Subject and Professional Mentor Meetings: Secondary ITE 1-year PGCE

1. Subject and Professional Mentor Meetings:Secondary ITE 1-year PGCE 30 September 2013

2. Aims of the session is to: • Provide an update on recruitment and allocations • Become familiar with the revised documentation and assessment procedures for 2013-14 and the Partnership website • Know the priorities and improvement plan for 2013-14 • Understanding how students can evidence the teachers’ standards • Challenging students to identify the impact of their teaching on pupils’ learning • Provide an overview of school-led activities and tasks and consider how partners can support students’ assignments and the completion of these tasks • Provide an opportunity to network and share good practice.

3. ASPIRE: our vision is to develop trainees into teachers who are: Ambitious Student focussed Professional Inspiring and Innovative Reflective and Excellent practitioners

4. Recruitment and Allocations

5. Course changes: • Staffing • Review of documentation and Partnership Website: www.hud.ac.uk/edu/secondarymentor • Modules • Assessment (Summative Partnership Reports and Mid Point Reviews)

6. Secondary ITE PGCE course requirements – modules and assessment DHS2220 DHS1220 DHS4020 / DMX6630 • Six modules: • DHS2220 - Practice of Teaching – induction (leading to a Summative Partnership Report and 1500 word reflection on Behaviour and standards evidence) • DHS1220 subject audit* (equivalent to 4000 words) • DHS3320 - Practice of Teaching- application (leading to a Summative Partnership Report and 1500 word on Assessment for/of Learning and standards evidence) • DHS4420 - Practice of Teaching- consolidation (leading to a Summative Partnership Report and portfolio of evidence and reflection on the Teachers Standards) • DMX6630 M level assignment on SEN and inclusion (alternative for Professional students – DHS4020) – portfolio and assignment • DMX5130 M level assignment - Curriculum Package (alternative for Professional students – DHS1520) • *this is started following the interview stage and is completed at the end of the course DHS3320 DHS1520 / DMX5130 DHS4420 PGCE with QTS

7. Presenting evidence to support the acquisition of teachers’ standards. • Visit the Secondary PGCE Partnership Website www.hud.ac.uk/edu/secondarymentorlook at: • Teachers' Standards at a glance • Teachers' Standards Grading guidance • Teachers' standards October revision • Teachers Standards overview • TS 2011 mapped onto QTS 2007 UCET Version • Student Evidence Collection • Student Teachers' Standards evidence overview‌ • Student Teachers' Standards Tracking Record of Grades‌ • Teachers’ Standards Evidence Record‌ • Evidence for New Teaching Standards‌ • Evidence examples • For further support: refer to What evidence? Evidence for the New Teachers’ Standards‌

8. Updates • School Direct: http://www.education.gov.uk/get-into-teaching/teacher-training-options/school-based-training/school-direct?keywords=School+Direct • DBS (CRB checks) • Strikes and working to rule • Priorities: • Improving Teacher Training for Behaviour • Supporting training for SEN and inclusion • Developing pupils’ literacy and numeracy skills • Developing Partnerships • Improving the outcomes of trainees (good and outstanding) • (also see the priority impact articles on the mentor website: • http://www.hud.ac.uk/edu/secondarymentor/

9. Overview of evaluations - what students say about us? • Excellent provision for extending specialist subject knowledge. • Good friendly staff with excellent subject knowledge. • Excellent equipment and facilities. • Good introduction to the course with right level of support at the start, with more autonomy as the course has progressed. • Excellent subject mentors who were supportive and very good at identifying areas for improvements in teaching and setting appropriate challenge. • Information is clearly communicated. • Course content, relevant lectures and use of visiting speakers • The on going support from the university, mentors and other staff • The assignments are relevant

10. What could be better Variable mentoring in schools Timing of assignments UniLearn Some repetition in teaching Some discrepancies between what subject tutors expect and what the generic course require.

11. What you say (mentor reviews 2013): • Overall very positive • Excellent communication between the university and partnership schools.(100%) • Good relationships are formed through this efficiency to feedback promptly and also to host meetings where we get the opportunity to network. • Regular meetings offered. • Excellent document design (100%) linking to the standards (100%) • Excellent organisation. Shows thought has been given to the impact of the necessary paperwork both on school staff and students.

12. What you say continued Good relationships are formed through this efficiency to feedback promptly and also host meeting where we get the opportunity to Excellent support. Staff are very well informed and keen to build strong relationships with schools in the partnership. It feels like a true partnership where we are consulted and given a chance to shape its future Clear targets for trainees in partnership with the placement schools Pro-active - forward thinking and always striving for excellence. Collaborative training events The university staff were excellent.

13. What could be better? Communication and contact with some tutors Mini CVs for all More notice of school visits More regular updates would be helpful Detail of arrangements if tutors are not available (e.g. out of the country) Include an outline of the standards on the observation Provide copies of the student’s observation to mentors

14. A reminder of what OFSTED said are our Key Strengths: • highly personalised training programmes that are adapted very effectively to meet the individual needs of trainees and support them to complete their training successfully • the high level of coherence between the professional and subject-specific courses and the timeliness of the assignments, so that trainees make good progress • excellent resources, both material and human, that are used effectively and highly efficiently across the partnership to support trainees’ good and improving outcomes • excellent relationships between all partners in the training and easy communication followed by speedy responses when needed, leading to high levels of trainees’ satisfaction • the excellent links members of the partnership have with national networks that enable them to have a very good ability to foresee future needs and plan effectively for them.

15. A reminder of OFSTED’s recommendations: • In order to improve trainees’ progress and attainment, the partnership should: • increase the proportion of trainees who are outstanding by the end of the training by developing further their ability to reflect on their own practice • reduce the variability in the quality of mentoring by ensuring all partners are clear about their responsibilities for monitoring the effectiveness of the feedback that trainees receive

16. The revised framework for judging the quality of an ITE partnership • ITE inspection is primarily about evaluating how well trainees are trained to be good or better teachers. • For each phase inspected, inspectors must evaluate: • the extent to which the ITE partnership secures consistently high-quality outcomes for trainees. • To make this judgement, inspectors must evaluate each of the three key judgements: • Outcomes for trainees • Quality of training across the partnership • Leadership and management of the partnership.

17. Key Dates • Mid Point Reviews: • Friday15 Nov 2013 • Friday 10 March 2014 • Friday 16 May 2014 • Summative Placement Reports • Friday 20th December 2013 • Monday 7 April 2014 • Monday 2 June 2014 • Professional Mentor meetings: Tuesday 6 May 2014 • Subject Mentor meetings: • Monday 27 Jan 2014 • Tuesday 6 May 2014 (BS, DT, ICT & Ma) Wed 7 May 2014 (Mu & Sc)

18. Mentor support: see Pearson, L (2010) An introduction to mentoring TTRB http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20101021152907/http://www.ttrb.ac.uk/ViewArticle2.aspx?anchorId=17746&selectedId=17748&menu=17833&expanded=False&ContentId=16378 Mentors Online Support system http://www.canterbury.ac.uk/education/tf-mentors/ University of Huddersfield Mentor Website: http://www.hud.ac.uk/edu/secondarymentor/

19. Evaluating, reviewing and reflecting • Short term: Evaluation • the student’s evaluation of lessons • Medium term: Reviewing • Weekly review of progress meeting (ROP) • Long term: Reflecting • Mid-point reviews • Summative Placement Reports

20. Medium term: ReviewingROP meetings • Pivotal central plank in the Training Process • Where the development of trainee from learner to teacher takes place … • Under the mentor’s guidance …

21. What is offered in the Review of Progress meeting? Encouragement Guidance Coaching & Development Honesty Mentor Support Critical friend Motivation

22. The ROP meeting must be... Don’t be shy of support, if targets are not being achieved and they are SMART then the University can help (C4C process) A designated weekly time slot Private Professional SMART - targets set and discussed with all Teachers’ Standards covered Documented during meeting (both parties keep copies and students to upload to unilearn)

23. How...formal? Avoids (moaning) high dependency culture. Develops Professional Understanding and Professional Dialogue. Encourages Professional Evaluation. Leads to trainee’s having a more active role in their learning and development as a teacher.

24. Structure of weekly ROP meetings • Student to complete the form as a basis for identifying a clear focus for the meeting • Joint review of previous targets and progress (use the form, Teachers’ Standards grading criteria, observation reports and student lesson evaluations) • Assessing the main achievements made over the week and identifying the evidence available supporting these • Identify SMART targets (not too many) for development N.B. It is important that the student is not asked to focus on too much at once , that the challenge is appropriate and that training opportunities or relevant reading references are identified. • .

25. Long term: Reflecting Mid-point reviews Summative Placement Reports

26. Any questions