A criminal destruction of teacher morale

This photograph tells a sad but shocking story - yet it is a photograph that could be taken in so many schools at present.

18 envelopes - to collect 18 leaving presents - for staff that felt they had no option but to resign rather than carry on working in intolerable conditions. That's 18 staff in just a two-form entry school !

As the teacher who took the photograph posted on Facebook: "Forced academy. Many of these people have served over decade, others more. All brilliant. Forced academies for you. A disintegration of a talented, loyal and dedicated workforce".

The short-sighted, Gove-inspired managements too often put in place by many of the sponsors of academy chains may be driving this demoralisation, but they are not alone. I have spoken tonight to a teacher in a Local Authority primary school of a similar size who is one of 12 teachers leaving this summer.

This scandalously high turnover and overall drop-out rate from teaching has become an established fact. Sir Michael Wilshaw has confirmed that 40% of teachers leave the profession within their first five years. Workload and bullying management is destroying teachers' lives - but it is also destroying stability and support for students and schools as well.

Yet the bullying culture of Ofsted/Estyn and 'Graded Observations' continue apace, despite the growing evidence of the complete lack of any reliability in the harsh judgements reached. Some teachers are being bullied out of their jobs as a result through 'capability' procedures, while the support and resources that teachers need are simply not being provided.

This is not only an issue for teachers in England and Wales. The lecturers' Union, the UCU, has just published a report condemning the use of graded observations in colleges. (http://www.ucu.org.uk/7105). The UCU website quotes the researcher Dr Matt O'Leary as saying: 'Attempts to measure the professional capabilities of practitioners through the lens of graded lesson observations are a pointless exercise based on a pseudo-scientific approach to teacher assessment ... The sooner we put an end to this pernicious practice, the better the sector will be for it. Although removing the graded element would certainly be a step in the right direction, it cannot be considered a panacea in itself. A root and branch reform of the way in which observation is conceptualised and engaged with as a form of educational intervention is what is required'.

In California*, the same anti-teacher mentality has led to a court judgement outlawing the existing contract on the basis that it needs to be easier to 'fire bad teachers'. Jack Schneider, writing for the LA Times website (http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-schneider-vergara-teachers-20140610-story.html) counters that "Engaged in difficult and demanding work, even gifted teachers need relevant, robust and continuous professional development opportunities. But very few get it, particularly in schools serving high-needs students. As a result, most teachers realize only a fraction of their full potential .. Making it easier to fire teachers — even if we imagine that such powers will be deployed judiciously by school administrators — will do little to ensure an effective teacher in every classroom. Instead, it will further erode trust between teachers and school administrators".

Of course, even the most supported, best trained teacher can only have so much effect. It's worth remembering that, as this US research points out (http://www.amstat.org/policy/pdfs/ASA_VAM_Statement.pdf) "most estimates in the literature attribute between 1% and 14% of the total variability [in test scores] to teachers. This is not saying that teachers have little effect on students, but that variation among teachers accounts for a small part of the variation in scores. The majority of the variation in test scores is attributable to factors outside of the teacher’s control such as student and family background, poverty, curriculum, and unmeasured influences".

Discussions at the campaign stall in Lewisham on Saturday

In explaining the action that we are taking to defend teachers and education, then we have to make sure parents understand the damage that Government policies are causing. We also shouldn't be shy in explaining the reality of teacher workload, the prospect of teaching at 68 and the effects of divisive performance pay and management bullying on teacher morale.

Our teaching conditions are our students' learning conditions. Let's have a serious struggle to defend them.

 * Messages of support can be sent to the California Teachers via http://d.shpg.org/46543107f?action_KEY=8688

'Mocksteds' - why the NUT says NO

One of the threats debated at last weekend's NUT Conference was the use of demoralising and unreliable 'graded observations' to unfairly compare and label teachers.

Some schools are even using such observations as part of a stressful 'mocksted' inspection of a school (even though that would be contrary to Ofsted's own advice!). 

The NUT has clear policy opposing this damaging and educationally unsound practice. I have produced a summary explaining why NUT members would be supported in refusing to accept an imposed 'mock inspection'. The advice can be downloaded from http://goo.gl/Br5upp but is also posted below:

1) CLASSROOM OBSERVATION IS NOT A RELIABLE PROCESS

Educational research confirms that the ‘grading’ of lessons through observation cannot be a reliable way of making judgements about teaching quality.

For example, Professor Robert Coe, a former teacher who is now the director of Durham University’s Centre for Evaluation and Monitoring, has highlighted a number of reasons why classroom observation can be an unreliable tool.

He highlights research (such as the Measures of Effective Teaching Research funded by the Gates Foundation) which shows that if a lesson is judged ‘outstanding’ by one observer the probability that a second observer would give a different judgement is between 51% and 78%.

According to Professor Coe there are several reasons why this happens.

1. It is hard for an observer not to project their own preferences for a particular style or behaviour onto a classroom situation and compare what is seen to what that person thinks they would have done. However, what a particular observer may like, may not always correspond well with what helps others to learn.

2. An observer may note that students are busy, engaged, receiving attention or feedback and that the classroom is ordered. Although these factors are all related to learning, it is quite possible for some or all of them to be observed without any actual learning taking place.

3. If observers are experienced, but not necessarily effective themselves, they may be unable to identify effective practice.

4. Accepted good practice may be more fashionable than effective.

5. A number of surprising studies in psychology show that when people try to focus on observing particularly things, they can miss an extraordinary amount – a phenomenon known as ‘inattentional blindness’.

2) OFSTED ALSO ADVISE AGAINST INDIVIDUAL GRADING

In his February 2014 Report, Mike Cladingbowl, Ofsted’s National Director of Schools, has written to confirm that
 “Since 2009, inspectors have been instructed not to grade the overall quality of a lesson they visit”. He points out that, in “the most recent version of the form, the box for a graded ‘judgement on the overall quality of the lesson’ has been removed”.

His Report includes the following points:

• Inspectors should not give an overall grade for the lesson and nor should teachers expect one. 
• If asked, inspectors will provide feedback to individuals on what they have observed, including the evidence they have gathered about teaching.
• Inspectors must ensure that this feedback does not seem to constitute a view about whether the teacher is a ‘good’ teacher or otherwise, or if they ‘taught a good lesson’ or otherwise. The feedback they give is confidential.
• Inspection is about evaluating the quality of education provided by the school, by considering a range of evidence, and not about evaluating, individually or collectively, the performance of teachers through short lesson observations

3) NUT/NASUWT ACTION SHORT OF STRIKE ACTION GUIDANCE

In the light of the points above, the guidance issued by the NUT and NASUWT on Inspections is even more relevant.

The points outlined above show that there is no justification for schools carrying out ‘mocksteds’ that seek to grade individual teachers and without giving notice of when teachers will be observed.

Firstly, the process would be unreliable. Secondly, it does not even replicate a genuine Ofsted inspection. Last, and but by no means least, such a ’mock-inspection’ is also too often highly stressful and demoralising for staff. Far from improving teaching and learning, it leaves teachers feeling fearful, particularly of outcomes being used to make judgements that could be used for capability or pay progression purposes.

Lewisham NUT is clear that our members are covered by our ongoing action ballot to implement Instruction 7 of our action short of strike action instructions:

7: Members should not participate in mock inspections commissioned by the school, sponsor, provider or local authority. 

If a school seeks to insist on imposing such an inspection, we will support our members in carrying out this instruction. Such action might include non-cooperation with the process, such as asking their classes to carry out silent reading if a ‘mocksted’ inspector visits, and/or consideration of escalation to strike action.

We would hope that such a step would not be required and that, instead, the Local Authority, schools, teachers and their unions could reach agreement on appropriate ways of evaluating schools which do not include such demoralising and unreliable tools as graded observations and ‘mocksteds’.

Collective Action to Beat the Bullies

"I have to admit that I spent the weekend after that learning walk sobbing. I was so upset by the feedback I considered leaving the profession. I also work with an NQT who was talking about leaving teaching"   Email from a Primary Teacher

Once again, last week's strike showed the enormous anger of teachers at the stressful conditions they face in their working lives - conditions which, in turn, make it even harder to support the children we teach.

That anger was shown by the big turnout on most of the demonstrations and by the increased numbers of picket-lines as teachers recognise that our dispute will only be won by taking a serious and determined course of action.

The bald facts about hours worked, pension ages and pay policies all give good reasons for teachers to be angry. However, these form the background to a bullying regime, imposed from Gove downwards, which are making individual teachers' lives unbearable - and driving them out of the profession.

Let me relate just a few examples of this regime that teachers that I am supporting have been experiencing in just the last few days. I won't give the names of schools, but some teachers reading this blog will know who I am referring to.

First, the use of the threat of 'capability' to bully teachers into resignation. These are not teachers who are 'incapable' of teaching. Even if, as new appraisal policies put it, they are genuinely 'experiencing difficulties', many problems usually stem from the complete lack of genuine support and training and the impossible workload we are all facing. 

In many cases, however, the evidence for 'incapability' is sparse, based on debatable classroom observation reports. Yet school managers know that, if they threaten putting a teacher on 'formal capability procedures', despite the lack of real justification, they can bully that teacher into resigning rather than take the risk of having 'incapability' on their employment record.

Then there's the use of 'learning walks', 'audits' and 'mini-Ofsteds' to come in to classrooms to criticise, bully and demoralise. Once again, these are based on debatable classroom observations which even Ofsted are now confirming should not be used as reliable indicators of an  individual's performance.

The email that I received this morning - quoted above - shows the demoralising effect of this regime. The anger is added to by the fact that conclusions often appear contradictory, with goalposts constantly shifting for classroom teachers.

The conclusion that teachers are rightly reaching is that this regime has to be fought collectively - through national action such as March 26, but also through local struggles. So, in another school where a 'mini-Ofsted' was threatened this week, teachers met and made clear that they would not accept it, putting in place Action Short Of Strike Action guidelines. Their threat to all refuse to co-operate but switch to shared reading if an inspector appeared, won the changes staff were seeking!

Tomorrow, the National Executive meets to discuss a priority Motion for NUT Conference to set out the next steps for the national dispute. I will be arguing for an escalation of action next term. We can't allow things to carry on like this.

Grading lessons to deny pay progression is unacceptable

"Dear Parent/Guardian, if your son/daughter fails to pay attention in my class, it could cost me £2,000"

Surely no school would dream of denying a teacher annual progression up their pay scale in such an unfair manner? Surely no school would want to poison the relationship between children, parents and teachers by imposing such a draconian policy?

Unfortunately, this imaginary letter is not such a far-fetched exaggeration. It is, in summary, what is effectively written in many school pay policies, including the disputed model policy issued by my employer, Lewisham Local Authority.
 
How can that be so? Firstly, because the National Association of Head Teachers  model pay policy, on which the Lewisham policy is based, states that "to move up the main pay range, one annual point at a time ... Teaching should be ‘good’, as defined by Ofsted"

Secondly, because the 'Ofsted definition' being used by schools (and expressly set out in some school observation policies) describes, amongst other things, the following description of a lesson; "Pupils find the strategies and tasks interesting. Most concentrate well and pay full attention to the teacher. However, some may lose interest and need to be reminded to concentrate by the teacher". 

However, that description, where a teacher uses interesting tasks and strategies and where most pupils pay full attention, is not a description of a good lesson. It is one that can't even be described as "satisfactory" any more, but one that "requires improvement". 

In short, if, despite all a teacher's efforts, despite all the various other issues that might be impacting on a particular child on that day, despite all the challenges that a particular class might present, if a few children lose concentration, the teacher has failed to meet the standard for pay-progression.

Some Heads will protest that they wouldn't apply the policy as crudely as that - but then why insist on such a crudely written policy?

Such policies are also based on a 'definition' which inspectors themselves say should not be applied to individual lessons.

For example, Mary Myatt, an adviser and inspector who should know a thing or two about teaching and learning, has written the following on her blog: http://marymyatt.com/2013/11/10/ofsted-criteria-and-lesson-observations/ :

"Some schools take the judgement on the quality of teaching from the inspection handbook and apply this to individual lessons. But it wasn’t intended to be used like this. It is not a tick box, it is a descriptor which is used to make a judgement on the overall quality of teaching in the school. Not, repeat not, for individual lessons".

In http://marymyatt.com/2013/10/29/why-lesson-observations-only-count-for-so-much/, she writes, "the Ofsted schedule makes clear that a wider range of indicators must inform the judgement on the quality of teaching. ‘Inspectors must not simply aggregate the grades awarded following lesson observations’ (School Inspection Handbook Sep 2013 p37)"

Training provider, David Didau, '@LearningSpy' on his blog www.learningspy.co.uk, goes further and rightly talks of "the mistaken belief that you can recognise great teaching and learning just from looking".

In http://www.learningspy.co.uk/training/can-make-lesson-observations-worthwhile/ he spells out that "The weight of critical opinion would suggest that grading lessons is both unhelpful and unreliable".

'@LearningSpy' refers to the research by Professor Robert Coe, director of Durham University’s Centre for Evaluation and Monitoring, who "has declared that schools inspectors in England are basing their verdicts on evaluation methods which may not be reliable  ... Coe even goes so far as to suggest that classroom observation might be the new Brain Gym. He questions both the validity and impact and points out that there isn’t even one single, solitary study that provides real evidence that observations lead to improvement in teachers’ practice. Who knew?"

In http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-24079951 Prof Coe "suggested that ratings given to lessons by observers could be 'influenced by spurious confounds'. These included the charisma and confidence of the teacher, the subject matter being taught, students' behaviour in the classroom and the time of day. He questioned whether the observation ratings could be consistent given so many variables. He also listed a series of "poor proxies for learning", arguing that outward signs such as busy and motivated students and a calm and ordered classroom do not necessarily always mean that students are learning effectively and could reproduce correct answers independently".

'@LearningSpy' concludes with a recommendation that schools should "Stop grading lessons. You don’t need to do it. The excuse that Ofsted force schools to judge lessons is just that".

I don't know what view Mary Myatt, David Didau and Robin Coe take about trade unions and strike action. What I welcome is that they are confirming what teachers already know from their everyday experience - that observations are inevitably subjective and that judgements can be arbitrary.  They certainly shouldn't be based on a completely inapplicable so-called Ofsted 'definition' of a 'good' lesson.

Yet 'Ofsted observation gradings' are widely being used in an unfair and destructive way to justify putting teachers on capability procedures and imposed 'support programmes'. When Gove's legislation allows it at the end of this academic year, they will also be used to block teachers' pay-rises too. This invidious practice has to stop. 

Of course, we all want to be 'good' teachers. However, firstly, as these educators all explain, judging the quality of a teacher can only be based on a wide range of factors. Given the vast range of different schools, the range of expertise and specialisms of staff and the many different pupil cohorts within any one school, and the range of needs and backgrounds in any one class, it is never going to be a simple judgement to decide who is 'good' and who isn't.  

What we can all agree is that, with appropriate resources, reduced workload, mutual respect and support, which could include properly-constituted peer observation, then we could all be better teachers. However, divisive performance-pay will cut across supportive teamwork and any honest discussion of strengths and weaknesses. It will be used to arbitrarily block pay-rises, especially when school-budgets are under pressure. It also has to be stopped.

Any school pay policy that is based on the NAHT's 'good' teaching 'as defined by Ofsted' is dangerous nonsense. Unfortunately, it seems that it will require teachers taking strike action to stop this nonsense demoralising teachers, and to prevent both the unfair denial of pay and the damage to education that will otherwise result from such divisive policies.

NUT gives notice for strike action at six Lewisham schools

As part of our national dispute with the Secretary of State, the NUT has issued notice for sustained strike action in six Lewisham schools to oppose pay and appraisal policies that fail to protect staff from the serious threats to pay progression allowed under Michael Gove's imposed performance-pay legislation.

Notice has been given for action to take place on Thursday November 28th, Tuesday December 3/Wednesday December 4 and Tuesday/Wednesday/Thursday January 7/8/9.

That action has been suspended in two schools after staff felt that they had received sufficient commitments from Governors that their concerns will be addressed.

Strike action could still take place in the following two federations of schools:
Leathersellers' Federation
King Alfred Federation

In each case, the Federations have been proposing to implement policies in line, or largely in line, with model policies issued by Lewisham Council, policies which fail to meet the national NUT/NASUWT check-lists. Lewisham teaching unions have proposed a number of amendments to these policies covering issues like limiting the numbers of observations, avoiding any Teachers' Standards 'check-list' and making sure that decisions on pay are based on appraisal objectives, not additional factors such as 'gradings' of lesson observations.

In particular, the policies state that progression on the main pay range will be dependent on showing that observation is 'consistently good' based on Ofsted criteria. As the proposed observation policy at one of the schools regrettably makes clear, this could mean that a class where "Pupils find the strategies and tasks interesting. Most concentrate well and pay full attention to the teacher. However, some may lose interest and need to be reminded to concentrate by the teacher" would be graded as "Requires Improvement" and the teacher would be at risk of not receiving pay progression! As staff at a primary school meeting that I have just attended commented, "on a given day, that could be used to stop any teacher in London getting their pay rise".

At that meeting, just as at meetings at all the other schools,  NUT and NASUWT members voted overwhelmingly in favour of supporting strike action. 

We still hope that the determination shown by the staff at these schools will convince Governors to agree to our proposals, just as, we are pleased to say, has happened in some other schools. Negotiations are continuing with Governors in the various schools next week which could still lead to action in some or all of the schools being suspended or withdrawn. However, if that is not the case, then strike action will be taking place to defend teachers and education from these damaging policies.

Please send messages of support to the school NUT reps via NUT@lewisham.gov.uk

No to excessive observations - building for strike action in Liverpool

Tonight was the last of my rushed journeys from school or NUT Office to travel to speak at Local Association nomination meetings. It was good to finish in Liverpool, an NUT Association that has always campaigned for a clear campaign of national action and who helped back LANAC, the Local Associations National Action Campaign, from the outset.

Liverpool teachers, like those across the rest of the North-West, have already taken part in regional strike action in June. Not surprisingly, therefore, the debate centred on what was to follow after the October strikes elsewhere. My view that we had to set the date for a national strike in November, co-ordinated with other unions in dispute, and then alert colleagues to put aside money ready for further action in the New Year, was echoed by other speakers too.

Just as in all the nomination meetings, the pressures facing classroom teachers were a prominent part of the debate. Peter Glover, one of the NUT National Executive members for the district, explained how he had been speaking to a Newly Qualified Teacher who had been observed by FOUR people at once – the Head, Deputy Head, a Governor and a pupil! As Peter put it, “that’s not observation, that’s surveillance!”

Teachers in the North-West took the lead on June 27. Teachers in the rest of England will follow with determined action in October. But if we are to stop the threat of performance pay, pension ages of 68, unbearable workload and bullying observations, that has to be just the start – the start of a program of action that can force back these damaging attacks. I hope to be elected as a NUT National Officer that can help to lead such a winning campaign.

I’ve written a newsletter for Lewisham NUT members to build for the October 17 strike. To download a copy, go to https://local.teachers.org.uk/templates/asset-relay.cfm?frmAssetFileID=11462

Ofsted - unreliable, unproven, unjustified

Accessed via: http://www.localschoolsnetwork.org.uk/2013/09/academic-upsets-ofsted-chief-inspector-in-presentation-on-evidence-based-education-at-researched/

It's no surprise that Sir Michael Wilshaw has reacted to Professor Robert Coe's criticism of Ofsted's evaluation methods by calling them "tosh and nonsense". That's because Coe's criticisms go right to the heart of the demoralising observation and performance-pay regime that is spreading across education.

In too many schools, observation gradings are being used as a supposedly 'objective' way of measuring a teacher's worth. Observations deemed to be less than "good" soon lead to threats of 'capability' and, under many new pay policies, would then also lead to teachers' pay progression being blocked next September.

As the graph above ( produced by Coe in his recent lecture at ResearchEd 2013 ) indicates, there is, of course, no evidence that performance-related pay helps raise educational standards in the first place. Rather than encourage and inspire, PRP divides and demoralises teams of staff.

However, even if PRP could be justified, how do you go about accurately measuring the 'performance' of an individual teacher given the host of different factors that can influence educational outcomes? As Coe shows, you certainly can't rely on 'Ofsted-ratings' of lesson observations.

Teachers know from their bitter personal experience that observation gradings can often seem arbitrary and unfair. At best, they rely on teachers adjusting their methods to fit the latest Ofsted schema, which does not necessarily equate to what is actually best for a particular class at a particular time. 

Academic backing for teachers' objections is certainly welcome. Coe's presentation points out a range of reasons why observations may not provide valid evidence. 

For example, Coe asks whether it can be shown that "observation ratings correspond with other indicators of teaching quality or effectiveness?" He asks whether they can be consistent across occasions and across raters. Coe points out that  ratings might be "influenced by spurious confounds" such as charisma, confidence, subject matter, students’ behaviour and time of day.  Teachers would definitely concur!

In Lewisham, and in some other Local Authorities, these dubious ratings are being used as a key part of the Authority's recommended pay policies. They say that for a Lewisham teacher to be recommended for pay progression up the main pay scale,“teaching should be over time consistently ‘good’, as defined by Ofsted”. For an upper pay range teacher, that demand is raised to "consistently good to outstanding".

What exactly does 'defined by Ofsted' mean? Even Ofsted accept that they are not providing precise definitions of performance in their inspection frameworks. Instead, individual schools will have their own interpretations - and their own subjective conclusions.

Coe's research confirms teachers' views that these policies are unacceptable. They will unfairly lead to teachers having their pay progression blocked based on unreliable and unfair Ofsted-based measures of their "performance". 

That's why a NUT briefing attended by over thirty Lewisham teachers tonight voted not just to build for the regional action on October 17, but also to support a program of sustained rolling strike action across Lewisham schools who have adopted these unacceptable policies. Reps have been asked to consult with their members before we reconvene again in a fortnight's time to confirm details of that program of action.

... and thanks to Sheffield NUT for their nomination tonight in the National Officers election.

Stratford Academy Concerned Parents Press Release

PRESS RELEASE (29/11/12)

STRATFORD ACADEMY CONCERNED PARENTS

TEACHERS SUSPEND FURTHER STRIKE ACTION

After nine days of strikes, teachers at Stratford Academy, Newham, have suspended further strike action. Following talks facilitated by ACAS, on Tuesday 27 November, the NUT and NASUWT teachers’ unions and Stratford Academy management agreed a joint press release: “Following constructive talks facilitated by ACAS, all sides have agreed to a process of further discussions to deal with outstanding issues.” The teachers will be reintroducing their unions’ joint national action (short of strike action) measures in opposition to excessive workloads.

It was the Academy management's outrageous demand that staff must individually promise not to take part in their unions’ joint action that provoked the strike in the first place. Staff who refused to repudiate their unions’ campaign had their wages cut by 15%, with further threats of monthly pay cuts. Nearly half a million teachers, in 23,000 schools, are taking part in the unions’ actions but only Stratford Academy management decided to take punitive action against teachers. Faced with this, teachers took strike action on 25 October, followed by eight more days of strikes, over the next three weeks.

We hope that the final outcome of negotiations will confirm an important victory for the teachers. This would also be a tremendous result for parents and pupils! Our children can then return to school full time and our teachers can return to teaching unbowed and confident they have the full support of parents.

The 'Stratford Academy Concerned Parents' group was formed after parents’ views were completed ignored by the Head and Governors. We organised mass leafleting to bring the real facts about the strike to parents and the local community. We held our own packed meetings of parents where it was unanimously decided to condemn the actions of the Head and Governors and to call on senior management to negotiate with teachers, to allow our children to return full time to school.

Under our continuous pressure, eventually the Head Teacher was compelled to call a “meeting of parents” on 20 November. Two hundred parents attended and loudly condemned the confrontational and reckless actions of school management that led to the teachers’ strike. Last Friday, 23 November, a delegation of Concerned Parents met with senior management and presented a motion of ‘no confidence’ to the Head.

Within days, the combined pressure from teachers and parents forced the Head and Governors (the Employers) to negotiate with teachers’ unions.

Areas of concern for parents remain

While teachers’ continue to negotiate over their issues, areas of concern for parents remain, in particular the heavy-handed management culture. But parents have found their voices! Stratford Academy Concerned Parents will continue to campaign for real representation and accountability. We will work to be represented by parent-governors that actually reflect our views on the Board.

We are confident that our example of firm parents and teachers’ unity in the face of bullying senior management will give encouragement to staff and parents in other schools facing similar problems with management.

The experience at Stratford Academy also serves as a warning to staff and parents at other schools where attempts are being made by senior management to turn them into academies about the sort of regime that might await them. Many parents at Stratford now question the rapid process and minimum so-called “consultation” that led to Stratford becoming an Academy in 2011.

We will endeavour to ensure the magnificent struggle at Stratford Academy is widely known at schools across the country!

Niall Mulholland
Stratford Academy Concerned Parents

For more details and interviews etc, please contact Niall Mulholland,
Stratford Academy Concerned Parents at:

stratfordacademyparents@gmail.com

Teachers' strike at Stratford Academy

"It's like being run by the Stasi in this school", a striker commented, as teachers at Stratford Academy, Newham, went on strike on Thursday 25 October.

The industrial action is over a pay cut imposed by school governors, and against a bullying school management.

The governors' punitive salary reductions were made after these east London teachers began a work-to-rule, as part of national action by the NUT and NASUWT teachers' unions.

Following a lawful national ballot, teachers are refusing to undertake tasks that distract them from the core role of teaching and which do not require their skills as qualified teachers.

The NUT rep Steve Charles explained that not only has teachers' pay been cut but that staff are subjected to threatening and intimidating actions by governors and school management.

A letter from management went to teachers demanding they agree not to take part in the NUT and NASUWT national action, which stops short of a strike, or else have their pay cut.

Those teachers who refused to be bullied into submission had their pay cut by 15%. In response, the NUT and NASUWT unions, which represent the majority of staff, issued notice of a strike, demanding the punitive wage cuts are withdrawn and the intimidation stops.

Niall Mulholland, a parent of a Year 8 pupil at Stratford Academy, and a local Socialist Party member, joined the picket line. "Teachers at Stratford Academy work very hard and professionally, despite dilapidated school buildings and the school being in one of the country's poorest boroughs.

"The teachers have been forced into strike action by the outrageous, autocratic actions of the governors and senior school management.

"It is they who are entirely responsible for any disruption to pupils and parents. I and other parents will do all we can to support the teachers' completely justified action.

"We will campaign to try to ensure that all parents are fully aware of the real issues in this dispute and the teachers' justified case, not just the management propaganda.

"We want to meet the governors without delay, to demand that they immediately end their pay cuts and anti-union intimidation."

NUT rep Steve Charles said that parents' support is valuable in the dispute and for the future of the school and its students.

More strike action is planned by the teachers; two days in the week after half-term and three days after that if their demands are not met.

The Stratford Academy teachers' action is significant for all staff in academies and throughout the education system.

If the Stratford governors and management get away with their attacks, it will encourage similar action by management in other schools.

This article was taken from the Socialist Party website:  http://www.socialistparty.org.uk/issue/740/15583/26-10-2012/teachers-at-stratford-academy-strike-against-scandalous-pay-cuts

Please send messages of support to Stratford Academy NUT rep Steve Charles at stevec4151@aol.com

Teachers vote to escalate to strike action over excessive observations

For over a year, there has been an ongoing concern over excessive observations at a Lewisham secondary school. Even worse, those observation outcomes are then linked to a system where teachers are placed in groups according to Ofsted categories. These can, and have been, then linked to harsh capability procedures.

Following the announcement of our action short of strike action, the school NUT rep sought discussions with the Headteacher, seeking changes to procedures to meet the NUT/NASUWT check-lists.

Unfortunately, the Headteacher has said that the profiling system will continue with staff being allocated into the categories of Satisfactory; Satisfactory to Good; Good; and Good to Outstanding (now downgraded from 'outstanding' which is no longer listed as a category !)

Staff would be observed too often, without adequate notice, nor with agreement over the lesson to be seen – only being given a ‘window’ of 6 periods:
• Each observation period will include 2 lesson observations over a 6 period 'window'
• Each teacher receives 48 hours notice of their 6 period window
• A teacher deemed “Satisfactory to Good” would receive 4 observation periods over the next four half-terms – i.e eight observations. ‘Satisfactory’ and ‘inadequate’ teachers may receive even more.

A joint NUT/NASUWT meeting this evening agreed that these arrangements were unacceptable as they
• were in clear breach of the NUT/NASUWT Joint Classroom Observation Protocol
• focus on Ofsted categories rather than performance management objectives
• fail to provide genuine professional development and support to teachers

Following discussion, the meeting of 39 NUT members and 10 NASUWT members voted in support of proceeding to escalate to strike action. A secret paper ballot was issued to NUT members asking if they would support strike action if called upon by the National Union. The votes were 38 YES, 1 abstention, 0 NO. NASUWT members met as a sub-group and agreed to support the NUT’s decision.

The meeting agreed with a proposal that we urgently seek a meeting with the Head and Chair of Governors to seek urgent negotiation over an acceptable appraisal and observation procedure but that, if there was a refusal to meet before the half-term break, we would ask that the NUT and NASUWT issue a notice for strike action.

Look out for further updates on this story

Teachers prepare for a new phase of action

A report from Lewisham:

Across England and Wales, teachers are preparing for the start of 'Phase One' of the NUT's national action - action we have to take to oppose the Government's attacks on pay, jobs and working conditions. These attacks are, of course, also an attack on young people's learning conditions as well.

The action, being launched jointly with the NASUWT union, begins with a program of 'action short of strike action' starting on September 26th [24.9.12 update - now starting a week later on October 3]. A list of twenty-five separate instructions have been jointly issued. These are intended to allow teachers to come together and to start to take back control of their workload - jointly refusing to carry out tasks that are in breach of the national guidelines.

Already, stories of successes are being reported. For example, some schools have cancelled the much-hated 'mock inspections' after NUT and NASUWT members informed their Headteachers that teachers would be refusing to take part in them, protected by the YES vote in our action ballot and the joint action guidelines.

35 NUT members packed a Lewisham NUT Action Briefing on Monday evening to discuss how to make the action as effective as possible. School Reps were encouraged to set up urgent school group meetings to collectively agree the action points they will focus on.

Teachers know that it will take determined effort to make the action effective. However, everyone at the meeting agreed that we have to take this opportunity to stand up for ourselves and start to turn back the tide of ever-increasing workload.

Long after the meeting had finished, I found three young teachers still debating in the car park as to how they were going to build the action in their primary school!

On Wednesday, I attended two school meetings that had been immediately organised. At a secondary school, the NUT group arrived at a number of priorities for action. The school rep will now be discussing these with the headteacher as a matter of urgency. They included the number of meetings in the school calendar and a marking policy that could mean teachers marking books for hours at a time.

At a primary school, the immediate priority was over the threat from the new appraisal and classroom observation policies which Michael Gove wants schools to adopt. Teachers knew that the introduction of such policies would leave them demoralised and threatened by endless management observations of their teaching.

When I explained that Gove also wanted schools to be able to start cutting the pay of teachers who were deemed not to have met their targets, there was outrage. As one colleague rightly exclaimed, 'It's all about making us pay for cuts'.

The meeting agreed that representatives should urgently talk to the Head to try and persuade her only to recommend an appraisal policy to governors that is line with Union guidelines. I have written a letter to all Lewisham Headteachers setting out our objections and offering alternative policies and protocols that we would be happy for schools to adopt (posted on the Lewisham NUT website www.teachers.org.uk/lewisham).

We hope that schools will refuse to yield to the pressure to adopt the kind of draconian policies that Michael Gove is recommending. After all, why should schools implement the demands of a Secretary of State who, as the GCSE scandal has shown, is so clearly out to trash community schools and block opportunities for our youngsters too?

But where schools refuse to listen, action short of strike action alone will not be enough to defend teachers. That's why Monday's Lewisham NUT meeting also asked school groups to let the NUT Office know as soon as possible if they would support strike action in their school, as part of joint across schools in Lewisham where unacceptable policies are being imposed.

There was also unanimous agreement that we cannot leave this campaign just with action short of strike action - national strike action is also urgently needed.

We agreed to encourage all members to attend the TUC demonstration against austerity in London on October 20 – but to use that event to call on all unions to organise further co-ordinated action in line with TUC policy.

The meeting also agreed that we should write to the NUT Executive to call on them to:
* Urgently approach the NASUWT to seek agreement on dates for co-ordinated strike action in defence of pensions, pay & conditions.
* Write to the National Executives of other TUC affiliates seeking urgent discussions about co-coordinating the biggest possible joint strike action.

Let's tackle the observations onslaught!

In the light of the new regulations brought in by Michael Gove, some Local Authorities and schools are opening discussions over new appraisal and capability procedures. 

The starting position in negotiations will be to stick with the 'status quo' where acceptable procedures are already in place. However, the NUT, ATL and NAHT have now agreed a joint appraisal policy to offer as an alternative to the punitive DfE model policy - a policy that links appraisal to fast-track capability procedures. The contents of the joint union model policy have been negotiated between the three unions - although in the end the ASCL rejected it.

The NASUWT have issued their own model policy - but, in the light of the joint declaration this week, let's hope that there can be agreement between the NUT and NASUWT over other key issues, not least an 'observation protocol'.

The joint model policy does include some safeguards on observations, for example stating that feedback from lesson observation should be developmental and not simply a judgement using Ofsted grades. However, no agreement over limits on classroom observations, especially unannounced 'drop-ins' and 'learning walks', was reached. 

But this is a key issue for many teachers who are facing an increasingly bullying observation regime, with teachers being criticised, demoralised and branded as 'failures', particularly through application of the harsh Ofsted framework. This is a framework which, after all, seems to be designed to 'fail' schools - perhaps so that they can be forced into becoming Academies!

That's why, backed up with the forthcoming ballot, NUT members need to fight to make sure that the NUT's reissued Classroom Observation Protocol (and the policy on Learning Walks and Drop-Ins) is adopted across schools in their area. 

You can find the joint policy and the classroom observation protocols on the National NUT website on: http://www.teachers.org.uk/appraisals-capability

Some of the key points in the protocols are: 

• Classroom observation for the purposes of performance management/appraisal will be limited to one observation per teacher, of a maximum of 60 minutes in length per performance management cycle, except in exceptional circumstances. Those exceptional circumstances are where the reviewee chooses to request a further observation, or where concerns have been raised about a teacher’s performance which require further observation to take place. 
• In the exceptional circumstances in which more than one observation of a maximum of 60 minutes is to be conducted, this governing body agrees that the amount of observation will be kept to the shortest necessary period on the fewest number of occasions, with a maximum overall limit of three hours of observation, made up of observations on no more than three occasions. This overall limit will apply to all observations carried out for the statutory purposes of performance management/appraisal and evaluation of standards of teaching and learning, meaning that no teacher will be observed on more than three occasions of up to one hour over an academic year, including drop-ins and learning walks.  
• The date and time of observations conducted for the purposes of performance management/appraisal or for the evaluation of standards of teaching and learning (or for both purposes) will be fixed at least five working days in advance. 
• Before any performance management/appraisal observation is conducted, there will be an opportunity for reviewer and reviewee to meet in order that the context of the lesson to be observed can be discussed.
• The arrangements for classroom observation for performance management will be included in the planning and review statement and will specify any particular aspects of the teacher’s performance which will be assessed
• Oral feedback from classroom observation at a pre-arranged time for the purposes of performance management will be given as soon as possible after the observation and no later than the end of the following working day. Written feedback will be provided within five working days of the observation taking place.
• The purpose or focus of a ‘learning walk’ should be explained to all relevant staff prior to its commencement. There shall be no evaluation of an individual teacher during a ‘learning walk’.
• Any teacher whose classroom is visited during a ‘learning walk’ will have the visit counted towards the overall maximum of three observations per year, each of up to an hour in length