The Student Room Group

Teachers salary UK 2015 ...

Do teachers get paid well? Is £22,000 starting salary considered good?

Scroll to see replies

Original post by Uz25
Do teachers get paid well? Is £22,000 starting salary considered good?


That comes down to your personal opinion. I started my first job after uni in 2008 on 16k. In London. By comparison, 22k now in the north east should seem hugely generous, but for the amount of work I would say it's not nearly enough.

But it is what it is, and we all know the pay scale before we start.
Original post by TraineeLynsey
That comes down to your personal opinion. I started my first job after uni in 2008 on 16k. In London. By comparison, 22k now in the north east should seem hugely generous, but for the amount of work I would say it's not nearly enough.

But it is what it is, and we all know the pay scale before we start.


Wise words.
Reply 3
It depends on where you're living also. 22,000 in the North of England or even the midlands - fantastic, in certain places down south and across the country, money could be a little bit of a struggle in the beginning.

I'm moving home for my NQT year purely to save money and because I can get london fringe pay rate and after working out my finances, I wouldn't be able to afford to not live at home for a variety of reasons and expenses that I need to take care of.

That isn't to say it can't be done - in terms of the pay rate, it is equal to a lot of graduate jobs. But it is a lot of work.

Pay really shouldn't be your motivation for teaching - the job is so rewarding and rich in a variety of other ways.
It's not bad, in terms of an annual salary. Certainly in the Midlands/North it's a decent amount to start off on, and as you go up the payscale you can live quite comfortably.

I was on M1 last year, went up to M2 in the Autumn term and have just gone up to M4 after applying for pay progression.

My partner is out of work, so I pay for all the rent, food, transport costs etc., and we still do OK. We can afford cheap holidays, meals out, new clothes etc. - not constantly, but we do have treats. Now I've had a pay rise I'm hoping to put more money in my savings.


What is bad is the workload in relation to the pay. But I don't think more money is the solution. Ultimately, the reason my money goes a long way is that I don't have time to go out spending very often. They need to do something about teachers' workload, not throw money at the problem.
Original post by myrtille

What is bad is the workload in relation to the pay. But I don't think more money is the solution. Ultimately, the reason my money goes a long way is that I don't have time to go out spending very often. They need to do something about teachers' workload, not throw money at the problem.


Agreed.
Original post by TraineeLynsey
Agreed.


I'm sure Primary School Teacher don't get a lot of work to do at home?
(edited 8 years ago)
Original post by Uz25
I'm sure Primary School Teacher don't get a lot of work to do at home?


Just felt the need to point out that they have TONS to do. Give lessons all day at school, do duties, deal with parents, then go home and plan all future lessons, make resources, Mark books and tests, contact parents, create classroom displays etc.
They have to do all this out of working hours, when else would they do it?
Original post by Sarahs.cheddars
Just felt the need to point out that they have TONS to do. Give lessons all day at school, do duties, deal with parents, then go home and plan all future lessons, make resources, Mark books and tests, contact parents, create classroom displays etc.
They have to do all this out of working hours, when else would they do it?


Out of interest, what is it that makes primary school workloads on par with secondary ones? I fully believe people when they say that the two sides of teaching have equivalent workloads, but I can't work out how that is the case. I mean... surely there's less marking? The brightest of Year 6 classes in English are never going to write as much as - say - a top-set Year 9 class. As an English trainee teacher, 30 books with 2 week's worth of work in them is at least a 5 hour job.

And lesson planning as well I can't see taking longer than secondary planning. Younger kids work more slowly. I suppose there's more differentiation to do since classes are mixed. And yes, a teacher may have to brush up on their subject knowledge to teach something they're less familiar with, but I feel English teachers have to do that every day, because even if you have read Jane Eyre and so are roughly familiar with the story, you're still going to have to go and re-read each chapter as it comes before attempting to plan a lesson on it.

Then there's the data. Don't primary school teachers only have 30 kids to manage? Surely it must be easier keeping track of their progress than 180 (or more) kids?

I'm just curious. Is there something I'm missing?
(edited 8 years ago)
Original post by Squoosh25
Out of interest, what is it that makes primary school workloads on par with secondary ones? I fully believe people when they say that the two sides of teaching have equivalent workloads, but I can't work out how that is the case. I mean... surely there's less marking? The brightest of Year 6 classes in English are never going to write as much as - say - a top-set Year 9 class. As an English trainee teacher, 30 books with 2 week's worth of work in them is at least a 5 hour job.

And lesson planning as well I can't see taking longer than secondary planning. Younger kids work more slowly. I suppose there's more differentiation to do since classes are mixed. And yes, a teacher may have to brush up on their subject knowledge to teach something they're less familiar with, but I feel English teachers have to do that every day, because even if you have read Jane Eyre and so are roughly familiar with the story, you're still going to have to go and re-read each chapter as it comes before attempting to plan a lesson on it.

Then there's the data. Don't primary school teachers only have 30 kids to manage? Surely it must be easier keeping track of their progress than 180 (or more) kids?

I'm just curious. Is there something I'm missing?


As a sixteen year old student, I use to think that too. I'm sure Secondary School teaching is harder and more work load. Not only that there are so many cheeky kids aha. That's why if I'm considering teaching, then primary school teaching will be best. Less stress and generally nice kids.
Original post by Uz25
That's why if I'm considering teaching, then primary school teaching will be best. Less stress and generally nice kids.


Depends what you care about. I care too much about my subject (English): I want pupils to love literature and storytelling as much as I do. I don't really care about my subject at a primary level: it isn't till it's taught at a more advanced level that kids can start engaging with the really interesting and beautiful stuff.
Original post by Squoosh25
Depends what you care about. I care too much about my subject (English): I want pupils to love literature and storytelling as much as I do. I don't really care about my subject at a primary level: it isn't till it's taught at a more advanced level that kids can start engaging with the really interesting and beautiful stuff.


Aww :smile: cool
Original post by Squoosh25
Out of interest, what is it that makes primary school workloads on par with secondary ones? I fully believe people when they say that the two sides of teaching have equivalent workloads, but I can't work out how that is the case. I mean... surely there's less marking? The brightest of Year 6 classes in English are never going to write as much as - say - a top-set Year 9 class. As an English trainee teacher, 30 books with 2 week's worth of work in them is at least a 5 hour job.

And lesson planning as well I can't see taking longer than secondary planning. Younger kids work more slowly. I suppose there's more differentiation to do since classes are mixed. And yes, a teacher may have to brush up on their subject knowledge to teach something they're less familiar with, but I feel English teachers have to do that every day, because even if you have read Jane Eyre and so are roughly familiar with the story, you're still going to have to go and re-read each chapter as it comes before attempting to plan a lesson on it.

Then there's the data. Don't primary school teachers only have 30 kids to manage? Surely it must be easier keeping track of their progress than 180 (or more) kids?

I'm just curious. Is there something I'm missing?


Roughly speaking, my workload is:

teaching contact hours - 8.45 to 3.30 Monday to Friday.

Weekly lit plan - 5 lessons, maybe one hour of planning and one hour resourcing.

Marking those books is probably 2-4 hours a week, depending on how many pieces of extended writing they've done. We need to mark them every day though - we can't just do them once a fortnight.

Plus us we do 4/5 separate SPAG/reading sessions each week. That involves maybe another hour or so of planning, prep and marking per week.

Numeracy planning - 5 lessons, roughly the same as literacy prep. Maybe a bit longer to sort resources.

Marking numeracy doesn't take as long. Maybe 2 hours a week. Perhaps 3 if they totally didn't get one of the lessons. Again, this needs to be done every day though. We can't just catch up on it at the weekend or what have you.

Then in at my school we teach 9 afternoon lessons each week. These are generally planned on a half termly basis ( probably 2 hours of planning each for science, topic, re etc). Preparing for those lessons takes maybe an hour over the whole week. Marking these is less urgent. Some teachers are amazing at keeping it up to date, others (me) catch up with them in a lump roughly once or twice each half term. The marking is much less intense though. You're probably talking 2 hours each term for science and 2 for topic. RE, computing etc marking is inconsequential.

2x morning meetings and one afternoon staff meeting each week = roughly 2 hours a week.

Dealing with emails, printing, photocopying, uploading planning, meetings with parents, taking an after school club, tidying the classroom, preparing instructions for PPA cover teachers / supply teachers covering when we're at courses etc, creating displays, putting up displays, meetings with colleagues about odds and ends, subject coordinator tasks, writing reports, parents evenings and all that usual stuff added on top makes (for me) an average weekly workload of around 55-60 hours.

I agree that secondary English pupils will be writing more (I often wonder if a secondary maths teacher has as much marking as a secondary English teacher...), but marking is only part of the job. The younger the kids, the less written work they produce BUT the more preparation is generally required for lessons (lots of practical activities, cutting, laminating etc!).
I forgot to mention data. Yes, we only have 30 kids to track, but we have to track their reading, writing, speaking and listening, SPAG, numeracy, science and (to a lesser extent) all the foundation subjects (topic, computing, RE, PE, MFL).
Thanks for the detailed response. It definitely sounds similar to what a secondary teacher does, other than the marking, which is way lighter.

Original post by TraineeLynsey
I agree that secondary English pupils will be writing more (I often wonder if a secondary maths teacher has as much marking as a secondary English teacher...)


It doesn't even compare. Maths is objective: it's right or wrong. Now of course if a kid gets it wrong then the teacher has to take a step back and work out what to suggest to them, but it is not half as time-consuming as marking a piece of writing, which is far more subjective and with far more factors to deal with. A maths teacher told me he can mark a stack of class assessments in half an hour. I'd be lucky if I could mark 30 assessments in 6 hours.

Original post by TraineeLynsey
but marking is only part of the job. The younger the kids, the less written work they produce BUT the more preparation is generally required for lessons (lots of practical activities, cutting, laminating etc!).


True: I can see how there's more resources to make.
(edited 8 years ago)
Original post by Squoosh25

It doesn't even compare. Maths is objective: it's right or wrong. Now of course if a kid gets it wrong then the teacher has to take a step back and work out what to suggest to them, but it is not half as time-consuming as marking a piece of writing, which is far more subjective and with far more factors to deal with. A maths teacher told me he can mark a stack of class assessments in half an hour. I'd be lucky if I could mark 30 assessments in 6 hours.


Yeah it's a similar situation in primary. I hate marking my literacy books when they've done a piece of extended writing, but would happily mark maths all day long, lol.
Original post by myrtille
It's not bad, in terms of an annual salary. Certainly in the Midlands/North it's a decent amount to start off on, and as you go up the payscale you can live quite comfortably.

I was on M1 last year, went up to M2 in the Autumn term and have just gone up to M4 after applying for pay progression.

My partner is out of work, so I pay for all the rent, food, transport costs etc., and we still do OK. We can afford cheap holidays, meals out, new clothes etc. - not constantly, but we do have treats. Now I've had a pay rise I'm hoping to put more money in my savings.


What is bad is the workload in relation to the pay. But I don't think more money is the solution. Ultimately, the reason my money goes a long way is that I don't have time to go out spending very often. They need to do something about teachers' workload, not throw money at the problem.


How do you progress up the pay scale and how often does it happen? I heard teachers only progress if their performance is good but I'm not sure how it's measured.

Let's not start an argument about who does the most work. It's obvious that primary and secondary teachers have equal amounts of work, just in different ways.
Original post by Veggiechic6
How do you progress up the pay scale and how often does it happen? I heard teachers only progress if their performance is good but I'm not sure how it's measured.

Let's not start an argument about who does the most work. It's obvious that primary and secondary teachers have equal amounts of work, just in different ways.


No one's arguing - just sharing our experiences. People rarely have experience in both settings, so that's the only way to appreciate the reality of those in a different setting.
Original post by TraineeLynsey
No one's arguing - just sharing our experiences. People rarely have experience in both settings, so that's the only way to appreciate the reality of those in a different setting.

Yeah, it was just the OP's assertion and Squoosh25's that primary was somehow less workload than secondary that annoyed me slightly. It's an obviously inflammatory thing to say that leads to nothing good, especially coming from people who haven't worked in the sector. It's like when non-teachers say to us 'it must be nice to finish at 3.30pm'. :angry:
Original post by TraineeLynsey
Yeah it's a similar situation in primary. I hate marking my literacy books when they've done a piece of extended writing, but would happily mark maths all day long, lol.


How is the pay like? Do u enjoy teaching? I'm Co side ring teaching but im going to try looking for work experience. ..

Quick Reply