A Self-evaluation Manual for Initial Teacher Training - 2011 (1)

7/29/2019 A Self-evaluation Manual for Initial Teacher Training - 2011 (1)

1/53

Aself-assessmentmanualfor

initialteachertraining2010


2/53

The purpose of Estyn is to inspect quality and standards in education andtraining in Wales. Estyn is responsible for inspecting:

nursery schools and settings that are maintained by, or receive funding from,local authorities;

primary schools; secondary schools; special schools; pupil referral units; independent schools; further education; adult community learning; youth and community work training; local authority education services for children and young people; teacher education and training;

work-based learning; careers companies; and offender learning.

Estyn also:

provides advice on quality and standards in education and training in Wales tothe Welsh Government and others; and

makes public good practice based on inspection evidence.

Every possible care has been taken to ensure that the information in this document is

accurate at the time of going to press. Any enquiries or comments regarding thisdocument/publication should be addressed to:

Publication SectionEstynAnchor CourtKeen RoadCardiffCF24 5JW or by email to [email protected]

This and other Estyn publications are available on our website: www.estyn.gov.uk

Crown Copyright 2011. This report may be re-used free of charge in anyformat or medium provided that it is re-used accurately and not used in amisleading context. The material must be acknowledged as Crown copyrightand the title of the report specified.


3/53

Contents Page

Foreword

1 Introduction

2 Effective self-evaluation

3 The process of self-evaluation

4 Self-evaluation and improvement planning

5 Self-evaluation and the Quality Assurance Agency (QAA)

6 Self-evaluation and the Common Inspection Framework (CIF)

Estyn 2010: the Common Inspection Framework

Guidance on undertaking self-evaluation against the CIF

How do we evaluate standards?

ContextPoints for considerationUseful references

How do we evaluate wellbeing?


How do we evaluate learning experiences?

ContextPoints for consideration

Useful references

How do we evaluate teaching?


How do we evaluate care, support and guidance?

Context

Points for considerationUseful references

1

2

3

4

6

7

8

9

10

11

111314

14

141617

18

1819

20

20

202223

23

23

2527


4/53

How do we evaluate the learning environment?


How do we improve the quality of our leadership?


How do we improve the quality of what we do?

ContextPoints for consideration

Useful references

How do we evaluate the effectiveness of our partnership working?


How do we evaluate the effectiveness of our resource management?


7 The self-evaluation report

8 Tools to support self-evaluation

27

272829

29

293031

32

3233

34

35

353536

37

373838

39

49


5/53

A self-evaluation manual for initial teacher training providers2011

1

Foreword

I am very pleased to introduce this first edition of Self-evaluation manual for initialteacher training (ITT) providers. Self-evaluation has become increasingly embedded

across education and training in Wales, and has contributed to improving quality andprovision, raising the attainment and achievement for all learners.

As a reflective professional process, self-evaluation enables ITT providers to get toknow themselves well, identify their agenda for improvement and promote innovationand sector-leading practice. Crucially, where the self-evaluation process focuses onimpact and outcomes, it leads to improvements in the educational experiences andoutcomes for learners.

This guidance is designed to support ITT providers self-evaluation activities,including annual quality development planning. Estyn has promoted thedevelopment of self-evaluation across all sectors for many years.

While the guidance is comprehensive, it is not intended to be definitive. There arereferences to other useful tools and sources of information that providers may wish todraw upon.

I am delighted to commend this guidance to you in taking forward our collectivecommitment to continuous improvement and excellence for all.

Ann KeaneHer Majestys Chief Inspector of Education and Training in Wales


6/53


2

1 Introduction

The terms self-evaluation and self-assessment are often used interchangeably inhigher education. For this manual, self-evaluation refers to the process by which ITT

providers (including their partners) evaluate the quality of their provision and traineesachievements through the systematic analysis of a range of sources. Sometimes thiswill involve self-assessment, which implies the use of measurement against setcriteria. Both self-evaluation and self-assessment involve a process of review andusually the preparation of a summary document, such as a self-evaluation report. Itis widely recognised that good self-evaluation is an important tool in planning forimprovement. In initial teacher training (ITT), the prime purpose of self-evaluation isto improve the standards achieved by trainees. While every aspect of an ITTproviders provision is a legitimate focus for self-evaluation, these should all lead to aview on how well trainees achieve.

Figure 1: Examples of focus areas for self-evaluation

There is no single formula or approach for self-evaluation. This manual linksself-evaluation to Estyns Common Inspection Framework (CIF). The CIF,comprising 10 quality indicators and 31 aspects, is not intended to replace orduplicate the documents regularly produced by providers to evaluate qualityassurance for other audiences. These documents can be drawn upon wherenecessary and made available for scrutiny during inspections. But the CIF does

provide a useful framework for self-evaluation.

Trainees'standards

Learning&Teaching

Leadership

Partnerships Resourcemanagement

Curriculum


7/53


3

2 Effective self-evaluation

Effective self-evaluation can bring about a shift in the institutions culture byformalising and extending existing quality assurance processes, sharing expertise,

and implementing organisational change. Effective self-evaluation:

Is open and honest;

has trainees achievements and experiences as the principal focus;

is a continuous process;

is embedded in strategic planning and draws on regular quality assuranceprocedures;

involves staff at all levels in assessing outcomes and their performance;

systematically seeks the views of trainees and consults other stakeholders, suchas partnership schools and employers, where appropriate;

seeks to make judgements in the light of measurable performance data and toidentify trends over time;

leads to development plans which are monitored against clear targets andsuccess criteria; and

results in improvement in standards and quality for trainees.

Self-evaluation is not an exercise that can be carried out by leaders or a task-groupworking in isolation. It can be influential only when all stakeholders contribute to theprocess, are aware of the findings and take action based upon them.

The judgements made during self-evaluation should be:

secure based on sufficiently robust, reliable and accessible evidence;

first-hand based on direct observation;

reliable based on common, well-understood criteria;

valid accurately reflecting what is achieved and provided;

free of bias valuing equality of opportunity and diversity; and

corporate reflecting the collective view of trainees, staff, partnership schools,employers and other relevant stakeholders.

Self-evaluation should be based on a wide range of information about strengths and

areas for improvement which is collected throughout the year, though it will often beappropriate to conduct some aspects of self-evaluation at longer intervals, and notnecessarily each year. Effective self-evaluation will draw upon data analysis tosupport and justify its judgements. Without such data, evaluations are likely to belittle more than assertions. Where possible, data analysis should be based on trends(over three years) rather than for one year. Any self-evaluation programme shouldinclude observation of teaching/training and learning activities. These observationsprovide important evidence of trainees achievements and progress in learning.

Self-evaluation should also take into account findings arising from peer observations.Discussions with trainees, mentors and tutors can prove a key source of evidence

for trainees achievement, attitudes and wellbeing. Trainees should haveopportunities to be involved in the process of self-evaluation, for instance by offering


8/53


4

their views through questionnaires and appointed representatives. The views ofother stakeholders, such as headteachers, governors, and school mentors/seniormentors, can also be gathered through surveys. Increasingly, trainees make use ofinformation and communication technology (ICT) in the preparation and presentationof assignments, to support seminars and workshops, exchange information, and

record their progress against the standards for qualified teacher status. Workscrutiny needs to include these digital sources.

Figure 2: Key methodologies to inform self evaluation

Section 8 provides further information on some of the most common self-evaluationtools and how these might be used in ITT contexts.

3 The process of self-evaluation

Self-evaluation is a process, not an event. It is the first, essential step in a cyclicalprocess of bringing about change and improvement. It is based on professionalreflection, challenge and support among practitioners. Effective self-evaluationinvolves taking wide-ranging decisions about actions which result in clear benefits forall learners. Most of all, it is about striving for excellence. At the heart ofself-evaluation are three questions noted in figure 3:

Figure 3: Core questions for self-evaluation

dataanalysis observations workscrutiny discussions questionnaires

Howwellarewedoing?

Howdoweknow?

Howcanwe

improvethings

further?


9/53


5

Higher education institutions are familiar with the cyclical process of planning,implementation and review through such activities as preparing self-evaluationdocuments for the QAA and other audiences. ITT providers can readily draw uponthese experiences in preparing for Estyn inspections.

The process of self-evaluation should be continuous anda regular part of the ITTproviders working life. It is probable that some aspects of quality and standards willbe evaluated more frequently than others.

ITT providers should use information from self-evaluation to plan for improvements,undertake improvement work, and ensure a regular cyclical process of monitoringand evaluation that leads to further improvement.

The diagram below shows the cyclical nature of effective self-evaluation along thePlan, Do and Review model.

Figure 4: Cycle of self-evaluation

It is a mistake to view self-evaluation as a one-off event. Ongoing activities includethe following:

analysis of data from examinations, tests or assessment activities at differentlevels: individual trainee, course, module/learning area, department, partnershipschool, as well as at whole ITT provider level;

evaluating the quality of trainees written and practical work; observations of teaching and training by peers and managers;

evaluating the quality of curriculum planning and assessment, recording andreporting;

sampling the views of trainees, staff, employers and other stakeholders;

auditing practice against policies and procedures such as those for safeguardingor health and safety;

reviewing progress against development plans; and

researching best or different practice from other ITT providers and highereducation courses.

Planningforimprovement

(Plan)

Undertakingimprovementwork(Do)

Monitoringandevaluatingimprovement

(Review)


10/53


6

4 Self-evaluation and improvement planning

ITT providers should use information from self-evaluation to plan for improvement.The relationship between self-evaluation and improvement planning is noted in figure

5.

Figure 5: Self-evaluation and improvement planning

Effective development plans:

are based on the outcomes of self-evaluation and are cross-referenced to

evidence; contribute to further self-evaluation;

are embedded in the ITT providers and universitys planning cycles;

have clear priorities, targets, timescales and specific actions;

identify persons responsible for actions, timescales and resource implications;

specify clear outcomes against which progress can be measured; and

give details of how, when and by whom progress will be monitored andevaluated.

Developmentplansnewpriorities

CompletionofSERbestpractice,strengths,areasforimprovement

Implementation

gatheringdata,monitoring(who,what,when)

Improvementplanningbeginsactionplans(who,what,when,resources,timescales)

PrioritiesidentifiedannualreviewandotherQAprocesses


11/53


7

5 Self-evaluation and the Quality Assurance Agency (QAA)

The Quality Assurance Agency (QAA) reviews higher education institutions (HEIs)and the degrees they offer. The QAA requires each HEI to produce a self-evaluation

document outlining its approach to managing the security of the academic standardsof its awards and the quality of its educational provision, and offering a view of theeffectiveness of that approach. (QAA, 2009: 6)1

The QAA suggests six questions to frame the self-evaluation, namely:

What are we trying to do?

Why are we doing it?

How are we doing it?

Why is that the best way to do it?

How do we know it works? How can we improve it?

The first three questions adopt a descriptiveapproach and the later ones take a more reflectiveview.

Like the QAA, Estyn is concerned with standardsand the quality of educational provision. Bothorganisations want to know how well the provideroperates, the grasp it has on student achievement

and the steer provided by its leaders. In some cases, staff mainly responsible forinitial teacher training may contribute to preparation for the QAA institutional review.Their views, together with the QAAs report, should help Estyn gain an understandingof the culture of self-evaluation within the institution.

1QAA (2009), Handbook for Institutional Review Wales, 2nd edn, QAA


12/53


8

6 Self-evaluation and the Common Inspection Framework (CIF)

Inspections provide an important external assessment of the work of ITT providersover a six-year cycle. Inspection can help ITT providers to focus on what needs to

be done and on how to bring about a step change in the quality and consistency oflearning.

The starting point for inspection is the ITT providers evaluation of its ownperformance, supported by relevant performance information. Inspectors will notinspect all aspects of work in depth during a core inspection. The ITT providersself-evaluation report(SER), referred to in section 7, will guide inspectors in thesampling of evidence to verify the ITT providers evaluation of its work and in theformulation of lines of enquiry.

The Common Inspection Framework (CIF) provides a comprehensive checklist of allthe key matters that ITT providers should review when conducting their ownself-evaluation. Estyn anticipates that all ITT providers will produce an annualself-evaluation report that covers the issues in the CIF although there is noprescribed format (see section 7).

Estyns 2010 inspection arrangements recognise that the ITT sector has developedcomprehensive systems for self-evaluation and development planning over manyyears. This progress is reflected through a more proportionate approach toinspection from September 2010.


13/53


9

Estyn 2010: Common Inspection Framework

The CIF might be used as a checklist for regular self-review in meetings with staff,trainees and partner schools.

KQ

Qualityindicator

Aspect Reviewdate

Points tonote

1

OUTCOME

S

1.1 Standards 1.1.1 results and trends in performance compared withnational averages, similar providers and priorattainment

1.1.2 standards of groups of learners1.1.3 achievement and progress in learning1.1.4 skills1.1.5 Welsh language

1.2 Wellbeing 1.2.1 attitudes to keeping healthy and safe1.2.2 participation and enjoyment in learning1.2.3 community involvement and decision making

1.2.4 social and life skills

2

PROVISION

2.1 Learningexperiences

2.1.1 meeting the needs of learners andemployers/community

2.1.2 provision for skills2.1.3 Welsh language provision and the Welsh

dimension2.1.4 education for sustainable development and global

citizenship

2.2 Teaching 2.2.1 range and quality of teaching approaches2.2.2 assessment of and for learning

2.3 Care,support andguidance

2.3.1 provision for health and wellbeing, includingspiritual, moral, social and cultural development

2.3.2 specialist services, information and guidance

2.3.3 safeguarding arrangements2.3.4 additional learning needs

2.4 Learningenvironment

2.4.1 ethos, equality and diversity2.4.2 physical environment

3

LEADERSHIP

3.1 Leadership 3.1.1 strategic direction and the impact of leadership3.1.2 governors or other supervisory bodies3.1.3 meeting national and local priorities

3.2 Improvingquality

3.2.1 self-evaluation, including listening to learners andothers

3.2.2 planning and securing improvement3.2.3 involvement in networks of professional practice

3.3 Partnershipworking 3.3.1 strategic partnerships3.3.2 joint planning, resourcing and quality assurance

3.4 Resourcemanagement

3.4.1 management of staff and resources3.4.2 value for money


14/53


10

Guidance on undertaking self-evaluation against the CIF

There follows a commentary on using the CIF for self-evaluation. Quality indicatorsand aspects are highlighted up front:

For each quality indicator, an overarching question is posed to frame discussions:

This is followed by a brief section that sets the question in context. It should be readin conjunction with the guidance.

Further questions and prompts are then included for more focused self-evaluationlinked to each quality indicator and aspects. These questions can be prefaced withTo what extent

These questions are not exhaustive and do not need to be discussed in sequence.


15/53


11

For instance, one question could be selected as a focal point for a team meetingsuch as a Partnership Committee.

Examples of references are noted for follow-up reading. Two of the most importantthroughout the manual are highlighted here.

Finally, a ribbon table is included of the most frequently used sources of evidence.These could be prioritised for each discussion point. Annex 2 of Guidance for theinspection of initial teacher training from September 2010 (Estyn, 2010) provides a

more detailed list of sources.

How do we evaluate standards?

Context

1.1.1 The starting point for evaluating the performance of ITT providers is their

recruitment rates and the progress trainees make towards the award of qualifiedteacher status (QTS). In particular, ITT providers should assess the performance oftrainees own literacy, numeracy and ICT skills and how well trainees use these tosupport pupils learning. In the case of undergraduate programmes, the results ofdegree classifications should also be considered. Monitoring standards helps inevaluating the impact of the quality of provision and of leadership.

Effective self-evaluation makes judgements in the light of measurable performancedata. A rigorous system of tracking and monitoring trainees progress against theQTS standards is essential to drive continuous improvement and to be able toprovide targeted support for trainees. An analysis of internal and external

benchmarking data enables ITT providers to identify good features as well as areasfor improvement (for possible data sources, see annex 2 of Guidance for the

observations workscrutiny

displays questionnaires discussions case studies dataanalysis

course docs

1.1 Standards 1.1.1 results and trends in performance compared with

national averages, similar providers and priorattainment

1.1.2 standards of groups of learners1.1.3 achievement and progress in learning1.1.4 skills1.1.5 Welsh language


16/53


12

inspection of initial teacher training from September 2010, Estyn, 2010).Performance should be compared to other Welsh and UK benchmark data, whileacknowledging that all ITT providers have their own unique characteristics.Performance should be assessed over a period of time, usually three years, ratherthan concentrating on performance in a single year. The key question is whether

performance is improving, declining or fluctuating over time.

1.1.2 The performance of particular groups should be considered, for exampletrainees from ethnic minority backgrounds, trainees with disabilities or those learningWelsh from homes outside Wales with no experience of the Welsh language.

1.1.3 Aside from using data, assessment of trainees achievement and progressshould be based on observations of university training sessions, scrutiny of traineeswork, observations of trainees teaching and discussions with trainees and otherstakeholders. The focus should be on how well trainees recall previous learning,acquire new knowledge, understanding and skills, and develop as reflective

practitioners. A programme of observations could include:

focused session observation related to a particular theme, such as trainees useof ICT or bilingualism;

joint observations of trainees teaching by tutors and mentors; and

observation of mentor and other in-service training.

These observations could be conducted by senior managers, immediate colleagues,those from other parts of the university and peers from other ITT providers. Overtime, it should be possible to build up a clear picture of particular strengths and areasfor development that inform planning.

Well-framed questionnaires for trainees, headteachers, senior mentors, mentors andemployers can provide further information on how trainees are progressing. It isimportant for ITT providers to survey the views of employers about the fitness of thenewly qualified teacher to take up a first teaching post.

1.1.4 There are many sources that contribute to a view on particular skillsdemonstrated by trainees. In literacy, numeracy and ICT these include:

audits in Welsh and English;

initial screening assessments; results of other relevant assessments;

the quality of trainees assignments;

communication skills evident in simulated reports to parents/carers;

standards of board presentation;

effective use of ICT to support administration and teaching; and

the quality of trainees teaching, marking and pupil support in relation to theseareas.

Trainees skills in working alongside others, solving problems and thinking creativelycan be evaluated through discussions, observations of seminars and workshops andwork scrutiny.


17/53


13

1.1.5 In evaluating learners Welsh language development, consideration needs tobe given to the linguistic background of trainees and the extent to which they are ableto:

use and promote the Welsh language in their work in school; and

teach bilingually, where appropriate.

Observations of both university and school-based sessions will furnish evidence oftrainees standards of oracy. A review of assignments, displays, marking of pupilswork and planning files will add further evidence of their written skills in Welsh andEnglish.

Points for consideration

How good are results and trends in performance compared with nationalaverages, similar providers and prior attainment? 1.1.1

Are we doing as well, or even better, than we were three years ago?

Are we doing as well as we could be or is there any room for improvement?

Are most trainees making demonstrable progress in meeting the QTS standardsfrom one school-based experience to the next?

Does trainees assignment work reflect a good understanding of teaching andlearning theories and good analysis of their own teaching and work in school?

In which programmes and courses do trainees do best? In which programmesand courses do trainees do less well? What are the factors that contribute to thisvariation and do they vary over time?

How good are the standards of groups of trainees? 1.1.2

Does the achievement of our trainees who need extra support compare withthose who do not?

Do trainees undertaking work at M level achieve well?

Do trainees pursuing their courses mainly through the medium of Welshcompare with those who are studying mainly through the medium of English?

Are there patterns to the circumstances behind the deferment or withdrawal oftrainees from programmes? What are the implications?

How good are trainees achievement and progress in learning? 1.1.3

Do trainees make good progress in university-based sessions and/or self-study?

Do trainees recall and apply previous learning?

Do trainees have a clear understanding of the QTS standards and what theyhave to achieve to pass the ITT course?

Do trainees effectively monitor their own progress against the QTS standards?

Do trainees acquire new knowledge, understanding and skills in line with theQTS standards?

Do trainees apply their knowledge, understanding and skills in relation to QTS

standards to new situations? Do trainees become reflective practitioners?


18/53


14

How good are trainees skills? 1.1.4

Do trainees achieve well in audits of literacy, numeracy and ICT?

Do trainees have the skills in literacy, numeracy and ICT needed to teacheffectively?

Do all trainees, including those who speak Welsh or English as a secondlanguage, have the linguistic skills needed to access the teacher trainingprogramme?

Do trainees apply their skills to their own work and their work with pupils withoutsupport?

Do trainees think creatively in solving problems?

Do trainees demonstrate higher-order skills, such as critical analysis, whenresearching and presenting assignments?

How good are trainees Welsh language skills? 1.1.5

Do trainees audit their skills in Welsh and seek to improve them?

Do trainees make good use of Welsh during school experiences, for instance intheir planning of sessions, formal Welsh lessons, incidental Welsh and bilingualdisplays?

Do trainees teach bilingually, where appropriate?

Do those trainees whose first language is Welsh regularly audit their Welsh toensure that they are able to teach meaningfully through the medium of Welsh?

Useful references

Estyn (2010), Guidance for the inspection of initial teacher training from September2010, Cardiff: EstynWelsh Assembly Government (WAG) (2009), Becoming a Qualified Teacher:Handbook of Guidance, Cardiff: WAGwww.Teachers.tv/videos/problem-based-learning

How do we evaluate wellbeing?

Context

1.2.1 In recent years the concept of wellbeing has become prominent in education,particularly at school level. It has long been recognised that health and wellbeing are



course docs

1. 2 Wellbeing 1.2.1 attitudes to keeping healthy and safe1.2.2 participation and enjoyment in learning1.2.3 community involvement and decision making1.2.4 social and life skills


19/53


15

wide-ranging and related concepts as early as 1946 the World Health Organisationdefined health as a state of complete physical, mental and social well-being and notmerely the absence of disease or infirmity.2 The World Health Organisation (1986)added to this definition reflecting what was achievable, describing health as theextent which an individual or group is able on the one hand to realise aspirations and

satisfy needs; and on the other hand, to change or cope with the environment.3

Theroot of the word health derives from an old German term whole and coveredsoundness of mind, body and spirit, exemplified when a toast was drunk to apersons welfare. Health then is viewed as a resource for intellectual, emotional,social and spiritual development (Holmes, 2005). The biological relationshipbetween physical health and emotional wellbeing is becoming increasinglyrecognised. Wellbeing involves experiencing feelings of worthiness and a positiveself-image.

The mental, physical and emotional wellbeing of trainees are essential pre-conditionsfor successful training and sustaining good health in a teaching career. In recent

years the challenges associated with managing workload in the teaching professionhave led to such developments as the introduction of Planning, Preparation andAssessment (PPA) time. Although trainee teachers do not qualify for PPA time, howthey make use of their non-contact hours will be a good indicator of their work-lifebalance during school experiences. In learning to manage workload, trainees needto consider how much time and effort they devote to their work, family and social life;their understanding of eating well and exercising regularly plays an important part inthis balance.

ITT providers have a duty of care towards trainees. This includes their health andsafety both at university and during school experiences. In evaluating traineesstandards of wellbeing, consideration needs to be given to the extent to which theyare fully aware of their rights and responsibilities, for instance in relation to theuniversity procedures for additional needs support, Disability Discriminationlegislation, and safeguarding procedures during school-based experiences.

1.2.2 Observations of trainees teaching will reveal the extent to which they enjoyworking in the profession. Regular discussions with trainees, for instance throughpersonal tutorials, may also reveal their attitudes towards teaching, study andmaintaining a healthy lifestyle. Their participation and enjoyment in learning will beindicated by their behaviour and attitudes in university and school based sessions,

the extent to which they have a say in what and how they learn and theresponsibilities that they demonstrate.

1.2.3 Increasingly, those entering the teaching profession will need to be equippedwith the skills to work as part of a professional community. The QTS standards (forinstance, S1 Promoting the school in the wider community and S1.6 Working withothers) make this clear. The extent to which trainees participate in thedecision-making processes that affect their programmes is an indicator of how wellthey are being prepared for the demands of teaching in the 21st century. Theproviders academic quality handbook should contain information about the

2

See Preamble to the Constitution of the World Health Organisation as adopted by the InternationalHealth Conference, New York, 19-22 June, 1946 at http://www.who.int/about/definition/en/print.html)3

World Health Organisation (1986), Ottawa Charter for Health Promotion, Geneva: WHO


20/53


16

representation of students in different committees. The level of trainee engagementin curriculum enrichment activities, such as conferences, workshops, visits andexhibitions, offered by the university should be considered. Estyn (2010b)recommends that trainees should have opportunities to work with a wider range ofprofessionals other than teachers, if they have not been able to do so during their

placements.

1.2.4 The emphasis upon the reflective practitioner model in ITT courses shouldfurnish evidence of how well trainees grow in confidence and develop their ownself-evaluative skills, in particular their self-awareness of how well they work withothers, solve problems, and what they need to do to become better teachers, as wellas their understanding of their own wider professional and personal needs. Furtherinsights into trainees views can be gained through questionnaires and interviewswith focus groups and programme representatives. Perceptions can be compared tohard evidence, for instance trainees attendance rates at university and data on theirpunctuality in schools.

Present-day trainees may still be teaching in 2050. Given the rate and nature ofeducational change, it seems rather foolish to predict the teaching environment of thefuture. But it is clear that trainees need to be equipped with a range of life skillsincluding: the management of knowledge, networking, empathy, teamwork,advocacy, communication, handling problems and skills for managing stress. Theyneed to demonstrate the professionalism embodied by the General Teaching Councilfor Waless Statement of Professional Values and Practice.


How good are trainees attitudes to keeping healthy and safe? 1.2.1

Do trainees understand school systems and know how to plan and organise theirwork to ensure they have time for family and social life?

Do trainees organise themselves to eat well?

Do trainees participate well in enrichment activities offered by the ITT provider?

Do trainees have strategies to deal with challenging pupils?

Are trainees appropriately trained in child protection procedures at university andin partnership schools?

Do trainees have a clear understanding of child protection procedures and how

to apply them should it become necessary?

How much do trainees participate in and enjoy their learning? 1.2.2

Are trainees demonstrating a professional manner in their attendance andpunctuality both in school and university-based sessions?

Are there are any variations in the attendance of particular groups of trainees?

Do trainees demonstrate professional behaviour in university-based and school-based work?

Do trainees demonstrate positive attitudes to their learning?

Do trainees make choices about how and what they learn? Are trainees views about what and how they learn taken seriously?


21/53


17

Do trainees discuss the topics to be taught and help to plan course work andactivities?

How good is our trainees involvement in the ITT programmecommunity? 1.2.3

Do trainees participate in university-based enrichment activities, such as sportsand music?

Do trainees participate in activities in their partnership school, such as clubs forpupils, staff meetings and open days?

Do trainees volunteer to help with ITT provider events?

Are trainees involved in discussions and the decisions about learning andteaching they receive and what impact does this have?

Are all trainees, including those from different groups, involved in makingdecisions about their life in university?

Are structures in place to ensure good liaison between trainee representativesand senior managers and/or the governing body?

Are trainees involved in the ITT providers self-evaluation?

How good are trainees social and life skills? 1.2.4

Are employers satisfied with the quality of trainees and their preparedness tocontribute to whole school life?

Do trainees show respect, care and concern for others, including other staff inschool and the pupils they teach?

Do trainees take responsibility for their actions and their work?

Do trainees develop emotional skills, including their self-confidence, self-esteemand resilience, which enable them to cope with the rigours of teaching?

Do trainees have the skills needed to improve their own learning, work withothers, solve problems and develop their thinking to move on to the next stage oflearning?

Do trainees develop and demonstrate soft skills such as negotiation, motivationand self-awareness?

Useful references

Estyn (2010), Guidance for the inspection of initial teacher training from September2010, Cardiff: EstynEstyn (2010b), A report on the standards and quality of initial teacher training inAdditional Learning Needs and Working with Others, Cardiff: EstynHolmes, E. (2005), Teacher Well-being, London: RoutledgeFalmerWAG (2009), Becoming a Qualified Teacher: Handbook of Guidance, Cardiff:WAG



course docs


22/53


18

How do we evaluate learning experiences?

Context

2.1.1 Initial teacher training programmes have experienced considerable change in

recent decades, in line with the introduction of the national curriculum in schools,revised standards for qualified teacher status and in the context of diversification inhigher education. ITT providers have modified their provision in response to nationalpriorities such as the growing emphasis on a skills-based school curriculum and thehigher profiles allocated to Welsh language provision, sustainable development andglobal citizenship. The Requirements for the Provision of Initial Teacher TrainingCourses (WAG Circular 017/2009, R2.1) make it clear that programme designunderpins all the other requirements on training and assessment. So the key issue isthe extent to which trainees have the learning opportunities they need to demonstratecompetence in meeting the Standards. This involves not only coherent, timetabledprovision in university and school experiences, but also how far trainees benefit from

extra-curricular activities and engage in professional learning communities, forinstance by contributing to conferences, online forums, workshops and exhibitions.

2.1.2 Programme handbooks and other documentation will indicate planning for thedevelopment of trainees literacy, numeracy, ICT, and thinking skills. A key issue isthe extent to which the programme structure enables trainees to develop their skillsin different contexts. These will include their skills of communicating with other adultsand pupils, as well as independence and initiative.

2.1.3 All trainees in Wales are required to follow courses to improve theirWelsh-language competence in accordance with their linguistic backgrounds and

starting positions. Providers need to reflect upon how well trainees linguistic needsare identified, tracked and supported through the programme. Discussions withtrainees, session observations, listening to Welsh-language conversations betweentrainees and monitoring the language model set by tutors and mentors will all provideuseful evidence when evaluating the quality of provision. The cultural, economic,environmental and historicalaspects of Welsh identity are as important as thelinguistic these should feature prominently in course documentation, traineesplanning files, displays, online materials and assignments. Tutor and mentorassessments of trainee sessions may also reveal how well trainees understand andmake appropriate use of the Curriculum Cymreig.

2.1.4 To gain QTS, trainees are required to demonstrate that they take appropriateopportunities to teach education for sustainable development and global citizenship

2.1 Learning experiences 2.1.1 meeting the needs of learners and employers/

community2.1.2 provision for skills2.1.3 Welsh language provision and the Welsh

Dimension2.1.4 education for sustainable development and

lobal citizenshi


23/53


19

in all relevant aspects of their teaching (S3.3.15). To do this effectively, traineesneed to see good role models in university-based and school sessions, to accessappropriate resources including specialist tutoring and to incorporate ESDGC withintheir planning and delivery. The extent to which ESDGC features within traineeassignments can indicate the relative importance the provider attaches to it.


How well do we meet the needs of trainees, employers and the community?2.1.1

Does the curriculum allow trainees opportunities to demonstrate the QTSstandards?

Is the curriculum engaging, challenging and stimulating?

Are courses equally accessible to all and, if there are constraints on traineechoice, is it in the trainees best interests?

Do trainees have access to courses that meet their interests, abilities, needs andlearning styles?

Are we successful in overcoming barriers to learners learning?

Do we have a range of partnership schools that will provide good qualitycomplementary placements?

Do the university-based and school-based curricula link cohesively?

Are senior mentors and mentors aware of the university-based curriculum andhow able are they to help trainees use theory to analyse their practice?

Do university and partnership school extra-curricular activities impact onlearners experiences and learning?

Do the systems in place help to identify trainees who are struggling with thecourse so that support and/ or counselling off can be provided?

How well do we provide for skills? 2.1.2

Do learning activities across the curriculum meet trainees needs in gaining andusing skills, particularly in literacy, numeracy and ICT?

Do we make sure trainees development of skills takes place across theuniversity-based and school-based parts of the course?

Does the provision for skills meet trainees individual skill needs, engage their

interest, develop their confidence and promote successful learning? Is the provision for skills properly co-ordinated so that they are embedded across

the course?

Is the development of trainees skills monitored and evaluated? What are theoutcomes of this?

How well do we provide for Welsh language provision and the Welshdimension? 2.1.3

Does the quality of our provision for Welsh language development enabletrainees to achieve good standards, taking into account linguistic starting points?

Do we support learners to maintain and further develop their existing Welshlanguage skills to be able to teach meaningfully through the medium of Welsh?


24/53


20

Do we encourage trainees to take up and achieve qualifications in Welsh?

Do we contribute to the trainees knowledge and understanding of the cultural,economic, environmental, historical and linguistic characteristics of Wales?

Do trainees understand how to plan and include appropriately the Welshdimension in their teaching?

.How well do we provide for sustainable development and global citizenship?2.1.4

Do we ensure that ESDGC is embedded across the programmes?

Do we give trainees the opportunity to develop ESDGC through extra-curricularactivities?

Do we measure the impact of ESDGC activities that are included in the ITTprogramme?

Do trainees know how to act sustainably?

Do we enable trainee to gain an appropriate level of awareness andunderstanding of sustainable development and of the knowledge, understanding,skills, attitudes and values necessary to help pupils become global citizens?

Do trainees incorporate ESDGC in their planning and teaching during schoolexperiences?

Useful references

Estyn (2010), Guidance for the inspection of initial teacher training from September2010, Cardiff: EstynWAG (2008), Education for Sustainable Development and Global Citizenship:

Information for Teacher Trainees and New Teachers in Wales. Informationdocument No: 066/2008WAG (2009), Becoming a Qualified Teacher: Handbook of Guidance, Cardiff:WAG, pp.142-161

How do we evaluate teaching?

Context

2.2.1 International research has shown that the quality of an educational systemcannot exceed the quality of its teachers (McKinsey Report, 2007). Getting the rightpeople into teaching, whether in the Foundation Phase or higher education, is

fundamental to achieving high standards. Teaching which is stimulating, engagingand challenging motivates learners to succeed.



course docs

2.2 Teaching 2.2.1 range and quality of teaching/trainingapproaches

2.2.2 assessment of and for learning


25/53


21

ITT providers should be familiar with a range of teaching and learning approachesincluding the use of web 2 technologies, problem-based learning and learningthrough scenarios (HEFCE, 2001; Punter, 2007). The Requirements for theProvision of Initial Teacher Training Courses (WAG Circular 017/2009, R4.5) statethat providers must systematically monitor and evaluate all aspects of provision to

improve its quality. As a starting point for evaluation, key documents such aspolicies on learning and teaching, marking and assessment and partnershipmaterials will provide an overview for judging this quality indicator. Institutionaldocuments, such as the Learning and Teaching Strategy, will also provide a widercontext to see how well the ITT provider fits in with the general direction of theinstitution. It is now increasingly recognised that good teaching in higher education isas much a function of an institutional-wide infrastructure as it is a gift with whichsome lucky academics are born (Biggs and Tang, 2007: 2). Self-evaluation thenneeds to explore what can be done to develop and sustain high-quality teachingincluding ready access to relevant resources, recognition of research and staffdevelopment opportunities.

During school-based experiences, self-evaluation should consider the quality oftraining including opportunities for trainees to observe good practice, approaches todebriefing and the level of critique offered by mentors. Post-lesson feedback totrainees requires a high level of skills in building confidence, offering constructiveways forward and encouraging reflective practice (Fish, 1995; Estyn, 2001). Thetraining role of the mentor is an important focus for self-evaluation because this iscritical to the success of trainees in achieving standards for QTS. It has long beenrecognised that the mentors role inevitably brings conflicts and tensions (Kerry andShelton-Mayes, 1995: 117) and a measure of the providers effectiveness is how wellthese are managed. Where providers know of excellent mentoring practice, an

important point for self-evaluation is the extent to which providers make the best useof resources, especially information and communication technologies, to share thisacross all partnership schools and beyond.

Document scrutiny will only provide part answers, mainly relating to planning. Tojudge the quality of teaching and training, a systematic programme of observationsneeds to be built into the timetable. Evaluation of the information on standards maylead to judgements about what is going well and not so well, but it is throughobservations and discussions that an ITT provider will find out the reasons why. Thekey issue in judging the quality of teaching, training and assessment is the impact ithas on learning and the standards achieved. Trainee feedback questionnaires on

university and school-based experiences should be regularly analysed and thefindings compared to other sources, before any recommendations link toimprovement planning.

Many higher education institutions have a long-established practice of peerobservation. A systematic approach is necessary to ensure that any evaluations arewell informed and based on reliable evidence. To work well, peer observation needsa common framework and shared assumptions about what is good teaching.Although peers act as critical friends, a distinction should be drawn betweenformative peer observation and appraisal; the former is designed to supportimprovements in teaching and training, while the latter often informs confidential

decisions about promotion and/or tenure. Both peer observation and appraisalshould form part of management practice.


26/53


22

2.2.2 HEIs will have a general assessment policy as part of their quality assurancearrangements. This is likely to include details such as objectives, the assessmentprocess, expectations relating to submission of work, extenuating circumstances,expectations of external examiners and procedures for student complaints andappeals. Accreditation of prior learning and supervision of dissertations will also

feature in quality assurance documentation. At the ITT provider level, specificmarking and assessment policies and partnership handbooks are likely to includeinformation about progress on school-based experiences, while programme/modulehandbooks will contain details such as assignment titles and the range ofassessments. Such documents are important sources in evaluating how well theprovider meets the assessment for learning agenda, although the impact will be seenin the quality of trainees work and how well they respond to feedback. Externalexaminer and internal moderator reports may point to general weaknesses inprovision such as inconsistency in assessment practice or lack of involvement oftrainees in self and peer assessment.


How well do we evaluate the range and quality of training approaches? 2.2.1

Do we have high expectations of all trainees?

Do we plan effectively and have clear objectives for university-based andschool-based training sessions and other learning experiences?

Is a range of training methods and resources used to interest trainees andstimulate and challenge them to achieve highly?

Are we successful in providing demanding work to meet the needs of all trainees,

for example mature students with young children? Do we communicate effectively with trainees?

Do we establish good working relationships with trainees that are appropriateand that foster learning?

Do we cause trainees to reflect and develop high professional standards?

Do we use technical and learning support staff effectively?

How well do we raise trainees achievement through assessment of and forlearning? 2.2.2

Do trainees regularly set their own targets and review their progress against theQTS standards?

Does the assessment process inform future ITT programme planning?

Do we analyse examination results, assignments and school experience reportsand use them to improve the ITT programmes?

Do we provide clear, systematic, manageable, consistent and useful records oneach trainee?

Do we use records to effectively track trainees progress, compare outcomeswith benchmarks and intervene in individual cases if necessary?

Do we involve headteachers, senior mentors and mentors fully in the traineesreview process?

Do we produce reports and reviews on trainees that are clear, consistent andinformative, and set out areas for improvement?


27/53


23

Do senior mentors and mentors in partnership schools understand assessmentprocedures and have access to records and reports relating to trainees?

Do we encourage senior mentors and mentors to respond to reports onprogress?

Are our external moderating procedures independent and rigorous enough in

supporting consistency of assessment?

Useful references

Biggs, J. and Tang, C. (2007), Teaching for Quality Learning at University,Maidenhead: Open University PressEstyn (2001), Good Practice in Mentoring Trainee Primary Teachers in Wales,Cardiff: EstynEstyn (2010), Guidance for the inspection of initial teacher training from September2010, Cardiff: Estyn.Fish, D. (1995), Quality Mentoring for Student Teachers, London: David FultonHEFCE (2001), Strategies for Learning and Teaching in Higher Education, London:HEFCEKerry, T. and Shelton Mayes, A. eds (1995), Issues in Mentoring, London:RoutledgeMcKinsey Report (2007), How the best-performing school systems come out on top,McKinseyPunter, A. (2007), Mentor Development for Teacher Training, Hatfield: University ofHertfordshire PressQAA (2009) Handbook for Institutional review: Wales, 2nd edition, Gloucester: QAAWAG (2009), Becoming a Qualified Teacher: Handbook of Guidance, pp.172-177

How do we evaluate care, support and guidance?

Context

2.3.1 ITT providers will know that teaching can be one of the most rewarding andmost stressful careers. Unless providers equip trainees with self-management skills

there are dangers that they will eventually implode, explode or walk away (Nias,1996). All those entering programmes leading to qualified teacher status should be



course docs

2.3 Care, support and guidance 2.3.1 provision for health and wellbeing,including spiritual, moral, social and

cultural development2.3.2 specialist services, information andguidance

2.3.3 safeguarding arrangements2.3.4 additional learning needs


28/53


24

made fully aware of the professional requirements relating to their fitness to teach.Providers selection and admissions procedures should ensure that all entrants havethe health and physical capacity to teach, based on the advice of the providersmedical adviser (DfTE, 2004: 5). Providers also need to be mindful of theimplications arising from the SEN and Disability Act (2001). They are required to

make reasonable adjustments for applicants with disabilities where thoseadjustments will enable them to teach; for instance, ensuring that a dyslexic applicanthas additional time to undertake a literacy task.

It is common practice in higher education for students to compile personaldevelopment plans or portfolios and these can prove useful sources for measuringthe impact of guidance on learners wellbeing. Research (Ashby et al., 2008)highlights the importance of what trainees bring to their ITT courses in terms ofcultural capital; they should be encouraged to explore at the outset their ownpreconceptions and beliefs, challenging these through reflection and discourse.

2.3.2 In evaluating care, support and guidance, the focus should be on the impact ofthese services on learners progress, standards and wellbeing. Research (Grigg,2010) has shown that trainees are often anxious over front-of-class delivery,particularly maintaining classroom discipline; they also express concern about ICTtechnical problems, assessment of pupils, the visits of external examiners andkeeping paperwork up-to-date. Self-evaluation should focus on how well trainees aresupported in developing time and stress management techniques, the pastoralcontribution of the school-based mentor and the quality of relationships. Traineesengaged in considerable periods of self-study need clear and supportive lines ofcommunicating with tutors and fellow students.

There should be a clear link between any judgements made about care, support andguidance to those on standards and wellbeing. ITT providers have a range ofwelfare services to support trainees personal development and the commitment tocontinuous improvement. These can include personal tutor systems, specialistacademic and counselling services, careers advice, medical services, additionalneeds panels, financial advisors and self-help resources.

2.3.3 Although dated, research has shown that, while child protection training wasprovided on most courses within the United Kingdom, coverage was found to bevaried in terms of length, timing, content and pedagogy (Baginsky and Hodgkinson,

1999). More recently, Estyn (2010b: 4) reports that Although most trainees have agood knowledge of child protection issues, a few are uncertain about how theyshould respond to a pupil who discloses allegations of abuse. Programmes need toreflect the most up-to-date legislation and guidance on child protection such as theAll Wales Child Protection Procedures (2008), which includes new mediums in whichabuse can occur.

2.3.4 The term additional learning needs is used in schools to describe thoselearners who have learning needs that are additional to the majority of their peers.It has a much broader scope than special educational needs; in higher education, theterms additional needs or additional support needs are sometimes preferred and

can apply to students requiring particular support other than meeting learning needs such as managing their finances. In some cases, mature trainees with young


29/53


25

families travel considerable distances to attend university-based sessions andself-evaluation might consider whether the timetable could be amended to meet theirneeds. Providers need to ensure that the programme provides opportunities for alltrainees to meet the QTS Standards.

HEIs will have interview arrangements for students with disabilities or additionalneeds where applicants are encouraged to disclose any disabilities or additionalneeds at the outset, such as dyslexia or hearing impairment. The rationale behindthis is to set up appropriate support facilities which may include programme deliveryand accommodation issues. There may also be additional needs panels to identifythe necessary actions required to facilitate the needs of students. Self-evaluationshould take into account how well these procedures work and whether the providerhas made reasonable adjustments to support the needs of trainees.

The extension of the Disability Discrimination Act to education and training meansthat providers must ensure that they are not discriminating against disabled

candidates, in either their selection procedures, their requirements for progressionand completion of training or provision of services. The provider must judge whetherthose admitted have the potential to meet the standards for QTS and decide, at theend of the training, whether they can be recommended for the award. Research inEngland (Ashby et al., 2008: 26) suggests that many trainees with disabilities feelthat providers put more emphasis on How you are going to cope? than onidentifying how to meet reasonably [their] needs.


How well do we meet the provision for health and wellbeing? 2.3.1

Do we have appropriate policies and arrangements for promoting healthy livingand trainees wellbeing? How well do these support trainees to achieveemotional and physical wellbeing?

Do we consider the views of trainees, tutors, senior mentors and mentors?

Do we encourage trainees to maintain a good work-study-life balance?

Do trainees feel valued? How do we know?

Are trainees physical, intellectual, social and spiritual needs met through ourprogrammes and extra-curricular activities?

Do we highlight for trainees the appropriate legislation in relation to pupil-teacher

relationships and the potential consequences of engaging in a pupil-teacherrelationship?

Do we highlight to drama and physical education trainees the Welsh guidance forteachers in these subjects?

Do we have suitable arrangements to report health and safety issues?

Do we have effective arrangements for dealing with harassment and bullyingincluding our arrangements for helping trainees to develop appropriateprofessional characteristics?

Do our trainees enjoy life in university and school?

Do we promote professional behaviour and regular attendance?

Do all trainees know whom to approach if they have a concern?


30/53


26

How well are learners supported with specialist services, information andguidance? 2.3.2

Do we provide trainees with individual support on educational and other issues?

Do we provide access to a wide range of information for trainees, including how

to apply and interview for a teaching post? Do trainees have full access to impartial guidance services?

Do we enable trainees to make use of professional support both from within theuniversity and from specialist service providers?

Do we liaise effectively with student support services to best support trainees?

Do we ensure that we have effective arrangements to ensure that all traineesreceive their basic entitlement to guidance and support?

Do we consider the coherence and effectiveness of the provision for personaland specialist support including the advice given to trainees on careers guidanceand development?

How good are our safeguarding arrangements? 2.3.3

Are our arrangements for safeguarding children appropriate for ITT and do theycomply with best practice and the Requirements for the Provision of InitialTeacher Training (R2.7 and Annex A)?

Do our partnership schools provide training for trainees about Child Protectionprocedures during their induction to each school experience?

Do our policy and procedures ensure that all university staff are trained and thatthey respond and comply with our safeguarding arrangements?

Does our policy set out:

the named senior member of staffs responsibilities for dealingsafeguarding issues and providing advice/support to other staff;

clear procedures that reflect the All Wales Child Protection Procedures2008 and the Safeguarding Vulnerable Groups Act 2006; and

arrangements for training?

Do we have effective recruitment, reporting and disciplinary arrangements for ourown staff and do our arrangements meet legal requirements?

How well do we meet the needs of trainees with additional learning needs?2.3.4

Do our policies and procedures make clear the support available to trainees? Do trainees in need take up the services available? Why?

Do we know our trainees needs?

Do our trainees with additional needs receive the necessary short or long-termsupport?

Do trainees receive additional support with literacy in Welsh and English,numeracy and ICT skills to help them to meet the demands of their ITTprogramme and credit aims?


31/53


27

Useful references

Ashby et al (2008), Beginning Teachers Experiences of Initial Teacher Preparation,Induction and Early Professional Development: A review of literature, London:DCSF

Estyn (2010), Guidance for the inspection of initial teacher training from September2010, Cardiff: EstynEstyn (2010b), Quality and standards in education and training in Wales: A reporton the quality of initial teacher training in Additional Learning Needs and Workingwith Others, Cardiff: EstynDfTE (2004), Guidance on the Education (Health Standards) (Wales) Regulations2004Grigg, R. (2010), Becoming an Outstanding Primary Teacher, London: LongmanNias, J. (1996), Thinking about feeling: the emotions in teaching, Cambridge Journalof Education, 26 (3), pp.293-306SSIA (2008), All Wales Child Protection procedures 2008, available from:http://www.awcpp.org.uk/index.htmlWAG (2009), Becoming a Qualified Teacher: Handbook of Guidance, Annex A.,Cardiff: WAG

How do we evaluate the learning environment?

Context

2.4.1 ITT providers and partnership schools need to provide a learning environmentthat helps trainees to succeed as well as they can. To be fully effective, an ITTprovider needs to be an inclusive community, where learners receive equal access toall areas of the ITT providers provision. Effective provision occurs when there is a

clear emphasis on recognising, respecting and celebrating diversity. For this aspect,self-evaluation should also consider how well the ITT provider contributes to thewidening participation agenda in higher education to enable all trainees todemonstrate the QTS standards.

2.4.2 It is also important that trainees have ready access to good quality, up-to-dateand relevant resources. In order to develop their study skills, trainees also need thebenefits of good accommodation, including ICT suites, teaching rooms and resourcecentres/libraries. Particularly during school-based experiences, providers need toconsider how they can support trainees in making the most of the learningenvironment. Questionnaires and reports from partnership committees, moderatorsand external examiners can prove to be useful sources in evaluating the quality ofthe learning environment trainees experience in schools. Internal audits, programme



course docs

2.4 Learning environment 2.4.1 ethos, equality and diversity2.4.2..physical environment


32/53


28

reviews and feedback from trainees also offer insights into the quality of the learningenvironment at university and school level.


How well do we assure the ethos, equality and diversity of our institution?2.4.1

Do we establish an ethos that is inclusive?

Do we take into account and value the diversity of trainees backgrounds and actappropriately on this information?

Do we offer equal access to the curriculum and challenge stereotypes intrainees attitudes, choices, expectations and achievements?

Do we develop inclusive attitudes and ensure that all trainees and staff are freefrom harassment?

Do we promote the prevention and elimination of oppressive behaviour includingbullying, sexism, racism, ageism and homophobia?

Are our policies and procedures effective in dealing with specific instances ofdiscrimination or oppressive behaviour?

Do we take reasonable steps to ensure that current and prospective learnerswith disabilities do not suffer less favourable treatment in the university or inpartnership schools?

Do we have a well-understood equality scheme and action plan that promoteequal opportunities and human rights? Does our policy meet statutoryrequirements?

Do we provide appropriate equality training for staff (and employers, where

appropriate)? Do we keep partnership schools aware of the universitys requirements regarding

equality and diversity?

Do we have an effective complaints policy that is known and understood byuniversity-based and school-based staff?

Do we monitor and promptly, objectively and effectively address any relatedissues or complaints that arise?

Do we provide trainees with individual support on educational and other issues?

How well do we ensure that the physical environment is appropriate for

trainees needs? 2.4.2

Are resources well matched to trainees needs in all learning environments?

Does the university accommodation provide a stimulating and well-maintainedlearning environment to support teaching, training and learning?

Is the university-based accommodation sufficient for the number of trainees?

Is the accommodation fit for the activities offered?

Do our partnership schools make available accommodation for trainees toprepare and teach effectively?


33/53


29

Useful references

Estyn (2010), Guidance for the inspection of initial teacher training.WAG (2009), Becoming a Qualified Teacher: Handbook of Guidance, R4.2.

How do we improve the quality of our leadership?

Context

3.1.1 Research (Bennett et al., 2003; Bolden et al., 2003) has drawn attention to thedifferent models of leadership in higher education including dispersed leadership(focusing on collective responsibilities), distributed leadership (with a focus ondelegated roles), and distributive leadership (with a focus on negotiated roles). Injudging the quality of leadership, attention should focus on impact rather than aparticular model or style, in particular the consequences of decisions taken by thesenior management team (SMT) which leads the ITT department, school or faculty.

Successful leadership teams work effectively together and have a sharedcommitment to excellence. They address staff underperformance directly and useappraisal systems effectively to provide support and set targets.

The SMT will operate within a wider university context in setting a strategic directionin ITT. Hence the lines of communication, both internally and externally, need to beopen and responsibilities clearly understood. Effective management should includefocused meetings in which key information, such as trainees performance data, isanalysed with specific action points arising. Committee structures should not resultin a washing machine effect in which decisions go round and round but remainunresolved.

3.1.2 The role of the governing body in higher education is to govern and not tomanage the institution. It is generally regarded as good practice for governors todraw up a schedule of delegation which sets out how major decisions (e.g. finance,admissions, appointments, investments) are made and by whom. Effectivegovernors have an appropriate overview of matters relevant to their responsibilities,including involvement in strategic direction and measuring performance.

3.1.3 Senior managers in the university need to take full account of relevantlegislation and guidance relating to ITT. Training programmes need to be planned

which reflect up-to-date knowledge of the priorities facing schools, such asdeveloping boys literacy skills or working within professional learning communities.



course docs

3.1 Leadership 3.1.1 strategic direction and the impact of leadership3.1.2 governors or other supervisory boards3.1.3 meeting national and local priorities


34/53


30

Managers also need to demonstrate their awareness of the socio-economic,environmental and technological drivers for change likely to affect schools and highereducation in the future.


How effective is our leadership? 3.1.1

Do our senior ITT managers work well as a team?

Do we have clear aims, strategic objectives, plans and policies that are focusedon meeting national ITT needs?

Are our plans appropriately focused and prioritised? Are they beingimplemented and monitored in a timely way?

Are lines of communication between all university-based and school-based staffclear and effective?

Are roles and responsibilities clearly defined and are the spans of responsibilityin senior and middle management teams viable and balanced?

Do all staff understand and fulfil their roles in direct relation to specific strategicaims, plans and responsibilities?

Do leaders manage their own time effectively and prioritise activitiesresponsively?

Do meetings focus on important issues of performance and core business andgenerate clear action points which are carried out as agreed?

Are our management and committee structures coherent with the strategicdirection of the ITT provision and do they address core issues?

How well do we use data to monitor performance?

Do we communicate high expectations to those we manage? Do we agree and achieve challenging and realistic targets for ourselves and

others?

Do we communicate the vision for our ITT provision well and explore how toachieve it, in collaboration with others?

Do we model and promote professional behaviours and values that contributepositively to creating an ethos where our trainees and staff feel valued?

Do we actively support and challenge everyone to do their best?

How well do we manage the performance of our staff in order to help them toimprove their practice?

Do we address issues of underperformance robustly and directly wherenecessary?

Does our performance management identify individual and whole-department/faculty training and development needs clearly? Do we prioritisethese appropriately and address fully?

Do all our staff have targets for improvement that support the delivery of thestrategic aims in our ITT development plans and other action plans?

How good is the work of senior university managers and governors linked toITT? 3.1.2

Do senior university managers and linked governors:


35/53


31

know how well we are doing compared to other ITT providers?

fulfil their statutory obligations and take full account of relevant legislation andguidance?

understand their roles?

have good information about the performance of the ITT provision and issues

that affect it? provide a sense of direction for the work in the department/faculty?

support our department/faculty as a critical friend?

hold the department/faculty to account for the standards and quality achieved?

take reasonable steps to inform trainees, members of staff, partnership schoolsor any other person of the procedures if they wish to make a complaint orappeal?

participate in training to help them do their work?

listen to the views of trainees and take these into account when takingdecisions?

make sure that complaints are dealt with promptly and fairly?

How well do we meet national and local priorities? 3.1.3

Are we clear about local and especially national priorities and do we have aconsistent and systematic view and strategy of how we will respond to them?

Do we take good account in our ITT programme of developments being initiatedin schools; e.g. School Effectiveness Framework?

Are we successful in meeting priorities, such as the reconfiguration of ITTprovision agenda?

Do we respond to the educational challenges of the local area by working with

other ITT providers, other agencies, the local authorities and schools in the areasserved by the ITT provider?

Useful references

Bennett, N., Wise, C., Woods, P., & Harvey, J. A. (2003), Distributed leadership: Fullreport (A review of the literature): National College of School Leadership, fromhttp://www.nationalcollege.org.uk/index.htmBolden, R., Gosling, J., Marturano, A. and Dennison, P. et al., (2003), A Review ofLeadership Theory and Competency Frameworks, University of Exeter, Centre for

Leadership Studies, available at:http://centres.exeter.ac.uk/cls/research/abstract.php?id=29The Leadership Foundation for Higher Education website:https://www.lfhe.ac.uk/research/observations work

scrutinydisplays questionnaires discussions case studies data

analysiscourse docs


36/53


32

How do we improve the quality of what we do?

Context

3.2.1 Self-evaluation is recognised as an essential driver for improving quality.The processes of self-evaluation and development planning should be a regular androutine part of the work of every trainers and mentors professional practice. The

focus of the ITT providers self-evaluation should be on identifying priorities forimprovement, monitoring provision and assessing outcomes. The process shouldinvolve a rigorous review of all aspects of ITT providers work and, most importantly,how these impact on the standards that learners achieve. A key consideration iswhether ITT provision is managed on the basis of an accurate evaluation of strengthsand areas for improvement. Leadership and management are unlikely to be good ifthere are no effective self-evaluation procedures.

In recent years there has been a discernible shift at all levels of education towardsthe learner and away from the teacher. This has been manifested in different ways,including accommodating learning styles, or as Biggs and Tang (2007: 15) put it:

teaching according to how students learn. There has also been a strong movetowards engaging students in all aspects of provision, in the context of the Listeningto learners or learner voice agenda. HEIs will have a range of mechanisms (e.g.questionnaires, representatives, staff/student committees, personal tutorials) throughwhich trainees can channel their views formally and on an informal basis. The viewsof other stakeholders, such as school representatives and tutors themselves, shouldalso be well integrated within the self-evaluation procedures.

3.2.2 The links between self-evaluation and improvement planning have alreadybeen highlighted. The cycle of continuous improvement means that priorities shouldbe based on the findings of self-evaluation. The test of good planning and good

monitoring is whether the actions have led to clear improvements. Where necessary,there may need to be direct intervention and support to improve performance. Itshould not be seen as a response to failure, but as intervention and support thatleads to substantive improvements.

Strategic collaboration can often bring about improvement. For ITT providers, thequality of the partnership with schools has a key bearing on the opportunities fortrainees to achieve well. However, the Furlong Review (2006: 12) acknowledged thechallenges faced by universities working alongside a wide variety of schools, noneof which are obliged to be engaged in initial teacher training. Under the newinspection arrangements, Estyns CIF (3.3.1) highlights the importance of schools

working with strategic partners including ITT institutions to build capacity forcontinuous improvement. It also emphasises the need for schools to be involved in

3.2 Improving quality 3.2.1 self-evaluation, including listening to learners

and others3.2.2 planning and securing improvement3.2.3 involvement in networks of professional

ractice


37/53


33

networks of professional practice (3.2.3), and ITT providers are in a strong position tomentor schools in this field.

The partnerships quality assurance arrangements will be an important source inevaluating the consistency of provision, especially assessment of trainees progress

against the standards for qualified teacher status. Where the provider has rigorousinternal and external moderation procedures in place, all stakeholders are likely tohave confidence in the partnership.

3.2.3 Well-established and successful partnerships with schools share commonexpectations and know their respective roles and responsibilities. ITT providers havean important role to play in contributing to and leading networks of professionalpractice, for instance in national/international research projects and, more locally, bybringing together partnership schools to review and moderate trainees progress.

Self-evaluation should consider how ITT providers can also play a key role in

supporting schools, local authorities and further education colleges in thedevelopment of their own professional learning communities (PLCs). Providers needto consider how well they monitor and capitalise on the research activity of tutors andmentors.


How well do we carry out self-evaluation, including listening to trainees andothers? 3.2.1

Do we use evidence to identify and confront underperformance or coastingperformance, identify improvement activity and set high but realistic targets andstandards?

Is self-evaluation a regular part of our working life?

Is it embedded in our strategic planning?

Is there thorough assessment and monitoring of data on standards and thequality of education, including consideration of trends and progress over time?

Do we draw on first-hand evidence of the quality of teaching, training andlearning?

Do we involve all staff in assessing outcomes and their own performance?

Do we encourage trainees to share their views and raise issues?

Do we take account of the views of our staff, trainees, partnership schools andother stakeholders?

Where appropriate, do we draw upon reviews by external agencies?

Does our self-evaluation lead to the formulation of our development plans andresult in improvement in standards and quality?

Do we agree and achieve challenging and realistic targets for ourselves andothers?

How do we plan and secure improvement? 3.2.2

Do we use information from self-evaluation to set priorities and appropriatelychallenging targets for improvement?


38/53


34

Have we prioritised the matters that we wish to improve?

Are we implementing sound strategies that are likely to bring about the desiredimprovements?

Do all staff play their part in implementing the strategies?

Where necessary, do we take early and direct intervention and support to

improve performance? Have we defined the actions for improvement in specified and realistic

timescales and allocated responsibility for their delivery?

Have we made sure that our priorities are supported by the allocation ofresources?

Have the actions we have taken had a positive effect and, where relevant, led tomeasurable improvements in standards?

Do we have a good or excellent track record in making improvements instandards and the quality of provision over recent years?

How are we involved in networks of professional practice? 3.2.3

Are tutors and mentors involved in networks within and beyond the universityand the partnership school?

Does our involvement in networks give us access to emerging knowledge aboutuniversity leadership, learning, teaching, training, standards and wellbeing?

Are we achieving a culture of collaboration within and across ITT providers?

How good are our arrangements to support the active engagement of all our staffin increasing their professional knowledge, understanding and skills, includingparticipation in university professional learning experiences and research?

Are all our staff supported well by continuous professional development?

Are all our staff acquiring new knowledge and skills to develop innovativeapproaches to learning teaching and training?

Are all our staff involved in direct observation of learning?

Do we reflect on our own practice and evaluate the impact of professionallearning on our trainees learning and wellbeing?

Useful references

Estyn (2010), Guidance for the inspection of initial teacher training from September2010, Cardiff: Estyn

Furlong Review (2006), Review of Initial Teacher Training in Wales, Cardiff: HEFCWStoll, L. and Louis, K.S. eds. (2007), Professional Learning Communities,Maidenhead: Open University PressStoll,

Documents

A Self-evaluation Manual for Initial Teacher Training - 2011 (1)