SCETT Conference: In Defence of Teacher Education

The Standing Committee for the Education and Training of Teachers (SCETT)
Annual Conference, London.

1:30-5:30pm, 26/11/2010.


In Defence of Teacher Education

By coincidence this Annual Conference was scheduled to take place soon after the publication of the government’s White Paper on education so it was able to focus on questions posed by the Paper about the future of teacher education. The format of the Conference was of three panels of high level speakers, and each panel led a debate on a particular question relating to teacher education and the possible implications of the government proposals included in the White Paper. Speakers on the panels were representatives of various different groups involved or affected by the education of teachers – the 4 main teaching unions, organisations with remits relating to teacher education, and Higher Education academics (from the Institute of Education, London). Each panel was allocated time for the speakers to give perspectives on their particular question followed by contributions from the floor.

The panels’ questions and membership were as follows:
Panel 1: What do teachers want from teacher education?
Speakers: Darren Northcott (NAS/UWT), Dr Mary Bousted (ATL), and Russell Hobby (NAHT) (NUT rep Christine Blower was ill)
Panel 2: Who will lead the fight for teacher education?
Speakers: James Noble-Rogers (UCET), Lee Davies (IfL) and Prof Dennis Hayes (SCETT)
Panel 3: What role has higher education in teacher education?
Speakers (all from IoE): Prof Gary McCulloch, Dr Shirley Lawes and Prof Michael Young.

Considerable debate was generated and over the course of the afternoon a number of common concerns emerged and were discussed. The main points are summarised below:
- The current system of teacher education is clearly facing changes that threaten to weaken it fundamentally not only as a result of what is being proposed in the White Paper but also in relation to other policies such as the Academies Bill in which it is stated that there is no longer a requirement for Academies to employ only those with QTS.
- The White Paper is underpinned by a belief that teaching is a craft, to be learned ‘on the job’ by sitting alongside someone doing that job. It was strongly argued by speakers from the panels and from the floor that this belief is flawed and that teaching must be recognised as a complex set of skills and knowledge.
- There was considerable consensus that the current system is not perfect - but also very strong agreement within the Conference that there are elements worth saving, and a major one of these is the input from Higher Education (HE). It is clear from union research involving practising teachers that theoretical perspectives are valued and that HE needs to be at the heart of providing these. Combination of theory and practice is needed – pointed out that not unique situation as other professions deal with this too.
- We need to concentrate on the provision of effective on-going CPD, particularly good quality subject-based CPD that is in need of transforming. (Cf below for link to article on this by Dr Boulsted, ATL, in recent TES). Professional knowledge and understanding is dynamic and changes over time – this reveals the potential for a framework of CPD to be extended and be underpinned by a relationship between schools and HE. A well-received suggestion was that ITT should not be overloaded– that we need CPD ‘journeys’ throughout teaching careers (again, pointed out that this was not an issue only faced by teaching profession) –
- University Training Schools – very interesting idea but not anticipated before White Paper – we need to know more as they could provide opportunities.
- Debate about how far we can ‘educate’ rather than ‘train’ when complying to the Standards – obviously not a new issue. Questions need to be considered such as what should the theoretical underpinnings be in teacher education? What does ‘theory’ look like? How does ‘knowledge’ fit into education? Master’s credits can provide the space for ‘education’ rather than training but no mention of Master’s level in the White Paper
- The taking on of ITT responsibilities will be worrying to many schools,and seen as problematic. White Paper focus is based on a view that schools are the only worthwhile unit – this is a mistake. Most Head Teachers are happy to use expertise from elsewhere to create a culture within which everyone can progress – the government proposals do not tackle this.
- We should see the White Paper as an opportunity, and need to get to grips with what’s right, what’s wrong with what we’ve got. Aim for a proper debate with the government on what we want in Teacher Education.
-
-
In summary, as was to be expected at an event such as this, there was wide-ranging and impassioned debate about which elements within our current system that should be defended, and the nature of that defence, in the face of the challenges found within the White Paper. Within these discussions there was some optimism expressed that the White Paper offered opportunities as well as challenges. It was clear by the end of the Conference that there was consensus about the essential role that debate of this level and nature is to play if we are to achieve a system of teacher education that does justice to the complex nature of what it is to be a teacher.


Links:

Standing Committee for the Education and Training of Teachers (SCETT)
www.scett.org.uk

http://www.tes.co.uk/article.aspx?storycode=6064239