Teachers demand 10% pay rise

lostinrates

Davesnave wrote: »

That's very true LIR, particularly in primary, where exams have skewed and narrowed the curriculum and teachers, forced by circumstances beyond their control, have also taken on roles that would have been seen as 'parenting' in earlier times.

Believe me, if we had the same kids coming into primary schools as we had in, say, the seventies, results would be different, and not just in an academic sense!

You know, when my neices started primary I was amazed that some of the other children were so unprepared. This was a private primary....the ones who suppossedly distort the figures becuse of the parents' value of education, but a good percentage of the children couldn't speak coherantly, use cutlery at all, some used just spoons, and very sadly, although we always read with the girls every single night (and all through the day we looked at words on road signs and packaging etc etc) lots of these kids thought a bed time story was something that happened at Christmas or birthdays

Weirdly though, most of these kids could use dvd players..figuring out the controls on our machines within 5 minutes of entry into the house.

I found it stressful dealing ith these little kids who were so ''behind'' patricularly the ones whose speach was so poor. Being in a room ful of children trying to learn 5 yr old stuff but with out the tools to learn that stuff must be ....well, I think I'd cry!

Davesnave

lostinrates wrote: »

You know, when my neices started primary I was amazed that some of the other children were so unprepared. This was a private primary....the ones who suppossedly distort the figures becuse of the parents' value of education, but a good percentage of the children couldn't speak coherantly, use cutlery at all, some used just spoons, and very sadly, although we always read with the girls every single night (and all through the day we looked at words on road signs and packaging etc etc) lots of these kids thought a bed time story was something that happened at Christmas or birthdays

Weirdly though, most of these kids could use dvd players..figuring out the controls on our machines within 5 minutes of entry into the house.

I found it stressful dealing ith these little kids who were so ''behind'' patricularly the ones whose speach was so poor. Being in a room ful of children trying to learn 5 yr old stuff but with out the tools to learn that stuff must be ....well, I think I'd cry!

Yup, the hidden victims of the 'Me' society. T'was not always thus.:(

baileysbattlebus

lostinrates wrote: »

You know, when my neices started primary I was amazed that some of the other children were so unprepared. This was a private primary....the ones who suppossedly distort the figures becuse of the parents' value of education, but a good percentage of the children couldn't speak coherantly, use cutlery at all, some used just spoons, and very sadly, although we always read with the girls every single night (and all through the day we looked at words on road signs and packaging etc etc) lots of these kids thought a bed time story was something that happened at Christmas or birthdays

Weirdly though, most of these kids could use dvd players..figuring out the controls on our machines within 5 minutes of entry into the house.

I found it stressful dealing ith these little kids who were so ''behind'' patricularly the ones whose speach was so poor. Being in a room ful of children trying to learn 5 yr old stuff but with out the tools to learn that stuff must be ....well, I think I'd cry!

On the table manners front, I had table manners instilled in me from an early age and certainly by the age of 5 was able to use a knife and fork properly, my own children were the same - my mother would have been horrified if they could only use a spoon or fingers at school age. Funnily enough our grandchildren are the same - because my kids hate bad table manners too! The youngest was 4 this month - she can use a knife and fork. But of course you have sit with them during meal times and help them until they are able to manage on their own - not stick them on their own with something they can manage on their own regardless of how. And hope the rest just happens.

We have a grandson (7) and daughter living with us - they have all of his life apart from a year in a flat. My daughter thought the baby talk was really cute - and of course it is - when they are babies and toddlers, and actively encouraged him to use it - where OH and I used to speak to him as if he was a little adult and never used baby talk to him (the same as with our own children) - and never used his words - only "words". I used to tell her what may be cute at 2 will not be cute 5 or 6. She eventually got the message. Left to her own devices GS would have still been using "baby talk" when he started school.

I often wonder if the lack of "social" skills in children is in part due to the lack of an extended family. You can gain a lot from an extended family, more than people realise I think.

I also think a lot of parents are blind to what may be perceived as poor or unacceptable behaviour from their children. And refuse to accept any form criticism from anyone and think their children are perfect. And as they get older they become perfect - perfect little sh*ts.


Teachers deserve a medal. IMO they deserve decent wages for what they do and have to put up with (remembering my son as a teenager) - often with their hands tied. It's a job I couldn't possibly have done - I would have been prosecuted for assault - and that's just for the infants!

lostinrates

baileysbattlebus wrote: »

On the table manners front, I had table manners instilled in me from an early age and certainly by the age of 5 was able to use a knife and fork properly, my own children were the same - my mother would have been horrified if they could only use a spoon or fingers at school age......

I agree, but its not just a question of manners, but dexterity and motor skills. Simiarly, lots of these children needed help dressing...no shoe laces and complicated fastenings, they are obviously harder, but any fastening other than velcro/poppers. Meaning that at five some still needed help, for example, to go to the loo, or butten up coats. One mother told me off for not helping her child do up its buttons (I had my neices and four other kids going to the cinema). It seemed sort of part of it to not rush little people and let them struggle through the doing ups. The mother interpreted it as me not being caring enough of her child, or making her feel bad for not being able to do what some of the others were doing. But how would she learn if someone did it for her all the time? (I never passed comment BTW, just handed out coats etc, and said put them on,I'd NEVER single a child out for being slower!) These dexterity skills are basic skilled of us as living breathing animals, regardless of their manifestation as 'manners'. The lack of those skills really concerned me. By using those skills we forge little neurological pathways....building the foundations for higher development later.

Similarly, I always used to check and double check seatbelts and car seats..I notice lots of kids who couldn't do up their seatbelts could sure as anything UNdo it!

stephen163

Might surprise a few people to find out that primary school children are better behaved now than they were in the 70's (as reported by several studies looking into changes in education). The improvement was said to be because of changes in the way children are taught - More praise, less punishment, more engagement.

Some people might see the weaknesses in the lack of discipline of this approach, but I just get the feeling the children are happier and will grow up into emotionally more resillient adults.

baileysbattlebus

lostinrates wrote: »

I agree, but its not just a question of manners, but dexterity and motor skills. Simiarly, lots of these children needed help dressing...no shoe laces and complicated fastenings, they are obviously harder, but any fastening other than velcro/poppers. Meaning that at five some still needed help, for example, to go to the loo, or botten up coats. One mother told me off for not helping her child do up its buttons (I had my neices and four other kids going to the cinema). It seemed sort of part of it to not rush little people and let them struggle through the doing ups. The mothe rinterpreted it as me not being caring enough of her child, or making her feel bad for not being able to do what some of the others were doing. But how would she learn if someone did it for her all the time? (I never passed comment BTW, just handed out coats etc, and said put them on,I'd NEVER single a child out for being slower!) These dexterity skills are basic skilled of us as living breathing animals, regardless of their manifestation as 'manners'. The lack of those skills really concerned me. By using those skills we forge little neurological pathways....building the foundations for higher development later.

Simialrly, I always used to check and doubke check seatbelts and car seats..I notice lots of kids who couldn't do up their seatbelts could sure as anything UNdo it!

Motor skills can be developed though - our GS is the youngest in his class and in the reception class it was really noticable through hand writing etc, that his motor skills were less developed than the children a year older than him.

But he could dress himself, go to the toilet on his own, put his socks and shoes on, get changed for PE and back - his polos shirt was usually on inside out - after PE. But he could do more or less what you would expect a 41/2 year old to do. Because he had been allowed and encouraged to.

When our children were young - pre school - they would have been, 4, 3 and almost 2 at the time - I had to go for the eldest's pre school assessment. He was expected to be able to get dressed and undressed, shoes and socks, go to the toilet, eat properly without help - before he started school in Scotland.
He could eat properly without help and go to the toilet on his own. He couldn't get dressed or undressed by himself. That was because he had never been allowed to - I had 3 very young children and it was far quicker for me just to dress them all rather than let them dress themselves - it would have taken for ever. I am not a particularly paitient person!

But I had to let him and the other 2, because he wouldn't have been able to go school unless he could do these things for himself. There were no teaching assistants or anything just the teacher - and they didn't have the time to help the kids get dressed or go to the toilet.
And the school had a full uniform with shirt and tie at 5. I understand only too well how easy it is to do things for your children rather than let them do them themselves. It's quicker and less stressful - but they do have to learn and I had to learn to let them. It drove me insane.

I understand that some children are going to school now not even properly toilet trained. Ours had to be toilet trained to go to nursery at 3, never mind school. They didn't mind the odd accident but if it was regular they had to leave until they could use the toilet. It might seem hard - but kids went to school and nursery able to use the toilet.

domcastro

10% pay rise - that's nothing. They should get a lot more. They only want this payrise because how rubbish the pay has been for years. In the good old days teachers and lecturers were respected and had nice houses now they can only afford to live on council estates. And in the old days they also had control, now the kid's parents do. They get abused and have horrible kids and horrible parents to deal with.

I remember, before the Unis got their payrises in the last couple of years, that my graduates taking on their first EVER job had a starting salary greater than mine and I had been teaching for 12 years. glad some of you think it's fair.

and judging from my dealings with parents - the ones here who think its outrageous are also the ones who constantly harass teachers about "my little johnny" - well your little johny is a brat like a lot of the others.

mitchaa

domcastro wrote: »

10% pay rise - that's nothing. They should get a lot more. They only want this payrise because how rubbish the pay has been for years. In the good old days teachers and lecturers were respected and had nice houses now they can only afford to live on council estates. And in the old days they also had control, now the kid's parents do. They get abused and have horrible kids and horrible parents to deal with.

I remember, before the Unis got their payrises in the last couple of years, that my graduates taking on their first EVER job had a starting salary greater than mine and I had been teaching for 12 years. glad some of you think it's fair.

and judging from my dealings with parents - the ones here who think its outrageous are also the ones who constantly harass teachers about "my little johnny" - well your little johny is a brat like a lot of the others.

What a lot of rubbish:mad:

Teacher pay in Scotland after 6 years is £33,400. This is for 39wks of the year so an equivalent of £856pw for every week that they do actually work. If we extrapolate that £856pw over the average workers 46wks in work it's an equivalent salary of nearly £39,300.

You cannot possibly suggest that is a low wage, that puts them in the top 20% of the workforce

The £33,400 or the equiv £39k figure is way over average (£26k median £20k mean) so teachers ARE already well paid.

Just to put perspective on the figures, £33k is how much a Police SGT is paid, which is around the same for a military SGT pay or similar rank in the fire brigade union, and certainly more than an NHS degree qualified nurse so what makes a teacher any more important than any of the roles listed above?

Teachers are supposed to be bright, well this is certainly not a bright move by their union. Talk about inappropriate timing:rolleyes: They will just cause public outrage and hatred and in my opinion they have not got a hope in hell.

dylansmum

domcastro wrote: »

10% pay rise - that's nothing. They should get a lot more. They only want this payrise because how rubbish the pay has been for years. In the good old days teachers and lecturers were respected and had nice houses now they can only afford to live on council estates. And in the old days they also had control, now the kid's parents do. They get abused and have horrible kids and horrible parents to deal with.

I remember, before the Unis got their payrises in the last couple of years, that my graduates taking on their first EVER job had a starting salary greater than mine and I had been teaching for 12 years. glad some of you think it's fair.

and judging from my dealings with parents - the ones here who think its outrageous are also the ones who constantly harass teachers about "my little johnny" - well your little johny is a brat like a lot of the others.

Oh yes. me and you both! And it is interesting listening to the current debate about how teachers might use more powers to discipline unruly kids - but what does this mean? I deal with nice middle-class undergraduates who were well behaved at school. Plenty are great kids BUT around 25% do not show up, bleat for more and more spoon feeding, get parents to question our grades without a clue about how marks are given. This 25% are unruly IMHO and need a different educational culture.

dylansmum

mitchaa wrote: »

What a lot of rubbish:mad:

Teacher pay in Scotland after 6 years is £33,400. This is for 39wks of the year so an equivalent of £856pw for every week that they do actually work. If we extrapolate that £856pw over the average workers 46wks in work it's an equivalent salary of nearly £39,300.

You cannot possibly suggest that is a low wage, that puts them in the top 20% of the workforce

The £33,400 or the equiv £39k figure is way over average (£26k median £20k mean) so teachers ARE already well paid.

Just to put perspective on the figures, £33k is how much a Police SGT is paid, which is around the same for a military SGT pay or similar rank in the fire brigade union, and certainly more than an NHS degree qualified nurse so what makes a teacher any more important than any of the roles listed above?

Teachers are supposed to be bright, well this is certainly not a bright move by their union. Talk about inappropriate timing:rolleyes: They will just cause public outrage and hatred and in my opinion they have not got a hope in hell.

My pay as a uni lecturer after 8 years training was 17.5K; hardly a fortune? But that is fine. I chose to do this - yet it does show that the coutnry wanted to pay thsoe training teachers well below average for other professions. Perhaps we just do not value our kids' education? For me the pay (for lecturers) is not the issue - it is the ever-increasing workload (which means pay is lower) and our educational culture.