosy cartel status quo of the union bosses continues unchallenged. That alone is enough to say no.

If you vote yes it means that you agree to further deteriorate your own pay and conditions, you agree to ongoing austerity, you agree that the ordinary citizen must pay for the mistakes of the greedy elite. And all the while the greedy elite continue to get away with murder, and that includes the grossly overpaid union bosses like King.These guys like you to think that you don't have a choice. But you do have a choice. Vote NO.

Peter Flynt · 28-11-2013 04:59PM

if you vote YES you'll be working during June within the next few years.

The plan is that a YES vote will see the abolition of the Junior Cert occurring without opposition. When this occurs teachers will be required to take on a month (June) of Continuous Professional Development under the Teaching Council . . . which is, of course, funded by teachers.

So add that to your 88 hours.

Peter Flynt · 28-11-2013 05:04PM

Peter Flynt wrote: »

Big tactical mistake from Quinn. . . He just couldn't help himself and wait for the possibility of a YES vote.

What a muppet.

http://www.asti.ie/fileadmin/user_upload/Documents/News/Letter_re_Sand_.pdf

Seems the Department have been going around today clearing up the mess made by Quinn.

ASTI members will be paid for S&S up to the date of rejection (should that occur)

km79 · 28-11-2013 05:39PM

Quinn has done more for a No vote than King will ever do with that silly statement. He has proved the promised in HRA are not worth the paper they are written on

Peter Flynt · 28-11-2013 05:43PM

RE: If ASTI members reject the Haddington Road Agreement again will they receive the Supervision & Substitution payment which is due in January?

Quinn: No they will not because the teachers in the system who have accepted Haddington Road (TUI and the INTO). . . they are not being paid

RE: So you say it's as clear as that. They definitively will not get this payment in January no matter what happens.

Quinn: That is absolutely clear and their representatives have been informed of that.

. . . . Later on today.

http://www.asti.ie/fileadmin/user_upload/Documents/News/Letter_re_Sand_.pdf

Rossdoc81 · 28-11-2013 06:03PM

The Dept of Education obviously aren't very organised if the head man doesn't even know whats going on. I can't see them having a plan for the future if we vote no.

This exact same situation happened back in 2001. The DES said they would not pay S+S, so ASTI members said they would not provide S+S. Teachers came into school to work but management had to leave students at home because of lack of supervision at breaks. The DES got external people in for the rest of the year. This caused them serious hassle. By the end of the school year they caved and started to pay the €1790. If this happens again we will win again.

As useless as the heads of the ASTI are, I'd guess the government are equally as useless - as demonstrated by today. We'll take them apart when it comes to it.

Pwpane · 28-11-2013 07:23PM

Peter Flynt wrote: »

So Ruairi has threatened ya. . . .If you vote NO you won't get paid for Supervision & Substitution and if you vote YES you won't get paid for Supervision & Substitution but you might be one of the lucky ones who gets to pay €1769 for the privilege of not doing Supervision & Substitution.

LOL - Quote of the day

Well said!!

ytareh · 28-11-2013 11:44PM

Peter Flynt wrote: »

http://www.asti.ie/fileadmin/user_upload/Documents/News/Letter_re_Sand_.pdf

Seems the Department have been going around today clearing up the mess made by Quinn.

ASTI members will be paid for S&S up to the date of rejection (should that occur)

I STILL wouldnt trust them to pay up regardless of how vote goes .Well and truly showing their pedigree today .Elected on lies and continue to lie through their teeth .ZERO chance of being elected next time , please God.Hopefully go the way of Greens and PDs .

Rebelheart · 29-11-2013 06:38PM

What's the ASTI vision for our profession in the event of another 'No' vote?

I am dead against this clear intention of the Irish state to make the teaching profession in Ireland as yellow pack as it is in Britain, with all the pointless bureaucracy of that English system. That is the ultimate nightmare scenario, and it's beyond me how so many people involved in teaching are not highlighting the way Irish state policy is going, the English way, and all that is wrong with it.

I'm a teacher - not a clerical officer and not a security guard. Everybody who went to university with me is being paid far more than me. That is the exchange I made - now, the Irish state is trying to change my terms of employment and make me as lowly as a teacher in the English system, despite Ireland having its own tradition where teachers have had a huge role in our community, our culture and our history. All of this HRA stuff is simply an "impose the English system no matter what and dress it up as benefitting students"

On the other hand, I would genuinely like to hear a positively-defined vision from the ASTI for our profession.

Rebelheart · 29-11-2013 06:41PM

Peter Flynt wrote: »

if you vote YES you'll be working during June within the next few years.

The plan is that a YES vote will see the abolition of the Junior Cert occurring without opposition. When this occurs teachers will be required to take on a month (June) of Continuous Professional Development under the Teaching Council . . . which is, of course, funded by teachers.

So add that to your 88 hours.

Can you reference this? Because, if this state intends to take June off me, then everybody in the teaching unions is being very quiet about it. Are you saying TUI people basically voted to give up June when they voted to accept HRA?

2011abc · 29-11-2013 06:55PM

Rebelheart wrote: »

Can you reference this? Because, if this state intends to take June off me, then everybody in the teaching unions is being very quiet about it. Are you saying TUI people basically voted to give up June when they voted to accept HRA?

Anybody who votes for HRA gives up EVERYTHING !They can do what they like with ye -and WILL.PLEASE GOD we in ASTI have sense to stay out of the whole rotten thing.The trouble IS 'everybody being very quiet about it' ....a la 'they came for the communists first but I wasnt a communist '....We have ALREADY lost a month if we join HRA -almost exactly 88 hours free work a year extra = 4 weeks = a month ....so lamenting for June should seem extra bitter in that context.

Peter Flynt · 29-11-2013 07:13PM

Rebelheart wrote: »

Can you reference this? Because, if this state intends to take June off me, then everybody in the teaching unions is being very quiet about it. Are you saying TUI people basically voted to give up June when they voted to accept HRA?

My source is an elected member of the Teaching Council.

It all makes sense when you consider it. With the Junior Cert abolished (and no marking or supervising by teachers to be done) then all that remains is the Leaving Cert.

The Department don't want teachers of specific subjects anymore. . . they want a jack of all trades to fit in with their new School Cert plans. . . Teaching Chinese one minute. . then teaching Animal Care the next.

They'll want teachers showing evidence of courses completed under the Teaching Council.

June is going. . . No doubt about that - It may not be this year or next. . . it may even form part of a future so-called "agreement"

ASTI members are now the only ones in a position to protect the profession and they can only do that by voting NO.

Icsics · 29-11-2013 07:27PM

Apart from CPD, with this new JCert we'll eventually all be setting exam/marking/supervising/correcting in June......and coming back earlier to do CP. Cannot imagine anything worse, essential to get a NO vote

teacherhead · 29-11-2013 08:21PM

Rebelheart wrote: »

Can you reference this? Because, if this state intends to take June off me, then everybody in the teaching unions is being very quiet about it. Are you saying TUI people basically voted to give up June when they voted to accept HRA?

memo v7 is very clear that teachers are entitled to 6 weeks holidays

Rebelheart · 29-11-2013 08:29PM

teacherhead wrote: »

memo v7 is very clear that teachers are entitled to 6 weeks holidays

Have you got a specific link? I currently get paid for 7.5 months work, with the payment spread over 12 months. If they intend to add 3 months more work to my year, I want to see evidence. Not even the most Bolshie of Union members in my school has claimed this.

Haddington Road Discussion ASTI/TUI/Non Union at Second Level

Comments