Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Educational cuts
Options
Comments
-
I fail to understand where all this teaching bashing is coming from. I see and hear it over and over again. Here's the thing though: Teaching isn't a secret society. Everyone in the country knows that the holidays, etc, are part of the working conditions. It's not the fault of the teachers that these holidays are given. Not everyone realises the stress that is involved in teaching. I'm not moaning about it. I love my job. But it's not easy. And decreasing the holidays will not increase productivity if you increase class sizes.
On the subject of the cuts, I spoke to a lot of my colleagues about it and the general consensus was that we would gladly add another 1% to the levy if the students didn't suffer. (Of course this probably would not be enough but there's no way a lot of non-teachers - and some teachers - would be happy with it, nor should they be. Anyway, it wont happen.)
I'm not so worried about having to have a cert for sickness as I am never sick, and have never 'pulled a sickie'. But the students will undoubtedly suffer.0 -
I fail to understand where all this teaching bashing is coming from. I see and hear it over and over again. Here's the thing though: Teaching isn't a secret society. Everyone in the country knows that the holidays, etc, are part of the working conditions. It's not the fault of the teachers that these holidays are given. Not everyone realises the stress that is involved in teaching. I'm not moaning about it. I love my job. But it's not easy. And decreasing the holidays will not increase productivity if you increase class sizes.
On the subject of the cuts, I spoke to a lot of my colleagues about it and the general consensus was that we would gladly add another 1% to the levy if the students didn't suffer. (Of course this probably would not be enough but there's no way a lot of non-teachers - and some teachers - would be happy with it, nor should they be. Anyway, it wont happen.)
I'm not so worried about having to have a cert for sickness as I am never sick, and have never 'pulled a sickie'. But the students will undoubtedly suffer.
I was talking to a friend today who said there were 44 children in his class in primary school, he turned out to be a grand, well educated professional.
There were 38 in my class back in the early 1980's and I can't say that it held me back in any way whatsoever...0 -
I was talking to a friend today who said there were 44 children in his class in primary school, he turned out to be a grand, well educated professional.
There were 38 in my class back in the early 1980's and I can't say that it held me back in any way whatsoever...
Well the quality of parenting has dropped greatly, meaning that a lot more kids are more troublesome. Back in the day you could probably get 44 kids to listen to you. Not so much today methinks.
Also there seems to be more special needs and foriegners who require special treatment these days.0 -
-
Well the quality of parenting has dropped greatly, meaning that a lot more kids are more troublesome. Back in the day you could probably get 44 kids to listen to you. Not so much today methinks.
Also there seems to be more special needs and foriegners who require special treatment these days.
Well throwing money at the problem Bertie Ahern style isn't going to resolve the issue. I'm dying to see where cuts are actually going to be made, because if what I'm hearing is true, 20% of current expenditure that is required to run the country next year will have to be borrowed. So something will have to give somewhere and as long as vested interests start jumping up and down every time a cut in announced, we are going to end up broke.
Also, everyone seems to want special treatment these days and in recent years, we've probably allowed this privilege mentality to bed in a degree and become a bit too accomodative of every whim that was aired.
I am amazed at how Barak Obama can say, "Yes, we'll improve education, but no government program is going to turn off the TV in the evening and take your kids out for a walk and spend quality time with them, or get you to cook a healthy meal for your family instead of buying take-away all the time.." Basically he is only half the answer to the problem, a facilator for improvement and progress. If we could have the same attitude here, we might be a lot better off...0 -
Advertisement
-
Well throwing money at the problem Bertie Ahern style isn't going to resolve the issue.
This is your second time using this line and it is no less trite and dumb second time around. If people require decent public services then it costs money so "throwing money at things" is required I'm afraid.
We should be paying far higher levels of taxation than we are. It is as simple as that. The PD ideological nonsense which was based on the nutty proposition that the private sector would buck the trend of history and not crash and burn spectacularly, would keep producing high levels of tax revenue and not have to be bailed out by government, sowed the seeds of the current situation.
"Throwing money at things" in order to support reasonable social provision after decades of inadequacy did not create the problem. It was the unreliable source of that money which was based far too much on private sector greed continuing to create a revenue bubble that created the problem.
Obviously there is an anti-education bias in Ireland, but to start blaming the education system for a problem created by too much enthusiastic brown-nosing of private sector chancers is ludricous.
The "throwing money at things" is passable barstool cliché but to recall the brave and true capitalist mantra - there's no such thing as a free lunch.0 -
Again I don't need a B. Ed or a H. Dip to speak from personal experience. If someone like me can pass through the whole educational system and only come into contact with one excellent teacher, then I'd question the quality or worth of the B. Ed or H. Dip that you say I should have completed, before you think I'm qualified to speak here about my experience of teachers.
Attending school qualifies you to speak of your experience of teachers. However, it does not remotely qualify you to speak of the job of teaching in the abstract in all fairness.
I have been to the dentist many times and could speak at length about the experience and how the dentist compared with another dentist I have attended. But don't ask me to comment on the nature of their work in the general sense based on such an attenuated experience.0 -
Powerhouse wrote: »This is your second time using this line and it is no less trite and dumb second time around. If people require decent public services then it costs money so "throwing money at things" is required I'm afraid.
We should be paying far higher levels of taxation than we are. It is as simple as that. The PD ideological nonsense which was based on the nutty proposition that the private sector would buck the trend of history and not crash and burn spectacularly, would keep producing high levels of tax revenue and not have to be bailed out by government, sowed the seeds of the current situation.
"Throwing money at things" in order to support reasonable social provision after decades of inadequacy did not create the problem. It was the unreliable source of that money which was based far too much on private sector greed continuing to create a revenue bubble that created the problem.
Obviously there is an anti-education bias in Ireland, but to start blaming the education system for a problem created by too much enthusiastic brown-nosing of private sector chancers is ludricous.
The "throwing money at things" is passable barstool cliché but to recall the brave and true capitalist mantra - there's no such thing as a free lunch.
We pay some of the highest salaries to teachers, nurses and gardai of any country. I believe the max salary for a secondary teacher in the UK is 45k and it's 55k here, that is where most of the money goes- salaries. The nurses held a strike before the last election looking for less hours and more money costing the state hundreds of millions, even though they were already some of the best paid in europe.
It's also well known that the public sector has been voting for FF for years now as they knew that Bertie would give them anything they wanted.
Now i agree with a lot of what you said- there was too much greed, and the government did lower our taxs too much. However we can't raise €15-20B extra taxs, it's just not possible without destroying the country. Income tax totalled €13B this year, so we would have to DOUBLE the standard 20/41% tax intake. Even if we went back to the old 28%/48%(52%) it would leave us well short. You even said it yourself- the government spent money that wasn't sustainable, so now that needs to be cut. That means wage cuts, which are unlikely in the public sector so at least pauses, job cuts and reduced services.0 -
Powerhouse wrote: »This is your second time using this line and it is no less trite and dumb second time around. If people require decent public services then it costs money so "throwing mone at things" is required I'm afraid..
So how come when we in the private sector increased your pay by 59% over the last ten years we didn't get any results. We pay enough taxes. Given the increase in private sector employment over the last decade the government was able to increse revenues without increases in taxation. This was effectively a defferred increase in taxation. So even if public sector workers take a well deserved pay freeze we private sector workers will see our tax bill increase. There will be no improvement in service because public sector workers don't feel the need to work harder as we pay them more. Instead they blame us. The problem is we are not paying them enough. They provide a crap service but it is us - employer, client and victim who is reponsible. We don't pay enough. Do we take a private sector pay freeze, pay more taxation to pay their undeserved pay increases and, no doubt still hear claptrap about how we are not paying them enough.
Enough of this nonsence. Benchmark the public sector. Let them follow the private sector down in wages as fast as they accelerated past private sector workers -with no return - on the way up.
Anything else is theft.0 -
"Enough of this nonsence.(sic) Benchmark the public sector. Let them follow the private sector down in wages as fast as they accelerated past private sector workers -with no return - on the way up.
Anything else is theft."
Accelerated past private sector workers???!!! Are you having a laugh!?Maybe you are considering the industrial average wage here or something .But comparing diploma or even some third level' certificate' qualification standard workers salaries, we were left for dead during the boom years.Im not even going to mention salaries of people who had DEGREES and postgraduate qualifications ...Look I didnt especially begrudge (well ok maybe a little bit LOL)all my similarly or lesser qualified friends earning typically 45-50k when I was on 18-24k at the start of the boom .Nor did I even rant on web fora when they were earning 100k + 'bonuses' ,ha we're lucky if we get a flippin Marietta biscuit without having to pay for it ...seriously)The same people are STILL driving S Classes and 7 Series' so excuse me now if I dont feel TOO sorry for you poor lot because of our 'job security' , pensions and medium-ish level salaries (by TODAY'S standard)
Swings and roundabouts...0 -
Advertisement
-
Powerhouse wrote: »Attending school qualifies you to speak of your experience of teachers. However, it does not remotely qualify you to speak of the job of teaching in the abstract in all fairness.
I have been to the dentist many times and could speak at length about the experience and how the dentist compared with another dentist I have attended. But don't ask me to comment on the nature of their work in the general sense based on such an attenuated experience.
Again, it's the customer who the process should be completely centred around, not the dentist or the teacher, meaning the process should meet and exceed the needs of the child being taught or in the case of your example, the person paying the dentist. This is the holy grail that should be pursued, meeting and exceeding the expectations at the centre of the process, the person receiving the service. You don't have to be a teacher to be able to identify problems within the system. You really should think about the size of that statement you have made there. Basially you are saying that the only people who should have an opinion are those that teach and take instructions from the INTO and the ASTI, two bodies of vested interests that have opposed every single attempt to improve the standard of teaching in this country.
This is the typical attitude of the teaching community, basically if you disagree with them, you obviously aren't educated. We've had benchmarking I and benchmarking II and still we don't have a single teacher in the entire country subject to a performance based review system. Hence we have no way of measuring of performance and on that basis, we have no hope of improving performance.
There shouldn't be another cent given to teachers until they accept a review system that takes account of their performance, like absolutely every other employment in the 21st century.0 -
Powerhouse wrote: »Attending school qualifies you to speak of your experience of teachers. However, it does not remotely qualify you to speak of the job of teaching in the abstract in all fairness.
I have been to the dentist many times and could speak at length about the experience and how the dentist compared with another dentist I have attended. But don't ask me to comment on the nature of their work in the general sense based on such an attenuated experience.
Interestingly, the dentist cannot speak for the quality of his or her work. This is only something you will perceive and be grateful for or possibly otherwise, dependant upon the quality and cost of the work...0 -
So how come when we in the private sector increased your pay by 59% over the last ten years we didn't get any results. We pay enough taxes. Given the increase in private sector employment over the last decade the government was able to increse revenues without increases in taxation. This was effectively a defferred increase in taxation.
I have no idea where you are getting the idea that you increased my pay by 59% over the past 10 years. I am not a teacher and work in the private sector - self-employed actually.
But you are contradicting yourself in the space of a few short sentences here. You are wrong to say we pay enough taxes - we don't. But when you say that the government policy in the last few years amounted to an effect a deferred increase in taxation, you are right.0 -
Interestingly, the dentist cannot speak for the quality of his or her work. This is only something you will perceive and be grateful for or possibly otherwise, dependant upon the quality and cost of the work...
I don't know about that. I am sure many dentists could speak at length about the problems they encounter in their work, the things that make for optimum working conditions, the type of client response which will ensure the best possible outcome to treatment, and what makes a good or a not so good dentist.
Why do you think they wouldn't have such opinons?0 -
Again, it's the customer who the process should be completely centred around, not the dentist or the teacher, meaning the process should meet and exceed the needs of the child being taught or in the case of your example, the person paying the dentist. This is the holy grail that should be pursued, meeting and exceeding the expectations at the centre of the process, the person receiving the service. You don't have to be a teacher to be able to identify problems within the system. You really should think about the size of that statement you have made there. Basially you are saying that the only people who should have an opinion are those that teach and take instructions from the INTO and the ASTI, two bodies of vested interests that have opposed every single attempt to improve the standard of teaching in this country.
This is the typical attitude of the teaching community, basically if you disagree with them, you obviously aren't educated. We've had benchmarking I and benchmarking II and still we don't have a single teacher in the entire country subject to a performance based review system. Hence we have no way of measuring of performance and on that basis, we have no hope of improving performance.
There shouldn't be another cent given to teachers until they accept a review system that takes account of their performance, like absolutely every other employment in the 21st century.
The 'size of the statement' I made is being greatly exaggerated by you. What I said was that you are not qualified to speak of the experience of teachers simply because you attended school. Neither am I. We can both speak of the particular experience of a student in our own classes in school, no doubt. But that is quite a separate matter from what you are claiming I said. You wrote -"Basially you are saying that the only people who should have an opinion are those that teach and take instructions from the INTO and the ASTI". That is a very distorted version of what I said.
I am simply questioning your right to fulminate on the direct experiences of teachers in schools, as if you know what the experience of standing in front of a class is like and understand the myriad of issues which is likely to crop up among a large eclectic group in the modern-day classroom.
I agree with you wholeheartedly (as the father of young primary school children) that the educational system should be child-focussed, which is why I vehemently oppose the education cuts which are massively anti-child and wipes out the progress of recent years, whether that is for traveller children, special needs children or those who need help with lanaguage development.
Unfortunately many cannot get past the "let's get those b*stards with the long holidays while I am stuck in the rat-race with my 20 days a year" mentality, which is a pity when the education of children is at issue.
And then there is the mentality of those such as yourself who can cite 1 person in a class 44 who became "a successful professional" and takes this as meaning everything was grand for all 44 in the class. There is an inverse relationship between the extraordinary ignorance of the issues at question here and the vehemence with which they are being expressed.0 -
Please correct me if my estimates are wrong hre but AFAIK Teachers get a lump sum of 1.5 times their salary the day they retire and then 50% of there wages until they die.
A teacher retiring this year would get nearly €100k in a lump sum and then €35,000 a year until they die?
Teachers pay for their pension - 6.5% of each cheque for 40 years!
There is nothing stopping any other employee in the country subscribing 6.5% of their salary to a pension scheme to prepare for retirement.
Teachers do not get a social welfare pension on retirement - they pay for the pension they receive - even though they pay P.R.S.I. like everyone else.0 -
-
Teachers pay for their pension - 6.5% of each cheque for 40 years!
Firstly that is clearly part of the package, it is a part of pay. Secondly there is no way that the 6.5% pays for your pension, and certainly not the pension and the lump sum. The €35K iteself would need about 1M euro in the bank. And that money is not put away somewhere in private investments either ( which would be subject to being reduced when the economy tanks like private pensions - yours is guaranteed).
so it is nonsense. What pays for teachers salaries is present day taxation from private sector workers.0 -
which is why I vehemently oppose the education cuts which are massively anti-child and wipes of the progress of recent years, whether that is for traveller children, special needs children or those who need help with lanaguage development.
Yawn. The major cost of education is salaries. Take a cut or a pay freeze and there would be no issue with services being cut back.0 -
Firstly that is clearly part of the package, it is a part of pay. Secondly there is no way that the 6.5% pays for your pension, and certainly not the pension and the lump sum. The €35K iteself would need about 1M euro in the bank. And that money is not put away somewhere in private investments either ( which would be subject to being reduced when the economy tanks like private pensions - yours is guaranteed).
so it is nonsense. What pays for teachers salaries is present day taxation from private sector workers.
If a single teacher pays pension contributions of 6.5% for 40 years and after retiring dies within 3/4 years then the pension dies with them...how can you imply they haven't paid enough?
Teachers salaries are not paid soley by private sector workers - all taxpayers contribute, including teachers!0 -
Advertisement
-
-
So 80% of the Education Budget is spent on teachers' salaries...why is anyone surprised by this figure? Why do people get apoplectic at the thought? I mean, who does the teaching? Last time I looked the classrooms were filled with kids and a teacher - not an unpaid robot in sight. So far the popular opinion is that teachers should take a pay cut in order to sort out the education debacle...this would be because most teachers spend 4-5 years in college, start on a pretty low salary and take personal responsibility for educating, to the best of their ability, 120+ teenagers. Why does this not seem logical to me? As has been repeatedly stated by the teachers in this debate, to compare the teaching profession with the private, corporate sector is just plain silly. Despite the best efforts of Industry to cororatise 3rd level this has not happened thus far in Primary or Second level. It's teaching, we work with kids, some of them pretty colourful characters, most of us do our very best and despite the rubbish slung around here and elsewhere our day doesn't end at 4 p.m. And without the holidays VERY FEW people would be capable of more than 5 years full-time teaching. Try it, I'm not moaning either, I love it but expect to get a decent wage out of it. I mean, how impetuous of me.0
-
So far the popular opinion is that teachers should take a pay cut in order to sort out the education debacle...this would be because most teachers spend 4-5 years in college, start on a pretty low salary and take personal responsibility for educating, to the best of their ability, 120+ teenagers.
The fact that you spend time in college is irrelevant. 50% of people now graduate from college. Some serve chips. And some of them earn the median wage, or less. The pretty low salary is not that low compared to the people who pay you, and rises with every year of your working life. We could believe "personal responsibility" if teachers could be fired, promoted, or demoted depending on their ability in teaching.Why does this not seem logical to me?
I cant say.As has been repeatedly stated by the teachers in this debate, to compare the teaching profession with the private, corporate sector is just plain silly. Despite the best efforts of Industry to cororatise 3rd level this has not happened thus far in Primary or Second level. It's teaching, we work with kids, some of them pretty colourful characters, most of us do our very best and despite the rubbish slung around here and elsewhere our day doesn't end at 4 p.m. And without the holidays VERY FEW people would be capable of more than 5 years full-time teaching. Try it, I'm not moaning either, I love it but expect to get a decent wage out of it. I mean, how impetuous of me.
The Corporate thing is a red herring. We make these points.
1) Complaining about cuts in the education budget, and it's affects on children, is hypocritical mush when 80% of the cost is your salaries. The government had two options when it needed cuts - to reduce the services or reduce the wages. It had to reduce services because of your greed.
2) Private sector workers take pay freezes all the time. Or else they lose their jobs. This clearly happens in recessions.
3) During the boom you were benchmarked because private sector workers were ( supposedly) getting better raises than you. As private sector pay increased the argument went less people would want a relatively well paid job in the public sector. When private sector wages fall, you still get pay rises. Why?
Corporate schmorporate.
i keep asking this and get no answer. Why do we not benchmark the publis sector on the way down if we benhmark them on the way up?0 -
all taxpayers contribute, including teachers!
The "tax" you pay is chimera. It merely means the government pays you less. The income the government receives is from the private sector.0 -
Well, it's a no brainer really. If 80% of current expenditure is teachers salaries, there is not much to be achieved by trying to make token cuts in the remaining 20% of expenditure.0
-
I'm probably over qualified to be a teacher
Trust me, that's an impossibility (at least from a primary level anyway) and this is coming from a person who is not short of a graduation photo or two either.
Primary teaching is one hell of a challenging job, alot more challenging that I thought it was looking from the outside in before I studied it.
It's such a fluid job in terms of the different things that are put in front of you on a weekly basis from actually trying to implement the curriculum of 10 subjects given limited resources, to kids being bullied, to kids coming into school clearly being illl treated at home, to kids with disabilities or with language and learning needs etc... which ultimately means that as a job it's an ongoing learning process.
For anyone that enjoys being continually challenged I would genuinely recommend teaching as a career though. You will never be mentally bored.
Apologies, about the above post being off topic but the quote I cited made me smirk as my Dad once said the same thing to me when I decided to quit my job and go for primary teaching. Trust me, he was very wrong!0 -
Vince135792003 wrote: »Trust me, that's an impossibility (at least from a primary level anyway) and this is coming from a person who is not short of a graduation photo or two either.
Primary teaching is one hell of a challenging job, alot more challenging that I thought it was looking from the outside in before I studied it.
It's such a fluid job in terms of the different things that are put in front of you on a weekly basis from actually trying to implement the curriculum of 10 subjects given limited resources, to kids being bullied, to kids coming into school clearly being illl treated at home, to kids with disabilities or with language and learning needs etc... which ultimately means that as a job it's an ongoing learning process.
For anyone that enjoys being continually challenged I would genuinely recommend teaching as a career though. You will never be mentally bored.
Apologies, about the above post being off topic but the quote I cited made me smirk as my Dad once said the same thing to me when I decided to quit my job and go for primary teaching. Trust me, he was very wrong!
Few things to point out Vince...
(1) Every job is an "ongoing learning process"... Unfortunately teachers have yet to accept this.
(2) Every single point you have made above with regard to change, fluid workplace situations, bullying, limited resources, opposing personalities, can be found in a private PAYE employment... There is nothing unique about teaching that ultimately means that it is an, "ongoing learning process", as you put it...
Nowadays we all have qualifications, and we all have experience. What some of us are missing are the hazy and fog like arguments, raised, refined and marketed by the teachers unions, that will ensure that we'll never be able to have any decent discussion about performance or transparency, unless money is handed over up front, which is what benchmarking has done, handed money over up front, albeit without any accountability, transparency or review of actual performance...
Yet still, we still won't be able to discuss performance, it's like negotiating with a heroin addict, they will change after you give them money, it's all about the next fix...0 -
You don't get it but to be fair neither did I until I started doing the job.0
-
Except the threat of losing your job. An academic who is not actively involved in research will not last very long at any third-level institution worth it's salt. Now, there's a difference between full-time academic staff, who are paid a salary, plus expenses, and dedicated lecturing staff, who are generally paid by the hour and are usually not involved in research.
Rubbish look at Moore McDowell. what has he published in a peer reviewed journal in the past decade? Once an academic has tenure they need produce nothing.0 -
Advertisement
-
I don't know. What's your point?mountainyman wrote: »Rubbish look at Moore McDowell. what has he published in a peer reviewed journal in the past decade?0
Advertisement