Saw this in yesterday's Sindo letters page ...... A first , one group of public servants ( the educators) calling for the Army ( he doesn't get the whole DF thing) to be scrapped so they can be paid 30m euro to supervise school yards ( isn't that a teachers job anyway ?)
I really hope the lads and lassies in the Golan, Mali , the Leb, at sea or doing air ambos etc didn't see this.... I really wonder .....
What does the broader Asti movement want? The first is a real concrete promise of not making teachers correct their own students in the new JC. Not a working group (under HR) from the man who promised (along with others) to burn the bondholders and protect child benefit. I know Colm has concern about the JC too. He wants to trust Ruairi Quinn to hear teachers' concerns. Most teachers don't trust Quinn. If continuous assessment comes in then some teachers will find a second job helping students they don't teach pass their projects. There will be plenty of work for grind teachers and parents in writing student projects. If the State couldn't police its own banks/industrial schools/creches -- what hope school projects?
The JC can be dealt with in a cost-neutral manner but supervision and substitution can't -- or can they?
While I find it hard to figure out why we need to spend €850m a year on the army (22 countries have abolished their army -- who exactly are we defending ourselves from?) and yet can't fork out €30m a year for supervising our children, I will take it that Ruairi Quinn fears Sandymount might be invaded by angry teachers. But in asking for it, did he have to increase the periods of availability from three to five? Why exactly? Ask any principal (Colm included) if that was necessary given that the 30 per cent who don't do supervision will now be frog-marched into it or be paying for someone else to carry the burden. Staying at the present three periods (cost neutral) and allowing all to opt out but pay the levy would also be acceptable to the majority, in my opinion.
That's some of what teachers want. Both requests would cost exactly nothing!
Barry Hazel, Asti CEC,
Bray, Co Wicklow
PS apologies can't do the quote bit properly.
I really hope the lads and lassies in the Golan, Mali , the Leb, at sea or doing air ambos etc didn't see this.... I really wonder .....
What does the broader Asti movement want? The first is a real concrete promise of not making teachers correct their own students in the new JC. Not a working group (under HR) from the man who promised (along with others) to burn the bondholders and protect child benefit. I know Colm has concern about the JC too. He wants to trust Ruairi Quinn to hear teachers' concerns. Most teachers don't trust Quinn. If continuous assessment comes in then some teachers will find a second job helping students they don't teach pass their projects. There will be plenty of work for grind teachers and parents in writing student projects. If the State couldn't police its own banks/industrial schools/creches -- what hope school projects?
The JC can be dealt with in a cost-neutral manner but supervision and substitution can't -- or can they?
While I find it hard to figure out why we need to spend €850m a year on the army (22 countries have abolished their army -- who exactly are we defending ourselves from?) and yet can't fork out €30m a year for supervising our children, I will take it that Ruairi Quinn fears Sandymount might be invaded by angry teachers. But in asking for it, did he have to increase the periods of availability from three to five? Why exactly? Ask any principal (Colm included) if that was necessary given that the 30 per cent who don't do supervision will now be frog-marched into it or be paying for someone else to carry the burden. Staying at the present three periods (cost neutral) and allowing all to opt out but pay the levy would also be acceptable to the majority, in my opinion.
That's some of what teachers want. Both requests would cost exactly nothing!
Barry Hazel, Asti CEC,
Bray, Co Wicklow
PS apologies can't do the quote bit properly.
Comment