Is the government’s plan for a raft of teaching schools the best way forward for managing continuing professional development? And how does teacher training fit in? Leaders share their thoughts.

Train to gain?

More than a menu?

It is difficult to see how the proposed model of teaching schools to coordinate and lead CPD will work effectively. The likelihood is that they will become either an income generation stream for teaching schools or will fail to meet local need.

The capacity of teaching schools will be key. How will they have the scope to offer more than a menu of courses?

What about the excellent work that many of the current training schools have undertaken – does this just not matter?

And eligibility depends on attaining three grade ones from Ofsted. Are there enough schools who have done so to ensure even and fair coverage across the country? I have serious doubts.

Jane Acklam
Head, Moor End Technology College, Huddersfield

Training sets a clear vision

The vision for teaching schools is very clear: networks of outstanding schools responsible for offering CPD for teachers and leaders and providing and quality assuring initial teacher training (ITT). Education secretary Michael Gove is committed to the notion of schools supporting schools.

Is this a good idea? The success of the National Support School programme, with its emphasis on strong leadership, teaching and learning and the development of leadership at all levels, would indicate that it is. Combine this with all the hallmarks of successful training schools and you have the perfect recipe.

However, in order for the recipe to work, you have to have the finest ingredients. Can this be achieved on £64,000 for the first year? For some, the answer is definitely no. For the more creative, it is a start.

Debbie Coslett
Executive Head, The Hayesbrook School, Tonbridge, Kent

Training quality is key criterion

We are a satisfactory school. We recently received an email from a higher education institute from whom we had two students. The senior lecturer said we should apply to be a training school because they were so impressed by the support and the practice the students were experiencing.

Both had been on a joint placement previously in a school which is specialist in their subject and outstanding; both have said their experience here is better.

In regards teacher training, the designation of teaching school should be based on a school’s ability to ensure students pass well, to address their needs constructively and on the feedback the university has from the students.

Lesley Kirby
Head of Richmond Park Academy, London

An imaginary problem

Our school has very long established links with an outstanding Initial Teacher Training (ITT) provider and a successful two-county graduate teacher programme (GTP) partnership. Both provide high-quality, long-term placements in schools.

It feels as if the government doesn’t really know what actually happens on PGCE or GTP courses and, with the implementation of teaching schools, is trying to fix a problem that doesn’t actually exist. We are able to focus on high qual quality in-school training but much of the necessary theoretical learning plus the administration, selection and quality assurance is done by very competent professionals.

My fear is that teacher trainees will in future be 'dumped' on to teaching school partnerships and left to sink or swim. If appropriate support is available, then we have some superb neighbouring schools and together we would be able to provide high quality teacher education as a partnership.

However, none of these superb schools currently meet all of the criteria to be a ‘teaching school’.

Jim Fuller
Assistant Head, staff development, St Birinus School, Didcot, Oxfordshire

Designed with IMPACT

© 2024 Association of School and College Leaders | Valid XHTML | Contact us