Education CommitteeWritten evidence submitted by the Department for Education

Introduction

The Government welcomes the opportunity to update the Committee on the work it has been doing since the Government’s response to the Committee’s report: “Great teachers: attracting, training and retaining the best” published last year. In the next section there is a detailed update in relation to each recommendation, however, this section gives a brief overview.

The Government is committed to raising the status of teaching by attracting graduates with the best degrees into the profession and supports proposals that have come from within the profession for a Royal College of Teaching. Since its last response to the committee the Government has: reformed the bursary scheme which has attracted more graduates with high quality degrees into teaching: moved the existing tests in literacy and numeracy to the point at which one applies for ITT (Initial Teacher Training): and published example interpersonal tests online to be used by ITT providers. More rigorous literacy and numeracy tests will be introduced next year.

The Government believes that school leaders are best placed to set the conditions to attract, train and retain the best teachers and they have consequently been given greater control and influence. To this effect the Government introduced School Direct in 2012–13. School Direct provides the opportunity for schools, or partnerships of schools, to apply for Initial Teacher Training (ITT) places and run ITT in partnership with a provider. In addition the Department has revised the Teachers’ Standards, introduced new regulations for appraisal of teachers, and the Secretary of State accepted the independent School Teachers’ Review Body’s (STRB) key recommendations on pay and performance. Furthermore Ofsted’s new framework for ITT,1 effective January 2013, raises the bar, putting much greater emphasis on how schools work in partnership with ITT providers, seeking evidence of the involvement of schools in the recruitment and selection of trainees. This increased flexibility and autonomy will enable schools to target school-level recruitment and retention problems.2

Finally, in March 2013 the Teaching Agency and National College for School Leadership were merged to create a single agency, the National College for Teaching & Leadership (NCTL). This change will support the Government’s reform programme to raise standards in schools, with the best leaders and best teachers working together to develop a self-improving school system that effectively attracts, trains and retains the best teachers and leaders.

Responses to the Committee’s Conclusions and Recommendations

In the response below, the Select Committee’s conclusions and recommendations are in bold text and the Government’s updated responses are in plain text. A copy of last year’s responses can be found in Annex B.3

The Government’s bursary scheme

1. We welcome the Government’s bursary scheme, trust that it will attract more people to consider the profession, and acknowledge the need to skew incentives towards subjects in which it is difficult to recruit. However, we caution that this alone will not do the job. Whilst bursaries will help to attract people with strong academic records, greater effort is also needed to identify which subset of these also possess the additional personal qualities that will make them well-suited to teaching. This is a key theme of this report that we will return to later. (paragraph 39)

2. We do, however, question the use of degree class as the determinant of bursary eligibility for primary school teachers. For this phase of education, a redesign of the criteria towards breadth of knowledge (at GCSE and A Level) may be more appropriate. Again, this of course needs to be complemented by a thorough testing of suitability as a teacher, as part of the course admissions process. (Paragraph 40)

The Government’s reform of bursary support to focus on applicants with high-quality degrees, as measured by the proportion of accepted applicants holding a 2:1 degree or better, has had a significantly positive impact on recruitment.4 In Autumn 2012, not only was the Department’s overall target for the number of trainees achieved but the number expected to be recruited to physics, one of the hardest subjects to recruit for, was the highest since records were first kept in 1979. In addition the number of high quality trainees, as measured by degree class, rose sharply to 71%, the highest ever-recorded.

The Government is also supporting scholarship schemes for high-quality applicants for ITT specifically in maths, physics, chemistry, and computing. These schemes, run by leading professional and subject bodies, use a range of written and task-based assessments to select people with the capacity to be outstanding subject teachers.

We continue to support recruitment of the best candidates to primary ITT, (as argued in last year’s response), ensuring that breadth of subject knowledge is tested appropriately for the award of Qualified Teacher Status. In Autumn 2012, 70% of successful candidates for primary-level training held a 2:1 or first class honours degree, an increase of 3 percentage points on the previous year.

For 2013–14 entry we have introduced an additional financial incentive for those candidates wishing to train as primary mathematics specialist teachers. This provides an additional payment for those candidates who have a good A-level in mathematics. We will continue to review the use of incentives to support the recruitment of specialist primary teachers for the coming year.

3. We have been surprised by the lack of research into the qualities found to make for effective teaching, including any potential link between degree class and performance. Overall, the research base in both directions is fairly scant and could usefully be replenished with new methodologically-sound research looking at UK teachers and schools, both primary and secondary, which we recommend that the Government commission with some urgency. (Paragraph 42)

The Government continues to recognise the importance of benchmarking effective teaching in England against the standards that are being achieved, and sometimes bettered, by the highest-performing education systems elsewhere in the world. Used appropriately, evidence from these international comparators can help us to understand what is working elsewhere, and how that might translate to England.

The Department is committed to improving the use of research and evidence, in both our own policy making and in teaching itself, to drive up standards. On 3 May 2013 we published the Department’s Analytical Review, setting out recommendations from two independent reviewers, Dr Ben Goldacre and Roger Plant. The Review identifies areas where effective use of research, data and evidence can drive improvement. The Department has committed to a series of actions which will: help to improve the use of evidence in policy making, improve access to data, and support a move towards more evidence-based practice in teaching. These actions include the commissioning of Randomised Control Trials, the launch of a “Test and Learn” programme to capture what works best in teaching that successfully narrows the achievement gap, and the forthcoming publication of a Research Strategy which will identify key research questions which teachers can usefully engage with. Ultimately, we want to support teachers to become more effective consumers and producers of educational research, helping to identify what works best in schools and why, and build an accessible and widely-used evidence base to underpin long-term improvements to teaching practice.

Furthermore, for the first time in 2013, England is participating in the OECD’s Teaching and Learning International Survey (TALIS). This wide-ranging survey is the first international programme focusing on the learning environment and teachers’ working conditions, and will provide additional data helping to fill important gaps in the comparison of education systems internationally. The survey covers elements such as teacher training and professional development, teachers’ pedagogical practices, and school leadership and climate. The 2008 TALIS survey provided some significant insights into areas such as the importance of professional development and sustained feedback for teachers. We intend to present the national results of our participation in TALIS 2013 with a conference in summer 2014, shortly after the publication of the international report. We expect that this conference will provide a stimulating forum for a broad range of interested parties to discuss what the results are telling us and how we might use them to drive further improvement.

Finally, teachers and head teachers should be encouraged to look outwards towards high-performing systems and to investigate and reflect on approaches that might be adapted and implemented in their own schools. This year, as part of the Government’s UK-China Partners in Education programme, we supported a group of 50 National Leaders of Education (NLEs), Teaching School Principals and subject specialists, to undertake an intensive study visit to schools in Shanghai. Participants were chosen for their potential to influence wide networks of schools and are looking to trial a number of key actions in their schools and networks that they think will have a real impact on standards, especially in mathematics.5

Entry tests

4. We support the Government’s introduction of entry tests in literacy and numeracy skills: teachers must be highly skilled in both. We also welcome the concept of a test of interpersonal skills but, amidst concerns about the nature of such a test, we recommend—whilst acknowledging the Government’s desire to give providers autonomy over test design—that the Department for Education publish further details of what such a test might include, and that it keep the test under close review. (Paragraph 45)

The Government moved the existing tests in literacy and numeracy to the application process for ITT in Autumn 2012. We also raised the pass mark and limited the number of re-sits available in order to raise standards. New, more demanding tests will be introduced in Autumn 2013 following the accepted recommendations of an independent review panel on teachers’ standards, chaired by Dame Sally Coates.6

The Department published its research findings on interpersonal skill assessments in Spring 2012 as part of a prospectus in which invitations were issued for companies to propose suitable tests. The key personal attributes included adaptability, emotional resilience and self-organisation. Those proposals, which met the relevant criteria, were published on our web-site in September 2012 as a guide to universities and other providers on the sorts of tests and assessments they may choose to adopt.

5. We recommend the Government engage with relevant experts to assist in designing and refining the interpersonal skills assessments, which we believe have potential to improve the predictive capability of the application/acceptance system. However, we remain to be convinced that a written test alone will constitute the most effective device. The added effectiveness that could come through deploying additional “assessment centre” techniques (such as group exercises and presentation) and a demonstration lesson may well outweigh their cost and we recommend the Government consider these too. Such techniques could form part of the second of a two-round system, similar to that now used in Finland. As a starting point, we believe there may be much to be learned from the selection processes of Teach First. (Paragraph 45)

6. We agree that teacher quality, actual or potential, cannot be fully established without observing a candidate teach. We would like to see all providers, wherever possible, include this as a key part of assessment before the offer of a training place is made. Assessment panels, where they do not already, must include the involvement of a high-quality practising headteacher or teacher. (Paragraph 49)

The Government continues to believe that individual providers, working with their partner schools, are best-placed to decide on the approach that best meets their needs. However, the Government is pleased to note that a number of partnerships offering ITT places in the new School Direct scheme have incorporated observation of applicants’ interaction with pupils, including through teaching.

Ofsted’s new framework for ITT puts much greater emphasis on how providers work in partnership with schools in the recruitment and selection of trainees. Ofsted evaluates the rigour of the recruitment and selection process, assessing whether ITT partnerships: recruit high-quality trainees that meet local/regional needs: select candidates with appropriate qualifications, excellent subject/specialist knowledge and a demonstrable aptitude for teaching: and place applicants on programmes that make best use of their skills, aptitudes and experience. The rigour of the recruitment and selection process is evaluated on each ITT inspection as part of the judgement made about the quality of leadership and management of the partnership. Each published report contains a detailed paragraph on this important aspect of ITT.

7. All providers should develop strong partnerships with local universities, colleges and schools which enable potential teachers to “taste” the profession, and experience first hand its content, benefits and career potential, before entering training: we believe this could have a strong and positive effect on both trainee quality and drop-out rates. Alongside this, Government should consider development of a more formalised system of internships for school and college students, as exists in Singapore. We would envisage extensive availability of “Teaching Taster” sessions for both sixth formers (for those considering undergraduate courses) and undergraduates (considering postgraduate training). Regardless of how long the taster session lasts, it must feature actual teaching, alongside the classroom teacher, and not just “observation” or being a “teaching assistant”. Feedback on the individual’s performance should be given to the individual only and the taster sessions should be entirely separate from formal application/acceptance processes. Applying to do teacher training is a “high stakes” decision and the purpose of these sessions is to give people a chance to try out their own aptitude before committing. We believe this approach could help both deter some people who are not best suited to teaching and persuade others to consider it. (Paragraph 50)

The Government continues to run its School Experience Programme (SEP) which, in academic year 2012–13, will provide opportunities for around 5,000 people to experience life in the classroom in a secondary school. Experiences range from one to 10 days depending on the needs of the participant and the availability of schools, 600 of which have now joined the scheme. While the Programme is not formally a part of selection for ITT, some schools and providers are seeking references from SEP schools as part of their assessment of relevant applicants. In addition, as stated under recommendation five and six, some School Direct partnerships are incorporating engagement with pupils in their selection exercises.

Marketing

8. Whilst marketing campaigns to date have had some success in raising the possibility of a teaching career amongst graduates, England is clearly lagging behind its international peers with regard to the number of applications per place. We recommend that the Government, through the new Teaching Agency, commit to consistent marketing of teaching as a profession, with the explicit aim of increasing the number of applicants for each training position, and that marketing should communicate that teaching is rewarding in all senses of the word. (Paragraph 55)

The new teacher marketing campaign successfully contributed to the outstanding recruitment results recorded in Autumn 2012 (see recommendation one above).7 Underpinning these results is evidence of a significant improvement in the public perception of teaching, especially among new graduates. Recent independent research evidence shows that 81% of final year students view teaching as one which has high status, while 72% of students felt that their friends and family would react positively if they decided to enter the profession. The equivalent proportions in 2010 were 77% and 66%, respectively.8

9. We strongly support the Government’s plans to implement a central admissions system for Initial Teacher Training, which we consider could bring significant benefits for individuals and institutions, and could have a positive impact on increasing the number of applications for training which we consider must be a priority for Government. (Paragraph 58)

The Government welcomes the planned introduction of a new, centralised system for applications to postgraduate ITT by the Universities and Colleges Admissions Service (UCAS). The new system, which will be live from November 2013, will incorporate the new School Direct scheme to enhance applicants’ choice, and should assist providers and schools by facilitating the more rapid enrolment of trainees.9

Different routes

10. We agree with Ofsted that a diversity of routes into teaching is a welcome feature of the system, and note that all routes have outstanding provision within them. (Paragraph 65)

As of June 2013, aspiring teachers will have access to the following routes into teaching:

1.Undergraduate—undergraduate university course leading to a degree;

2.Postgraduate—a university-led course leading to a postgraduate qualification such as a PGCE;

3.School Centred Initial Teacher Training (SCITT)—a course provided by an accredited school-based provider, leading to qualified teacher status (QTS) and possibly an academic award such as PGCE;

4.School Direct fee based training—a course provided by a partnership of a school or schools and an accredited provider (university or SCITT), in which the schools select the trainee and expect to employ them on completion of the course, leading to QTS and possibly an academic award such as PGCE;

5.School Direct Salaried—an employment based programme for experienced graduates, in which the trainee is employed as an unqualified teacher by a school; replaces the Graduate Teacher Programme (GTP), although with no “supernumerary” requirement;10

6.Teach First—a two year employment based Leadership Development Programme which includes QTS and a PGCE; and

7.Troops to Teachers—two year employment based training for non-graduate service leavers (service leavers can also access School Direct and School Direct Salaried programmes with additional, tailored, training opportunities).

Routes 4, 5 and 7 are new since the last response. A proportion of applicants to each route apply only though that route, which supports the case for continuing to offer a diversity of routes, each appealing to particular applicants.11 For example, School Direct Salaried is targeted at high quality career changers with three or more years’ work experience, and over 5,000 potential teachers applied only to this route.

11. We support the announced expansion and development of Teach First, which continues to provide a number of excellent teachers, including those who would not otherwise have considered the profession. We also agree with the cautious approach towards any further expansion, beyond the announced doubling, adopted by the Schools Minister. (Paragraph 66)

Teach First continues to play a valuable role in recruiting highly able graduates to work in challenging schools for at least two years.

The programme will have doubled in size in the course of this Parliament when 1,250 participants start their training in 2013–14. The number who will be teaching STEM subjects has increased from 42% in 2010–11 to 50% in 2013–14. 90% of the 2010–11 cohort taught for two years and 63% of this cohort are currently teaching for a third year. Overall, 53% of all Teach First participants since the programme began in 2003 are still teaching in schools in the UK and over two-thirds of these are teaching in challenging schools.

In November 2012, following further discussions with Teach First about expanding to serve schools in semi-rural and rural areas, the Secretary of State announced support for Teach First’s aim of recruiting 2,000 participants in 2015–16. The proposed pace of expansion is based on a realistic assessment of the resource, capacity and the infrastructure that Teach First will need to meet the above targets whilst maintaining the same rigorous entry criteria and continuing to provide an outstanding training programme. Teach First will do this by increasing the number of universities that are targeted, enhancing their recruitment campaign and increasing the diversity of candidates to include, for example, career changers.

School-based training

12. It is clear that school-based training is vital in preparing a teacher for their future career, and should continue to form a significant part of any training programme. We welcome policies which encourage, or enable new, school-centred and employment-based providers, expansion of which should be demand-led, and which will ensure good balance between schools and universities in teacher training. Specifically, we believe that School Direct could provide a valuable opportunity for those schools which do have the capacity and appetite to offer teacher training, and support its creation. However, we recommend that, as a condition of the programme, trainees must undertake a placement in at least two schools, to ensure they are not trained specifically for one school where they will begin, but are unlikely to remain for the entirety of, their career. (Paragraph 77)

In addition to the minimum requirement for an ITT trainee to work in two schools, for training in 2013–14, almost 600 of the 850 lead schools which were allocated School Direct places were in an alliance of at least two schools. Over 300 of them were in an alliance of more than six schools. This means that they are able to meet the requirement for trainees to gain experience in two schools while working within their own alliance. The NCTL is actively encouraging individual schools to come together in alliances to request School Direct places for training in 2014–15 through providing list of potential alliances and in some cases brokering these relationships.

Many schools are going even further to enhance their School Direct training programmes beyond the minimum requirements of the ITT Criteria. School Direct alliances often contain schools in different phases, so that secondary trainees are given additional short placements in primary to supplement their understanding of, for example, phonics and early literacy.

Other alliances include a special school or a PRU in their alliance, and are able to offer their mainstream trainees additional training or placements focused on SEN or behaviour management. Nineteen current School Direct alliances are led by special Teaching Schools, and 26 special schools have expressed an interest in leading alliances for next year. One of these schools has one of each type of school in their alliance (primary, special, secondary, independent, and PRU) and the alliance have planned a training programme that will equip the trainees to teach in any one of those schools.

13. We welcome the creation of Teaching Schools, and note that they will be expected to work with universities, which we strongly support: we believe that a diminution of universities’ role in teacher training could bring considerable demerits, and would caution against it. We have seen substantial evidence in favour of universities’ continuing role in ITT, and recommend that school-centred and employment-based providers continue to work closely with universities, just as universities should make real efforts to involve schools in the design and content of their own courses. The evidence has left us in little doubt that partnership between schools and universities is likely to provide the highest-quality initial teacher education, the content of which will involve significant school experience but include theoretical and research elements as well, as in the best systems internationally and in much provision here. (Paragraph 78)

Universities continue to play an important role in ITT. Out of the total 29,033 core ITT places allocated for 2013–14, 16,767 places have been allocated to outstanding providers and HEIs will deliver 90% of these places.

Strong links and partnerships exist between schools and universities in ITT. The effectiveness of these partnerships is secured through Ofsted’s new Initial Teacher Education (ITE) Framework, which came into effect from September 2012.

To facilitate more schools to lead on teacher training, whilst retaining the expertise and experience of ITT providers, we have rolled out the School Direct route into ITT. The school and its chosen ITT partner work together to recruit graduates and develop programmes to train them. In 2012–13 there were only 400 School Direct places in total, of which 90% of places were with schools partnering with universities, but in 2013–14 schools have elected to partner with ITT providers to deliver 9,441 School Direct places. 71% of these places are with schools that have chosen to partner specifically with universities.

Our initial analysis indicates that approximately one third of School Direct places were bid for by Teaching Schools in 2013–14. We expect this trend to continue and to encourage this in May 2013 we set the expectation that Teaching Schools should be at the forefront of leading the development of a school-led ITT system through the revision of their roles. Since March 2012 five Teaching Schools have been accredited to deliver ITT, with nine in the process of becoming accredited. A further 19 Teaching Schools are already accredited ITT providers. All Teaching Schools include at least one university as a strategic partner in their alliance. 72 different universities work as the strategic partners for the initial 182 Teaching School alliances designated since 2010.12 Universities support Teaching Schools in the development and delivery of ITT, CPD/leadership development, and evidence based research.13

To ensure quality, Ofsted’s new Initial Teacher Education (ITE) Framework assesses the extent to which ITE partnerships secure consistently high quality outcomes for trainees. Ofsted makes a judgement about accredited providers: overall effectiveness: the quality of outcomes for trainees: how well the ITE partnership prepares trainees to teach pupils in the age range and/or subject(s)/specialisms for which they are being trained: and how well leaders and managers at all levels of the ITE partnership ensure that the best outcomes are achieved and sustained. This new framework puts much greater emphasis on the inspection of ITE partnerships rather than the individual providers.14

School placements

14. We recommend that the Government develop preliminary proposals to provide more adequate funding to schools which provide placements to trainee teachers. We believe that a better level of funding, passed from lead providers to placement schools, might incentivise better partnership working between institutions. Ofsted should look carefully at the quality of placements when inspecting providers, including the ease with which they are arranged. (Paragraph 80)

The School Direct route into ITT has meant that these schools and ITT providers have had to work together closely over the last 12 months to determine each partner’s involvement in, and the content of, the training programmes at a local level. As stated under recommendation 13, there are now a total of 9,441 allocated School Direct places for which schools and providers are negotiating levels of resourcing and funding needed to deliver these programmes effectively in 2013–14. Schools and providers draw up partnership agreements to formalise arrangements which makes clear the split of responsibility. Of the 9,441 School Direct places, the 3,592 School Direct Salaried places will have the funding paid directly to Lead Schools instead of ITT providers, which gives the schools more direct control of the funding. This pilot will commence in September 2013. Academies will be paid directly for these trainees, and Local Authority (LA) maintained schools will be paid via the LA. The Lead Schools will then in turn distribute the funds, as per their partnership agreement, to the other institutions in their partnership.

The new Ofsted framework (mentioned in the updated reply to recommendation 13) also puts much more emphasis on how the provider works in partnership with schools. When evaluating the quality of training across the partnership, Ofsted considers how well placement arrangements are made, the quality of placements in developing trainees’ teaching skill and opportunities to encounter and learn from good and outstanding practice. Inspectors spend a significant amount of their time in schools observing trainees’ and newly qualified teachers’ teaching. Ofsted have also introduced an online trainee survey which provides feedback on various aspects of the trainee experience including placements. The vast majority of responses have been positive but a higher proportion of negative responses have been received with regard to whether arrangements for placements have been made in a timely manner than to other questions. Where this has been raised as a concern it is investigated during the inspection and incorporated in the published report.

15. We support the recommendation of our predecessor Committee that “those who mentor trainees on school placement should have at least three years’ teaching experience and should have completed specific mentor training”. We further recommend that Ofsted look specifically at the quality of mentoring when inspecting providers of Initial Teacher Training. (Paragraph 83)

The Government is still of the view that mentoring is best organised at the ITT provider level. As mentioned in the previous reply Teaching Schools, working with or as accredited ITT providers, continue to have a key role in leading and quality assuring ITT in their area, including the quality assurance of mentoring.

There are currently 301 Teaching School alliances, in which trainee teachers have the opportunity to be mentored by, observe, and work with excellent classroom practitioners in outstanding schools. The alliance structure also gives mentors the opportunity to work together to develop approaches to mentor training and support which are appropriate to their schools.

High quality mentor training and mentoring is also being supported within and beyond teaching school alliances by the work of Specialist Leaders of Education (SLEs).15 To date over 10% of SLEs have been designated with an ITT specialism which means that just over half of the first and second cohort of Teaching School alliances have an SLE with an ITT specialism, and Teaching Schools are hoping to extend this by 50% in 2013–14. 91% of the SLEs with an ITT specialism are working in alliances which have School Direct places. SLEs support mentors by providing training and professional development opportunities designed to enhance the quality and range of trainee experience. In some regions alliances are strategically working together to: provide training events and conferences for trainee teachers, share resourcing, develop expertise, and provide access to high quality mentor training for schools in the wider network. The NCTL is supporting this work by recommending 25 Teaching Schools that have volunteered to strategically lead on ITT, which includes providing support for high quality school-based mentoring.

Although mentoring is organised at a provider level Ofsted’s new Initial Teacher Education Framework16 evaluates the quality of mentoring when judging the quality of training across the partnership. This evaluation considers: the mentors’ experience and expertise, their response to trainees’ needs, how effectively they improve trainees’ teaching skills, how they model good practice in teaching and whether they provide high quality coaching and mentoring to enhance trainees’ professional development. In terms of leadership and management they evaluate how well the partnership provides high quality training for all mentors and trainers involved in the ITE partnership. Published reports comment on the strengths and areas for development associated with the mentoring program.

Retention rates

16. We agree with research arguing that movement and wastage must be distinguished from each other, and that in light of that (and comparable figures from other professions) retention rates amongst the profession as a whole perhaps present less cause of concern than sometimes suggested. However, the retention of the best teachers is clearly desirable, and we recommend that the Department for Education commission detailed research on the barriers to retention, better to inform the development of policy on teacher training and supply. The research should also look at the impact of, and potential to diminish (including through incentivising staff), the loss of the best teachers, particularly in the most challenged schools. Finally, it should examine the quality of those teachers leaving the profession: whilst retention of the best is clearly important, loss of the worst is not to be regretted. (Paragraph 89)

Rather than carrying out additional research the Department has used existing methods of data collection and analysis to focus on ensuring an adequate supply of high quality teachers whilst at the same time giving schools the power, through reformed pay arrangements, to ensure that they can retain the best staff.

To this effect we continue to monitor the movement of teachers out of the state funded sector through the Database of Teacher Records (DTR) and, along with various other data on the supply of, and demand for, teachers, use this to inform the Teacher Supply model. The Teacher Supply model in turn is used by the NCTL as the basis for allocating teacher training places to schools and teacher training providers. The quality of applicants and acceptances for teacher training each year is monitored through the NCTLs Trainee Number Census, which is published annually.

The data published from the sources above suggest that wastage is relatively stable and potentially on the decrease. Although we do not monitor the quality of the teachers who are leaving the state funded sector, flexibilities over pay, the strengthened performance management system introduced in September 2012, and the changes recommended by the STRB (as summarised in the introduction), mean that headteachers will have the freedom to develop tailored policies to attract and retain those teachers who have the greatest impact on their pupils’ achievements. In addition, schools in the most challenging circumstances, that often struggle to retain good teachers, will be able to use their pupil premium, worth £900 per pupil per year from April 2013, to attract and keep the best staff.17

CPD

17. We are clear that, for too long, CPD for teachers has lacked coherence and focus. Despite financial constraints which we acknowledge and appreciate, we are concerned that England lags seriously behind its international competitors in this regard, and recommend that the Government consult on the quality, range, scope and content of a high-level strategy for teachers’ CPD, and with an aim of introducing an entitlement for all teaching staff as soon as feasible. The consultation should include proposals for a new system of accrediting CPD, to ensure that opportunities are high-quality and consistent around the country. (Paragraph 99)

The Government remains of the view that headteachers and teachers are best placed to make decisions about professional development to meet the needs of their pupils and school. High-quality professional development, which takes account of evidence of what works, allows teachers to incorporate established best practice into their own approaches to teaching. The new Teachers’ Standards, which were developed by leading teachers and headteachers, set a clear benchmark for the level of practice expected of all teachers. They provide a valuable tool to help teachers and headteachers identify and address professional development needs through regular appraisal.

While the Government increasingly expects schools and teachers to take more responsibility for their own professional development, in recognition of the importance of CPD, there are some priority areas where we have provided additional support. For example, through the National scholarship Fund we are encouraging more teachers to deepen their subject knowledge in Maths, English and Science, and SEN expertise. Also we are supporting the network of Science Learning Centres co-funded by the Wellcome Trust and others to become self-sustaining. More generally we have created a national network of Teaching Schools to improve schools capacity to take the lead in the training and development of teachers and create more opportunities for peer-to-peer learning.18

18. We recommend that the Government develop and implement a National Teacher Sabbatical Scholarship scheme to allow outstanding teachers to undertake education related research, teach in a different school, refresh themselves in their subjects, or work in an educational organisation or Government department. In addition to the likely positive impacts on individual teachers and schools, we believe such an investment would help raise the profession’s status amongst existing and potential teachers. (Paragraph 100)

The National Scholarship Fund for teachers is now in its third year. It continues to deliver on its primary aim of deepening the subject knowledge of teachers in the four priority areas of English, mathematics, science and SEN, and increase the status of the profession through intellectually rigorous and challenging activities and studies.

“Closing the Gap: Test and Learn” was approved by Ministers in November 2012. The scheme was refocused on teacher led testing of interventions using a randomised controlled trials approach following the work that Ben Goldacre undertook in reviewing the analytical community. This new scheme will give schools and teachers the opportunity to be meaningfully involved in and help to manage randomised controlled trials to test interventions that may help to close the gap. This will help to embed rigorous research in teaching, build the capacity of schools to run their own research projects, help to increase the evidence base for schools and teachers, and embed evidence informed practices.19

Career structure

19. We recommend that the Government introduce a formal and flexible career structure for teachers, with different pathways for those who wish to remain classroom teachers or become teaching specialists, linked to pay and conditions and professional development. We believe that the introduction of such a structure would bring significant advantages to the recruitment and retention of high-quality teachers, and bring teaching into line with other graduate professions in this regard. (Paragraph 109)

As stated last year we agree with the Committee that we need to do more to retain high quality teachers. We do not believe, however, that the answer is to impose a uniform career structure. The Government believes the teachers’ pay system has in the past been too rigid and complex for schools and does not allow them to recruit and retain the high-quality teachers they need to address specific shortages and benefit their pupils. The STRB’s report into this sets out a number of recommendations which the Secretary of State has accepted.

These changes included:

Removing pay progression based on length of service, linking all pay progression to performance and allowing these changes to be at different rates;

Replacing the current threshold test for progression from the main to the upper pay range with new simpler criteria; and

Discontinuing the current Advanced Skills Teacher (AST) and Excellent Teacher (ET) designations and creating a new pay range for leading practitioners whose primary purpose is to model and lead the improvement of teaching skills.20

The changes will give schools greater autonomy and more freedom to decide how much they pay a teacher and how quickly pay progresses. It is this increased flexibility that will: enable schools to target school-level recruitment and retention problems: and support head teachers in addressing teacher shortages in specific subjects and in certain areas of the country. It will be particularly important to schools in disadvantaged areas, empowering them to attract and recruit the teachers that they need to deliver outstanding education in the most challenging circumstances.

In addition, the emphasis on pay progression related to teacher performance will help to raise the status of the profession by enabling individuals to be rewarded in line with their contribution to improving their pupils’ achievements, and allowing higher rewards and more rapid progression for the most able teachers. The new arrangements will come into effect from September 2013.

College of Teaching

20. We acknowledge and support the case for a new, member-driven College of Teaching, independent from but working with Government, which could play important roles, inter alia, in the accreditation of CPD and teacher standards. We are not convinced that the model of “Chartered Teacher” status proposed by the existing College of Teachers will bring about the changes required to teachers’ CPD and career progression opportunities, or that the existing College has the public profile or capacity to implement such a scheme. We recommend that the Government work with teachers and others to develop proposals for a new College of Teaching, along the lines of the Royal Colleges and Chartered Institutions in other professions. (Paragraph 114)

The Government is following with interest the debate that has recently been generated about a potential Royal College of Teaching, and is encouraged that work towards its establishment has come from within the teaching profession itself. The establishment of an independent professional body for teachers, with a status similar to that of the medical Royal Colleges, would represent an important step in helping the teaching profession to realise greater autonomy and self-determination. In that sense, the current debate sends a hugely important signal about the aims and aspirations of the teaching profession.

We remain of the view that any role for Government would depend on how such a body proposed to operate, and how it wished to work with Government. Nevertheless, we are firmly in agreement with the view that an effective professional body for teachers could play a vital role in further raising standards of teaching, championing excellence and enhancing the status of the teaching profession.

We have noted the recently published pamphlet Towards a Royal College of Teaching and welcome the contribution to the debate this has made. Similarly, we are aware that the Commission established by the Prince’s Teaching Institute, which includes a number of leading educational figures, expects to consult on a blueprint for a new, member-driven College of Teaching in June 2013, and we look forward to following this development.

Teacher standards

21. We support the Government’s desire to reduce bureaucratic burdens on teachers and school leaders, and therefore welcome the simplification of the Teacher Standards. Following our call for a radical improvement in career opportunities for teachers, we would expect the Government to update the Standards when implementing a new and better career structure. (Paragraph 118)

The revised Teachers’ Standards came into effect in September 2012. They set a clear baseline of expectations for the professional practice and conduct of teachers in England. There are no plans to supplement these standards with additional higher level standards. We do realise, however, that the standards relating to head teachers can be a valuable resource for Governing Bodies.

In relation to career opportunities, we committed to consult the STRB on the implications for pay of Dame Sally Coates’s recommendation to discontinue the current standards for Threshold, Excellent Teachers and Advanced Skills Teachers. The STRB agreed that those standards be abolished as part of a wider package of reform to give schools greater freedom to determine how teachers are paid. The STRB recommended the replacement of existing threshold arrangements with simple criteria based on one set of standards. It also recommended discretion for schools to create higher salary posts (akin to AST posts) for leading practitioners whose primary purpose is the modelling and leading improvement of teaching skills within their school. These recommendations have been accepted by the Secretary of State.21

These recommendations mean that the new pay range for leading practitioners is not linked to a new set of standards or other centrally imposed criteria (other than qualified teacher status). Instead, schools will have the flexibility to appoint any qualified teacher that they believe has the necessary skills and expertise. Overall the new pay arrangements will allow schools to reward individuals in line with their contribution to improving pupil outcomes, enabling the most successful teachers to progress faster than at present.

Performance management and pay

22. We encourage school governors to be rigorous in their scrutiny of performance management in schools, and recommend that the Department for Education, with Ofsted, provide additional information to governing bodies following inspections, aiding them better to hold headteachers to account for performance management arrangements. (Paragraph 119)

We agree that governing bodies should be rigorous in their scrutiny of appraisal. In maintained schools they are directly responsible for the appraisal of the head teacher, drawing on the advice and support of an external adviser. They also have a critical role in agreeing and overseeing appraisal arrangements for other teachers. Governing bodies need to ensure that their school’s appraisal policy is being implemented effectively and fairly and that appraisal evidence informs other decisions including on professional development and pay. The new arrangements set out in the draft School Teachers’ Pay and Conditions Document (STPCD) 2013 (described in the reply to recommendation 21) strengthen the link between pay and performance and give leaders within schools the freedom to pay good teachers more.

In reaching their judgement on the quality of leadership and management Ofsted inspectors consider a number of factors including whether governors performance manage the head teacher rigorously, and understand how the school makes decisions about teachers’ salary progression. Inspectors, in turn, evaluate how well the head teacher manages staff performance and uses the staff budget to differentiate appropriately between high and low performers. In line with Ofsted’s proposal mentioned in the last response, Inspectors can now ask schools for anonymised information from the last three years. This shows the proportion of teachers who have: progressed along the main pay scale, to and through the upper pay scale, along the leadership scale, and who receives additional responsibility payments, such as the Teaching and Learning Responsibility payments and Special Educational Needs allowances. They compare this information with the overall quality of teaching and determine whether there is a correlation between the two.

Since last year governing bodies can draw on Ofsted’s School Data Dashboard, which provides a high level summary of each school’s performance data over a three-year period. It is intended to provide support for governors in holding schools to account for their performance, helping to focus discussion on what needs to be done to secure improvement. Governors can also draw on tools such as RAISEonline data to help support their understanding of their school’s performance.22

23. We strongly recommend that the Department for Education seek to quantify, in a UK context, what scale of variation in teacher value-added equates to in terms of children’s later prospects.

We further recommend that the Department develop proposals (based on consultation and a close study of systems abroad) for a pay system which rewards those teachers who add the greatest value to pupil performance. We acknowledge the potential political and practical difficulties in introducing such a system, but the comparative impact of an outstanding teacher is so great that we believe such difficulties must be overcome. (Paragraph 121)

As mentioned above the Government accepted all of the STRBs recommendations23 and the main changes to the existing system relating to linking performance and pay are:

Removing pay progression based on length of service, linking all pay progression to performance, and giving schools the option of increasing individual teachers’ pay at different rates based on their performance;

Replacing the current threshold test for progression from the main to the upper pay range with new simpler criteria;

Discontinuing the current Advanced Skills Teacher (AST) and Excellent Teacher (ET) designations and creating a new pay range for leading practitioners whose primary purpose is to model and lead the improvement of teaching skills;

Giving schools more freedom to determine starting salaries of teachers new to the school; and

Removing any obligation on schools when recruiting to match a teacher’s existing salary.

The Government continues to believe that it is head teachers themselves who are best placed to make professional judgements on which teachers in their school are highly performing and, as argued in the Government’s previous response, this is why the Government did not choose to accept the committee’s recommendation to carry out quantative research in this area and our position has not changed on doing research into “value-added” since the last response. The new arrangements, which are due to come into effect from September 2013, will give schools the flexibility to exercise their judgement in relation to how they reward their staff and more closely align pay and performance.

24. We urge the Government to consider how best it might continue to engage non education sectors with the fantastic and inspiring work which goes on in many classrooms around the country. We similarly urge the Government to continue championing the work done by teachers up and down the country—not least through shadowing some of them, which the Secretary of State has committed to doing—and to sell the many benefits and rewards of the profession to the brightest and best candidates. (Paragraph 123)

We are delighted that the brightest and best graduates continue to see the teaching profession as an attractive career choice. There are currently more graduates with good degrees applying for teacher training than ever before. We are committed to championing the outstanding work that teachers do in schools up and down the country: Ministers have sent letters of congratulation to schools whose pupils performed well in recent Key Stage 2 and GCSE examinations, whilst the Deputy Prime Minister has written to schools whose pupils eligible for Free School Meals are achieving well, encouraging them to apply for the Pupil Premium Awards. Ministers in the DfE continue to pursue a full programme of visits to schools throughout the year, which have included shadowing Ofsted inspectors, and are proud to be able to cite examples of the excellent practice they have seen and the outstanding teachers and heads they have met, in their public speeches and in Departmental publications.

Annex

Overview of the STRBs Recommendations

The Secretary of State accepted the independent School Teachers’ Review Body’s (STRB) key recommendations. The main STRB recommendations are:

linking all pay progression to performance;

removing automatic progression based on time-served;

giving schools the option of awarding differential pay progression based on performance;

giving schools more scope to pay high performers more; and

replacing the current threshold test for progression from the main to the upper pay scale with simple criteria; and allowing more discretion for schools in the use of allowances for recruitment and retention and time-limited Teaching and Learning Responsibility payments (TLRs) for specific projects.

The new arrangements will come into force in September 2013.

July 2013