Higher Education Academy response to:
Initial Informal Information Gathering on the
Memorandum on Entry requirements to Courses
of Initial Teacher Education in Scotland and the
Guidelines for Courses of Initial Teacher Education in Scotland
Date: 31 January 2013
Contact:Kathy Wright, Discipline Lead, Education,
Issues for Comment
1. Memorandum on Entry Requirements to Courses of Initial Teacher Education in Scotland
This Memo sets minimum requirements for entry qualifications for applicants for Initial Teacher Education. Given that application rates for ITE programmes are generally healthy and that many of the universities already seek competitive qualifications considerably above the minimum there is an argument that there is no need for the Entry Memo.
What are your views on this?
The Higher Education Academy (HEA) recommends retaining the Entry Memo to guard against any changes in the economy which may affect demand for places on ITE programmes. Recruitment to STEM subjects may be adversely affected if the economy improved. It is a useful safeguard even though currently most successful candidates exceed the minimum requirement.
Top-up courses
Currently graduates applying for entry to Initial Teacher Education are allowed to bring a maximum of 20 credits from top-up courses.
Is this appropriate in principle and do you have any comment on the level of credit permitted?
In principle the maximum number of credits from top up courses appears reasonable.
Masters Degrees
Occasionally, applicants do not meet the credit requirements from an undergraduate degree but do bring Masters level qualifications.
Should relevant Masters level credit be acceptable?
The HEA believes consideration should be given to those who could bring Masters level credits. The Admissions team would need to consider if there is evidence of breadth of knowledge and understanding from a combination of the Masters study and previous study/work experience. In secondary subjects there needs to be a good match between the applicant’s knowledge and the curriculum of the subject they are intending to teach.
2. Secondary
Subjects
Currently various Secondary subjects have specific requirements which have to be met by applicants.
Is this an appropriate approach?
The HEA would broadly agree with secondary subjects having specific requirements but would suggest that ‘or equivalent’ be entered with the subject requirement, to enable the recruitment of otherwise suitable applicants with extensive subject knowledge, gained through work or other study, particularly for ‘shortage’ subjects and vocational subjects.
If so, should all subjects have specific requirements?
Please feel free to make comments about the existing statements for specific subjects. (Business Education, Home Economics, Modern Languages residence periods and Physical Education all feature regularly in enquiries to the GTCS.)
Yes with the caveat above included.
In PE, breadth of knowledge is important and it may be helpful to specify the range of knowledge and understanding that applicants need to bring to a post graduate ITE course. ITE courses are knowledge enhancers. PE applicants should bring secure subject knowledge to their proposed programme (for example the areas of the curriculum could be specified with a recommendation that students bring knowledge of a set number of these areas to the programme.)
Various ‘new’ subjects (such as Psychology) have come into schools in recent times and some subject associations (such as ATPS) have lobbied the GTCS about introducing an Initial Teaching Qualification.
What views do you have on this issue?
As new subjects become part of the curriculum it is important that teachers possess a good knowledge of the subject, its pedagogy, the curriculum and the assessment framework.
General
Given the emphasis within Curriculum for Excellence on numeracy, should having a SCQF level 5 qualification in Maths be a requirement for Secondary (in line with what is already demanded for Primary)?
The HEA supports the proposal that all teachers should have good levels of literacy and numeracy.
If the requirement for Maths for Primary were to be raised to level 6, should this also be required for Secondary?
It is not necessary to raise the SCQF level for Secondary. Many secondary subject specialists would not need to have a higher level and those that do e.g. teachers of STEM subjects would have studied Mathematics to a higher level anyway.
Teaching Scotland’s Future makes various references to literacy and numeracy and work is currently going on in developing diagnostic assessment and support materials.
Should the Entry Memorandum set requirements for certification in literacy and numeracy at SCQF level 5?
The HEA agrees with the set requirements for certification in literacy and numeracy at SCQF level 5.
For English and Mathematics requirements the current Entry Memo identifies a range of possible qualifications which would meet the set requirements. Various new qualifications are also being introduced. For example, there is a qualification entitled Lifeskills Maths at National 5.
For the revised Memo which qualifications should be deemed acceptable to meet the requirements for English and Mathematics?
Without knowing the content of alternative qualifications, it is difficult to comment. However, GTC Scotland would scrutinise the content of the alternative qualifications and if accepted as equivalent, it is wise to allow candidates to provide evidence of their numeracy skills from a range of equivalent qualifications.
3. Primary
Languages
The Language Learning in Scotland: A 1+2 Approach report recommended that students undertaking a course of primary school teacher education should have attained a languages qualification at a higher level or equivalent (SCQF level 6) either on entering the course of initial teacher education or on its completion.
What is your view on this matter?
As a starting point the HEA agree that at least SCQF level 6 should be achieved. On completion of ITE, students should be at a higher level than this in the spoken language, in order to conduct the lesson through the target language.
STEM subjects
The Supporting Scotland’s STEM Education and Culture report recommended that the qualification requirements for Primary Teaching students should be raised to include a minimum of SCQF level 5 or above in a science and mathematics, increasing to SCQF level 6 or above in a science and mathematics within five years. (The requirement for Maths is already at SCQF level 5.)
What are your views on increasing the Maths requirement to level 6?
The 5 year suggested lead in time is necessary. Consideration should be given to mature entrants who will have achieved their school qualification, possibly SCQF level 5, before this requirement was introduced. These candidates may bring considerable life and work experience to the teaching profession and might be lost without some possible pre ITE support in Maths.
What are your views on introducing a Science requirement and on its potential level?
For those intending to become Primary teachers, it is important that they enter their programme with baseline knowledge in Science.
Guidelines for Courses of Initial Teacher Education in Scotland
The Guidelines need substantial revision following the change of status of the GTCS but there is also a necessity to consider and, where appropriate, address various recommendations from Teaching Scotland’s Future. The intention of the Guidelines is to set the necessary parameters for all Initial Teacher Education programmes but still to allow the universities flexibility within what is offered and to encourage innovation in provision.
Your views on the following matters would be appreciated.
1. Primary Provision
Undergraduate
Teaching Scotland’s Future recommends that ‘the traditional BEd degree should be phased out and replaced with degrees which combine in-depth academic study in areas beyond education with professional studies and development.’
How detailed should the Guidelines be in setting specific requirements for these new degrees?
There should be guidelines for the minimum content of the Education and School Experience components of the degree. It would not be realistic to set specific guidelines for the content of subject modules outside Education. However specified subject areas for this component could be defined.
For example, should the Guidelines require universities to give 50% of the programme to ‘Education’, 25% to ‘School Experience’ and 25% to courses outwith Education?
The HEA agrees that some guidance would be helpful to course developers and also ensure that student teachers do receive an adequate amount of professional education and training. However, the HEA suggests that such guidelines are general in nature. Teacher education programmes in Scotland are led by experienced teacher educators working in partnership with schools. They should be trusted to develop programmes which meet the needs of schools.
Should the Guidelines suggest/require that the study outwith Education is in specified subject areas? If so, what areas?
The HEA would support the view that the study outwith Education should be in subjects which are part of the Primary curriculum e.g. core subjects of either Maths, English or a Science, or a subject such as Music, PE, History etc
The Model of the Primary Teacher
Teaching Scotland’s Future endorses the model of the generalist Primary teacher but also supports opportunities for specialism.
Should requirements be set within the guidelines to encourage this model? If so, what provision should be made for undergraduate and post graduate programmes?
- Areas of Difficulty- literacy including teaching of reading
- Areas of Difficulty- mathematics
- Music and creative subjects
In other nations of the UK, there has been a move to develop Primary specialist teachers in these areas, particularly in literacy and mathematics. The GTC Scotland could evaluate models from other countries.
Teaching Scotland’s Future recommends that ‘The professional component in programmes of initial teacher education should address more directly areas where teachers experience greatest difficulty and where we know that Scottish education needs to improve’. It also identifies what these areas are.
Should the Guidelines set specific requirements for all programmes in these identified areas?
For example, Donaldson identifies ‘additional support needs (particularly dyslexia and autistic spectrum disorders)’, issues which have also been raised by groups such as Enable in its petition to the Scottish Parliament referenced above.
Should there be requirements in the Guidelines to have a specified amount of input on these areas?
There appear to be no specific references to children ‘with additional support needs’ in the Standards for Registration, so the areas where teachers experience greatest difficulty ought to be included in the guidelines, with a requirement that these are covered in the university-based education programme. There may not be support for these areas in schools. It will be the quality of input rather than the amount of input which will be fundamental. The student teacher will need to be able to demonstrate effective practice during their school experience.
Partnership
Donaldson calls for ‘New and strengthened models of partnership among universities, local authorities, schools and individual teachers’.
What level of advice/requirement for Partnership should the Guidelines give?
There is considerable experience in other UK nations of developing partnerships in teacher education. It would seem advisable to require the development of a partnership agreement setting out the roles and responsibilities of each partner institution and requires the establishment of a coherent and comprehensive professional education programme under the guidance of experienced teacher educators in universities. The agreement should also contain details of internal and external quality assurance procedures to ensure consistency, accuracy and reliability of judgements against the Standards for Registration. Also included should be a commitment from all partners to mechanisms for securing quality improvements in pre-service professional education and training.
School Experience
The current Guidelines set expectations for School experience placements but also allow provision for ‘other relevant educational placement experience such as within Children’s Services provision’.
Donaldson emphasises the need ‘to ensure that the model of placement reflects the broader and evolving roles of teachers’ and that placements should ‘include more substantial experience for all prospective teachers in relating to parents and working with other professionals.’
Should the Guidelines set more specific requirements for the content and methodology of placements? If so, what?
The guidelines could include Lord Donaldson’s recommendation and then leave the specific organisation of this to the university-school partnership.
Teaching Scotland’s Future also recommends that ‘Suitably trained school staff should have the prime role in the assessment of students whilst on placement.’
Should the Guidelines set requirements on how this is to be achieved within partnerships and give clarification of the role expected of the ‘Suitably trained school staff’?
If detailed requirements are specified, this could lead to litigation on the part of student teachers who feel that they have been unfairly assessed by a school mentor/member of staff. However, it is important to specify that school staff must have received training for their role in supporting, training and assessing student teachers and should have timetabled release time to be used for mentoring, in order to protect the student experience.
The current Guidelines specify the minimum amounts of time which must be spent on placement in the various forms of ITE programmes. The intention would be for the revised Guidelines to continue to do this.
What are your views on the current stipulations?
The 50% stipulation allows for a significant placement schools with time to complete university based scholarly and professional activity.
For the BEd (Technology) programmes the Guidelines currently specify that a minimum of 24 weeks must be spent on school experience and a further minimum of 6 weeks on industrial placement.
What are your views on the necessity of the industrial placement?
The HEA agrees that all teachers of Technology should have experience in an industrial setting. However, if the student teacher already has recent and relevant work experience in such an environment, this requirement could be waived.
Selection Processes
The existing Guidelines state that ‘Student teachers should only be admitted to a programme after an interview which should normally involve personnel from both the university and education authorities/schools.’ However, this was subsequently relaxed and currently universities are employing a variety of approaches to selection.
On the other hand, Teaching Scotland’s Future recommends that:
‘Selection for entry to initial teacher education programmes should be made more rigorous, drawing on existing best practice and using a wider set of selection criteria. The possible establishment of a national assessment centre should be explored. The role of future employers should be significantly strengthened within any revised process.’
Should the Guidelines be specific on what the ‘selection criteria’ should be and on identifying the ‘best practice’ to be followed, including the strengthening of the role for ‘future employers’?
With the increased emphasis on partnership working, the HEA would support a requirement stating that relevant staff from school and local authority partners should be involved in the selection of student teachers. The HEA supports the view that the selection requirements should encompass applicant dispositions and attributes, as well as academic qualifications. These could take cognisance of research on the characteristics of effective teachers (e.g. the Hay McBer findings on effective teachers). Revising the specific selection criteria could be trialled and evaluated before taking a decision to invest significant funding in a national assessment centre.
Interdisciplinary Learning
Curriculum for Excellence calls for interdisciplinary learning.
Should the Guidelines specifically require programmes to address this matter, and if so, how?
As Curriculum for Excellence requires this, it should be included in the requirements. Universities could be encouraged to explore innovative strategies for encouraging and modelling working across subjects as well as introducing students to ideas and resources already in use.
Gaelic
The current Guidelines say that ‘Programmes which offer a Gaelic medium pathway must ensure that at the end of the programme student teachers can demonstrate the Standard for Initial Teacher Education through Gaelic.’
Is there any necessity to supplement this requirement?
This seems to be sufficient.
ICT
The current Guidelines set no requirements for ICT.
Given its use in both teaching and learning within schools and in the professional learning of student teachers, should something be added to the Guidelines and, if so, what?
Competence in a range of ICT skills should be audited at interview. Those who otherwise meet all the entry requirements but who have inadequate ICT skills should be set pre-course targets in this area. Development of ICT as a tool for learning should happen on course.
1 | Page