PUZZLING over how to choose 11 candidates from over 100 for the forthcoming General Teaching Council election, and sure that just voting for the union slate was not appropriate, I decided to select those who mentioned improving conditions for the pupils as a reason for restoring professionalism to teachers.
After all, this was what kept me at it for 23 years and was the major source of job satisfaction for most of my colleagues. That certainly cut the field down.
Good old Grahame Cotterill, though looking a bit fed-up in his mug shot, cares about "children from backgrounds blighted by poverty". So there's one vote cast.
Ian Harper cares about the sociability of young people, so there's another. Susan Jones is "pupi-centred" (I'd expect no less from Friesland School - I worked up the road in another go-ahead Derbyshire school) and Clive Leach wants "pupil-focused professionals", so there's two more.
Mark Macdonald "wants the best possible education and care for all our children" - three cheers. I went on through until I reached Gareth Stamp, caring about restoring creativity and for students in rural areas, and Danny Swan who wants "to raise the achievement of disadvantaged pupils". Great stuff! Two more votes.
But I couldn't find enough to use all 11 votes!
What does this mean? Are we forgetting something? Like who schools are supposed to be for?
7 Newtown Road