ScoobyWon't

I'm sure, going back 16 years or so, we covered every major religion in a fair amount of detail. I reckon it's useful to be honest, even looking through the local jobs paper today, they are advertising positions working in a Sikh based environment which only calls for a knowledge of the religion and doesn't specify that you cannot be a practicing participant of any religion.

One of my good friends, although brought up Catholic, lives in a neighberhood of Nottingham where she is the minority in both skin colour and religion, but she knows every holiday celebrated by just about every religious group out there and even knows a few phrases which she uses every now and again.

Lisawrx

iTrader: (1)

When I was at school, RE was compulsory in the first 3 years. We covered all main religions at a fairly basic level, but it gave some understanding of other faiths, which I found was no bad thing. Once religions were covered, we went on to look more at social issues. Once in the 4th year, we still had to carry on, but it became personal, social and religious education, and tbh, not alot of religion was ever taught as our teacher was against teaching it.

IIRC, there was either no GCSE at all, or you could opt out, but you had to attend these lessons. (I'm pretty sure there was no exam, as if there was, I would have done it)

Gordo

you're right, lazy b4strd teachers should have much less holiday and focus on teaching the kids how to leave school at least able to read and write. shame there's no performance related pay. 1095 hours a year? that's be ~20 hours a week? woooo, how tricky, poor things.

G

alcazar

iTrader: (2)

And what do YOU do for a living, pray tell, Einstein?

I actually misquoted the number of hours minimum, it's 1265, divided over 190 days, so 6.65 hours per day, TEACHING time.

Don't forget that this does not include registration time, and duties, any dinner duties etc etc.

Most teachers I know work well over 50 hours a week. How much work do YOU take home?

Alcazar

BTW: teAching, not teching, your teachers did you not a lot of good

Flaps

iTrader: (1)

Or planning, marking, training, parents' evenings, school trips etc. A few years ago I spent four of the six weeks summer 'holiday' writing schemes of work, lesson record sheets, resources for the classroom and learning support, overview presentations, self evaluation sheets etc to provide the provision for one year group from September until February half-term.

The 480 different students I see each week don't teach themselves you know!

So Gordo

Gordo

Haha - ooops, bit rattled are we. I work ~60 hours a week in the city and regularly work / field calls etc at nights and weekends. I do very well, thanks but would love to have the holidays that teachers have!

The old adage is still true - those that can do, those that can't teach.

G

alcazar

iTrader: (2)

And I know quite a few who THOUGHT they could, gave teaching a go, and failed miserably.

Alcazar

Gordo

That's fair, Alcazar. The real issue IMO is that it's one of the few industries where people expect a lifetime career and get that, even if they're actually poor at the job.

i.e. most service based industries have clear performance-related rewards - introducing that for the teaching profession would attract better quality people to consider it as a career, would incentivise / keep the good ones already in it and gives scope for actively managing out the under-performers. Hiding behind unions and expecting everyone to be treated the same is out of tune with the real world and unhelpful for our kids' education. In an ideal world it would he healthy for people from industry to participate in educating kids and it would be great if it attracted people who've been in the real world to go into teaching later in, or as part of, their careers.

Gordo

PeteBrant

And how do you propose we measure such targets and what should those targets be?

Bearing in mind of course that we already have league tables, and that teachers are inspected regularly.

How are you going to convince someone on £100,000 a year to go and become a teacher for £30,000?

Leslie

I believe that a target driven economy is a mistake and is non productive. If people are trusted to do their jobs without having to fiddle it to attain targets they will as before tend to take a pride in the job and do it to their best ability. Targets are usuall set by people who are incapable of leading a workforce and can only do their job by numbers and in an attempt to tell their superiors what they would like to hear whether the job is done successfully or not. I am not surprised that teachers are resigning in droves with what is expected of them these days without the ability to impose true and effective discipline on recalcitrant children.

I believe that education should be as rounded as possible so that children get the widest possible view of the world and society in general. Teaching them about religion is part of that so that they understand what it is all about even if they choose not to follow it. They should of course be allowed to make up their own minds what they want to believe knowing the necessary facts.

Les

Flaps

iTrader: (1)

The starting salary is currently only £20,133.

I'm not sure how PRP could be implemented, what happens if you are given a crap class with low ability and no desire to learn? I have plenty of these.

Gordo

Blimey, what a confusing picture.

Let me make sure I understand the points being made:

- Measuring teachers' performance is difficult (don't assume because New Labia's pathetic efforts have failed that measurement can't be done - loads of businesses don't have hard measurable targets but individuals are still assessed and rewarded very well by objective setting and appraisals by their bosses - a lack of obejctive measurement means there's no incentive to improve, and no ability to tell address poor performance)
- Setting targets to deliver against is bad as they're a sign of people who can't lead (odd one this - I guess this thinking is why we have record levels of public spending with appalling results in terms of improvements for the tax paying public)
- Financial rewards wouldn't act as incentives for teachers as they're happy to merely take pride in their work (bollocks - why do they whinge about pay so much then? What more can i say on this one?)
- Starting salary is only £20,133 (this is fine - compares pretty well actually with a lot of post graduate jobs - the issue is not the starting salary, it's the lack of ability to grow that other than on the same old same old time served nonsense perpetuated by union-led workers)
- PRP can be implemented very easily - I'm not a fan of perpetual made up tests for kids to be assessed against - I'd use clear objective setting for the teachers with assessments by heads (including getting feedback from teachers and kids as part of that. the issue is one of cost as it only really pays back in the medium to long term for society and politicians struggle to do anything that's not a quick win)
- How to convince someone on £100k to become a teacher? the pay has to be there, granted, but give tax cuts to companies to provide staff on what effectively would be sabbaticals as part of their career development - that reduces the burden on the state considerably whilst introducing some external thinking and support to the full-time professional teaching staff

Without proper incentives, rewards and the ability to weed out under-performers (who drag down and dis-incentivises the strong performers in any situation) teaching will never improve. The ultimate test of success would be a long term real improvement in exam results. BUT results have to be assessed objectively i.e. using GCSEs and A levels that haven't been moderated to buggery to massage the results, but exams where an "A" really is a gold standard for the kids to aim for, universities and employers to value and where some years the kids don't do as well as the previous year.

Gordo

Flaps

iTrader: (1)

So is the one that says 'You can't polish a turd'. How can PRP be implemented fairly if the students have 'mush for brains' (a quote taken from a maths teacher just yesterday). Surely those teachers at private schools (with parents who care about their child's education) will be guaranteed a high bonus but those in public schools in poor areas (where the kids and some parents aren't interested) don't stand a chance. The ability of the teacher shouldn't me measured by the standard of the students! It's never going to work.

Anyway, back to the original issue, RE is rubbish

Gordo

Flaps, I didn't say that PRP had to measured against results - I said against objectives. Surely even if the kids have 'mush for brains' you can still subjectively improve them - even if it means administering a few lobotomies?

I avoided saying it but you're right, RE is rubbish - it perpetuates the myth that it's anything other than dilusion - more useful academic subjects please!