Sunday, November 04, 2007
Scrap the GTCMore from the 'Scrap the GTC' blog-
‘Child porn sir gets school ban’, ‘Stressed Out Deputy Head Drank Vodka in the Boiler Room!’ ‘Willy row Miss fired’ and ‘PE Sir, 32 romped with pupil’ – are just a few of the tabloid headlines that the disciplinary cases heard by the General Teaching Council have generated. Set up in 2000 the GTC set itself the task of “Championing teachers and advocating change and improvements on their behalf.” Its primary function was to maintain a list of registered teachers and hear disciplinary cases.
The GTC didn’t exactly make an auspicious start billing itself as “the voice of teachers” it instantly ran into union hostility, was it trying to usurp their role? It hastily changed this to “the voice for teachers”.
The planners then erected an unwieldy, creaky edifice called the Council. This body was composed of four sections,
a) 13 people directly appointed by the Secretary of State.
b) 17 members from other quangoes, obviously working on that sound playground principle -'if we let you go on our quango, we can have a go on yours'
c) 25 teachers - elected in a turnout so low that the dullest parliamentary by-election would struggle to emulate it
d) 9 nominees from teacher unions
Even the elected members came from a national ballot and therefore had no identification with or responsibility to a particular area or constituency. This increased the impression of a remote, inaccessible and distant organisation.
After an attempt at “voluntary” contributions resulted in a derisory 14% return the government stepped in to bale them out. We had the surreal scenario of the government sending out a lump sum of money to teachers, and then telling them to send it to the GTC, who processed the cheques.
So the GTC has continued, disregarded by most teachers another unloved orphaned quango competing in the alphabet soup of education – TDA, QCA, OFSTED. The GTC has heard over 100 disciplinary cases at an average cost of £12,000. However, it hasn’t been able to expedite this core function, the average time for a first hearing after a case is referred is over a year.
Apart from the lurid tabloid headlines there have been ridiculous cases like the teacher arraigned before a GTC disciplinary panel for “making silly faces and derogatory remarks about other members of staff, mimicking silly walks and using foul language.” In October 2007 Keith Robinson, a teacher with an unblemished record of thirty three years, was cleared of ‘failing to return library books’ and calling a teenager who swore at him ‘a waste of space’. There but for the grace of God go most of the teaching profession…
Concern has also been expressed by serving members of the GTC about the new ‘suitability declaration’, will teachers have to declare any indiscretions, even those which happened in early adulthood, or personal matters on a GTC form? Would failure to reveal this information lead to sanctions from the GTC?
The statements that underpin the GTC code of conduct are also being reviewed, it currently reads, ‘Registered teachers may be found guilty of unacceptable professional conduct where they seriously demean [my emphasis] or undermine their pupils, their parents, carers or colleagues…’ Under a proposed review this would be changed to ‘cause upset or distress’, a statement so vague that almost any allegation would meet the test for a hearing.
Other concerns centre on the ‘suitability check’, which could be extended to any motoring offence, other than a 3 point fixed penalty, which would be considered as a relevant conviction in terms of ‘unprofessional conduct’.
If those proposals now ‘under review’ weren’t bad enough we have the plans to bring in ‘active registration’ whereby teachers would have to prove that they had undertaken continuing work-based learning. Despite reassurances that this would only apply to supply teachers or those who had taken a break from teaching, the GTC Wales are considering plans for all teachers to record the training they have undertaken on an online database.
Has the GTC won the trust of teachers? The elections for teacher representatives in 2004 saw a turn out of only 10%. The National Association of Schoolteachers carried out a survey, of the respondents 88% felt the GTC was ‘ineffective’, this later led to the GTC threatening them with legal action after they were accused of misusing funds.
To lift its profile the GTC has sent out a free magazine to teachers, now you might have expected a witty irreverent publication chock full of letters, comments and articles by … teachers. No such luck, look away now, another teacher-free zone. I wrote a piece for the GTC magazine only to be informed that they didn’t take material from teachers because,“objectivity isn’t achieved by a teacher who might be too close to his/her subject,” So the alternative is a bland, safe, ‘house style’ nothing that reflects teachers’ despair, cynicism, humour, hope and elation.
GTC representatives have warned that scrapping it would leave registration with the government. I really don’t ‘buy’ that argument. If you bought a second-hand car that leaked oil everywhere, the engine misfired and the gearbox jammed and you took it back to the dealer, only to be told, ‘our competitors are worse than us’, you wouldn’t be impressed.
Teachers deserve a fast, efficient, responsive regulatory body not this slow, bloated quango that has never won teachers’ trust or confidence. Scrapping the GTC isn’t the most important issue facing teachers; I don’t wake up in the middle of the night thinking ‘We’ve got to scrap the GTC’. But in the spirit of ‘My Name is Earl’, let’s start with number 97 on the list. That’s why I want to stand in the GTC elections on a simple slogan – ‘Scrap the GTC’.
If you want to stand as a ‘Scrap the GTC’ candidate contact me on scrapthegtc@aol.com
Labels: GTC
Wednesday, October 31, 2007
A Waste of SpaceThe Times Educational Supplement (TES) has an ‘exclusive’, yes, the earth shattering news that the General Teaching Council’s (GTC) board could be slimmed down from 64 members to just 12.
The current board is composed of –
a) 13 people directly appointed by the Secretary of State.
b) 17 members from other quangoes, obviously working on that sound playground principle -'if we let you go on our quango, we can have a go on yours'
c) 25 teachers - elected in a turnout so low that the dullest parliamentary by-election would struggle to emulate it
d) 9 nominees from teacher unions
Teachers with banners outside parliament with the slogan ‘Save the GTC’? It isn’t going to happen. Let’s just say that the GTC isn’t exactly teachers’ favourite quango.
Their latest wheeze has to been to float the idea of ‘active registration’. Teachers would have to prove their ‘commitment to, and participation in, continuing work-based learning’. English performance management frameworks require schools to identify teachers’ development needs. So it’s claimed that this measure would just apply to supply teachers and those coming back to teaching after a break.
Everyone wants a well-trained teaching profession. However, privatised supply agencies aren’t exactly in a rush to supply free training for teachers. The GTC Wales have also proposed that all serving teachers would have to enter the training they have completed on an online database – more intrusion into teachers’ working life.
One of the main reasons why the GTC is so unloved are the ludicrous cases that come before their disciplinary panels. One teacher was arraigned for “making silly faces and derogatory remarks about other members of staff, mimicking silly walks and using foul language.” There but for the grace of God go most of the teaching profession.
The most notorious case involved Scunthorpe secondary teacher Keith Robertson, he had an unblemished record from thirty-three years of teaching. At his hearing in October 2007 he was charged with ‘failing to return library books’ and calling a pupil who had sworn at him and accused him, incorrectly, of losing course work, a ‘waste of space’. Robinson told the deputy head another pupil had ‘a great big back and backside’. This remark was made in confidence to the deputy head in his office; he then reported the matter to the head. Robinson was cleared of unacceptable professional conduct. Average cost of GTC hearings? £12,000.
Truly a ‘waste of space’.
Labels: GTC
Tuesday, July 24, 2007
Nice work if you can get it!More from 'Scrap the GTC'
There was an interesting post from 'astaire' on the TES Staffroom
'You might encourage people to stand by mentioning that council members get first class travel, excellent accommodation and expenses, AND around £250.00 per day pay, for each day (or part of a day) they are on Council business.'
£250 a day! Nice work if you can get it. No wonder the GTC fees are so high!
Labels: GTC
Monday, July 23, 2007
In Flagrante DelictoSome interesting material from 'Scrap the GTC'
I found an interesting post on the TES Staffroom about the new suitability declaration that the GTC are preparing, this from 'Serving member' -
The new suitability declaration: currently this will be trialed for 1 year for student teachers. Next year existing teachers will have to sign the declaration.
Soon every teacher in the country will have to declare any indiscretions, even those which happened in childhood or early adulthood, or those which are entirely personal, on a GTCE form. Failure to do so will risk a sanction from the GTCE, up to and including a prohibition order.
GTCE council members have been concerned for some time about the public perception of the GTCE intruding into the personal lives of teachers. Such concerns were first raised in council meetings in Autumn 2004. Recently concerns have been raised again on the members’ extranet, in the lights of the proposed suitability checks which have been railroaded past council members at the behest of the GTCE management.
Recently there have been two cases where ‘affairs’ between two consenting adults have been judged to be unacceptable professional conduct. There are three more such cases in the pipeline for hearings. Many council members are worried that the GTCE management’s determination to pursue such cases are irrevocably undermining the GTCE’s regulatory reputation amongst the teaching profession, and beyond.
Furthermore there is a real concern that the statements underpinning the code of conduct are being subverted. These statements are due to be reviewed during the next year, but council members are asking whether teachers will really have an opportunity to voice their views or whether changes will simply be railroaded through by the GTCE management.
In particular, paragraph one of the code of conduct currently reads: “Registered teachers may be found to be guilty of unacceptable professional conductwhere they: Seriously demean or undermine pupils, their parents, carers or colleagues, or act towards them in a manner which is discriminatory in relation to gender, marital status, religion, belief, colour, race, ethnicity, class, sexual orientation, disability or age”.
Under the proposed review, this statement will now read:“Registered teachers may be found to be guilty of unacceptable professional conduct where they: Cause upset or distress or undermine pupils, their parents, carers or colleagues, or act towards them in a manner which is upsetting or distressing in relation to gender, marital status, religion, belief, colour, race, ethnicity, class, sexual orientation, disability or age”.
This statement is now so vague, almost any allegation will now meet the test for a hearing – i.e. a prima facie case to answer against the teacher and a good chance of a sanction being found against a teacher. This is deeply disturbing.
Recent hearings and investigatory committee discussions we have had sight of have also raised a number of key areas were such loose language is likely to be exploited. Already allegations are being made against lesbian, gay and bisexual teachers based on remarks they might have said in relation to their sexuality which have been alleged to have been discriminatory or demeaning. Under the new clause, any behaviour which can be argued to have caused upset or distress could merit an investigation. If the trickle of recent referrals is anything to go by, there will be a barrage of lesbian, gay and bisexual members before the council in 2008/2009 charged with simply asserting their sexuality and thereby committing acts of unacceptable professional conduct. Such a code of conduct has no place in our society, or in the teaching profession. All the teachers in England have a right to contribute to the new code of conduct - not just the privileged few.
Another real concern is the proposed suitability check, which if successful, the GTCE management plan to extend to all existing teacher members. Concerns in the past regarding the declaration of driving offences were raised, but at previous council meetings the decision was made to pursue only serious drunk driving offence convictions. However, this will now to be extended to dangerous driving. In fact any motoring offences other than 3 point fixed penalties are now to be considered as a relevant conviction in terms of unacceptable professional conduct. These convictions will be considered retrospectively.
The concern is, and there is much recent evidence at GTCE hearings to support this, that some LEAs keep knowledge of such allegations in reserve, especially for headteachers. Since the GTCE does not, and never has enforced the statutory 30 day deadline for allegations, allegations can be unearthed years later. Since the registration requirement does not apply for convictions or police investigations, this means that events which occurred well before the inception of the GTCE will be considered, as has already been the case. Already this practice is common with criminal convictions and a useful way for LEAs to prune their pool of headteachers. Now it will be extended to minor offences and investigated allegations, regardless of the outcomes.
We understand that every teacher member will have to sign the suitability declaration after the 1 year trial for new members.
We also understand that the GTCE management intend to use the declaration to bar from teaching anyone who has had an abuse allegation made against them, as part of post Bichard framework. This act would be swingeing and unfair on those maliciously accused. We hope the GTCE management will reconsider for the sake of the integrity of self-regulation within the teaching professions.
This really is 'deeply disturbing' the case of teachers being disciplined for having an affair? As one post noted John Prescott is caught 'in flagrante delicto' with his diary secretary and that is viewed as a perk of the job. Yet, when it comes to teachers...
Labels: GTC
Sunday, July 22, 2007
Scrap the GTC!I've just found this web site 'Scrap the GTC'.
They are trying to find candidates to stand in the elections, nominations are open between October and December.
1. The General Teaching Council has never won teachers’ confidence. A survey by the National Association of Schoolteachers found that 88% of its members thought the GTC was ‘ineffective’. The turnout in the last GTC elections in 2004 was a derisory 10%.
2. The disciplinary process is slow, expensive and cumbersome. Teachers can wait for anything up to a year before their case is heard. The average cost of a hearing is £12,000.
3. The GTC has failed to speak out on issues that affect teachers. The ‘voice for teachers’? A bad case of laryngitis.
4. Some of the cases that have gone to disciplinary hearings have been trivial. Why was a teacher charged (and subsequently cleared) with “making silly faces and derogatory remarks about other members of staff, mimicking silly walks and using foul language”?
5. The new suitability declaration, where teachers will have to declare any indiscretions which happened in childhood or early adulthood or those that are entirely personal is an intrusion.
6. The GTC has failed to communicate with teachers or to allow teachers to express opinions. The termly GTC magazine is almost entirely teacher-free. Meetings with teachers are rarely held.
7. Money spent on the ‘Teacher Learning Academy’ is just another example of teachers paying for their own training. The GTC should concentrate on one job, maintaining a register of teachers, and do it well.
8. When it was established in 2000 the GTC set itself the task of “Championing teachers and advocating change and improvements on their behalf”. By its own standards it has been an abysmal failure.
9. The GTC has never been financially independent. When only 14% of teachers were willing to make ‘voluntary contributions’ the government had to step in and paid teachers an extra £33 which was then taken out of our wages.
10. Scrapping the GTC isn’t the most important issue facing teachers. Most of us don’t wake up in the morning and think, ‘We’ve got to scrap the GTC!’ But in the spirit of ‘My Name is Earl’ let’s start with number 97 on the list.
Anyone willing to stand as a 'Scrap the GTC' candidate should contact scrapthegtc@aol.com
Labels: GTC
Saturday, July 07, 2007
The GTC – the mouse that roared?The General Teaching Council were holding one of their consultation meetings on their plans to end high-stakes testing. As it was in Liverpool, I decided to mosey along.
It wasn’t an auspicious start, there were plenty of ‘suits’ from the GTC looking around nervously at the sparsely attended venue. Eavesdropping on some of the conversations there appeared to be a preponderance of Heads of Department, ASTs and head teachers, and not many ‘ordinary teachers’. Eventually the audience swelled to around thirty.
Two boffins from the London Institute of Education made short presentations putting the standard case against testing. Their alternative to high-stakes testing was cohort sampling. From 1978 to 1988 the DfES had an Assessment Performance Unit, every year they tested 10,000 students (1.5% of the school population). The tests gave an accurate indication of whether ‘standards’ were rising; as different schools were tested they were able to use the same questions every year.
One teacher was from one of the 500 schools undertaking a two-year pilot of ‘Single Level Progress Tests’. This has been hailed as the alternative to SATs testing. Don’t get excited – it’s far worse! Pupils from Year 3 through to Year 9 take two tests every year, when they are deemed to be ‘ready’. Schools are rewarded with progression premiums for boosting the number of pupils that gain two levels in a year, i.e., 3C to 3A. In this teacher’s school successful pupils received certificates, those who didn’t reach the required level got the equivalent of an Ofsted ‘notice to improve’.
The attack by the GTC on high-stakes testing follows on from the Institute of Physics who described them as, “blunt instruments that have a number of undesired consequences.” The Institute of Educational Examiners, which represents 3,500 examiners, believes that all external exams before the age of 18 should be phased out. The Royal Society, Britain’s national academy of science, has described the present system as not “fit for purpose” and believes that testing is stifling creativity. The Qualifications and Curriculum Authority have also called for an end to the present testing regime.
What effect will the GTC have? For a start they have almost zero credibility with teachers – something the government will be aware of. Their main aim is to ‘persuade’ the government with a softly-softly campaign. Will the government listen? If you look at the appointments to Gordon Brown’s new National Council for Education Excellence, the prospects aren’t wonderful. Among them was Damon Buffini from the private equity sector, where the executives pay less tax than their cleaning ladies and Terry Leahy the boss of Tesco who earns 574 times more than his shop floor workers -could he help children with equations? British industry doesn’t have a great track record in training its own workers; the Leitch Review found that the lack of investment in skills, particularly in manual workers, had cost the economy more than £4.8 billion.
The plain truth is that the ‘Daily Mail’ sets government policy. If the GTC does speak out too loudly they can always abolish it. Teachers out on the streets demonstrating with placards ‘Save the GTC’? It isn’t going to happen.
The great and the good have all spoken out against high-stakes testing that just leaves the people who could abolish it in one fell swoop – teachers. There was an excellent unofficial Anti-SATs campaign that moved the NUT into calling a ballot in 2003 to boycott testing, 86% of those who voted wanted to take action, however, the turnout was only 34% and the union rules stipulated a 50% turn out. If we are honest everyone took their eye off the ball and the campaign folded. Surely the time is right to call for another ballot of Key Stage 2, and this time to include Key Stage 3, on boycotting tests?
I don’t hold out much hope of the NAS joining in, they are busy proving themselves the goody-two-shoes of the Rewards and Incentives Group. A moot point is, ‘what incentives?’ Apart from PPA for primary teachers, on the debit column there’s been – Performance Management, Payment by Results, Management Allowances replaced by Teaching and Learning Responsibility payments and teaching assistants taking classes. Even though a testing boycott would save half of the NAHT’s membership from an incipient nervous breakdown, the prospects don’t look great there either.
The GTC meeting finished with an address from the new Chief Executive (and former Ofsted Assistant Divisional Manager) Keith Bartley. He looked like one of those accidental figures that are thrust into the limelight. After he released the statement opposing testing he did fifteen media interviews. He posed some elliptical questions about ‘accountability’, he didn’t exactly make a stirring call for teachers to rise up and loosen their chains, Martin Luther King it wasn’t. Less ‘I Have a Dream’ more ‘Here’s Some Interesting Statistics’.
One thing is clear, high-stakes testing has become education’s equivalent of the Iraq War. Almost all the experts (including those who initially supported it) are in opposition, the Weapons of Mass Destruction have never materialised, the troops on the ground and even the generals know it’s a lost cause, the cost has escalated exponentially and as the casualties pile up public opinion is hostile. The only people in denial? The government.
Thursday, June 14, 2007
Keith Bartley and the Waffen SSHow to win the fans over? That dilemma faces every new player or manager. When Phil Neville arrived at Everton it wasn’t so much the fact that he’d played for Manchester United, it was more his brother Gary ‘I hate Scousers’ Neville. A bit like the new kid in Year 7 who has an obnoxious brother in Year 11.
Phil Neville just got on with it, winning over the fans by his performances on the pitch. One of his early games was at Old Trafford, Everton won a creditable draw and Phil Neville was Man of the Match, ‘whenever I put on the blue jersey I’m a 100% Evertonian’.
The General Teaching Council magazine ‘Teachers’ has a profile of the new Chief Executive Keith Bartley. It started well, on a teaching placement in a ‘tough’ Liverpool school he had a Damascene conversion and realised “this is a really important job”. This was followed by 13 years teaching in schools in Kent and Norwich. Just when it was looking promising there it was, 1999-2003, ASSISTANT DIVISIONAL MANAGER OFSTED.
You may well claim that you tried to ‘change it from within’. However, by 1999 most of the old teacher-friendly HMI inspectors had resigned or been sacked. Colin Richards left Ofsted and delivered a withering attack on the whole inspection process to a House of Commons committee in 1998.
Some people do conceal their past, the German writer Gunter Grass has only recently admitted that at the end of the war, as a 17 year old, he was a member of the Waffen SS. Naturally there is a difference of scale here, the Waffen SS laid waste to most of Europe whereas Ofsted merely confined themselves to the English education system. Similarities? The Waffen SS never did have a ‘Human Relations Department’ and Ofsted have never exactly done ‘touchy feely’.
Bartley is probably one of those grey ‘Vicar of Bray’ bureaucrats who moves effortlessly and seamlessly between organisations without ever challenging the ideology of the regime.
The GTC may have won some Brownie points by attacking the testing system but appointing a former ‘Assistant Divisional Manager of Ofsted’ as their Chief Executive won’t exactly ‘win the fans over’.
Tuesday, June 12, 2007
Savaged by a ChihuahuaThere’s been a tendency to write off the General Teaching Council as a useless, bureaucratic, toothless, irrelevant organisation that is intent on proving that there is death after life. Amazingly they have arisen from their coffin to attack the testing psychosis that afflicts education and have called for testing for under-16s to be abandoned in favour of sampling a small representative group to measure attainment and progress.
Even super-smoothy Education Secretary Alan Johnson was thrown when he was informed of the GTC’s proposal, he looked as though he’d been bitten on the ankle by a particularly vicious Chihuahua (the former postie had won the backing of the Union of Communication Workers in his bid to become Deputy Leader of the Labour Party, in an acrimonious debate at their recent conference the delegates voted overwhelmingly to censure the executive and to withdraw support, citing his position on Post Office closures and employment tribunals, one delegate said, ‘we’d get more support off a lamp post’ – intriguingly the details of the debate has been expunged from the UCW web site).
Johnson came out with the traditional robotic reply about needing testing to ‘raise standards’. How have standards risen? Teaching to test, making tests easier and tests always score higher than teacher assessment.
Such is the pressure that the government may consider revising SATs tests in Year 6, but beware! From September 484 schools in 10 local authorities will spend two years trialling “progression tests”. Children will take the tests twice in the year in an attempt to move up one curriculum level in English and Maths.
Targets will be set for the number of pupils expected to move up two levels a Key Stage, with extra funding in the form of “progression premiums” for those schools that achieve this.
Tuesday, February 27, 2007
Groucho and MeI thought it might be humble pie time because ‘Teacher’s TV’ e-mailed back to say they’d be putting my article on ‘Stress’ on their web site, they promised to “get back to me”, those fatal words, a week on and I’ve heard nothing. I don’t know anyone that actually watches ‘Teacher’s TV’ certainly not the programmes on stress, the main five programmes attracted 12 votes and 0 comments.
One thing writing my book and this blog has taught me is just how difficult it is to get your voice heard – by anyone.
I approached the Teacher Support Network, the charity that helps and advises teachers with problems at work. Back came a gushing e-mail and a promise to offer my book as a prize in one of their on-line surveys… a few days later another e-mail, 'Er, I’ve consulted with the bosses, they don’t want to upset the sponsors, we’ll get back to you.' They never did. Strange that, I thought TSN got most of their money from teachers not sponsorship. In a fit of pique I cancelled my subscription.
It probably just confirmed my views on charities, not that I’m trying to attack the motives of people who donate. It’s just that charities are very good at presenting individuals as grateful supplicants or helpless victims, but as soon as they speak out or worse still organise together, the charities are nowhere to be seen, they don’t want to upset the sponsors.
I tried that fearless ‘voice of the teachers’ the General Teaching Council, but no they didn’t want to carry any articles by teachers in their boring, colourless magazine because they wouldn’t be ‘objective’. The GTC does have a discussion forum on its web site, since its inception in 2000 it has attracted 853 comments (current forums non existent), the TES forums had 3,773 comments in 24 hours.
The Socialist Teachers Alliance is the main left grouping in the NUT. I sent a piece in to them, heard nothing, tried again, heard nothing. After moaning and complaining they put a piece up. When my book was published I sent in a second piece, heard nothing, tried again, heard nothing, this time I just cancelled my direct debit.
As you’ve probably gathered by now I’m a bit of a contrarian, a fully paid up member of the awkward squad, I probably subscribe to Groucho Marx’s theory that he would refuse to belong to any organisation that would have him as a member.
It’s quite scary the way that discussion, debate and certainly dissent has been closed down. In response you either get sullen acquiescence from teachers, denial or displacement activities – teachers rattle on for ages about dirty cups in the staff room but just ignore the larger issues.
There’s always plenty of “consultation” whenever councils want to trash education. They hold meetings, pretend to listen, look interested and write down everything that people say. But you know that even if 99% of opinion is against they will bin everything, do it, and if anyone asks them, they did “consult”. Their favourite phrase is, “I hear what you say”.
Most of my early blogs were just my articles from the TES (the one organisation that is willing to print “controversial” comments). I’ve tried to write about life at school but also the wider issues. There are some great “resources” blogs out there, but surely when Unicef says our children are miserable you’ve got to go beyond the cheapest laminating paper and day glow stickers. Or maybe resources are another displacement activity.
At times you feel like a lone voice ranting away in the wilderness of cyber space then someone stretches out the hand of friendship, so thanks to David Osler the writer of the award winning blog Dave’s Part for mentioning ‘How Not To Teach’.
