Report comment

Please fill in the form to report an unsuitable comment. Please state which comment is of concern and why. It will be sent to our moderator for review.

Comment

Bob Worley has very clearly and brilliantly illustrated the situation within the Secondary School Sector. I am a senior science technician of 25 years’ service. I only got promoted eight years ago as a result of two FT technicians taking voluntary redundancy and they were replaced by a term time Technican.
I thoroughly enjoy my role as a School Science Technician. I am professionally qualified to degree level in Science and in management. During the 25 years CLEAPSS (http://science.cleapss.org.uk/) has provided quality training in many areas of my job. So I proudly and loudly shout that I consider myself as a Professional Science Technician. I do not see any difference between myself working in the secondary school sector and those of my colleagues within the tertiary. Yet for some reason, which I cannot understand, there appears to be a gap between the two. That annoys me.
Aside from this Secondary School Science Technicians have had to endure what I call “the perfect storm” which underpins many of our issues.
There are no consistent technician job roles and pay structures in all schools. There is a worrying lack of understanding from Principals or School finance officers (who carry a high level of influence) as to what School Science technicians really do. I am regularly appalled to regularly read about Technicians going on sick leave because of lack of support within their job or that line management treat the individual in a subservient or disrespectful way.
Educational cut backs over the past ten years has seen a frightening downsizing of the number of technicians within the profession. In parallel with this the practical demands of our science syllabus has increased. Those that have left the profession have not been replaced. Those that have been recruited, the career & pay structure does not make the Job role attractive enough to make people want to stay. So there is a high staff turnover and arguably the skills among those who do come into the profession are not developed sufficiently to make a positive difference to delivering quality practical science education.
Yet the “bean counters” and decision makers are happy to allow this to continue. That is because there is no mechanism, legal or otherwise, for them to want to change. While I applaud the work of report by Sir John Holman referenced in Bob Worley’s reply above, there is little incentive for management to read it, let alone follow its recommendation.
So we really need to find a legal solution here along the lines of the SSSNB developed by the Labour Government in 2009. Until such times as a legal solution is found or perhaps some other form of pressure placed on School authorities to look closely at the professional career and reward structure of technicians, I believe that we will still be talking about this topic for many years to come.

Your details

Cancel