Head Teacher earning 200k (inc bonuses)

[xStatic]

Now he needs to go to my old school, the school that went from the top 2% in the country to the bottom 5% in the country in 1 year, all because it became an academy and not a school, therefore money was the main priority and not education. So glad I don't have to go back in September .

W000T, awesome school!

*sigh* We became an academy. Not the best option. Headteacher gets way to much power.

[G4Z]

So for turning round one school with 350 pupils (a primary school at that, not even a secondary or college or university) and potentially 'helping' some schools around him he gets paid more than the prime minister responsible for running a country with 65 million people in it?

Come off it, I am all for rewarding people when they do well but this is just insanity. £200k is not peanuts at all, how many average taxpayers will it require to pay that bill?

Secondly, I can't understand why he is being paid for 2 full time jobs at such a high rate. I certainly couldn't do 2 full time jobs at the same time there simply are not enough hours in the day (assuming 8 hours per day at each job, 8 hours sleep and travel time). Ok if he is taking on extra responsibility then fine pay him a bonus of some sort but I just think these figures are astonishing. That 200k could pay for 10 nurses or 2 doctors and I am actually not that convinced that head teachers even this one work as hard as that. When it comes down to it running a school with 10 - 15 staff and 250 pupils is not really that different to running a small business or something. I would run a school for £200k a year no problem, I honestly don't think it would be that difficult.

I think some people here need to get some perspective regarding what a 'good' wage should be. The average in this country is around 20k and I really don't think anybody in the public sector should be earning 10 times that. Its this kind of lunacy that makes life more expensive for those at the bottom of the income scale because they get done at both ends via inflation and taxation.

[TheAnimus]

I hate these comparisons to PMs wage.

Look at tony blair's total comp turns out invading a country puts you in good stead for the US lecture circuit. One hour performance will be the same as this guys bonus.

He is also 40k below the PMs wage.

[G4Z]

Fair enough, I agree comparing to the PM's wage is not the best way to demonstrate how overpaid this particular manager is. How about this, how many teachers could that additional 100k over his basic employed? 3 - 4 maybe? How much would that cut the average class sizes in his school and how much would teacher - pupil face time improve do you think?

What else do you think his school could have spent 100k to the direct benefit of his pupils?

[TheAnimus]

10 interactive wipeboards, oooh oooh 3 rooms in a refurbished building.

we have this idea of what makes a good education all wrong. (thanks to Labour we spent <--------------> this much money!)

Its the individual people. Not the buildings. I ran (and I'd like to think along the way taught) some after school clubs for kids on robotics, mostly with Technic Lego, and getting them ready to compete in competitions, maze finding been my personal favourite.

Some schools where refurbished at great expense, it makes absolutely not difference, as if a lick of paint is all that was required. Its engaging the kids, getting the parents involved when possible too, and providing support for those that lack parents able to do that.

As much as I hate the common target 1:30 ratio, 1 good teacher, to 40 students is preferable to 1 mediocre teacher to 20 students.

The management structure is often a great way of helping do that. I remember visiting a school again 6 months after we'd helped on a refresher activity, the kind of thing were we as a bunch of overly enthusiastic geeks who just love science, maths and technology help teachers who are a little bit bored of it all (very understandably) have fun exploring and often learning new ways of teaching it. Often, sadly, those teachers have little understanding, and as such can not fully love or appreciate the subject matter. Helping them learn how to do some fun (often pointless) creative things in a simple language like Logo, or how you can teach groups with Lego in a more flexible fashion piratically (giving kids boxes and saying follow these instructions is boring, and you lack full participation..... I was quite practiced at teaching lego ) anyway, back to the point, 6 months later we were asked back to do a follow up, this time the dynamic was reversed, the teachers where calling all the shots asking for help from us (subject specialists) to create ways for them to teach that bit better, this resulted in a few of us fabricating some basic robot chassis that could be programmed in a higher level manner, writing some simple code for them to use for the IT classes. (databases are more fun when you have more visual inputs and outputs)

The grades of the kids also improved across the board too, now that is obviously a result of the teachers been happier and more confident, not the fun specialist activities we helped the kids with (which the hope was would make more of them go into science & engineering).

[Funkstar]

What else do you think his school could have spent 100k to the direct benefit of his pupils?

So we fire all head teachers and spend the money on facilities?

What does the school do without a head teacher? What does any business or organisation do without it's Managind Directory or CEO?

Head teachers are in massively short supply, especially good ones. Pay reflects this.

[neonplanet40]

I dont see the problem to be honest. To have turned around a school in this way and saved as much money in the long run as he has then I think he deserves every penny. If everyone who was paid this kind of wage done their job as well as him then we may not have ended up in a recession.

Don't get me wrong im against huge wages for people who do nothing of merit (Didnt the former head of the bank of scotland get a huge bonus for almost bankrupting the bank?) but when they do their job well then I agree we have to pay them more to stop them going overseas and in the process loosing their unique skills.

[G4Z]

I wasn't especially talking about super fancy facilities but simple things like up to date text books and scientiffic calculators (Why, when I was a lad we always had to share text books and buy our own scientiffic calculators which were all invariably a little different).

1 good teacher to 40 students is better than 1 mediorce one to 20 might be a fair point but why not 1 good teacher to 20 students in every class, isn't that what we should be going for?

Also I wish people would stop calling this guy a teacher, he isn't a teacher any more he is a manager. He might put in a couple of hours cover here and there but in all my years at school I don't ever once remember being actually 'taught' by a head teacher. Sure I have been babysat by one, but never taught. I don't see any evidence that this head actually did any teaching and even if he is the most incredible teacher, squeesing in a couple of hours a week around both his full time jobs can't have that great an impact.

I notice none of you on the other side of this have given any regard to how it is that this head can seemingly fit in 2 (extremley well paid) full time jobs. I am also not at all convinced that this city challenge is not something he should maybe be doing as a head teacher anyway.

[nichomach]

http://www.dcsf.gov.uk/citychallenge/

Welcome

City Challenge is a highly targeted drive to crack the cycle of under-achievement among disadvantaged children in primary and secondary schools in three urban regions: London, The Black Country and Greater Manchester.

It is an expansion of the successful London Challenge and will provide support over three years from 2008 to improve outcomes for young people in the Black Country and Greater Manchester and continued support for the London Challenge.

The Challenge will be tailored to local needs, using some of the proven approaches adopted in the capital over the last five years. London Challenge has backed solutions which respond to the local and unique challenges the capital faces. City Challenge will respond in the same way to the local challenges faced by the Black Country and Greater Manchester and will use the best learning from the London model.

City Challenge will be delivered in partnership with all those working in education in the three city regions, and backed by significant additional investment. The Challenge will build on improvements already underway to develop strategies tailored to local needs in each area. By 2011, the main outcomes of the programme would be:

*

a sharp drop in underperforming schools, particularly focusing on English and Maths
*

more outstanding schools
*

significant improvements in educational outcomes for disadvantaged children.

Frankly, given the stated objectives, if you have a truly outstanding head teacher who has a demonstrated capability for turning problem schools round that's probably exactly who you want doing it.

As for "extrememly well paid", £83k per year is certainly a decent whack, but bluntly I don't think that's over the odds for the CEO/COO of a highly challenging multi-million pound enterprise, which is what his school is; and given that the City Challenge £100k is actually for a shedload of additional work, and is actually for two years, not one (so £50k pa, not £100k), I don't have a problem with that, either.

[IBM]

I think some people here need to get some perspective regarding what a 'good' wage should be. The average in this country is around 20k and I really don't think anybody in the public sector should be earning 10 times that. Its this kind of lunacy that makes life more expensive for those at the bottom of the income scale because they get done at both ends via inflation and taxation.

The (mediam) average in this country is around £25k. The reason this is relatively low is because the vast majority of people on or below this wage lack the skills, ability, or drive to earn more. There are exceptions, lots of them, but at the same time, salaries are driven entirely by market forces. It just about works (although you might not be able to say the same about capitalism) given the considerations (overpopulation/educational & social failings etc).

£200,000 is nothing if it gets the right person in the job. You want to complain about excess? Talk about expenditure on armed forces or government wastage on failed initiatives. This guy has proved his worth.

[G4Z]

[url]
As for "extrememly well paid", £83k per year is certainly a decent whack, but bluntly I don't think that's over the odds for the CEO/COO of a highly challenging multi-million pound enterprise, which is what his school is; and given that the City Challenge £100k is actually for a shedload of additional work, and is actually for two years, not one (so £50k pa, not £100k), I don't have a problem with that, either.

Is it actually a shed load of additional work though, or was he doing it when he was supposed to be doing his normal head teacher duties?

Also, the guy is not a CEO, we are talking about a primary school head here its far closer to a small business than a million pound business. Frankly I think 83k is in fact quite over the odds for that level of reasonability in any case, that is what I might expect a head of a collage or university to earn.

[G4Z]

The (mediam) average in this country is around £25k. The reason this is relatively low is because the vast majority of people on or below this wage lack the skills, ability, or drive to earn more. There are exceptions, lots of them, but at the same time, salaries are driven entirely by market forces. It just about works (although you might not be able to say the same about capitalism) given the considerations (overpopulation/educational & social failings etc).

£200,000 is nothing if it gets the right person in the job. You want to complain about excess? Talk about expenditure on armed forces or government wastage on failed initiatives. This guy has proved his worth.

That is total rubbish, the reason that is so low is because only a tiny number of people earn more than 50k in fact if I recall correctly earning that puts you in the top 5%. Plenty of skilled people earn around the average and below, what about mechanics, teachers (!!!!), nurses, IT people etc

[jim]

http://www.dcsf.gov.uk/citychallenge/



Frankly, given the stated objectives, if you have a truly outstanding head teacher who has a demonstrated capability for turning problem schools round that's probably exactly who you want doing it.

As for "extrememly well paid", £83k per year is certainly a decent whack, but bluntly I don't think that's over the odds for the CEO/COO of a highly challenging multi-million pound enterprise, which is what his school is; and given that the City Challenge £100k is actually for a shedload of additional work, and is actually for two years, not one (so £50k pa, not £100k), I don't have a problem with that, either.

Agreed. My secondary school ran on a yearly budget of £25m, I seem to recall.

Paying somebody 1/250th of that to use the money wisely seems like a good plan.

[Bugbait]

If the bonus was in the initial employment contract and he met or exceeded his targets then he absolutely should get it. From all accounts he did an excellent job and should be rewarded accordingly.

That is total rubbish, the reason that is so low is because only a tiny number of people earn more than 50k in fact if I recall correctly earning that puts you in the top 5%. Plenty of skilled people earn around the average and below, what about mechanics, teachers (!!!!), nurses, IT people etc

Every member of the current IT team I work with make over £83k, with some (or maybe most) of the contractors making way more than this. We don’t even manage people. Some members can barely manage themselves (great coders, just bad at the other things like prioritisation). Poorly paid IT staff? By Trader standards sure, but probably not when compared to the rest of the workforce.

I know several Project Managers making £150k+ and the budget for their projects could be equated to that of a school (usually £2-5mil). So by these standards I don’t think £200k for an arguably exceptional head teacher is ridiculous at all.

[matty-hodgson]

£83k for a head teacher doing a bloody good job is nothing.

My head teacher of the last 2 years (since it became an academy) has been earning £77k a year, and now we're one of the worst schools in the country. I see absolutely no reason why him being paid £83k is a problem.

Oh, and, my head teacher only runs the 6th form centre, with about 140 pupils, probably a lot less come September.

[IBM]

That is total rubbish, the reason that is so low is because only a tiny number of people earn more than 50k in fact if I recall correctly earning that puts you in the top 5%. Plenty of skilled people earn around the average and below, what about mechanics, teachers (!!!!), nurses, IT people etc

Mechanics - not particularly skilled work. Dime a dozen. Low demand. High Supply. Low wage.
Teachers - average wage for teachers above £30,000, including primary and nursery. Typically capped at just over £60,000 depending upon seniority. Depends entirely upon experience.
Nurses - as above for teachers. Also features more chances for advancement depending upon skills & drive.
IT people - don't make me laugh. The good ones get paid a fortune. The ones that don't are lazy/not intelligent enough/lack the skills to advance.

The reason it's so low is because the VAST majority of people are incapable of handling the jobs and associated pressures/demands higher up the pay scale.

If it's to do with intelligence, then that's pretty crappy as those born with natural intelligence will always do better. But as often as not it's about effort, and for those who can't be bothered, hard luck. Better luck next time.

*puts away stick*