Contrast the findings of the government-funded UK Commission for Employment and Skills (Ukces) review into further and higher education, which calls for yet more league tables – this time in FE – with the Cambridge Primary Review that calls for formal learning to begin later than at present.

The first is funded by the Government and lo-and-behold it is full of praise for existing Government policy and in the Guardian the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills is quoted as saying: “We work very closely with Ukces and warmly welcome their valuable insight on improving the skills system.”

The latter isn’t funded by the Government and, unsurprisingly, its findings are rejected.

This whole corruption of education research is reminiscent of Tony Blair at the time of the Iraq war fabricating intelligence to fit his own messianic designs. Look where that got us.

1.
“”There has been a significant improvement in retention,” says media curriculum manager, Perry Perrott.” and:

2. “As a consequence, he says that there has been a reduction in the number of students dropping out of courses.”

Now, let’s examine these passages in more detail. At the Gloucestershire College website there is no public access to this data so it can’t be verified. In other words, we have to trust Mr Perrott and the College that their figures are exact and have been analysed correctly.

This doesn’t seem too much to ask. But should a BBC journalist – Sean Coughlan – be taking them at their word? Shouldn’t the journalist mention in the very same article that the data has or hasn’t been verified? We’ll never know if he did because it isn’t mentioned.

Despite Auntie’s mission to be objective and impartial, this article through not checking its facts, has failed. It would be interesting to know what motivated Mr. Coughlan to write this article. Education journalists are no different to others and must act to identify PR parading as news. The links and information in this article do nothing to prove or demonstrate that Facebook improves retention rates. It only says it does.

The same applies to all of the other assertions made:

1. “Gloucestershire College says social networking is used to keep students informed and in touch with staff.”

2. “Using such teenager-friendly communication tools has a “positive effect on motivation”, says the government’s technology agency, Becta.”

3. “”We’re embracing it rather than fighting it,” says Mr Perrott. He says Facebook pages for individual courses help the students to bond with each other, work together as a team and maintain their connection with staff.”

4. “Students on media-related courses at the college use the social networking website to get information about assignments and to access help either from other students or from staff.”

5. “These are closed group pages, with designated times when lecturers will check for questions or messages and when students can have discussions about their courses.”

6. “When the use of such websites was so widespread among students, Mr Perrott said it made sense for colleges to take advantage.”

7. “With social networking also available through mobile phones, it means that students can keep in touch with each other and be given support outside of class.”

8. “As a practical example, he says students had been asking each about what was needed for an assignment – and he was able to intervene and explain, allowing the work to be handed in on time.”

9. “”This can be a properly managed way of sharing information,” he says.”

10. “It was also used as a way of keeping in touch with students who were about to start courses, helping them to make contact with future course mates.”

11. “At City of Sunderland College, a pilot scheme using Facebook has found it useful as a way of reminding students about deadlines.”

12. “Lynne Hardy, a lecturer in biology and physiology, says that students can often forget when work needs to be completed and this is a way of “giving them a gentle prod”.”

13. “”Students are already familiar with it, they’re very comfortable with using it,” she says.”

14. “”Technology is no longer an optional extra – and modern trends such as social networking should not be ignored,” says Jane Williams of Becta, the government’s educational technology agency.”

15. “”Virtual learning environments, simulations such as Second Life and social networking sites can have a positive effect on motivation and attainment across the further education sector,” says Ms Williams, executive director for further education, regeneration and delivery.”

16. “”With social networking technologies, you can communicate to many students easily and quickly at next to no cost, which is increasingly important in a world where budgets are under pressure.”"

There is no evidence. Therefore, you can’t make these claims.

Aren’t they supposed to have the interests of their members to look after?

Further education lecturer, Barnet

Diana Whelham
Salary: £26,780

* Leo Benedictus
* Society Guardian,
* Thursday March 20 2003
* Article history

About this article
Close
This article was first published on guardian.co.uk on Thursday March 20 2003. It was last updated at 23:43 on March 19 2003.
Diana Whelham

Diana Whelham

The biggest problem for me and my colleagues at the moment is the way our workload isn’t being recognised. We work to a 23-hour week and the new management is trying to get us to accept a 25-hour contract as part of its restructuring.

This might sound easy, but it doesn’t take into account all the administrative parts of the job, the marking or the time spent talking to students and parents. It all adds up to another 20 hours a week, which makes it very difficult to find time to prepare my students’ work properly within the working day.

What’s more, we’re being asked to meet more and more targets for things like language training and dealing with mental health problems. And, of course, in further education we don’t get classroom assistants so, as an art and film teacher, I have to go out and buy all the materials and everything we need. All this makes it extremely hard for me to keep reading up on my subject or actually make it to the cinema.

The new contract offers a small extra increment in pay, but I can’t support it. It’s not about the money, it’s about impossible workload. We’re all feeling very demoralised. There are other schools and colleges in the area which have accepted it, but we’ve resisted for a long time, with the help of our union, Natfhe, which has been excellent.

Last year’s inspection was incredibly stressful, although in the end it went reasonably well and we had good responses from the students. It worries me that, under these conditions, the teaching they receive will eventually be impaired. To some managers, targets have become more important than students.

People forget that we teachers are here because we want to do it, it’s a vocation to us. And yet we have so many targets to meet that we don’t have time to build relationships with students or discuss issues in class. I’m thinking about moving out of the profession, and that’s a real shame.

The good news is I’ve moved into my own art hut, which is great, although I can feel a little bit isolated. Luckily, my colleagues are absolutely brilliant people. It’s their support that energises me – that’s what keeps us all going.

Public voices: March 21 2002

Further education lecturer, Barnet
Salary: £25,000

The main change that has affected my work in the last 12 months is the further reduction to course teaching hours. This does not mean that I have less work to do. The opposite is true – I now have to teach the same syllabus in less time. This in turn means I have to teach extra classes, which means more students to deal with, more marking and more preparation.

My college is also due for an inspection in April, so I will be spending more time than usual working at home. Inspection is a really stressful time for all teachers because we have to fit in even more paperwork into our already very busy schedules. We are also observed and graded on our performance in the classroom.

I think that most FE lecturers feel there are just not enough hours in the day to do the job properly these days. We have recently received a small pay rise which helps a little bit. This was funded by the Teacher’s Pay Incentive initiative, which is intended to keep qualified and experienced teachers in the classroom. Frankly though, I think it’s going to take quite a lot more than this to avoid a shortfall in the numbers of lecturers working in the sector. We have been fighting for parity of pay with teachers for a long time now and most of us feel our wages are not in accordance with our qualifications and experience.

Despite this, I can honestly say that I love teaching and feel that I am privileged to be able to do the work that I do. I am still really enthusiastic about the subjects that I teach (art and film) and to see a student pick up on an idea or develop something creative is a real thrill. As a result my work is genuinely rewarding a lot of the time and I regard myself as committed to my job. I am also very lucky to work with fabulous colleagues who are all very supportive and caring.

Unfortunately though, the increased stress and tiredness make it more and more likely that I will change the direction of my career into an area where I will feel more valued generally.
Lou Alexander

The Common Good: March 21 2001

Further education lecturer, Barnet
Salary: £24,500

Most FE lecturers feel extremely demoralised at the moment. This is mainly because their pay levels have fallen drastically behind school teachers who do a very similar job. There are constant pressures to teach more hours each week too.

This is especially frustrating because we perform such an important role. A lot of 16 year olds do not have access to sixth forms at their schools and so they have to come to us to gain any further qualifications.

As a London college it is also true to say that most of our students come from groups which tend to underachieve academically. Many also have social and family problems. Consequently, they are especially in need of dedicated teaching staff who can give them plenty of attention.

In my experience, most FE lecturers work very hard. Their jobs, like many other public sector workers’ jobs, have been made even more difficult by the increase in paperwork. This means they have less time to deal with student problems and the development of their skills. On the other hand we are also being pushed constantly to improve examination results. We are caught in the middle and it is often the students who suffer.

Many people believe that teachers have ridiculously long holidays, but believe me, we need them.

Another example of Guardian spin. Lies, lies, lies.

The following response is indicative of the rest:

“I would have thought that it was quite obvious what makes a good teacher in this day and age. The ability to cope with enormous amounts of administrative paper-work including individual lesson plans for every lesson of every day taken down to individual targets for each child in the class. Ability to enjoy pointless and meaningless paper chases to satisfy regulators and local authorities. Ability to be able to ignore all legislation relating to European Working Hours Directives. The ability to accept criticism from failed teachers and advisors who populate a self-sustaining OFSTED system. The ability to accept continuous and unfounded criticism of everything they do by people who always know better, no matter how poorly qualified. The ability to be able to adapt to every ill conceived and poorly thought through initiative. There are certainly enough Teachers willing to be creatively subversive, but OFSTED is not. All of this before they even get anywhere near children, who after all are now secondary to league table results in the exam factory mentality which now exists. But still they do get such lovely long holidays and good pay.”
Orlando F.Stead, Manchester, UK

“Over 2,000 teachers and trainers have registered as members of the Institute for Learning (IfL) since its new website and online registration facility went live on Saturday 1 September 2007, increasing the professional body’s membership to nearly 5,000.

In line with new regulations that came into force at the beginning of September, all FE college teachers have to register as members of IfL, undertake at least 30 hours’ continuing professional development (CPD) each year and abide by a code of professional practice. These regulations form part of the Government’s wider FE workforce reforms, which collectively support the National Improvement Strategy for FE designed to create a qualified workforce with a sustainable culture of professionalism.

Lee Davies, operations manager at IfL, said, “We are delighted that our new website and online registration went live successfully, on the target date, and that so many teachers took advantage of the new facility to register as members over the weekend.

“There has been widespread support for professionalising the FE workforce, and we welcome the Government’s decision to invest by meeting the full costs of registration with IfL,” said Mr Davies. “Teachers have a seven-month window in which to register, which means that existing teachers need to register by 31 March 2008.

“In the meantime, we are raising awareness of the importance of CPD and will shortly launch a suite of online tools to support teachers as they reflect on their professional practice and prepare personalised development plans. We are working closely with Lifelong Learning UK and other partner agencies to raise the status of teaching practitioners across the sector, and are very encouraged by the support we’ve received so far from teachers, employers and other stakeholders.”

The Institute for Learning (IfL) was formed in 2002 and is the professional body for teachers, trainers and student teachers in the learning and skills sector, including adult and community and learning, emergency and public services, further education colleges, Ministry of Defence and the armed services, the voluntary sector and work-based learning.

Much of IfL’s work will be guided by two sets of regulations that came into force on 1 September 2007:
> Revised teaching qualifications, including the introduction of licensed practitioner status and differentiation between full and associate teachers

> Remaining in good standing as a teaching professional, including mandatory continuing professional development (CPD) for all teachers.

Under the regulations, all FE college teachers are required to register as members of IfL, undertake CPD each year and abide by the IfL code of professional practice. The regulations are supported by contractual requirements for LSC-funded provision, which will ensure that the scope of the regulations will cover all teachers in the sector.

Teachers new to the sector from September 2007 are additionally required to become licensed practitioners and achieve Qualified Teacher Learning and Skills (QTLS) status or Associate Teacher Learning and Skills (ATLS) status. Although not mandatory for them, existing teachers are also encouraged to become licensed practitioners, as this becomes the future benchmark for the sector.

As a key partner in delivering workforce reform, IfL is responsible for managing this registration process and for conferring licensed practitioner status.

An independent body, IfL is run by an elected council and works closely with several sector organisations, unions and employer bodies.”

http://www.publictechnology.net/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=11583

WHOSE BRIGHT IDEA WAS THIS ONE, THEN? WHO ON EARTH THINKS FE LECTURERS HAVE TIME TO COMPLETE 30 HOURS OF CPD ON TOP OF THEIR CURRENT BUREAUCRATIC-INFESTED WORKLOAD? IS ANYONE AT THE DFES OR WHATEVER YOU CALL IT EVER BEEN A TEACHER?

The answer to FE’s problems is not further training for already demoralised, undervalued and underpaid staff but instead an end to this kind of patronising, heavy-handed and ill-judged
initiative which makes all exisiting teachers feel that they may as well not teach at all and just become a robotic, form-filling, surveillance mouth-piece for a few Dimwits in Victoria.

Existing teachers want to teach. Until The Dimwits can prove that there exists any need to retrain someone who has been teaching for year-on-year without a hitch then The Dimwits will be on a hiding to nothing. How do The Dimwits know that current staff need further training? Have they asked them? Where is your proof that you can distinguish between a good and bad teacher? Are you able to sleep at night knowing that you make a normative judgement about the ability of a teacher on a self-justifying and wholly-unscientific process of observation and surveillance? That it isn’t about the relationship built up between staff and student but about the way paperwork is completed and how well the pre-written, questionable and unproven teaching script is adhered to? Ultimately, isn’t this more about trying to justify yourselves to the voters than what impact it will have on Education? Surely FE staff know what they need? These Institute for Losing Teachers reforms are utter rubbish, a complete waste of time and totally unnecessary, very unnecessary. Stop interfering in what you have no idea about, please, especially as NOT ONE SINGLE ONE OF YOU HAS EVER BEEN TO AN FE COLLEGE. YOU ALL WENT TO OXBRIDGE WHICH MEANS NO MATTER HOW HARD YOU TRY YOU ALWAYS BE UNDER THE MISAPPREHENSION THAT YOU ARE CLEVERER THAN EVERYONE ELSE AND NEVER FULLY CONCEDE THAT YOU HAD UNDERSTANDING PARENTS AND WENT TO GOOD SCHOOLS.

It appears that relationships between senior managers and those lower down the managerial food chain have reached an all-time low. In “College staff ‘bullied’ into new contracts” it is written that “Barnet College has been accused of ‘intimidation’ and ‘harassment’ after sending out letters threatening employees with dismissal if they failed to accept new terms of employment.”

Of course, the College senior management team have replied with the stock and tired argument that they have only been responding to changes in Government funding. This is another example of deliberate buck-passing on behalf of both Government and senior managers, however. Flash Gordon and his cronies are responsible for this ridiculous situation where senior College managers are left with no choice but to bully their own employees into submission causing bitterness and ultimately storing up trouble for the future.

We thought Labour was called Labour for a reason?!

Take Literacy. Why can’t the powers that be understand that in today’s economy higher-level paper-based skills are not as crucial in the world of work as keyboard-based ones? Clearly, a well-structured essay on the importance of feminism to Jane Austen is not going to have as immediate an effect on a individual’s job prospects as learning how to organise an e-mail. Indeed, it could be argued that aside from note-taking and written exams, there is no call for paper-based writing skills in academia and even less so in the world of work. Many more learners would benefit from keyboard skills, both in terms of producing assignments and more significantly, in terms of finding work. Why then do we persist with a focus on writing in the old sense of the term?