Skip to main content

Absurd logic of job-sizing

As a headteacher, privy to "snippets" from various sources, the more I am convinced that the points awarded in the job-sizing exercise should be made open for everyone to see.

We know now that timetabling only gains its remit-holder the princely sum of two points and it is a massive exercise which cannot be undertaken proficiently by anyone other than someone with a teaching background, who has daily contact with the competing pressures of deploying staff and accommodation.

In addition, hugely time-consuming and onerous "whole school" responsibilities such as "working with parents" and "working with fellow colleagues" are awarded only one point each.

However, the irrationality and lack of knowledge of what being a senior manager entails is best illustrated by the points attributed to deputes who have responsibility for health and safety.

If a depute has responsibility for health and safety in one of the curricular areas of CDT, PE, chemistry, physics, biology, home economics, or art and design, three points will be accrued. If responsibility lies with "other curricular" areas, no points are given and only one point is racked up for having responsibility for health and safety matters with year groups or specialist sections of the school.

However, should a depute have total responsibility for health and safety in the entire school, one point is the gain - not the three for only one subject area of the school for which that person has entire responsibility.

I'm amazed and angry at this absurd logic.

Name and address withheld

Log in or register for FREE to continue reading.

It only takes a moment and you'll get access to more news, plus courses, jobs and teaching resources tailored to you