Many schools are doing this and it is happening at our school this year.

When a teaching member of staff is off on short term sick leave, they set some work for the class, usually book work, as quite often the person coming in to cover the class is from a different subject. Sometimes it is a teacher from a different deparment given an extra session, sometimes it is someone from an agency, who is a qualified teacher though not in that subject.

To try and save money on employing supply teachers (i believe to be £135ish a day), they are taking on 'cover supervisors', Who i discovered do not have to be qualified teachers. (It was suggested i may want to do it, but you must be joking). They do not have to teach, but just make sure they do the kids do the work set for them. It was also suggested that it may help the kids behaviour to see the same faces around the school rather than just random supply teachers (though we do usually get the same ones). It was stressed that these cover supervisors would only be used for short term illness and supply teachers from agencies would be used for long term cover.

What do you think about this?

Fuzzy, you may be interested in reading this website (http://www.remodelling.org/) where you will see that this is a planned strategy designed to ease the workload of the class teacher.

I do have some idea of what is going on to make the teachers workload easier. They expect other people within schools to take on the however many jobs that teachers are not meant to do anymore, I know this :loopy: Lucky our unions have informed us of the list of jobs, and not to do them even though they are trying to foyst (? not sure on spelling) them onto us, by calling it workforce reform :loopy:

What i want to know is how are you meant to do more work when you don't heve time to do the stuff you have already???:loopy: :loopy: :loopy: :loopy: and without any change in PAY?

Workforce reform = BIG CON

My wife is a qualified Nursery Nurse.. and continues to work hard on a University degree course in play therapy etc
She is livid that they plan on bringing in unqualified Classroom Assistants virtually off the street and plan to pay them as much as she gets!!
If the TV ads are to be believed all the qualifications you need is to be able to entertain kids!

Fuzzy, even more worrying is the fact that some people on this 'fast-track' scheme are actually being timetabled to teach several hours a week at schools now, right from the start of their training. They have no teaching qualifications, often no background in the subject they are teaching, and basically no idea how to do the job. I know a school where someone has literally just been in the door a couple of weeks and wants to be a music teacher via this scheme. They have no musical qualifications, no teaching qualifications, and in fact they have an extremely poor musical knowledge. In reality they shouldn't even get in the door as a teacher, that in itself is a travesty, but now they are being set loose on their own classes without having a clue about teaching methods or, even more worryingly, the subject matter involved! Supply pay varies very slightly between areas but it is in the region of what you say, in some places a bit less.

With relevance to the other thread on here about teaching, the other ridiculous thing, as you point out, is that people are being asked to take on axtra duties but with no extra reward. This is plain wrong, especially when they are strapped for time in the first place. The bottom line, at all levels from technicians and assistants up to the highest levels is that people are being asked to do things and given jobs which they are not capable of doing and/or are not qualified to do. My brother was taught half of his English GCSE course by a student teacher who couldn't put a sentence together and wasn't as intelligent as half of the kids!

Originally posted by Wavey
My wife is a qualified Nursery Nurse.. and continues to work hard on a University degree course in play therapy etc
She is livid that they plan on bringing in unqualified Classroom Assistants virtually off the street and plan to pay them as much as she gets!!
If the TV ads are to be believed all the qualifications you need is to be able to entertain kids!

Wavey to be honest it is an outrage. People with no qualifications, no experience, and often no basic intelligence (!) are as you say coming straight off the streets, stuck in front of a class full of kids, and paid the same wage as a teacher who has gone through University and maybe other Higher Education at a huge cost. Even more outrageous is that some of these people are even slipped sneaky cash bonuses, despite being totally inept and unqualified. This applies both to 'classroom assistants' and 'fast-track' people who want to train to be teachers.

Originally posted by Jonesy
Wavey to be honest it is an outrage. People with no qualifications, no experience, and often no basic intelligence (!) are as you say coming straight off the streets, stuck in front of a class full of kids, and paid the same wage as a teacher who has gone through University and maybe other Higher Education at a huge cost. Even more outrageous is that some of these people are even slipped sneaky cash bonuses, despite being totally inept and unqualified. This applies both to 'classroom assistants' and 'fast-track' people who want to train to be teachers.

Is this really true? The classroom assistants I know are paid a very meagre rate.

so are qualified Nursery Nurses.. but at least she makes the effort to better herself and has pride in her work.

Originally posted by Jonesy
Wavey to be honest it is an outrage. People with no qualifications, no experience, and often no basic intelligence (!) are as you say coming straight off the streets, stuck in front of a class full of kids, and paid the same wage as a teacher who has gone through University and maybe other Higher Education at a huge cost. Even more outrageous is that some of these people are even slipped sneaky cash bonuses, despite being totally inept and unqualified. This applies both to 'classroom assistants' and 'fast-track' people who want to train to be teachers.

Wow what a fairy story. Do you seriously believe this?

Teaching assistants are paid nowhere near what qualified teachers are paid though the Higher Grade Teaching Assistants will be paid a higher salary than 'normal' teaching assistants. This will reflect their extra qualifications and in turn their extra responsibilities.

How would you get anybody to train 3 or 4 years to be a teacher if they could get the same salary as an assistant?

Any school worth its salt would not dream of leaving the responsibility of teaching and developing the education of a class of children to unqualified staff.

I'm a qualified nursery nurse and I wish I was on as much money as a teacher! Infact, my job's on the line most of the time!!

I was talking about Nursery Nurses, not teachers, I can't comment on what teachers do or don't earn in relation to classroom assistants.
Proper, qualified Nursery Nurses go through a lot of training. Initially through college courses and, in my wife's case, additional university degree courses. The current plan is to introduce untrained classroom assistants into the school nurseries who are quite literally 'off the street'. As I said, if the current advertising is to be believed, all the qualifications you need is to be able to entertain kids.. this is so far from the truth, it's frightening.
Everything that goes on in nursery is structured and designed to introduce infants to school life and learning. Believe me, if you were to bring a 3-4 year old to nursery you would be far better putting them in the hands of a properly trained nursery nurse than the happy amatuers they're currently introducing.

Originally posted by Jonesy
My brother was taught half of his English GCSE course by a student teacher who couldn't put a sentence together and wasn't as intelligent as half of the kids!

How else are people ment to train? Student teachers need classroom experience and as long as they are closely supervised (which they are) there should be no problem. It would be like trying to become a doctor without ever looking a patient!

No offence but is this the view of a teenage boy? if so they can hardly be relied upon for a completely sound and objective perspective on a teacher.

And what is your beef with fast track? You only seem to be sighting one example of it all going wrong! How much do you actually know about the scheme? I know very little really so wouldn't presume to pass judgement on it.

Originally posted by caz2
How else are people ment to train? Student teachers need classroom experience and as long as they are closely supervised (which they are) there should be no problem. It would be like trying to become a doctor without ever looking a patient!

No offence but is this the view of a teenage boy? if so they can hardly be relied upon for a completely sound and objective perspective on a teacher.

And what is your beef with fast track? You only seem to be sighting one example of it all going wrong! How much do you actually know about the scheme? I know very little really so wouldn't presume to pass judgement on it.

How else are they meant to train? Well for a start I don't think it's a good idea to throw someone in front of a class full of year 11s who have potentially life-changing exams on the horizon. That's too risky. By all means set them loose on some year 7s initially or something to get used to being in a classroom and everything that goes with it, and then work up. Not only that, the 'couldn't out a sentence together thing', well we're getting into the realms of the 'too many people get into university' argument and the 50% target there but I"m sure there have been plenty of topics about that. I think I am probably in a decent position to pass judgement on a teacher, my parents having been them for about 70 years between them and knowing quite a lot of teachers on a personal level as a result of mixing in 'teacher circles'. The problem with fast-track, is that whilst it does open doors to many people who are perfectly able, you also get a lot of people through the door who aren't capable of being there. A lot of schools won't take them on. Also, heads of department or such like who have to mentor the fast-track people, which can take up a lot of time and add several hours onto the week, often don't get compensated for it. In fact the sum of money which the school receives for accepting the student is often given to the student, whilst the mentor gets nothing for all their extra hours. This isn't only based on one example, this is fairly common practice.

Originally posted by caz2
You only seem to be sighting one example of it all going wrong!.

Do you mean citing? Sorry, couldn't resist as you teach English.... ah well no offence anyway we will just have to agree to disagree because we won't get far otherwise. All the best.......