Raj Posted 17 April 2008 Posted 17 April 2008 they do about 15 hours a week for about 3 weeks a year and they want more money loada workshy useless layabout Marxists if you ask me but then nobody ever does in the old days a "teacher's strike" meant you were in for a jolly good thrashing with a 6 foot long swishy cane twat!
Thracian Posted 17 April 2008 Posted 17 April 2008 they do about 15 hours a week for about 3 weeks a year and they want more money loada workshy useless layabout Marxists if you ask me but then nobody ever does in the old days a "teacher's strike" meant you were in for a jolly good thrashing with a 6 foot long swishy cane I remember it well. Mind you my headmaster at primary school got his priorities right. When three of us were caned for one rather shameful episode the headmaster whacked the other two first. He then took me to one side and said he'd go easy on me but wanted a hat-trick in return from the school match the following day. He provided padding and emphasised that I was to make plenty of row when he swung the cane so the other lads didn't catch on. Needless to say the headmaster got his hat-trick, one trip to his office being quite enough. Happy days and a wonderful school (Holmfield Avenue). Full of enthusiastic teachers who took a real pride in the place.
BigGibbo Posted 17 April 2008 Posted 17 April 2008 On a serious note why did they ever abolish caning?
Zingari Posted 17 April 2008 Posted 17 April 2008 On a serious note why did they ever abolish caning? there were too many cases of repetitive strain injury put in by the teachers at my school
Simon Posted 17 April 2008 Posted 17 April 2008 You can argue that salaries should be regionalised to reflect local costs, but in the main I think thirty grand is pretty decent for a salary and £35K for post-threshold is reasonable too. Top that off with thirteen weeks a year holiday and there's not many jobs to touch it.At a time when pay rises are being scrapped in industry, council workers face up to a 50% pay cut and the deal offered to teachers exceeds that of the Police - general support and sympathy for teachers is going to be in short supply. Again, this is the NUT flexing its militant muscle and children are the ones going to suffer just before the examination period. Everyone wants to be paid more money but I can not support this strike action, it's just plain wrong. The deal offered the teachers does exceed that of the Police but then I think that the Police have just as much ground to be complaining too (although I understand that by law they are not allowed to strike). No teacher I know actually spends all their 13 weeks of their holiday ON HOLIDAY. I'd estimate around 5-6 weeks in most cases are actually taken as holiday. Planning and preparation done properly takes a long time- so this time is deserved. It isn't like teachers only work 9-3.30 anyway (many work at least the 8 hours, often 10 and usually need a day at the weekend for planning, prep and marking). A pay deal that is lower than current inflation and taken over three years (when we do not know what is going to happen with inflation!) is in my view completely unacceptable. And btw, it will take most NQT teachers a good 5 years to get anywhere £30K.
StroudFox Posted 17 April 2008 Posted 17 April 2008 Many teachers I've met wouldn't have a clue what hard work really is. And many people would snap your hand off for £35,000. Stop feeling so sorry for yourself.This country doesn't need anyone getting a pay rise right now. Nor Governments stealing more money off the workforce in taxes. The economy is fast heading for shit creek and it needs everyone to stop being so sodding greedy. Including the politicians and teachers who should be setting an example. I am not feeling sorry for myself at all and never meant to come across like that. I was merely pointing out that Disco Bob was not 100% spot on with his figures for me. Also I was responding because I get annoyed with ignorant people who think teachers only work during school hours when the children are there. The reason the economy is in trouble is not because of teachers but because banks are giving people more money than they can afford to pay back. Get off your soapbox as I am sure you have not met every single teacher - you have certainly not met me and your judgements about teachers do not describe me at all.
Simon Posted 17 April 2008 Posted 17 April 2008 You see I didn't realise this. I thought that strike action was ratified as a result of a popular vote, and that a majority of teachers would have to support the action for it to become reality. Only NUT teachers are striking and it was ratified by a popular vote; 3 out of 4 members of the Union have voted to strike. The NUT is also the biggest and fastest growing teaching union. A majority of that kind is never found in parliament.
StroudFox Posted 17 April 2008 Posted 17 April 2008 Only NUT teachers are striking and it was ratified by a popular vote; 3 out of 4 members of the Union have voted to strike. The NUT is also the biggest and fastest growing teaching union.A majority of that kind is never found in parliament. Also the UCU (University and College Union) is going on strike so that will affect some FE and HE colleges.
Lord Nibblington Posted 17 April 2008 Posted 17 April 2008 Seriously,i think she's in ATl and they aint striking. She wouldn't. ATL have a no strike rule. </random> Lots of interesting and pointless opinions in this thread. All I know is that as a student teacher, I get to teach 70% of a full timetable, and do a full time Uni course all for the princely sum of £667 a month. Make of that what you will.
Joe. Posted 17 April 2008 Posted 17 April 2008 Well I only have two lessons on Thrsday now, better than four I suppose, but not quite as good as a day off.
Raj Posted 17 April 2008 Posted 17 April 2008 She wouldn't. ATL have a no strike rule. </random>Lots of interesting and pointless opinions in this thread. All I know is that as a student teacher, I get to teach 70% of a full timetable, and do a full time Uni course all for the princely sum of £667 a month. Make of that what you will. ATL rocks!!! To be serious. Me Mrs LOVES her job. It aint the money or the Hols. She loves knowing she has an effect on Young peoples lifes(she teaches 16+) Every student who thanks her or says Cheers or buys her a card or chocs for Xmas for her help is why she does it. How many of us in our meaningless menial jobs get thanks for what we do? I aint helping to make the youth of today better. I aint doing my bit to try and make the parents of tomorrow into educated,head strong people like Disco Bob. People may begrudge them the hols,pay etc.....but i tell you what i couldn't fcuking do it for a day! So for all you teachers out there i wanna say....FCUK YOU!....i mean WELL DONE .....(Lazy bastards!!!)
LeeCovFox Posted 17 April 2008 Posted 17 April 2008 City of Leicester is full of queers!Mundella was well 'ard! It probably is now! Its now called City of Leicester College, and is a specialist business college I think. Could any of the teachers on here explain to me what this specialist status stuff is about, how it works? Is it just a label to encourage more parents to send their kids there, is more funding provided to a particular subject area to the detriment of others? I honestly have no idea what it really means, if it works, anything. I'm quite intrigued by it though.
LeeCovFox Posted 17 April 2008 Posted 17 April 2008 On a serious note why did they ever abolish caning? Presumably it wasn't working. And why would it? If they had the cane when I was at school I would just have made sure I didn't get caught. I still would have misbehaved. I was a kid. Kids do, and so they should too! I can see no way in which violence promotes respect and good behaviour.
AoWW Posted 17 April 2008 Posted 17 April 2008 they do about 15 hours a week for about 3 weeks a year and they want more money loada workshy useless layabout Marxists if you ask me but then nobody ever does in the old days a "teacher's strike" meant you were in for a jolly good thrashing with a 6 foot long swishy cane Pay me enough and I'd be more than happy to oblige with a long swishy cane. After all, I need to boost my meagre salary - and I have plenty of free time on my hands.
Lord Nibblington Posted 17 April 2008 Posted 17 April 2008 It probably is now! Its now called City of Leicester College, and is a specialist business college I think. Could any of the teachers on here explain to me what this specialist status stuff is about, how it works? Is it just a label to encourage more parents to send their kids there, is more funding provided to a particular subject area to the detriment of others? I honestly have no idea what it really means, if it works, anything. I'm quite intrigued by it though. Mostly that. They're given extra funding to make those subjects they've got specialist status in better - weather it be equipment, more or teachers or whatever. And once they've got it, they're subject to a constant review process to show they're worth the money. Or something like that.
LeeCovFox Posted 17 April 2008 Posted 17 April 2008 Mostly that. They're given extra funding to make those subjects they've got specialist status in better - weather it be equipment, more or teachers or whatever. And once they've got it, they're subject to a constant review process to show they're worth the money.Or something like that. Should all subjects not have equal funding though? With perhaps English, Maths and Science receiving more? As I understand it this is extra funding, so isn't having a detrimental effect of other subjects financially, but could this extra money not be put to better use by being spread across the board, or perhaps by allowing the scholl to choose how to allocate it. Physical Education for example, was in dire need of funding when I was at school, although that may now have changed, I have no idea.
Lord Nibblington Posted 17 April 2008 Posted 17 April 2008 Should all subjects not have equal funding though? With perhaps English, Maths and Science receiving more? As I understand it this is extra funding, so isn't having a detrimental effect of other subjects financially, but could this extra money not be put to better use by being spread across the board, or perhaps by allowing the scholl to choose how to allocate it. Physical Education for example, was in dire need of funding when I was at school, although that may now have changed, I have no idea. School's get to choose what specialisms they want to apply for. It's a decision made the the SLT in whatever school to apply for whatever specialism they feel best suits the needs of their school. They may feel they have a strong department in a certain subject and by applying for specialist statuts that can make it even better and it acts as a way of attracting more pupils. The specialist status also needs tangible results. You could I suppose choose to use your extra funding to try and strenghten all areas of the school, but if you don't come up to scratch in what you're meant to be doing with it, you loose it. You can also apply for more than one specialism.
potter3 Posted 17 April 2008 Posted 17 April 2008 Yeah our school is a specialist Sports & Science college, to get it we had to raise a certain amount of money by a deadline then they'd pay the rest or something. Most of it was spent on a gym and sport science lab thingy I think.
LeeCovFox Posted 17 April 2008 Posted 17 April 2008 School's get to choose what specialisms they want to apply for. It's a decision made the the SLT in whatever school to apply for whatever specialism they feel best suits the needs of their school. They may feel they have a strong department in a certain subject and by applying for specialist statuts that can make it even better and it acts as a way of attracting more pupils.The specialist status also needs tangible results. You could I suppose choose to use your extra funding to try and strenghten all areas of the school, but if you don't come up to scratch in what you're meant to be doing with it, you loose it. You can also apply for more than one specialism. Has the whole scheme worked? I know that is has been running for some time now. I agree with anything that is going to help schools get results, just haven't fully understood this idea until now. Always wondered, but never asked! Yeah our school is a specialist Sports & Science college, to get it we had to raise a certain amount of money by a deadline then they'd pay the rest or something. Most of it was spent on a gym and sport science lab thingy I think. Sounds to me as though its doing some good then in that case.
Webbo Posted 17 April 2008 Posted 17 April 2008 Presumably it wasn't working. And why would it? If they had the cane when I was at school I would just have made sure I didn't get caught. I still would have misbehaved. I was a kid. Kids do, and so they should too! I can see no way in which violence promotes respect and good behaviour. You obviously weren't there. Sure there were some kids who pretended that they weren't bothered, but the majority of us were shit scared of some of the teachers and we didn't misbehave. The difference is today is that every little willy puller knows that the teachers can't touch them and the worse they'll get (eventually) is a suspension, in other words a few days off school.
LeeCovFox Posted 17 April 2008 Posted 17 April 2008 You obviously weren't there. Sure there were some kids who pretended that they weren't bothered, but the majority of us were shit scared of some of the teachers and we didn't misbehave.The difference is today is that every little willy puller knows that the teachers can't touch them and the worse they'll get (eventually) is a suspension, in other words a few days off school. Fear and respect are two completely different things. A teacher should not have the right to strike a pupil. Nobody has the right to strike anybody. Its uncivilised, and promotes the view that hitting people is good way to solve a problem. If I was a pupil, and a teacher struck me, I would strike the buggers back. Thats not a lack of respect, or at least its no more disprespectful than them hitting me in the first place.
Lord Nibblington Posted 17 April 2008 Posted 17 April 2008 Has the whole scheme worked? I know that is has been running for some time now. I agree with anything that is going to help schools get results, just haven't fully understood this idea until now. Always wondered, but never asked! To be honest, I haven't a clue about that! You'd probably best ask someone whose been teaching for more than 5 months!
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.