Are the teachers living in the real world?

Alcatel

bobbyjoe wrote: »

Don't see any reason why not. Nothing stopping it from happening now except the pay thing. They might not be so happy working for less than their colleagues.

It's a business, not a friendship. They're getting more than they would at home - indeed, when I was working in Germany they nearly fell around laughing at the idea of our school holidays. 3 months for secondary school, when they're in working from 8.30 in the morning right through most of the summer? Wow, they thought.

Use it as an opportunity to break the goddamn unions.

bobbyjoe

Alcatel wrote: »

It's a business, not a friendship. They're getting more than they would at home - indeed, when I was working in Germany they nearly fell around laughing at the idea of our school holidays. 3 months for secondary school, when they're in working from 8.30 in the morning right through most of the summer? Wow, they thought.

Use it as an opportunity to break the goddamn unions.

How come they are not all doing it then?

Alcatel

bobbyjoe wrote: »

How come they are not all doing it then?

Lack of creative imagination and willingness? You could ask the same about all the nurses and doctors we have from around the world, filling very critical gaps we had. We got them because we went out and actively attracted them, and made it easy for them: Step 1 - 4 of going to work in Ireland.

bobbyjoe

Alcatel wrote: »

Lack of creative imagination and willingness? You could ask the same about all the nurses and doctors we have from around the world, filling very critical gaps we had. We got them because we went out and actively attracted them, and made it easy for them: Step 1 - 4 of going to work in Ireland.

We have lots of foreign nurses because Irish nurses leave cos the pay is so crap. Do we really want the same for education? Classes of graduates heading for the boat again.

Alcatel

bobbyjoe wrote: »

We have lots of foreign nurses because Irish nurses leave cos the pay is so crap. Do we really want the same for education? Classes of graduates heading for the boat again.

I don't think we'd miss our teachers if they were replaced with European counterparts; and I doubt they'll get a better paying gig elsewhere.

bobbyjoe

Alcatel wrote: »

I don't think we'd miss our teachers if they were replaced with European counterparts; and I doubt they'll get a better paying gig elsewhere.

I think they would be missed. If we want a yellow pack education system to join our health system at the bottom.

jimmmy

bobbyjoe wrote: »

I think they would be missed.

I read that 24% of the Irish adult population is illiterate. Given our teachers are amonst the highest paid in the world, with far more holidays and far more days off and less hours per week than their European counterparts, and a far higher salary than the European average, they would indeed be missed

In general, they / their union representatives have a lot to answer for. Shame on them.

bobbyjoe

jimmmy wrote: »

I read that 24% of the Irish adult population is illiterate. Given our teachers are amonst the highest paid in the world, with far more holidays and far more days off and less hours per week than their European counterparts, and a far higher salary than the European average, they would indeed be missed

In general, they / their union representatives have a lot to answer for. Shame on them.

You reckon thats teachers faults? They are the only one's who have been fighting for literacy programs, special needs teachers more resources etc. Now all thats being cut so expect that figure to rise even more. Whats shameful is the underfunding of the system.

otwb

jimmmy wrote: »

I read that 24% of the Irish adult population is illiterate. Given our teachers are amonst the highest paid in the world, with far more holidays and far more days off and less hours per week than their European counterparts, and a far higher salary than the European average, they would indeed be missed

In general, they / their union representatives have a lot to answer for. Shame on them.

Reference to where you got this figure Jimmmy please.

snubbleste

bobbyjoe wrote: »

We have lots of foreign nurses because Irish nurses leave cos the pay is so crap. Do we really want the same for education? Classes of graduates heading for the boat again.

The pay for nurses is so bad compared to where?

BubbleWrap85

From today's Independent:

Anyone worried by Kevin Myers' likening on Tuesday of Ireland's economic situation to the 'Titanic' can take comfort in the fact that his purported economic analysis is probably on a par with his demonstrated ignorance of the education system.
Let's start with putting the record straight on education. The fact is that primary school classes in Ireland are the second most overcrowded in the EU. In numerical terms, this means that Irish teachers teach 20pc more pupils than their EU colleagues. The school year for primary pupils is 16pc longer than the OECD average and, thanks to the good work of teachers and the support of parents, literacy scores in Ireland for young people are among the highest in the world.
Contrary to what he suggests, Irish teachers are not the best paid in Europe.
Mr Myers then goes on to suggest that about 40pc of teachers are absent or on leave. This is nothing more than the lazy regurgitation of the Education Minister's pre-Christmas propaganda designed to deflect from his savage cuts.
It obviously escaped Mr Myers' notice but last week, Batt O'Keeffe acknowledged his error and apologised. The minister is well aware that only about one in a 100 primary teachers is absent on any given day -- a remarkably low figure considering the substandard conditions in which many work.
And, as anyone with even a rudimentary knowledge of the schools system knows, teachers who don't teach a class every day are not absent or on leave as Mr Myers suggests but doing a variety of jobs, including teaching special-needs children. Another error peddled by Mr Myers on Tuesday is that the public service is immune from government cutbacks and remains intact. That argument is untrue when it comes to primary teaching as over 1,000 qualified teachers will testify next September when they have to sign on the dole.
But it is Mr Myers' comparison of today's teachers with first-class passengers in the life boats of the 'Titanic' which is delusional. There are not, and never were, any teachers in the staterooms. In 1912, each first-class passenger paid $4,350 for passage on the 'Titanic' -- a sum just as far out of reach of teachers today as it was 97 years ago.
The equivalent sum today would be little more than petty cash to bankers, developers, speculators and less than the annual salary of senior politicians, consultants and media superstars. When it comes to luxury on that scale, teachers' salaries just don't cut it.
Despite that, teacher unions were among the first to recognise the economic crisis and sought a fair tax system where everyone would make an increased contribution. We argued that services like primary education could not be sustained on PD tax levels.
Rightly, teachers insisted that those with other forms of wealth should be asked to make a contribution. Properly we refused to accept that only those with means could reserve a seat in the lifeboats.
Contrary to what Mr Myers suggests, teachers, in criticising the Government's handling of the economic crisis, never sought to be made a special case but simply looked for a modicum of fairness and equity in tackling the downturn.
In April 1912, survival chances were doubled by privilege and wealth. Although post-colonial Ireland did much to sideline rank and royalty, recent governments allowed the re-emergence of a privileged class of bankers, developers and speculators. Mr Myers appears offended by the fact that ordinary workers like teachers object to letting those who steered the ship towards the iceberg sail off in the lifeboats.
The proposition that a fairer taxation system would lead to a revival of the criminal tax evasion of the 1980s could be easily tackled if government was prepared to deal properly with offenders. Mr Myers appears to suggest that by asking everyone to pay their fair share, tax dodgers will get seats in the lifeboats. That will only happen if government continues to offer preference to cronies.
Mr Myers concludes with a wish to spend less time working for the Revenue Commissioners, enabling him to spend more time working for himself. An easy solution to that is to take up a salaried post in the PAYE sector where he wouldn't have to bother about the potential for tax evasion. The downside is that tax due has to be paid.
Finally, teachers make no apologies for demanding that children be protected. Even in 1912, children were a priority.
John Carr is General Secretary of the Irish National Teachers' Organisation
- John Carr



Fantastic article IMO. As a primary teacher myself, we've endured a lot of slack in the public eye over the last few weeks - one only has to take a glance at some of the threads on boards, though I must admit to not having read this one in its entirety. Whilst I do believe teachers need to pay their fair share considering the current climate, I also believe that education is something which needs to be valued. Teachers have no problem paying a percentage towards tax if it's fair; what they do have a problem with is unjust cuts which affect the children in their care. Some may argue their only care about their own pockets, but I think this is untrue. Combined with the drastic cuts of the November budget, teachers are outraged that the government can continue to make us pay [in this case, quite literally] without targeting the higher earners.

The lady on the Liveline show complaining she'd only a hundred quid for socialising or not being able to afford her holiday home in Croatia did teachers no favours, but you'll have those asses in all walks of life. The holidays and shorter working day are one of the perks of the job. I for one put in more than my 6 hours a day, and many a day at the weekend has been spent researching content for school, wondering "How can I make this better?", printing pictures, making worksheets, correcting etc. I love my job, and I'm not looking for sympathy, but I think sometimes people need to be a little more tolerant and understanding about the workload that we do undertake. Yes I'm happy with my pay, but by no means is it much better than any other public sector workers. Check out cso for comparisons!

johnnyc

otwb wrote: »

Reference to where you got this figure Jimmmy please.

Searched google but the stat is from 1997 its down at the bottom of the page


http://www.finfacts.ie/finfactsblog/2007_12_01_archive.html


Half a million Irish adults (a quarter of the adult population) are functionally illiterate - a figure that shocked us when it was published in an international study in 1997. But it didn't shock us so much that we know what the figure is now.''

irish_bob

bobbyjoe wrote: »

We have lots of foreign nurses because Irish nurses leave cos the pay is so crap. Do we really want the same for education? Classes of graduates heading for the boat again.

you sir are a grade A moron , we have the highest paid nurses in the EU in this country

nice_guy80

reference for nurses pay?

ardmacha

Ireland's ranking in reading literacy is 2nd out of 20 European countries, while our average class size at Primary level is the highest of the 17 countries for which data are available.

http://www.education.ie/admin/servlet/blobservlet/des_educ_trends_chapter06.htm

Poor literacy is found in many countries. Ireland has decent educational outcomes for below average expenditure per student at all levels. Education is by no means the less efficient part of the public service or the economy.

bobbyjoe

irish_bob wrote: »

you sir are a grade A moron , we have the highest paid nurses in the EU in this country

No need for the abuse or to call me sir I consider you an equal.

asdasd

Not to take sides but 3 points on "illiteracy":

1) 25% of the irish population is "functionally" illiterate, not illiterate. From wikipedia

An illiterate person cannot read or write at all, for all practical purposes. A functionally illiterate person can read and possibly write simple sentences with a limited vocabulary, but cannot read or write well enough to deal with the everyday requirements of life in his own society.

The last bit is dubious because i have no idea what they mean by "cannot read or write well enough to deal with the everyday requirements of life in his own society" means. They may be defining tabloid readers who can't write coherently in paragraphs etc, but we see that on boards. 25% of the population may not need to write well to survive, or read well to survive.

2) the present generation of teachers cannot be held responsible for older generations - this survey was 1997, 27 years after free education was introduced for secondary school: age 13. So people over the age of forty were less likely to have more than primary school education.

3) survey was 1997. For the reasons I give in 2) it probably does not apply now.

randylonghorn

asdasd wrote: »

The last bit is dubious because i have no idea what they mean by "cannot read or write well enough to deal with the everyday requirements of life in his own society" means. They may be defining tabloid readers who can't write coherently in paragraphs etc, but we see that on boards.

No, functional illiteracy refers to people, while they have some basic ability to read and write, cannot read and write at a level which allows them to do things for themselves which are normally required of adults.

They may be able to pick up a child's reader, and read "Mark and Sally went to the shop, and bought ice-cream", but they cannot cope with filling forms, or applying for a job, or probably even getting the necessary information from a job ad.

That may be a somewhat simplistic explanation, but I'm trying to give people a sense of what is meant, not a technical definition!

asdasd

but they cannot cope with filling forms, or applying for a job, or probably even getting the necessary information from a job ad.

I doubt that 25% of the adult population is unemployable.

randylonghorn

asdasd wrote: »

I doubt that 25% of the adult population is unemployable.

I didn't say that, nor does the definition.

While yes, some of that small band of unemployed who were always around even while the tiger was puffing out its chest would have fallen into this category, there are many people with low levels of literacy who hold down jobs, though usually lower paid jobs: manual workers, farm workers, construction (in the days!), casual labourers, etc.

They have become very proficient at disguising their low levels of skill. Two examples of people I knew myself might serve to illustrate. One was an old farm worker on a neighbouring farm near where I grew up. He loved the horses and putting on a wee bet, and many's the hour I spent perched on a wall reading the racing paper to him as he worked. When it came time to fill the betting slip, his hands were always dirty, and I got the job ... "shure they'll kill me down in the bookies if I hand them in a slip with muck all over it again!". He would then hand in his pre-filled betting slip to the bookies with no-one any the wiser, or at least so he thought, and bring a battered old transistor radio around from place to place with him the next day to listen to the races and / or the results.

The other person who immediately springs to mind owned a pub. He was severely dyslexic and could barely write his own name. He was also highly intelligent, and could for example do mental maths at a level and speed that left me open-mouthed, and my maths were fairly good. As he prepared to open the pub each day, he would listen to the news and "It says in the papers" and any current affairs programme that was on. By the time they opened, he would be sitting with the paper and a coffee beside him, and would engage the customers in conversation about the events of the day as if he had just completed reading the paper from cover to cover. In his case, very few people actually knew he couldn't read.

Neither of those people could fill a form or read an advertisement; in fact, in both those cases, they couldn't even read the instructions on the side of a packet.

asdasd

nice anecdotes but neither of these two people "cannot read or write well enough to deal with the everyday requirements of life in his own society".

Clearly they get on. I think the definition too broad.

randylonghorn

asdasd wrote: »

I think the definition too broad.

Well, if you google for the OECD website, I'm sure they have an email address for suggestions!

Seriously, the definitions aren't about whether someone manages to hold down a job or not, they are about the level at which a person can read. Both the cases above were fully illiterate, not just functionally illiterate. Yes they both survived ... the first fairly much at subsistence level, the second ended up a fairly wealthy man. But they still couldn't read or write. they certainly couldn't read or write at the level to be expected of a functioning adult in their day, let alone now.

And that's an important point ... both those men are well over 70 now, and lived in an era where high levels of literacy weren't as important, broadly speaking. Do you really think they would do even so well if they were 18 in to-day's society? ... where not just old-fashioned literacy but computer literacy are seen as a standard basic minimum for everyone?

asdasd

Do you really think they would do even so well if they were 18 in to-day's society? ... where not just old-fashioned literacy but computer literacy are seen as a standard basic minimum for everyone?

Oh I bet Txtspk would be measured by the OECD as funtional illiteracy. Many 17 years olds who can communicate well enough with their peers may not have the written skills to write a proper email, but that is not necessary outside of Office work. It is not essential in retail ( scanning), hospitality, construction and so on. Some of these have deskilled in the last generation.

i think they overestimate how literate people need to be to function, and therefore the definition is meaningless.

( But we are off topic. I brought that up to defend teachers a bit)

randylonghorn

asdasd wrote: »

Oh I bet Txtspk would be measured by the OECD as functional illiteracy.

Actually, probably not. But *I* would define it as such! :pac:

asdasd wrote: »

i think they overestimate how literate people need to be to function, and therefore the definition is meaningless.

( But we are off topic. I brought that up to defend teachers a bit)

I'm not sure I agree ... "to function" and "to function normally in society" are not quite the same thing.

But you're right, we are OT ... though that might be a relief to everyone, tbh! :pac:

nice_guy80

then again, today's generation are fairly literate in computers and technology etc so to make comparisons with literacy levels of previous generations is a bit superfulous

but as figures say, ireland is a very literate country.

if 25% of people are illiterate, might it be due more to the fact that they never HAVE TO use their reading or writing skills in work?

jimmmy

johnnyc wrote: »

Searched google but the stat is from 1997 its down at the bottom of the page


http://www.finfacts.ie/finfactsblog/2007_12_01_archive.html


Half a million Irish adults (a quarter of the adult population) are functionally illiterate - a figure that shocked us when it was published in an international study in 1997. But it didn't shock us so much that we know what the figure is now.''

And yet our teachers are paid so much more than the European average, and they work far fewer hours, and take more holidays ....no wonder a quarter of Irish adults are illiterate.

P. Breathnach

jimmmy wrote: »

And yet our teachers are paid so much more than the European average, and they work far fewer hours, and take more holidays ....no wonder a quarter of Irish adults are illiterate.

There is a difference between functional illiteracy (a concept as arguable as relative poverty) and illiteracy.

You might say that when somebody reads something and fails to grasp its meaning, it is an indicator of functional illiteracy. Like reading that somebody is functionally illiterate and reporting that he is illiterate.

jimmmy

Its only one pointer which indicates our standard of education is nothing to be proud of, despite the fact we overpay our teachers so much. Maybe if our teachers did not have as much time off as they do ?

P. Breathnach

jimmmy wrote: »

Its only one pointer which indicates our standard of education is nothing to be proud of, despite the fact we overpay our teachers so much. Maybe if our teachers did not have as much time off as they do ?

I think that you failed to comprehend what I wrote.

jimmmy

P. Breathnach wrote: »

I think that you failed to comprehend what I wrote.

You think incorrectly, as indeed I comprehended fully what you wrote. There is no evidence you comprehended fully what I wrote. While you can argue about adult illiterancy in Ireland - and there is a problem there - you must also look at the bigger picture ( eg how our universities compare with others around the world ) in order to evaluate the success or otherwise of our education system. This thread is then more about the poor value for money teachers are giving the country.