Scrap the GTC
‘Child porn sir gets school ban’, ‘Stressed Out Deputy Head Drank Vodka in the Boiler Room!’ ‘Willy row Miss fired’ and ‘PE Sir, 32 romped with pupil’ – are just a few of the tabloid headlines that the disciplinary cases heard by the General Teaching Council have generated. Set up in 2000 the GTC set itself the task of “Championing teachers and advocating change and improvements on their behalf.” Its primary function was to maintain a list of registered teachers and hear disciplinary cases.
The GTC didn’t exactly make an auspicious start billing itself as “the voice of teachers” it instantly ran into union hostility, was it trying to usurp their role? It hastily changed this to “the voice for teachers”.
The planners then erected an unwieldy, creaky edifice called the Council. This body was composed of four sections,
a) 13 people directly appointed by the Secretary of State.
b) 17 members from other quangoes, obviously working on that sound playground principle -'if we let you go on our quango, we can have a go on yours'
c) 25 teachers - elected in a turnout so low that the dullest parliamentary by-election would struggle to emulate it
d) 9 nominees from teacher unions
Even the elected members came from a national ballot and therefore had no identification with or responsibility to a particular area or constituency. This increased the impression of a remote, inaccessible and distant organisation.
After an attempt at “voluntary” contributions resulted in a derisory 14% return the government stepped in to bale them out. We had the surreal scenario of the government sending out a lump sum of money to teachers, and then telling them to send it to the GTC, who processed the cheques.
So the GTC has continued, disregarded by most teachers another unloved orphaned quango competing in the alphabet soup of education – TDA, QCA, OFSTED. The GTC has heard over 100 disciplinary cases at an average cost of £12,000. However, it hasn’t been able to expedite this core function, the average time for a first hearing after a case is referred is over a year.
Apart from the lurid tabloid headlines there have been ridiculous cases like the teacher arraigned before a GTC disciplinary panel for “making silly faces and derogatory remarks about other members of staff, mimicking silly walks and using foul language.” In October 2007 Keith Robinson, a teacher with an unblemished record of thirty three years, was cleared of ‘failing to return library books’ and calling a teenager who swore at him ‘a waste of space’. There but for the grace of God go most of the teaching profession…
Concern has also been expressed by serving members of the GTC about the new ‘suitability declaration’, will teachers have to declare any indiscretions, even those which happened in early adulthood, or personal matters on a GTC form? Would failure to reveal this information lead to sanctions from the GTC?
The statements that underpin the GTC code of conduct are also being reviewed, it currently reads, ‘Registered teachers may be found guilty of unacceptable professional conduct where they seriously demean [my emphasis] or undermine their pupils, their parents, carers or colleagues…’ Under a proposed review this would be changed to ‘cause upset or distress’, a statement so vague that almost any allegation would meet the test for a hearing.
Other concerns centre on the ‘suitability check’, which could be extended to any motoring offence, other than a 3 point fixed penalty, which would be considered as a relevant conviction in terms of ‘unprofessional conduct’.
If those proposals now ‘under review’ weren’t bad enough we have the plans to bring in ‘active registration’ whereby teachers would have to prove that they had undertaken continuing work-based learning. Despite reassurances that this would only apply to supply teachers or those who had taken a break from teaching, the GTC Wales are considering plans for all teachers to record the training they have undertaken on an online database.
Has the GTC won the trust of teachers? The elections for teacher representatives in 2004 saw a turn out of only 10%. The National Association of Schoolteachers carried out a survey, of the respondents 88% felt the GTC was ‘ineffective’, this later led to the GTC threatening them with legal action after they were accused of misusing funds.
To lift its profile the GTC has sent out a free magazine to teachers, now you might have expected a witty irreverent publication chock full of letters, comments and articles by … teachers. No such luck, look away now, another teacher-free zone. I wrote a piece for the GTC magazine only to be informed that they didn’t take material from teachers because,
“objectivity isn’t achieved by a teacher who might be too close to his/her subject,” So the alternative is a bland, safe, ‘house style’ nothing that reflects teachers’ despair, cynicism, humour, hope and elation.
GTC representatives have warned that scrapping it would leave registration with the government. I really don’t ‘buy’ that argument. If you bought a second-hand car that leaked oil everywhere, the engine misfired and the gearbox jammed and you took it back to the dealer, only to be told, ‘our competitors are worse than us’, you wouldn’t be impressed.
Teachers deserve a fast, efficient, responsive regulatory body not this slow, bloated quango that has never won teachers’ trust or confidence. Scrapping the GTC isn’t the most important issue facing teachers; I don’t wake up in the middle of the night thinking ‘We’ve got to scrap the GTC’. But in the spirit of ‘My Name is Earl’, let’s start with number 97 on the list. That’s why I want to stand in the GTC elections on a simple slogan – ‘Scrap the GTC’.
If you want to stand as a ‘Scrap the GTC’ candidate contact me on scrapthegtc@aol.com
Saturday 3 November 2007
Tuesday 24 July 2007
GTC Expenses
There was an interesting post from 'astaire' on the TES Staffroom
'You might encourage people to stand by mentioning that council members get first class travel, excellent accommodation and expenses, AND around £250.00 per day pay, for each day (or part of a day) they are on Council business.'
£250 a day! Nice work if you can get it. No wonder the GTC fees are so high!
There was an interesting post from 'astaire' on the TES Staffroom
'You might encourage people to stand by mentioning that council members get first class travel, excellent accommodation and expenses, AND around £250.00 per day pay, for each day (or part of a day) they are on Council business.'
£250 a day! Nice work if you can get it. No wonder the GTC fees are so high!
Monday 23 July 2007
New Suitability Declaration
I found an interesting post on the TES Staffroom about the new suitability declaration that the GTC are preparing, this from 'Serving member' -
The new suitability declaration: currently this will be trialed for 1 year for student teachers. Next year existing teachers will have to sign the declaration.
Soon every teacher in the country will have to declare any indiscretions, even those which happened in childhood or early adulthood, or those which are entirely personal, on a GTCE form. Failure to do so will risk a sanction from the GTCE, up to and including a prohibition order.
GTCE council members have been concerned for some time about the public perception of the GTCE intruding into the personal lives of teachers. Such concerns were first raised in council meetings in Autumn 2004. Recently concerns have been raised again on the members’ extranet, in the lights of the proposed suitability checks which have been railroaded past council members at the behest of the GTCE management.
Recently there have been two cases where ‘affairs’ between two consenting adults have been judged to be unacceptable professional conduct. There are three more such cases in the pipeline for hearings. Many council members are worried that the GTCE management’s determination to pursue such cases are irrevocably undermining the GTCE’s regulatory reputation amongst the teaching profession, and beyond.
Furthermore there is a real concern that the statements underpinning the code of conduct are being subverted. These statements are due to be reviewed during the next year, but council members are asking whether teachers will really have an opportunity to voice their views or whether changes will simply be railroaded through by the GTCE management.
In particular, paragraph one of the code of conduct currently reads: “Registered teachers may be found to be guilty of unacceptable professional conductwhere they: Seriously demean or undermine pupils, their parents, carers or colleagues, or act towards them in a manner which is discriminatory in relation to gender, marital status, religion, belief, colour, race, ethnicity, class, sexual orientation, disability or age”.
Under the proposed review, this statement will now read:“Registered teachers may be found to be guilty of unacceptable professional conduct where they: Cause upset or distress or undermine pupils, their parents, carers or colleagues, or act towards them in a manner which is upsetting or distressing in relation to gender, marital status, religion, belief, colour, race, ethnicity, class, sexual orientation, disability or age”.
This statement is now so vague, almost any allegation will now meet the test for a hearing – i.e. a prima facie case to answer against the teacher and a good chance of a sanction being found against a teacher. This is deeply disturbing.
Recent hearings and investigatory committee discussions we have had sight of have also raised a number of key areas were such loose language is likely to be exploited. Already allegations are being made against lesbian, gay and bisexual teachers based on remarks they might have said in relation to their sexuality which have been alleged to have been discriminatory or demeaning. Under the new clause, any behaviour which can be argued to have caused upset or distress could merit an investigation. If the trickle of recent referrals is anything to go by, there will be a barrage of lesbian, gay and bisexual members before the council in 2008/2009 charged with simply asserting their sexuality and thereby committing acts of unacceptable professional conduct. Such a code of conduct has no place in our society, or in the teaching profession. All the teachers in England have a right to contribute to the new code of conduct - not just the privileged few.
Another real concern is the proposed suitability check, which if successful, the GTCE management plan to extend to all existing teacher members. Concerns in the past regarding the declaration of driving offences were raised, but at previous council meetings the decision was made to pursue only serious drunk driving offence convictions. However, this will now to be extended to dangerous driving. In fact any motoring offences other than 3 point fixed penalties are now to be considered as a relevant conviction in terms of unacceptable professional conduct. These convictions will be considered retrospectively.
The concern is, and there is much recent evidence at GTCE hearings to support this, that some LEAs keep knowledge of such allegations in reserve, especially for headteachers. Since the GTCE does not, and never has enforced the statutory 30 day deadline for allegations, allegations can be unearthed years later. Since the registration requirement does not apply for convictions or police investigations, this means that events which occurred well before the inception of the GTCE will be considered, as has already been the case. Already this practice is common with criminal convictions and a useful way for LEAs to prune their pool of headteachers. Now it will be extended to minor offences and investigated allegations, regardless of the outcomes.
We understand that every teacher member will have to sign the suitability declaration after the 1 year trial for new members.
We also understand that the GTCE management intend to use the declaration to bar from teaching anyone who has had an abuse allegation made against them, as part of post Bichard framework. This act would be swingeing and unfair on those maliciously accused. We hope the GTCE management will reconsider for the sake of the integrity of self-regulation within the teaching professions.
This really is 'deeply disturbing' the case of teachers being disciplined for having an affair? As one post noted John Prescott is caught 'in flagrante delicto' with his diary secretary and that is viewed as a perk of the job. Yet, when it comes to teachers...
I found an interesting post on the TES Staffroom about the new suitability declaration that the GTC are preparing, this from 'Serving member' -
The new suitability declaration: currently this will be trialed for 1 year for student teachers. Next year existing teachers will have to sign the declaration.
Soon every teacher in the country will have to declare any indiscretions, even those which happened in childhood or early adulthood, or those which are entirely personal, on a GTCE form. Failure to do so will risk a sanction from the GTCE, up to and including a prohibition order.
GTCE council members have been concerned for some time about the public perception of the GTCE intruding into the personal lives of teachers. Such concerns were first raised in council meetings in Autumn 2004. Recently concerns have been raised again on the members’ extranet, in the lights of the proposed suitability checks which have been railroaded past council members at the behest of the GTCE management.
Recently there have been two cases where ‘affairs’ between two consenting adults have been judged to be unacceptable professional conduct. There are three more such cases in the pipeline for hearings. Many council members are worried that the GTCE management’s determination to pursue such cases are irrevocably undermining the GTCE’s regulatory reputation amongst the teaching profession, and beyond.
Furthermore there is a real concern that the statements underpinning the code of conduct are being subverted. These statements are due to be reviewed during the next year, but council members are asking whether teachers will really have an opportunity to voice their views or whether changes will simply be railroaded through by the GTCE management.
In particular, paragraph one of the code of conduct currently reads: “Registered teachers may be found to be guilty of unacceptable professional conductwhere they: Seriously demean or undermine pupils, their parents, carers or colleagues, or act towards them in a manner which is discriminatory in relation to gender, marital status, religion, belief, colour, race, ethnicity, class, sexual orientation, disability or age”.
Under the proposed review, this statement will now read:“Registered teachers may be found to be guilty of unacceptable professional conduct where they: Cause upset or distress or undermine pupils, their parents, carers or colleagues, or act towards them in a manner which is upsetting or distressing in relation to gender, marital status, religion, belief, colour, race, ethnicity, class, sexual orientation, disability or age”.
This statement is now so vague, almost any allegation will now meet the test for a hearing – i.e. a prima facie case to answer against the teacher and a good chance of a sanction being found against a teacher. This is deeply disturbing.
Recent hearings and investigatory committee discussions we have had sight of have also raised a number of key areas were such loose language is likely to be exploited. Already allegations are being made against lesbian, gay and bisexual teachers based on remarks they might have said in relation to their sexuality which have been alleged to have been discriminatory or demeaning. Under the new clause, any behaviour which can be argued to have caused upset or distress could merit an investigation. If the trickle of recent referrals is anything to go by, there will be a barrage of lesbian, gay and bisexual members before the council in 2008/2009 charged with simply asserting their sexuality and thereby committing acts of unacceptable professional conduct. Such a code of conduct has no place in our society, or in the teaching profession. All the teachers in England have a right to contribute to the new code of conduct - not just the privileged few.
Another real concern is the proposed suitability check, which if successful, the GTCE management plan to extend to all existing teacher members. Concerns in the past regarding the declaration of driving offences were raised, but at previous council meetings the decision was made to pursue only serious drunk driving offence convictions. However, this will now to be extended to dangerous driving. In fact any motoring offences other than 3 point fixed penalties are now to be considered as a relevant conviction in terms of unacceptable professional conduct. These convictions will be considered retrospectively.
The concern is, and there is much recent evidence at GTCE hearings to support this, that some LEAs keep knowledge of such allegations in reserve, especially for headteachers. Since the GTCE does not, and never has enforced the statutory 30 day deadline for allegations, allegations can be unearthed years later. Since the registration requirement does not apply for convictions or police investigations, this means that events which occurred well before the inception of the GTCE will be considered, as has already been the case. Already this practice is common with criminal convictions and a useful way for LEAs to prune their pool of headteachers. Now it will be extended to minor offences and investigated allegations, regardless of the outcomes.
We understand that every teacher member will have to sign the suitability declaration after the 1 year trial for new members.
We also understand that the GTCE management intend to use the declaration to bar from teaching anyone who has had an abuse allegation made against them, as part of post Bichard framework. This act would be swingeing and unfair on those maliciously accused. We hope the GTCE management will reconsider for the sake of the integrity of self-regulation within the teaching professions.
This really is 'deeply disturbing' the case of teachers being disciplined for having an affair? As one post noted John Prescott is caught 'in flagrante delicto' with his diary secretary and that is viewed as a perk of the job. Yet, when it comes to teachers...
Sunday 22 July 2007
Scrap the GTC!
1. The General Teaching Council has never won teachers’ confidence. A survey by the National Association of Schoolteachers found that 88% of its members thought the GTC was ‘ineffective’. The turnout in the last GTC elections in 2004 was a derisory 10%.
2. The disciplinary process is slow, expensive and cumbersome. Teachers can wait for anything up to a year before their case is heard. The average cost of a hearing is £12,000.
3. The GTC has failed to speak out on issues that affect teachers. The ‘voice for teachers’? A bad case of laryngitis.
4. Some of the cases that have gone to disciplinary hearings have been trivial. Why was a teacher charged (and subsequently cleared) with “making silly faces and derogatory remarks about other members of staff, mimicking silly walks and using foul language”?
5. The new suitability declaration, where teachers will have to declare any indiscretions which happened in childhood or early adulthood or those that are entirely personal is an intrusion.
6. The GTC has failed to communicate with teachers or to allow teachers to express opinions. The termly GTC magazine is almost entirely teacher-free. Meetings with teachers are rarely held.
7. Money spent on the ‘Teacher Learning Academy’ is just another example of teachers paying for their own training. The GTC should concentrate on one job, maintaining a register of teachers, and do it well.
8. When it was established in 2000 the GTC set itself the task of “Championing teachers and advocating change and improvements on their behalf”. By its own standards it has been an abysmal failure.
9. The GTC has never been financially independent. When only 14% of teachers were willing to make ‘voluntary contributions’ the government had to step in and paid teachers an extra £33 which was then taken out of our wages.
10. Scrapping the GTC isn’t the most important issue facing teachers. Most of us don’t wake up in the morning and think, ‘We’ve got to scrap the GTC!’ But in the spirit of ‘My Name is Earl’ let’s start with number 97 on the list.
1. The General Teaching Council has never won teachers’ confidence. A survey by the National Association of Schoolteachers found that 88% of its members thought the GTC was ‘ineffective’. The turnout in the last GTC elections in 2004 was a derisory 10%.
2. The disciplinary process is slow, expensive and cumbersome. Teachers can wait for anything up to a year before their case is heard. The average cost of a hearing is £12,000.
3. The GTC has failed to speak out on issues that affect teachers. The ‘voice for teachers’? A bad case of laryngitis.
4. Some of the cases that have gone to disciplinary hearings have been trivial. Why was a teacher charged (and subsequently cleared) with “making silly faces and derogatory remarks about other members of staff, mimicking silly walks and using foul language”?
5. The new suitability declaration, where teachers will have to declare any indiscretions which happened in childhood or early adulthood or those that are entirely personal is an intrusion.
6. The GTC has failed to communicate with teachers or to allow teachers to express opinions. The termly GTC magazine is almost entirely teacher-free. Meetings with teachers are rarely held.
7. Money spent on the ‘Teacher Learning Academy’ is just another example of teachers paying for their own training. The GTC should concentrate on one job, maintaining a register of teachers, and do it well.
8. When it was established in 2000 the GTC set itself the task of “Championing teachers and advocating change and improvements on their behalf”. By its own standards it has been an abysmal failure.
9. The GTC has never been financially independent. When only 14% of teachers were willing to make ‘voluntary contributions’ the government had to step in and paid teachers an extra £33 which was then taken out of our wages.
10. Scrapping the GTC isn’t the most important issue facing teachers. Most of us don’t wake up in the morning and think, ‘We’ve got to scrap the GTC!’ But in the spirit of ‘My Name is Earl’ let’s start with number 97 on the list.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)