Date:   27th February 2006

Dear Prime Minister

Education and the employment of teachers

I am writing on behalf of a teacher who has had a lot of problems over the years in finding suitable employment. When he first qualified as a teacher in 1976 he had great difficulty getting his first post. The reason being that he was newly qualified and schools wanted to employ experienced teachers

 

In 1990 the introduction of the Local Management of Schools regulations (LMS) altered the situation facing newly qualified teachers they were to become the most sought-after group of teachers! Prior to the introduction of these regulations the local authority paid the teacher’s salary. There was little reason for schools to consider whether to employ an experienced teacher or a newly qualified one. In fact the newly qualified teacher would require ‘breaking in’ they need to be looked after, have untested paper qualifications and they need to use extra resources.

 

We hoped that the situation would be resolved when the new labour government took office but this was not to be the case. In fact the situation has got worse, and is about to get even worse with the new Education White Paper 2006

 

The reality is that there is probably no shortage of teachers, many have just given up trying to gain employment. A few die-hards soldier on as supply teachers.

 

Many teachers report that LMS has lead to dispirited staff , inability to find employment in another school, favouritism and behaviour more appropriate to a fascist state than a British school. The head teacher has always had great power but this has increased with LMS as they now have economic control and are free to exert pressure (supported by their personally appointed senior management team) on teachers to conform to the way he/she wants the school to run and its direction.

Didn't the local authority (LA) once have the power to employ staff for a particular school and redirect them to another school if they felt that it was necessary or desirable, taking into account the interests of the teacher and the school. Didn't also the LA have its own inspectorate which could look after staff and have a greater role in training and didn't head teachers have to take more care when making decisions that may have a discouraging effect on the morale of staff?

 

Yours sincerely

  

A. Citizen

A reply to the letter to the PM above has been included below. The text of the letter and formatting is identical to that received the only alteration being the addition of paragraph numbers for reference

department for

education and skills

creating opportunity, releasing potential, achieving excellence

Castle View House P.O. Box 12, Runcorn Cheshire, WA7 2GJ

info@dfes.gsi.gov.uk
www.dfes.gov.uk

Our ref: 2006/0215873 13 April 2006

Dear Citizen

1. Thank you for your letter of 27 February addressed to the Prime Minister about teacher shortages and the employment of teachers. The Prime Minister receives a large amount of correspondence and is unable to answer it all personally. It is for this reason that your letter has been passed to the Department for Education and Skills and I have been asked to reply.
2. Let me begin by saying that the success of the Government's recruitment and retention policies has undoubtedly created more competition for posts than only a few years ago. We also know that the availability of teaching posts can vary from one part of the country to another. Teacher numbers are now at their highest since 1981. In January 2005, the number of full-time equivalent (FTE) regular teachers in the maintained sector rose by 4,200 (1 %) to reach 431,000. This means that there are now 30,000 FTE more teachers than in 1997, an increase of 8 per cent. You may also be interested to know that we have recently improved the financial incentives for trainee teachers and newly qualified teachers of priority subjects.
3. At the same time as the general increase in regular teacher numbers, the total number of teacher vacancies fell by 140 to 2480 in January 2005. This gives an overall vacancy rate in primary, secondary and special schools for January 2005 as 0.7%, compared to 0.9% in 2003. This means the numbers of teachers in service are currently at their highest since 1981. However, although the overall picture is healthy, there are still shortages of teachers in London and the South East, and in certain secondary subjects, particularly in mathematics and science subjects.
4. You mention teaching posts being filled by newly qualified or less experienced teachers at the expense of more experienced teachers. We recognise that in some circumstances - for example, where school budgets are tight and there is little to choose between two good candidates - schools may prefer to appoint a good but less experienced or younger teacher who will cost less to employ than his or her more experienced and more expensive counterpart. However, Ministers do not believe that there is any evidence that schools generally choose to appoint cheaper teachers on that basis alone. Schools recognise the benefits of a wide range of ages, skills and experiences amongst their workforce.
5. I have noted your comments about schools recruiting their own staff. I should explain that since local management was first introduced some 15 years ago under the term 'Local Management of Schools' (LMS), it is essentially for governing bodies to weigh up the merits of individual candidates when they interview prospective new teachers. They have to decide whether they want to recruit more experienced staff who may cost more, or employ cheaper newly qualified teachers, who may bring new "blood" and fresh ideas in to a school. This is purely a governing body decision and thus a cornerstone of local management.

Yours sincerely

Elaine Gordon

Public Communications Unit

A reply to the letter from the Department for Education and Skills is posted below.

Elaine Gordon

Dept for Education & Skills
Castle View House
PO Box 12
Runcorn
Cheshire, WA7 2GJ

Your Ref: 2006/0215873

Dear Elaine Gordon

RE: Education and the Employment of Teachers 

1. Yes, I understand that the PM is a very busy man, but I sure he likes to keep in touch and has staff to manage his mail. Unfortunately, your letter does not actually address the main issue that was raised in my letter. That there are teachers of outstanding quality who are unemployed because of Local management of Schools (LMS).
2. The competition for posts that you mention, is I am sure, only among newly qualified teachers.  Government policy, has as you point out, even encouraged the supply of new teachers, at the expense of well-qualified and experienced teachers. Teacher numbers may be at their highest since 1981 but this still does not meet the increase in children to be taught.  Classroom size increased over that period to a high.
3. There may be fewer vacancies now but I do not have statistics for classroom size beyond 1999. The simply appalling truth is that according to your figures, which may be better or worse; since your data is based on Jan 2005 figures, there are still over 3,000 vacancies!
4. School budgets tight? Surely this is part of my argument, because of LMS there is likely to be mismanagement both of staff and capitation. There should, surely, be little variation in funding of schools; the funding for schools should be fair, either all schools find themselves with a tight budget (not enough money) or none. The tendency for interviewing panels is, to ask: do we really need this chap given his remarkable experience and qualifications, for this particular post? Bearing in mind that several thousand pounds will be saved if the younger less experienced teacher is appointed. Invariably, the cheaper teacher will be employed.  
5. LMS is not better for staff or children it was mistakenly brought in by the last Conservative Government. The proper management of education should be by professional staff within each Local Educational authority (LEA) and these LEA’s should have the power to appoint staff for placement within that authority.  Unfortunately, mentioning Ministers’ beliefs is rather inappropriate at this time as our present Prime Minister has been badly let down by some of his Ministers.

The “new blood” you refer to, that a newly qualified teacher could bring fresh ideas to a school is invariably, the result of that trainee’s educational development, the ideas have come from their training; from older experienced educationalists, and is rather insulting to those teachers who continue to reflect, read, and add to their academic and practical skills qualifications usually at their own expense.

Yours sincerely

A. Citizen

PS. I note that our Prime Minister didn’t appoint “new blood” to his recent reshuffle. Of course not, he needs the most experienced personnel by his side.

A reply to the letter above is included below. I have added paragraph numbers to facilitate ease of reference and the formatting has been changed as the document could not be easily OCR scanned

department for

education and skills

creating opportunity, releasing potential, achieving excellence

Castle View House P.O. Box 12, Runcorn Cheshire, WA7 2GJ

info@dfes.gsi.gov.uk
www.dfes.gov.uk

Our ref: 2006/0225792 1 June 2006

Dear Citizen,

1. Thank you for your further letter about the recruitment of teachers and school funding methods. As previously stated, Ministers do not believe there is any evidence that schools generally choose to appoint cheaper teachers. Schools recognise the benefits of a wide range of ages, skills and experiences amongst their workforce
2. In addition, the Government actively encourages people who wish to return to teaching and there is plenty of help available for qualified teachers wanting to return to the profession. For example, the Training and Development Agency for Schools (TDA) runs a Return to Teach programme which is specifically targeted at those who are contemplating a return to teaching. The TDA's recent survey on those completing a returner course revealed that 61% of those teachers who had completed a course had already returned to teaching and a further 13% are actively looking for teaching posts.
3. With regard to your comment on class sizes, in fact, the overall teacher: pupil ratio has dropped each year since 2000. In January 2006, the overall teacher: pupil ratio was 17.2 and the number of pupils in maintained nursery and primary schools has been falling since
4. This trend is expected to continue over the next few years. It is also projected that the number of pupils in maintained secondary schools will fall over the next 10 years. As you are aware, the number of teacher vacancies in maintained schools has dropped each year since The latest count shows in January 2006 shows there were 2,200 teacher vacancies in England. Details can be found on the Department's website at http://www.dfes.qov.uk/rsqatewav/DB/SFR/s000653/index.shtml
5. I have noted your further comments about local management of schools (LMS), including staffing powers in schools. There are no plans to reverse the delegation of such powers which have been generally accepted by schools, and who have become accustomed to delegation in its various forms since the first introduction of local management in the early 1990s
6. The Department accepts that LMS can be challenging for some schools, but in these circumstances heads and governing bodies should seek support from the education finance team in the local authority (LA).
7. In terms of school funding, the Department has regular meetings with our education partners - national bodies representing LAs, head teachers, teacher unions and governors; they have not expressed any similar views in favour of reversing local management.

Phil Turner

Public Communications Unit

A reply to the letter above is published below some considerable time after receiving the letter.

Return to the Home Page

  © XYZWeb 2006-2017