Getting rid of TA's

[Scarlettangel]

At our school one of the support assistants is a qualified teacher who has been unable to get a job!

When we advertised about 2 years ago for a level 1 part time temporary position to support another child with special needs about 10 out of the 60 applicants were teachers or had degreees. One bloke even had 2 degrees!

[Guest]

We have TAs who are qualified, from EY qualifications, degrees and EYPS to some qualified to teach adults but quite a few who were as someone said earlier, recruited from being midday supervisors with not even basic maths and English. Any new TAs have to be level 2 qualified at least now in our school. We are all on the same pay bracket, unless we do things that PPA cover as HLTAs, so other that that there is no benefit to being qualified. In nursery we have to have a TA with a L3 EY ( I also have EYPS) but again that is paid at the same rate as the 'general' and SEN TAs.

One thing I have noticed is that the qualified TAs are always more keen to do further training than the unqualified one! Perhaps training in EY and TA makes you lust to learn more!

 

I think almost all of our TAs across the school (1 form entry Nursery to Y6) are now Level 3 trained and we have A LOT of them - mostly part time and four working with statemented SEN children. The issue of qualifications keeps on coming up and with a recent surge of TAs in our school gaining L3 whilst working I wondered if anyone else has had the same issue as us in that one L3 qualified TA may be far more knowledgeable (and dare I say it far more professional!) than the next?

I know that the latest report/advice from Nutbrown suggested big improvements and higher standards for qualifications taken by TAs and EY staff. I have to say that I would agree with this as some of the TAs we have who have gained L3 qualifications do not match up to others with L3 at all but they are paid the same wage.

 

On the Ofsted issue, we had ours not so long ago and support staff were flagged up as not always having a positive impact on children attainment and progress. So value for money is definitely a bit issue around this area. Perhaps as a compromise the government could consider a case of quality over quantity rather than dropping the TA role altogether?

[Guest]

A salary of £17,000 per year - I'd love that. The report forgets that even if a lucky TA does have that salary its then cut on the pro rata system.If a school is a FANTASTIC school they'll value their TAs and use them effectively.

[Ratatat]

I'm quite intrigued by the statement that TAs earn about £17,000 a year and most have few qualifications.

 

Who wants to go first...?

I am a qualified EYP with a fist class honours degree in early childhood education and care and thirteen years experience. I work full time hours in a local authority nursery school. I am employed as a Teaching Assistant at level 2/3 on our pay scale and earn about £12600pa. My setting cannot afford to pay me more however I am fortunate to have a permanent contract. - Rare these days!

 

Let me know if I am due to receive a cheque to cover my underpaid wages!

[Melcatfish]

Well if this all comes to pass and the TA's are scrapped then my goodness we will get a retrospective look at the impact they have on progress. Certainly in my school the 1 to 1 support staff do their level best to improve little Johnnys progress however crucially their very presence allows the teacher to effectively do his or her job instead of spending all her time trying to deal with little Johnny.

 

YES all children deserve to be included, YES we want them all to make progress but reflecting on my own school we have two staff who are one to one support in reception. One supports a little boy who has frequent seizures and needs constant supervision, he also has various behaviour issues as he has had a lot of allowances made for his condition and consequently has learned that he can do pretty much what ever he wants without any comeback. His TA spends the entire day being vigilant for seizures and if necessary administering medical treatment and working with him to develop appropriate behaviour towards his peers.

 

The other child has a wide range of developmental delays and likes to run, out of classrooms, in and out of other rooms, if he has access outside he also likes to climb fences and run. Needless to say his TA is becoming more athletic by the day but is also working hard with him on engaging with the activities within his classroom environment.

 

In both these classrooms removing the TA support would have a devastating impact on the progress of ALL the children. The teacher would have no option but to focus her attention on the very pressing needs of children's safety and would have little time or energy left for what she is paid for; teaching.

 

I despair of all things Govesque and if the education world don't unite and oust him and his cronies at the next election I dread to think how much worse things will get.

 

Mel

x

[HoneyPancakes]

I've seen an Australian reference to these attitudes to support in schools so quite wide-spread Conservative thinking.

 

On the subject of TA's being teachers, this is often the case in our area where teacher mums take on part time TA positions until their children go to high school.

 

My thinking on recent policies is that everybody MUST be available to work full time at low rates. 'Stay-at-home Mums are a drain on resources' is the thinking. Not earning much, not spending much. Not being taxed and not adding to the GDP. No more namby pamby Mumsy jobs so that parents can care for their own children. Get those kids in wrap-around care and get out to work. Give someone else a low-paid job so that they can put their own children into wrap-around care. Settings that can't, or choose not to, provide 'fully flexible' sessions are penalised in the rate of funding. TA jobs that suit parents are threatened. Where's the choice in this?

 

My boys still need me at home. Not to be rushed from school, to care, to activities without a break in a space that's special to them and I expect that's the case with most children.

 

Rant over.

 

Honey

[Upsy Daisy]

interestingly this does seem to be the case if you search online Happy Maz!

What i would like to know is how children with additional needs and additional maguages are going to do if they choose to go down this line....what are they going to do with them...invest in lots of SEN schools that cost a fortune in order to save money!!!!!!???????

 

Well I can be quite sure that my younger daughter wouldn't be in mainstream education if this happened and my older one wouldn't have been a couple of years ago either.

 

I don't understand how they think they can drive up standards while at the same time reducing the quality of interaction between the teacher and the pupils.

 

Lets face it, education their way is about free childcare to get parents into work and low quality education delivered at minimal cost. The end game will be children herded into enormous childcare facilities from the age of two to eighteen where they sit in rows watching screens displaying teachers broadcasting the appropriate curriculum for their age. Those who can't access their education that way will be written off as too expensive to bother with.

Oh and there will be big tax breaks for those who can afford to pay for private education.

 

Not that I'm cynical or anything.