ChatterBank12 mins ago
Diversity Or Ability?
57 Answers
http://
/// Schools are being offered £30,000 extra funding to hire and promote gay and transgender teachers, it can be revealed. ///
/// Critics have described the policy as "profoundly misguided" and warned it will oblige head teachers to favour some staff over others, regardless of their
ability. ///
/// Schools are being offered £30,000 extra funding to hire and promote gay and transgender teachers, it can be revealed. ///
/// Critics have described the policy as "profoundly misguided" and warned it will oblige head teachers to favour some staff over others, regardless of their
ability. ///
Answers
Jim, //The more people you are drawing from when choosing your workforce, the better chance you will have of finding the most able people.// I don’t understand your reasoning. Schools already have the whole workforce from which to choose and their choice should always be the most able candidate for the job. This scheme is intended as an incentive to favour...
08:56 Mon 07th Dec 2015
AOG pointed out something else that I'd not thought about on a recent thread about racism in the workplace.
It's been proven on a number of occasions in 'blind tests' that a subset of employers will immediately discard applications from anyone with 'ethnic-sounding' names in favour of white candidates.
Indeed, the playing field is not level, and probably never will be - need to acknowledge that there is degrees of prejudice which keep minorities out of jobs which they are clearly qualified for.
Moves to combat this, in my view - are welcome.
It's been proven on a number of occasions in 'blind tests' that a subset of employers will immediately discard applications from anyone with 'ethnic-sounding' names in favour of white candidates.
Indeed, the playing field is not level, and probably never will be - need to acknowledge that there is degrees of prejudice which keep minorities out of jobs which they are clearly qualified for.
Moves to combat this, in my view - are welcome.
Sorry - I forgot to say what AOG pointed out...and that's that some employers will not accept qualified minorities for fear they might be taken to a tribunal at some point in the future.
Selection by discrimination rather than talent.
I'm sure that this is not a widespread problem (at least, I hope it isn't), but it does suggest that rather than ability vs. diversity, the equation should be ability vs. diversity vs. prejudice.
Selection by discrimination rather than talent.
I'm sure that this is not a widespread problem (at least, I hope it isn't), but it does suggest that rather than ability vs. diversity, the equation should be ability vs. diversity vs. prejudice.
Jim, // I don't agree that this is about promoting less-able people just to tick diversity boxes, which is the slant you're putting on it.//
I’m not putting a slant on it. That’s exactly what it’s all about.
SP, people who aren’t from minority groups but are nevertheless constantly passed over for other reasons - and it happens - have no race card to play.
I’m not putting a slant on it. That’s exactly what it’s all about.
SP, people who aren’t from minority groups but are nevertheless constantly passed over for other reasons - and it happens - have no race card to play.
Well that's not exactly what this is all about -- depending on whom you believe, of course. The Telegraph thinks that it is. As I've said, it's actually about applications rather than recruitment, ie people still won't get jobs if they don't meet the required standards, but the applicant pool to draw on becomes more diverse, which in turn will increase the number of successful applicants from minority backgrounds. But they'd still have to meet the job requirements -- says the DfE, at any rate. They could be lying, of course. Depends on whom you believe.
Do you even read my previous posts? That they are open to all in theory hasn't translated to being open to all in practice -- a fact that is evident all over the place, both because so workforces are as diverse as the population is and because applications are in many cases not all that diverse either!
The simple fact is that everyone seems to think that we're now equal finally, but we are not still. And it will take some work to make it so, and in the long run that benefits everybody. In the short-term, things are rarely so pretty, but if you think that applications are actually open to all then you have another think coming. There's still lots of work to undo the damage done by a heavily discriminatory past.
The simple fact is that everyone seems to think that we're now equal finally, but we are not still. And it will take some work to make it so, and in the long run that benefits everybody. In the short-term, things are rarely so pretty, but if you think that applications are actually open to all then you have another think coming. There's still lots of work to undo the damage done by a heavily discriminatory past.
From the article:
The fund encourages applications on the basis of so-called
protected characteristics, defined by the Equality Act in 2010.
These include age, disability, gender reassignment, marriage and civil partnership, pregnancy and maternity, race, religion or belief, sex and sexual orientation.
So - pretty much everyone is included.
The fund encourages applications on the basis of so-called
protected characteristics, defined by the Equality Act in 2010.
These include age, disability, gender reassignment, marriage and civil partnership, pregnancy and maternity, race, religion or belief, sex and sexual orientation.
So - pretty much everyone is included.
The reality of this is that the people recruit people.
No school recruiter is going to do or say anything illegal, but those who would never recruit from a certain minority will still never recruit from that minority (probably a more rare situation in schools than in other arenas); those who have no problem recruiting from a minority will still have no problem; and those in between, especially the more cynical, may be persuaded to recruit from a minority not on a matter of principle or positive discrimination, but because there's some cash to be had for doing so.
How this helps education or the people being recruited (that wouldn't otherwise have been recruited), I don't know.
No school recruiter is going to do or say anything illegal, but those who would never recruit from a certain minority will still never recruit from that minority (probably a more rare situation in schools than in other arenas); those who have no problem recruiting from a minority will still have no problem; and those in between, especially the more cynical, may be persuaded to recruit from a minority not on a matter of principle or positive discrimination, but because there's some cash to be had for doing so.
How this helps education or the people being recruited (that wouldn't otherwise have been recruited), I don't know.
As referred to in the study before - those with 'ethnic-sounding' names. This was a study done (I think) last year. And it's not specific to education - I was pointing this out to demonstrate that we already have unfair job exclusion.
Therefore ability vs. diversity is not the right equation, as mentioned before.
Therefore ability vs. diversity is not the right equation, as mentioned before.
Any of yous Ofsted trained? Nope? OK then, during inspection one target schools must achieve to be deemed satisfactory at the very least, is that they are aware of diversity in all arenas of life and are inclusive of it.
Schools did not make this benchmark up for themselves.
It came into being during the Bliar regime and has been absorbed by his buddies in the Tory party.
So the game is, you don't have to prove you're diversity-aware, but if you wanna, here's some funding you can apply for, and if you 'continue to select teachers exclusively from within certain communities' we'll fail you on inspection.
That means the school goes into special measures, the kids and staff are demoralised, and in a short space of time the senior management team is replaced.
So, what actually prevents people from becoming teachers apart from the legal checklist?
Fear of very hard work and a disinclination to be damned if you do or don't.
Schools did not make this benchmark up for themselves.
It came into being during the Bliar regime and has been absorbed by his buddies in the Tory party.
So the game is, you don't have to prove you're diversity-aware, but if you wanna, here's some funding you can apply for, and if you 'continue to select teachers exclusively from within certain communities' we'll fail you on inspection.
That means the school goes into special measures, the kids and staff are demoralised, and in a short space of time the senior management team is replaced.
So, what actually prevents people from becoming teachers apart from the legal checklist?
Fear of very hard work and a disinclination to be damned if you do or don't.
Mosaic
I have a huge respect for teachers. I think the vast majority work harder than those of us in the private sector.
When I watched 'Educating Essex' and 'Educating Cardiff', I recognised the kind of teachers I had at school, and the ones that I'm mates with now.
They have a very poor reputation, which I think is thoroughly undeserved. I couldn't do what they do.
Not in a million years.
I have a huge respect for teachers. I think the vast majority work harder than those of us in the private sector.
When I watched 'Educating Essex' and 'Educating Cardiff', I recognised the kind of teachers I had at school, and the ones that I'm mates with now.
They have a very poor reputation, which I think is thoroughly undeserved. I couldn't do what they do.
Not in a million years.
I have to say I think Jim is nearest we have to someone who was offered a golden hello to teach math to non academic no hopers such as live in the slums near me...
and he chose academe
lots of his fellow chose silicon valley and I dont blame them
asked why he didnt take the golden hello and teach in the slums -
i imagine he would say - when you stop beating your head against concrete what does it feel like ?
as for the fifty or so children in our grove
twenty five should have gone onto uni
and it is well under ten ( three or four )
[ Does doing 'guitar' at a poly count as a uni etc ?]
no one has done anything near a science
and he chose academe
lots of his fellow chose silicon valley and I dont blame them
asked why he didnt take the golden hello and teach in the slums -
i imagine he would say - when you stop beating your head against concrete what does it feel like ?
as for the fifty or so children in our grove
twenty five should have gone onto uni
and it is well under ten ( three or four )
[ Does doing 'guitar' at a poly count as a uni etc ?]
no one has done anything near a science
Latest Posts
Quizzes & Puzzles43 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles52 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles67 mins ago
ChatterBank75 mins ago
Film, Media & TV85 mins ago
