College staff reject compulsory professional body in fees row

A survey by UCU published today has delivered a damning indictment of the professional body for further education lecturers, as less than one-fifth (19.7%) of respondents said they thought the Institute for Learning (IfL) fulfils its role.
 
The results come in the wake of a controversial announcement by the IfL that its members, who are compelled to join if they work in further education, will have to fork out an annual membership fee of £68 from April - a cost previously picked up by government.
 
The equivalent organisation for schoolteachers, the General Teaching Council, has been axed. Teachers forced to join the GTC were charged half (£36.50) the rate that college professionals will now have to stump up.
 
The survey,  of which part aimed to elicit UCU members' attitudes, experience and perceptions of IfL, found that half (49%) of respondents answered 'no' to the question, 'Do you think IfL fulfils the role of professional body for further education senior lecturers?' A further 31.2% answered 'don't know' to that question and a minority of just 19.7% answered 'yes'.
 
The key benefits of IfL membership are seen as access to the website and an online tool that allows members to log the 30 hours of professional development they are required to do each year. However, over half of respondents (53.1%) branded the website 'difficult to use' and only two-fifths (42.4%) thought the online log was 'fit for purpose'.
 
Over half (51.4%) believed there should not be a requirement to join IfL, while a massive 84% said they would not be happy to pay for membership. The survey was conducted before plans for the new membership charge were announced.
 
The union said that if IfL really prided itself on being member-led then it needed to axe plans to charge the £68 fee if it was to survive with any credibility. IfL membership peaked at around 1,000 before it was compulsory for lecturers to join. It is now around 200,000.
 
Comments made at the end of the survey (see notes) were largely negative and reflected widespread resentment to the enforced joining of an organisation which many see as not supporting them in day-to-day work, nor adequately representing their professional interests.
 
UCU general secretary, Sally Hunt, said: 'The results of this survey seriously damage the credibility of the Institute for Learning. Far too many teachers and lecturers do not believe it is fulfilling its role satisfactorily.
 
'Now they are being asked to pay for the privilege of a membership which many see as having scant, if any, real benefits, our members can no longer contain their anger. Following the axing of the General Teaching Council, it is only college staff who have to pay to join a professional body; a privilege that few of them want. If the IfL is to survive with any credibility it must axe plans for the imposition of membership fees.'

Notes

The online survey, carried out between October 2010 and January 2011, of 4,000 UCU members produced 908 responses.
The survey included those working in general further education colleges, tertiary colleges, specialist colleges, adult and community education, private and independent providers and prison education.
 
Examples of comments

• 'I have not seen the IfL add significantly to education debates in the media or develop any authority as a voice in education.'
• 'Close IfL down  - it's insulting to us, a self-serving gravy train and an appalling waste of money.'
• 'Enforced joining is the only way they are existing.'
• 'IfL are weak and do not speak to us or for us.'
• '[IfL is] very remote from my day to day work'
• 'I'm not sure exactly what this organisation does.'
• 'It seems to be a well-meaning organisation that has been "forced" on teachers, rather than a fully recognised professional body which teachers can join if they wish.'