		Special PRP Briefing Suffolk Division NUT February - March 2000
Still a bad idea: The NUT continues to oppose the principles of PRP and Payment by Results. Close scrutiny of the draft materials from the DfEE for the process leaves no doubt that it remains a time-consuming, bureaucratic minefield, impossible to standardise or implement fairly, a divisive approach which works against teamwork and supporting colleagues and one which SHA headteachers have said would only allow about 10% of qualifying teachers (those on point nine or above) to go over the threshold. Consultation and beyond: The NUT will continue to argue against the STRB report in its response to the risible "consultation" exercises on the threshold application form and on the STRB proposals. We still believe that these proposals will cause serious division among teachers, dissatisfaction with pay decisions, hostility towards school management and litigation through industrial tribunals. All will lead to a demoralisation of the profession and diversion of energies away from teaching and learning. However, no one believes that the Government is listening to what the profession is pointing out to them about the failure of PRP in teaching, whenever it has been tried! The Government has determined that the only way of getting a proper pay rise is to apply for it using their criteria. The Union believes that all teachers should have the £2000 pay increase and there is no inconsistency between opposition to the new structure and supporting members in securing a pay increase to which they are entitled.
Countdown to fiasco: March 1st: deadline for receipt of comments on the draft threshold application forms March 7th: deadline for receipt of comments on the STRB report itself		From 27th March to Easter: distribution to schools of application forms for threshold assessment and guidance. June 5th: deadline for threshold applications to be submitted to headteachers.
PRP Training These deadlines are actually impractical. The DfEE was in such a hurry to get this hare-brained scheme launched, that it has got its timetable in a mess, earlier encouraging Heads to use the extra PD Day for PRP training, this term. Then the DfEE wrote to LEAs saying: "It would be premature to run performance management training for schools before the performance management framework has been finalised and the draft regulations and model policy have been produced. Therefore, the intention is to launch this training with regional conferences for school representatives later in the summer term", leaving little or no time for the applications to be filled in. If you are directed to attend such sessions earlier than stipulated by the DfEE, please contact the Union straight away.
Threshold Criteria: Applicants will have to complete a six-page questionnaire to show they consistently meet the criteria. These start off reasonably enough: Knowledge and Understanding: Teachers should demonstrate that they have a thorough and up-to-date knowledge of the teaching of their subject(s) and take account of wider curriculum developments which are relevant to their work; Teaching and assessment: plan lessons and sequences of lessons to meet pupils' individual learning needs use a range of appropriate strategies for teaching and classroom management use information about prior attainment to set well-grounded expectations for pupils, and monitor progress to give clear and constructive feedback. Then the PRP bit: Pupil progress: Teachers should demonstrate that, as a result of their teaching, their pupils achieve well relative to the pupils' prior attainment, making progress as good or better than similar pupils nationally. This should be shown in marks or grades in any relevant national tests or exams, or school based assessment for pupils where national tests and exams are not taken. And the killer clauses: Wider Professional Effectiveness: teacher takes responsibility for his/her professional development develops and uses the outcome to improve their teaching and pupils' learning makes an active contribution to the policies and aspirations of the school; Professional Characteristics: Teacher is an effective professional who challenges and supports all pupils to do their best through: *inspiring trust and confidence* engaging and motivating pupils positive action to improve the quality of pupils' learning building team commitment analytical thinking. Interpretations These criteria are wide open to interpretation and therefore to misuse. They assume that those making the initial assessments, Headteachers, are all capable of reaching these standards themselves and can exercise those judgements fairly. The Union knows from experience this is not so. Wherever pay decisions are based on subjective discretion, it can and does lead to favouritism, corruption, unfairness, victimisation, bullying, etc., and to a break-down of trust and confidence
Delays in implementation? It is still not clear when the first "moderated" threshold "bonuses" would become payable, even if applications are in by June 5th 2000. The assessment structure and pseudo standardisation frameworks will not be ready. The date being suggested now is April or September 2001.
Your opinions The NUT is surveying members' views on how best to respond to the on-going situation. Our boycott of performance management for PRP remains in place for as long as is practicable. The NUT Executive decided on 21st February to survey members on a range of options, including: a representative lobby of parliament a nationally organised demonstration a boycott by teachers of performance management training protest strike action.
Unity? Suffolk NUT is supporting the STOPP campaign and will be lobbying both the DfEE and NUT National Excecutive. Meanwhile talks continue with the other teacher organisations. However, these do not share the Union's total opposition to PRP.
***** OTHER NEWS *****
Advisory Teacher Cuts The LEA has decided to remove up to 10 advisory teacher posts because of what they say is a poor response to "buy-back" from schools when the money for these services has to be distributed direct to schools from April 2000. Heads tell us that they had insufficient information on which to base their "buy-back" and that when central funding is distributed to all schools, small schools, which traditionally relied more on visiting specialist advisory teachers, do not get enough to buy in a viable amount of this excellent resource. The Union has objected that these cuts have fallen on the advisory teachers, rather than on the Advisory Service as a whole. Those who are being made redundant are those who make the biggest difference to pupils' education on the ground.
OAKWOOD The campaign against the rushed closure of Oakwood EBD school has made some progress, but not before a great deal of damage has been done. 58 SEN places for children with the most severe Emotional and Behavioural difficulties in the County have been unusable since November. The pupils have been forced into unsatisfactory part-time alternative arrangements, including non- specialist home tuition and early "inclusion" into mainstream schools. So, there is a number of EBD pupils with statements stipulating residential provision, whom the LEA are seeking to "include" in mainstream schools, ahead of the planned phased introduction of strategies for inclusive education. Members should be on their guard and seek assurances from their headteacher that no child who would otherwise be considered for a place in a PRU or Oakwood should be admitted to mainstream without a behaviour support package, including extra teaching support from teachers with EBD experience.
Ask for this briefing in jumbo print, or on cassette.	Published by the Suffolk Division of the National Union of Teachers. Secretary: Martin Goold 1 Gainsborough Road BURY ST EDMUNDS, IP33 3RX	Tel & FAX 01284 763980 Mobile: 07850 221051 *martingoold@suffolknut.org.uk*