News


Pensions and budgets are the big concerns for headteachers in 2012


Heads and teachers are facing a new year of worry over budgets, the pace of change in education, and more potential industrial action over pensions. As 2011 ended, talks between


union leaders and ministers over pensions had still not reached an agreement. A new offer had been tabled by the government, but as Headteacher Update went to press, the two biggest teach- ing unions had rejected the offer. Other education unions are still consulting members. Elsewhere, two unions, the


NASUWT and National Union of Teachers (NUT), were prepar- ing to go back to the High Court to challenge the government over its decision to switch the indexing of pensions from the Retail Prices Index (RPI) to the Consumer Pric- es Index (CPI). An appeal hearing is expected soon. Meanwhile, a survey of more


then 3,000 headteachers found that financial issues and budgets were their main concerns for the year ahead. The Association of School and


College Leaders (ASCL) study found that managing a reduced budget was a concern for 38 per cent, while making changes to pay and conditions and strategic medium-term financial planning worried 24 per cent and 16 per cent of heads respectively. Almost a fifth said they were having to manage reduced staffing levels. It comes as the pre-Christmas


necessary information on which meaningful discussions could take place, chopped and changed its mind on the issues which were up for discussion and presented some potential changes which did not have Treasury approval.” However, the Association of


negotiations over the future of the Teachers’ Pension Scheme (TPS) led to the government tabling a new deal on pensions. The proposals retain plans for a


career-average pension scheme but include an improved accrual rate of 1/57th of salary each year. Also, teachers who are 10 years from retirement will be immune to any changes and those who miss the 10-year cut-off by up to 3.5 years will also receive some protection. Teachers would continue to be


able to choose a retirement date at any age from 55 onwards and one union said that although teachers’ retirement age will be linked to the state retirement age, “the govern- ment has conceded that retirement at 65 will be financially viable for teachers”. After the talks, Danny Alexan-


der, chief secretary to the Treasury, said: “We and the unions agree that this is the best outcome that can be achieved through negotiation.”


However, the two largest teach-


ing unions – the NUT and the NASUWT – have both rejected the new proposals. Christine Blower, general secre-


tary of the NUT, said: “We remain committed to a negotiated agree- ment on pensions but these pro- posals will not, in our opinion, serve the interests of teachers or the education system. Michael Gove assured us in December that suffi- cient time and resources would be provided to secure a solution. The government must face the fact that further discussions and additional funding are needed.” Her counterpart at the


NASUWT, Chris Keates, said: “Put bluntly the NASUWT National Executive has recognised that the process the DfE used to seek to reach agreement by its imposed deadline of December 20 was a debacle. “Valuable time was wasted by the DfE. It failed to provide the


Teachers and Lecturers (ATL), National Association of Head Teachers (NAHT), Voice, and ASCL have all agreed to take the offer back to members, although the NAHT warned that “it could take a lot to persuade school lead- ers to swallow it”. General secre- tary Russell Hobby said: “There are significant areas to discuss in the new year, including the contri- bution rates.” ASCL chief Brian Lightman said


the new proposals “go some way to addressing our concerns” but warned it was not a done deal. Dr Mary Bousted from the ATL said the deal was “the best that can be achieved in negotiation”, but that it was still unfair. The NASUWT, meanwhile,


is awaiting a date for its appeal against the government’s change to the indexing of pensions from RPI to the lower CPI. The hearing is expected this month. The NUT has also said it is


committed to appealing the High Court ruling. The judges in the original hear-


ing late last year were unable to reach a unanimous decision, and one of them believed that ministers had acted unlawfully.


Teaching assistants’ impact questioned


There should be a “fundamental rethink” in the way teaching assist- ants are used in schools including ending the practice of asking them to concentrate on lower perform- ing students or those with SEN. The claim comes from professors


at the Institute of Education (IoE) in London who have hit out at the way teaching assistants spend their time in the classroom in a new book. The three professors – Peter


Blatchford, Anthony Russell and Rob Webster – have released the findings of a five-year study which measured the impact teaching assistants had on 8,200 students. It found that students receiving the


most support from teaching assist- ants consistently made less progress than those who receive less support,


4


partly because such pupils become separated from the teacher and the curriculum. They are now recom- mending that teaching assistants should not routinely support lower attaining students or those with SEN. Prof Blatchford, who is a pro-


fessor in psychology and educa- tion, told Headteacher Update that teaching assistants working with lower attaining students do not provide “additional” help – instead they are seen as simply replacing the role of the teacher. He explained: “We surely need


to do more in schools than just contain certain pupils. The ques- tion to ask is what would the appropriate pedagogical input be for the pupil, and the balance of the teacher and the teaching


assistant input. The teacher needs to have overall responsibility for all the pupils in the class, and this includes those with SEN. “The convenient separation of


pupils with SEN from teachers is not sustainable. We are calling for a fundamental rethink of the way teaching assistants are used because it lets down the most needy and disadvantaged pupils. “We use the idea of value added


to make the point that the teach- ing assistant should add value to the teacher’s input not replace her, which is unfortunately the system that often operates at the moment.” The book, Reassessing the


Impact of Teaching Assistants: How research changes practice and policy, also recommended


that schools should have a formal induction process for teaching assistants and more joint planning and feedback time for teachers and teaching assistants. However, the authors empha-


sised the solution is not to “do away” with teaching assistants and instead that they should hold more of a “roving role” in schools that will enable teachers to concentrate on the students who need it most. Christine Lewis, national officer


at UNISON, which represents teaching assistants, said: “It is dif- ficult to accept the bald statement that teaching assistants should not routinely support lower attaining pupils and those with SEN. It real- ly does depend on the child and circumstances.


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40