BATOD's response to the Model Performance Management Policy for Schools
The document is not in the public domain and was only sent to statutory consultees and a few other selected recipients such as BATOD. If you wish to see the consultation document please contact me at email@example.com
Thank you for inviting BATOD to comment on the above named document. We have a number of points we would like to make.
- The Association notes that the Policy is written for Schools and we have made contact with the DfES about this. We do urge the Department to consider preparing a similar document for centrally employed teachers working for Local Authorities some of whom are members of this association.
- We continue to have mixed feelings over the matter of linking pay with Performance Management (PM). In particular, we are concerned about the impact this will have, not only on Headteachers, but also on the unity and team spirit of an institution’s staff.
- Where schools have delegated ‘units/resource bases’ and therefore control of the staff, we wonder who will decide how Performance Management will be conducted for staff in these ‘bases’? Teachers who are in special ‘units/resource bases’ usually have different roles from those of mainstream classroom teachers. Currently PM for such teachers is very variable. We strongly argue that their PM should be carried out by people who have appropriate qualifications and experience in deaf education (or, as appropriate, in other areas of special educational needs).
- Regulations – Requirements
- It should be noted that ‘unattached teachers’ would not be able to comply with the ‘Regulations’ in as much as they do not have ‘governing bodies’ and this should be borne in mind when if and when a similar document is being drawn up for these teachers.
- ‘Unattached teachers’ may not undertake their teaching in a classroom (e.g. they may be working in a child’s home) and this too needs to be taken into account.
- The arrangements should relate to the progress of individual children and where appropriate to the development plan of the specialist teaching Service or to that of the ‘unit/resource base’.
- Pg. 3. Consistency of treatment and fairness can only be achieved if those carrying out PM have relevant experience and knowledge.
- Pg. 6. Training and support. Teachers of the Deaf (ToDs) need specialist input if they are to keep abreast of developments within their own specialist field. It is likely that such training would not normally be available within their school or Local Authority (LA). Therefore funding needs to be made available to allow such teachers to attend training courses elsewhere.
- Pg. 7. It should be considered that for ToDs (including Heads of ‘units/resource bases’ or specialist Services) a ‘School Improvement Partner’ or ‘External Adviser’ should be someone who has experience and knowledge of deaf education.
- Pgs. 10/11 Annex 1. Where ‘Classroom Observation’ is being undertaken of a ToD then the ‘Observer’ must be qualified and experienced in deaf education.
We hope these points will be helpful. If you require further clarification please let me know. We would be very happy to discuss with you PM issues relating to ‘unattached teachers’, perhaps helping to draw up a suitable PM policy document for them.
Paul Simpson, National Secretary, February 2007