Recipe for tears

12th September 2003 at 01:00
My school has a roll of just under 900 pupils and it offers a huge range of courses and subjects - all headed by principal teachers.

When the job-sizing exercise first came about, I thought it would result in principal teachers of big departments such as maths, English and modern languages being awarded more.

This, according to your issue of August 22, is what the Executive insists too. However, it is definitely not the case. I know for certain that our principal teacher of home economics was job-sized at point 4 of the new scale, the same as the principal teacher of maths and the same as me.

Yet in home economics the department presented approximately 45 candidates for examinations. In modern languages we presented 176 candidates. The number of staff in the departments I have compared would also indicate that maths and modern languages should have a bigger weighting but this does not seem to have had any bearing.

I am at a loss to understand how the job-sizing exercise can have any credibility.

Principal Teacher

modern languages

(Name and address supplied)

Log-in as an existing print or digital subscriber

Forgotten your subscriber ID?


To access this content and the full TES archive, subscribe now.

View subscriber offers


Get TES online and delivered to your door – for less than the price of a coffee

Save 33% off the cover price with this great subscription offer. Every copy delivered to your door by first-class post, plus full access to TES online and the TES app for just £1.90 per week.
Subscribers also enjoy a range of fantastic offers and benefits worth over £270:

  • Discounts off TES Institute courses
  • Access over 200,000 articles in the TES online archive
  • Free Tastecard membership worth £79.99
  • Discounts with Zipcar,, Virgin Wines and other partners
Order your low-cost subscription today