May-June 2000
|
|
Suffolk NUT Briefing May-June 2000 |
| June 5th is the deadline for registering your threshold application with your headteacher. If you have not had time to complete the form, the Head may provide an extension, but needs to know of your intention to apply. The Head has to inform Cambridge Education Associates Ltd of the number of applicants at the school after June 5th but the date of completion of the actual form can be negotiated. It would be unreasonable for a head to reject an application after June 5th provided that the intention to apply had been registered. |
As the Government imposes its hare-brained PRP scheme against the wishes of the vast majority of the profession, it is total confusion.
The Headteacher training was, by all accounts, a disaster and failed to answer heads' questions as to how to make the system fair for all (because it cannot be!!).
Now heads are finding that the academic data available does not always back up their observations or hunches. So heads are reduced to telling staff to provide their own statistics. The "system" provides reams of OFSTED statistics about the school, the year group, the department, residuals, value added, etc., etc., then you suddenly find that it gives a mixed picture, and needs interpreting for individual results, and individual teachers. So fairness and equity disappears out of the window.
The whole philosophy of Blunkett's threshold payments is that some are more equal than others: you will have to show that you are better than your colleagues.
Confusion reigns also on how many can go over the threshold: if all go over, then what is the point of the assessment? But if you "fail", what message does that give you?
Quotations from heads in staff meetings on PRP include:
|
Supply teachers should obtain their application forms from the school they work at most often. You do not have to be working this term in order to apply. Unattached teachers can obtain a form from the Area Education Personnel Officer who will advise you of your line manager for threshold assessment. |
That "portfolio"
Some headteachers are insisting that your application is accompanied by a "portfolio" to include examples of work and results. In fact, nothing should be attached to the form (DfEE Guidance, page 1). The Union is most concerned about the workload involved in collating supporting information for the headteacher's convenience and the lack of fairness where different teachers can submit different types of evidence, because of the year(s) they teach, or the nature of their work/subjects. (The information for English, Maths and Science will be very different from what is there for Art or PE!).
In any case, the Head will use what (s)he knows! DfEE Guidance says "The assessment should be based on the evidence summarised on the application form but headteachers may also draw on their wider knowledge of the applicant and the contribution he or she has made to the achievements of the school. Headteachers should use information from classroom observation and existing school monitoring systems."
What if I do not want to apply?
You do not have to. The Union will support your decision. Some heads where staff have indicated a reluctance to apply have exerted pressure. If you object to this pressure and it does not stop, you can seek Union assistance. Your decision must be yours alone: resist pressure from others; they may have a vested interest.
What if I apply and fail?
Fear of rejection is one reason why some members will hesitate. If you are rejected, the head must give reasons in feedback. If these reasons are unreasonable, the Union will support you in taking out a Grievance.
I am not on point 9 yet. Why don't I get £2000 for doing a good job?
Precisely! NUT policy is that all teachers should get the £2000 pay rise without going through the threshold application charade, and we mean all. The Government's scheme is unfair and divisive all the way through, but it is most unfair for those with less than 9 experience and qualification points. [There are great differences between schools on points awarded (if any!) for "relevant experience" in industry or commerce. Those whose experience has been recognised get to the threshold more quickly.] Neither will this "oldies" threshold help recruit NQTs. All the evidence shows the exact opposite. Starting salaries are still way below that of comparable jobs.
What's the Union doing?
The NUT alone continues to oppose PRP on principle. A survey of members' views in April showed overwhelming (over 90%) dissatisfaction with PRP and agreeing that it would not recruit, retain or improve standards.
Easter Conference, building on that survey of members, called for an intensified campaign including:
The full text of the Conference Resolution is being sent to School Representatives.
Do I have to report on my colleagues' work?
The Union is challenging in the courts the legality of the Government imposing, as a new condition of service, the duty of "assisting the headteacher in carrying out threshold assessments of other teachers" which is also pre-empted in the Threshold Application Guidance where it states that external assessment may "involve the assessor speaking to a teacher or line manager to verify evidence cited in the application or carrying out classroom observation."
As this new condition of service was not mentioned in the consultation document, or even presented to Parliament, a judge has already found for the NUT awarding a judicial review on all issues. The judge was highly critical of the Government, wondering when teachers would make their reports and why anyone would take up teaching under such a régime!
The judge also noted that PRP has been rejected by the Scottish Parliament and that the National Assembly of Wales had excluded examination and test results from threshold criteria.
Suffolk NUT has consistently rejected this unfair and unwanted PRP scheme which is designed simply to save money and to avoid paying "the rate for the job".
Suffolk NUT urges members to continue to show the Government that, whether or not we apply for or receive the threshold payment, we still reject its philosophy and warn of its harmful effects on the profession, our schools, and ultimately, on standards.
The Suffolk Division Council voted unanimously on 11th May to urge members to support the Union's campaign against Performance Management and PRP by taking part in the coming ballot and voting in favour of all the suggested action to enable the National Union to plan an effective response.
You are the Union.
Your vote counts.
Published by the Suffolk Division of the National Union of Teachers.