Carter Review of ITT

DfE should commission a sector body (for example, the Teaching Schools Council, a future professional body (College of Teaching), or another sector body) to develop a framework of core content for ITT. We believe that a framework of the essential elements of core content would build a stronger shared understanding of good ITT content meaning that trainees will have a more consistent experience. We also feel it is critical that a framework is developed by the sector, rather than by central government. Though we have not aimed here to set out exactly what should be in the framework, we feel that the areas outlined in section 1 offer a good starting point (we have included this as an Annex in this report). We would like the framework to be informed by the areas for improvement we outline in this report, as highlighted in the following sub-recommendations: 1a: Subject knowledge development should be part of a future framework for ITT content. 1b: Issues in subject-specific pedagogy, such as pupil misconceptions, phases of progression in the subject as well as practical work, should be part of a framework for ITT content. 1c: Evidence-based teaching should be part of a framework for ITT content. 1d: Assessment, including the theory of assessment and technical aspects of assessment, should be part of a framework for ITT content. 1e: Child and adolescent development should be included within a framework of core ITT content. 1f: Managing pupil behaviour should be included in a framework for ITT content; with an emphasis on the importance of prioritising practical advice throughout programmes. 1g: Special educational needs and disabilities should be included in a framework for ITT content.

Wherever possible, all ITT partnerships should build in structured and assessed placements for trainees in special schools and mainstream schools with specialist resourced provision.

ITT partnerships should ensure all trainees experience effective mentoring by: i. selecting and recruiting mentors who are excellent teachers, who are able to explain outstanding practice (as well as demonstrate it) ii. providing rigorous training for mentors that goes beyond briefing about the structure and nature of the course, and focusses on how teachers learn and the skills of effective mentoring iii. considering whether they are resourcing mentoring appropriately – the resource allocated to mentoring should reflect the importance of the role.

DfE should commission a sector body, for example the Teaching Schools Council, to develop some national standards for mentors.

All schools should, whenever practically possible, seek out and participate in robust local partnership arrangements. In a school-led system, this recommendation is naturally the responsibility of schools.

Building on the development of school-led ITT, DfE should work in collaboration with those involved in ITT to consider the way in which teachers qualify with a view to strengthening what has become a complex and sometimes confusing system. We would like applicants to understand that QTS is the essential component of ITT and that a PGCE is an optional academic qualification.

DfE should undertake a review of the effectiveness of the skills tests in selecting high quality trainees.

In order for applicants to make well informed decisions when choosing a course, we recommend the development and expansion of the NCTL's "Get into Teaching" website. This should signpost information that applicants might consider when choosing a course, for example: provider Ofsted rating and inspection report; completion rates; NQT survey results; and employability rates.

In order for schools to find out how to get involved with ITT and make well-informed decisions about the partners they work with, we recommend that the DfE develop a page on the Gov.uk website to signpost information that schools should consider when making choices about a partner provider, including, for example: provider Ofsted ratings and inspection reports; completion rates of trainees; and employability rates.

Schools should make clear information about how to train readily available at all school reception areas and a link to recruitment appointments on all school websites. It would be for schools to take this recommendation forward.

All ITT partnerships should: i. rigorously audit, track and systematically improve subject knowledge throughout the programme ii. ensure that changes to the curriculum and exam syllabi are embedded in ITT programmes iii. ensure that trainees have access to high quality subject expertise iv. ensure that trainees have opportunities to learn with others training in the same subject

Schools should include subject knowledge as an essential element of professional development.

DfE should make funded in-service subject knowledge enhancement courses available for new primary teachers to access as professional development.

Universities should explore offering "bridge to ITT" modules in the final years of their subject degrees for students who are considering ITT programmes.

The Teachers' Standards should be amended to be more explicit about the importance of teachers taking an evidence-based approach.

A central portal of synthesised executive summaries, providing practical advice on research findings about effective teaching in different subjects and phases, should be developed. A future College of Teaching would be well placed to develop this.

There are many universities that are home to world-leading research and assessment organisations – yet in our experience it can be the case that these organisations are either not involved in ITT or are involved in a superficial way. ITT partnerships should make more systematic use of wider expertise outside university departments of education.

Alongside a central portal on evidence-based practice, a central repository of resources and guidance on assessment should be developed.