science technicians petition

[browolf]

I got this link from the head of the science technicians. Seems to me they require specialist knowledge as much as we do and we should support them too. Our school has more sci technicians than IT ones but I think its much easier for them to quantify when they need more.

 

the blurb on the petition is

 

Initiatives in the pipeline to increase the number of pupils taking separate Sciences will have a considerable knock on effect on the workload of Technicians. Technicians are already recognised by professional bodies as the "expert" in the Science Department on practical Science issues, often training teachers in practical techniques and advising on safety, yet we earn less than £10 per hour. This state of affairs needs to remedied quickly if Science Education is to be at the forefront of government policy.

 

Petition to: Push for School Science Technicians to get a better rate of pay. | Number10.gov.uk

[Dom_]

Maybe when they realise everything grinds to a holt without IT something similar will happen for us!

[lionsl2005]

I did sign

[grumpy_git]

Our science technicians are in the main good - although one spends a lot of time on cigarette breaks he is apparently very good.

 

Half their problem here is that the labs are randomly scattered around the school so chemicals, equipment etc have to be carted all over the place.

[browolf]

Half their problem here is that the labs are randomly scattered around the school so chemicals, equipment etc have to be carted all over the place.

 

I think thats partly how they quantify the need for more technicians. they have to set stuff up at the start of lessons and they can only be in one place at a time. If there's suddenly more science lessons ..... well there's nothing like not being able to deliver the curriculum to force change.

 

trouble we have, add more rooms of computers and what with active directory, group policy, deployment servers and all sorts of other handy automation the impact is a lot lower and less definable. All the things we use to be more efficient effectively stab us in the back when comes to required human resources.

[grumpy_git]

I think thats partly how they quantify the need for more technicians. they have to set stuff up at the start of lessons and they can only be in one place at a time. If there's suddenly more science lessons ..... well there's nothing like not being able to deliver the curriculum to force change.

 

I don't think it would be so bad if they were closer - for example in two adjacent rooms they might be able to take equipment to both in quick succession, then uplift the old. But if one is at one end of the school and the other at the other end, it's going to take ages to trolley them down.

 

trouble we have, add more rooms of computers and what with active directory, group policy, deployment servers and all sorts of other handy automation the impact is a lot lower and less definable. All the things we use to be more efficient effectively stab us in the back when comes to required human resources.

 

Quite true - the previous head here was a big fan of plucking building projects out of thin air and declaring "we'll stick x computers here, y computers there" etc - but not doing anything about the fact that he was only adding to an overstretched IT department...

[Butuz]

Hmm. From what I've seen around here - Sci techs are on around the same money as ICT Techs.

 

In my oppinion ICT Techs have to have more specialist knowledge than Sci Techs - and also the field of Practical Science does not change beyond recognition every single year in the same way ICT does. A sci tech can do the job for 10 years without really doing much different. Maybe some new initiatives or safety rules yes - but science as a field does not seem to change much at all.

 

Also - a Sci tech only caters for 1 department and perhaps only 5 teachers out of 70 odd? An ICT tech caters for every single pupil in the school, every department, both curriculum and admin, and every member of staff both teaching and non teaching. This, I believe is a level of responsibility above that of Science techs.

 

Thats just my 2p! No offence to any Sci techs intended!!! Schools in general need more science techs, that is for sure as one is not enough - but I do not believe they are required to be particularly generously paid also.

 

Butuz

Edited April 22, 2009 by Butuz

[Andrew_C]

In my oppinion ICT Techs have to have more specialist knowledge than Sci Techs - and also the field of Practical Science does not change beyond recognition every single year in the same way ICT does.

"Have to have" well maybe not, but the most highly qualified member of our chemistry department retired recently; yep, one of the technicians!

 

As to the rapidity of change in IT, that won't last forever, and I'd question the wisdom of playing "catch-up" with M$ at the best of times.

[witch]

One of our science techs is an ex teacher and he spends quite a lot of time actually teaching the class - which on his salary is ridiculous. He shouldn't do it.

Having said that, he is employed full time in term time to cover 2 science labs and gets extra if he helps out in Tech or Art.

I, on the other hand, get about the same money per hour but look after 2 IT suites, 20 laptops, lots of whiteboards, desktops, lapsafes etc and all the other gubbins in 15 hours a week!

[torledo]

"Have to have" well maybe not, but the most highly qualified member of our chemistry department retired recently; yep, one of the technicians!

 

As to the rapidity of change in IT, that won't last forever, and I'd question the wisdom of playing "catch-up" with M$ at the best of times.

 

ain't that the truth. I'm planning to not care about new microsoft releases after the 2010 raft of releases....even then as most orgs won't be implementing those for months, maybe years, after release i think i'll be employable enough with the skills i have using the todays [and some of yesterdays]M$ products.