14 minute read
REFLECTIONS OF A LEARNER DRIvER
FEATURE FEATURE DO WE REALLY NEED A SHAKE-UP DO WE REALLY NEED A SHAKE-UP OF INITIAL TEACHER TRAINING? OF INITIAL TEACHER TRAINING?
In this article, Clive Hill explains the case for ITT reform, despite the In this article, Clive Hill explains the case for ITT reform, despite the understandable opposition to it from stakeholders across the education sector. understandable opposition to it from stakeholders across the education sector.
Advertisement
By Clive Hill By Clive Hill
E Education has been a politicalfootball for far too long, so it is good to see that consultations are being made with stakeholders from across the ITT delivery sector. The ITT Market Review takes into account the experiences of those coming into the profession, going some way to attempt to plug the haemorrhaging retention fi gures seen within the fi rst fi veyears of teaching. ITT providers have a critical role to play in this. Honest and thorough conversations need to be had to ensure that we maintain the independence of academia within the educational sector, while ITT is simultaneously informed by those at the ‘chalkface’ who mentor trainees and Early Career Teachers, tempering the ideals of academia against the anvil of classroom teaching.
Classroom teachers need to have this discourse with our university partners. We require academic rigour to maintain our professional status, in a career that is centred on us as teachers, being ambassadors for academia, to the next generation. But the DfE also needs to listen to the entire sector before rushing in head-fi rst. If we are retention fi gures seen within the fi rst fi ve- looking to the ITT Core Content Framework to be the far-reaching historic shake-up of teacher-training that it has the potential to be, then it must be done in a manner that does not disrupt the infl ux of teachers into the profession. Proceeding at pace will likely create gaps in ITT provision, jeopardising the stability of the sector, which will detrimentally impact schools and consequently the education of children across the country. We must avoid this.
discourse with our university partners. We
The importance of the ITT Core Content Framework
Reading the ITT Core Content Framework it is clear that both University, Independent, and Schoolbased ITT providers have been at the centre of the consultation. As someone that benefi tted from one of the trials of funding for a school-based mentor and extra PPA-time that fed into the off er now available for ECTs, I see the benefi ts for the extra entitlement of a structured package of support for future teachers. After all, it takes new teachers a lot more time to plan, asses and do everything else, compared to more seasoned staff . The pressure caused by this is a major reason why many of them leave so early in their careers.
The ITT market itself draws upon both recent graduates and career-changers, with routes being varied enough to meet the training needs of all interested parties – this is key to understanding why accreditation and reputation factor into the reasoning behind trainees selecting different pathways.
For context, I trained with Teach First in 2017; coming through their undergraduate “Leadership Development Programme”, and the first cohort to be working toward a PGDE alongside QTS. I didn’t fit the usual model of recruit for the undergraduate programmes, because I was a careerchanger, but not from a graduate-career.
Teach First partners with ITT university departments to deliver their content, with experienced classroom practitioners working as “Development Leads” working alongside both university and school-based colleagues to deliver the PGDE content and mentoring of trainees and ECTs.
It makes complete sense to have the Early Career Framework and ITT Core Content Framework mirror one another, as they are pegged to run in partnership with each other. It is refreshing to see the recommendation of a “full bibliography… to support [their] critical engagement with research”.
This is not to say the profession should favour a ‘traditional’ or ‘progressive’ pedagogical approach, because context is key – all teachers should ideally be versed in the research supporting approaches across the spectrum, because ITT providers will be training teachers to work across varied school-settings. It is important, therefore, for the traineeteacher to use this research to critically inform and develop them as professionals, in order to find what works well for themselves and their students, in their own given context. There is much to say about just how research-informed we as teachers are, compared to even four-years ago, with many now having access to the original papers and engagement being much higher for quality CPD after ITT. CPD programmes within schools have often been haphazard, lacking subject specificity, and plagued with broad-scope generalisms that need to be implemented immediately, without consideration of the need for time to do so and without reflection on the efficacy of the initiatives.
I’m now at the stage of my teaching career where many teachers leave the profession, and one thing that networking with my peers informs is a disparity in the quality of mentoring and CPD experience for those of us in our early careers. Mentoring is not always a voluntary role within a school, and many see this as an additional burden to their workloads. Preparation for such a crucial role in the teaching journey is all too often unsupported by high-quality training for the mentors themselves; selected for either their classroom-experience, or, unwisely, for their own time-based proximity to the process themselves – something that has the potential to rob the new trainee of the experience of a seasoned-veteran of the classroom. The extra time given to mentors, under the new framework, should help remedy this problem.
So, why are ITT providers so concerned about the shake-up?
The most contentious issue seems to be the recommendation from those consulting that ITT providers prove capacity to deliver high-quality ITT through a re-accreditation process. This is not unusual for independent training providers in other sectors, but is new to the education sector. With teacher-training moving from the traditional teachertraining colleges to the present-day with SCITTs, independent providers, and universities it is important that trainees are able to make informed decisions regarding their routes into teaching.
However, I can also understand the professional-unease at the apparent lack of subject specificity, where pedagogical content knowledge is crucial. Additionally, the independence of university ITT staff, whose experience and expertise is highly valuable, is similarly under threat. Finally, the pace at which this is being driven through is a matter that needs to be considered very carefully. Rushing to put this consultation into action is ill-advised; sustainable transformation is measured and takes time. Debate needs to be had, listened to and must actually inform decisions, rather than being a token gesture.
More so, it takes the positive-engagement of all those concerned to create the change that may be needed. Doing so without this risks the loss of established ITT providers and mentors; having an adverse affect on recruitment and retention, and compounding the challenges already faced by the profession.
The one thing everyone involved in teaching agrees on though, is that the most important stakeholders in our sector are the students and the communities we serve. All of the decisions made about ITT reform should reflect that.
PEDAGOGY
30. The Power Of Preparing Your Explanations
How preparing your explanations in advance saves you time and increases your effectiveness
35. Generative Retrieval In English
Strategies to allow for more complex and meaningful recall in the English classroom
PEDAGOGY
THE POWER OF PREPARING OUR EXPLANATIONS
E ective teaching requires clear explanations. But clear explanations don’t always come naturally. In this article, Michael Chiles shares strategies to help improve your explanations, so that learning becomes a much easier process for your students.
By Michael Chiles
Albert Einstein once said, “if you can’t explain it simply, you don’t understand it well enough”. Refl ecting on your own classroom practice, I’m sure we have all been there when we have just fi nished delivering our explanation to the class and one pupil puts their hand up, “I don’t get it!” On the fl ip side, there will be times when pupils have that lightbulb moment and exclaim, “Oh, I get it now!”
Our classrooms are diverse and ever changing environments underpinned by the multitude of events occurring throughout a typical school day. The di erence between whether a pupil ‘gets it’ or ‘doesn’t get it’ will depend on our explanation. When we explain, we do so to enable pupils to acquire new knowledge and skills. Ultimately, it is a core principle part of our role as a teacher. Therefore, it is vital we spend time as a profession practicing how to craft our explanations.
I believe the power of explanations will depend on three core principles - how we set up our arena (the classroom), the time we spend on preparing our pitch, and how we deliver our explanations. In this article, I briefl y explore the key ingredients to preparing our explanations that will help in mastering this key pedagogical principle.
In 1991, Ball indicated, ‘Teachers cannot help children learn things they themselves do not understand.’ Research indicates a strong relationship between teacher subject knowledge and pupil outcomes. Refl ecting on my own teaching practice, I remember in the early few years not always being prepared for a lesson. I would have a quick skim over the Powerpoint the night before and be like no problem teaching that. This would often be the case when I was delivering a lesson that I hadn’t planned myself and I was using someone else’s presentation within the department. Inevitably, this created problems whenever I was delivering the lesson because I wasn’t prepared for that tricky question, I didn’t always have the confi dence or the conviction in my explanation. So, it would lead to pupils fi nding the subsequent tasks di cult to complete. I would then be left frantically running around the room trying to answer each individual question so that the pupils could complete the task.
PEDAGOGY
The Sutton Trust indicated in their review of ‘what makes great teaching’ that pedagogical content knowledge was a signifi cant component. ‘The most e ective teachers have deep knowledge of the subjects they teach, and when teachers’ knowledge falls below a certain level it is a signifi cant impediment to students’ learning.’ Therefore, preparing our explanations before delivering is an important component to ensuring we deliver them with precision to impart knowledge that enables learning to take place.
In order to do this, we need to have a clear understanding of the curriculums we are delivering. Take time to work collaboratively with colleagues and practice delivering your explanations. Subject leaders can use department time to enable colleagues to present an example of how they intend to deliver their explanation for a lesson the following week. For example, in Geography we might be teaching how longshore drift infl uences the morphology of a beach. This is a complex series of processes that occur to change the shape of beaches. In the department meeting, time could be set aside for colleagues to demonstrate how they intend to explain this process, refl ect on each other’s pitch and give constructive feedback. Not only does this provide teachers time to perfect the craft of their explanation, it also allows time to consider any misconceptions that pupil’s might have and how this can be dispelled. Using time in departments to work on your explanation also provides an opportunity to see how other colleagues intend to approach their explanation.
The fi nal stage in the preparation of our pitch is the level of demand we apply to the content with our intending to deliver. Mary Myatt has passionately talked about the importance of teaching content that is ‘above their pay grade’. All too often pupils will ‘switch o ’ if the work isn’t challenging enough for them. From a Geography perspective a classic example is teaching map skills to Year 7 pupils in the fi rst few weeks of September. Most pupils will have done some form of map skills at primary school and dedicated a whole half term on di erent map skills won’t create the awe and wonder we want pupils to get from studying Geography. Integrating the map skills with other aspects of the subject would bring something new and create a challenge for pupils right from the beginning of their Key Stage 3 studies.
The fi rst step to creating challenging lessons that activates deep level thinking is to consider what we are going to teach, why we are starting with this, and how we can create rigorous and challenging lessons. This is where curriculum planning is a core element to preparing our explanations.
Ultimately, when we pitch up our explanations we create a culture of high aspirations. We want our pupils to believe that learning should be challenging and that a healthy struggle is necessary for learning. To get this right, we need to take time to prepare our explanations by knowing our subject inside and out, work collaboratively with colleagues to fi nd the best approach to teaching core concepts and processes, and pitch up to create a challenging learning environment.
