Suffolk & Norfolk Secondary SCITT

Stephen Grounds HMI

reproduced in whole or in part for non-commercial educational purposes, provided that the information quoted is reproduced without adaptation and the source and date are stated. Inspection reports are available on the Ofsted web site (www.ofsted.gov.uk).

p.2

Introduction

The Suffolk and Norfolk Secondary SCITT currently works in partnership with 43 schools to provide secondary initial teacher training (ITT) courses in the 11-16 age range. It presently offers training in English, mathematics, science, modern foreign languages (MFL), music, information and communication technology (ICT), design technology and physical education. At the time of the inspection there were 36 trainees.

p.3

Context

The inspection was carried out by a team of inspectors in accordance with the Ofsted Handbook for the Inspection of Initial Teacher Training (2005-2011).

p.3

Context

This report draws on evidence from a full inspection of the provision and an inspection of the management and quality assurance arrangements.

p.3

Grades are awarded in accordance with the following scale

Grade 1 Outstanding Grade 2 Good Grade 3 Satisfactory Grade 4 Inadequate

p.3

Management and quality assurance: Grade: 3

The next inspection of this provider will take place in accordance with the Framework.

p.3

Key strengths

 the professional commitment of the trainees as measured by their involvement in the life of the consortium schools

p.4

Key strengths

 the commitment and enthusiasm of the consortium schools

p.4

Key strengths

 the effective systems of communication across a large geographical area

p.4

Key strengths

 the rapid and intelligent response to issues identified in internal and external evaluation.

p.4

Points for action

 improving the quality of trainees’ planning and evaluation of lessons, and of their assessment of pupils’ progress

p.4

Points for action

 improving the design and use of the subject knowledge audits to further develop trainees’ subject knowledge and understanding of subject pedagogy

p.4

Points for action

 improving the training of partnership staff in order to improve the quality of lesson evaluations, termly reports and the coherence of the target setting process

p.4

Points for action

 strengthening the quality assurance of school-based training, particularly in the latter months of the course.

p.4

Points for consideration

 reviewing the roles and responsibilities of professional tutors

p.4

Points for consideration

 linking together the targets, lesson observation reports and subject audits into a training plan for each trainee.

p.4

Standards achieved by trainees

1. Trainees have high expectations of pupils and challenge them to do well. They maintain excellent working relationships with pupils and provide good role models in terms of dress and communication. They use praise well to motivate pupils. Trainees work very effectively with school staff and quickly become involved in school life. Many offer help and support with out-of-school activities such as clubs and this involvement is a key strength of the cohort.

p.5

Standards achieved by trainees

2. Trainees’ evaluative skills are satisfactory. Trainees make good use of the reflective journal and are self-evaluative in their portfolio assessments. Their self- assessments of lessons are sound, but their written evaluations are limited by the format of the partnership’s pro-forma. Much that emerges from these evaluations is about class management issues, rather than an evaluation of teaching through its impact on pupils’ progress against the intended learning outcomes.

p.5

Standards achieved by trainees

3. Trainees’ levels of subject knowledge, understanding and skills are adequate for the age range for which they are training; their capability for Key Stage 3 is much stronger than that for Key Stage 4. They have a secure understanding of the National Curriculum programmes of study for their subjects and of national issues and priorities. All are good at using ICT as a teaching tool. Trainees often have gaps in their knowledge of topics outside those they have been called upon to teach. The same criticism applies to their knowledge of aspects outside those evident in their own schools, for example the knowledge of some trainees of key skills and vocational routes.

p.5

Standards achieved by trainees

4. Trainees’ planning is satisfactory overall. Their long and medium-term planning is good, but there are common weaknesses in the planning of individual lessons such as lack of a clear identification of pupil learning outcomes. Literacy and numeracy are seldom explicitly considered leading to missed opportunities to develop pupils’ capabilities in these aspects. The planning for differentiated support for the less and more able pupils in the same lessons is underdeveloped, as is the planning for monitoring pupils’ progress during lessons.

p.5

Standards achieved by trainees

5. Trainees’ willingness to experiment with different teaching strategies is good. For example, mathematics trainees try hard to carry out work which captures pupils’ interests. Group and paired work is common and many trainees deploy ICT in a variety of interesting ways. The production of high quality resources is a common feature of trainees’ teaching. Notwithstanding the weaknesses in differentiating material for a single class, trainees frequently alter their strategy when presenting the same topic with different classes.

p.5

Standards achieved by trainees

6. Trainees often produce their own resources and systems for monitoring and assessment to complement those in use in the schools. They mark and keep records systematically and in line with the schools’ policies. They are able to assess work well at Key Stage 4, and modern foreign languages trainees are noticeably effective at Key Stage 3 as well. Their ability to ascribe National Curriculum levels to pupils is good. Many trainees’ skills in formative assessment within lessons require further development.

p.5

Standards achieved by trainees

7. Trainees are well organised and can manage their classes at least satisfactorily. The best do so by combining effective planning, teaching and assessment. All trainees have a sound theoretical understanding of different techniques for class management, but these are sometimes limited to those in use in their placement school.

p.6

The quality of training

8. The course structure and content meet the Requirements and enable trainees to demonstrate that they meet the Standards. Trainees have good opportunities to teach and assess pupils across the full age and ability range. For the most part, the partnership has made good attempts to fill any gaps in the full 11-16 experience. For example, supplementary teaching in a middle school setting was organised for a modern foreign languages trainee. A number of trainees have been provided with very good post-16 experiences to enhance their training. The lead school training days are used well to model good teaching and to address subject knowledge and pedagogy. The number of such days is appropriately varied depending upon the needs of the particular subject and its cohort of trainees. The programme of general professional studies builds well on the preparation tasks which trainees have to do in schools.

p.6

The quality of training

9. The suggested general professional studies programme for schools is cross- referenced to the Standards and covers key areas. School-based professional studies are thoughtfully prepared by professional tutors, but the programmes provided are not always those recommended by the partnership nor do they always link with school subject training. This inhibits the coherence between the different elements of the course.

p.6

The quality of training

10. Central training, whether in subject studies or in general professional studies, is well planned and delivered. School-based training is characterised by the enthusiasm and commitment of the trainers and their willingness to offer support. For the most part, trainees receive their entitlement from their mentors. However, in the last few months of the course the frequency of formal lesson observations, and to a lesser degree of mentor meetings, has fallen below the expectations of the partnership. The intention that trainees become reflective practitioners has yet to be fully realised. The records of lesson observations and weekly mentor meetings are often fragmentary and the outcomes seldom include clear areas for development and precise indications of what trainees must do to improve their practice.

p.6

The quality of training

11. The auditing of trainees’ subject knowledge is secure. It relies heavily, however, on trainees’ self-assessment and mentors do not have a formal role in checking the audit. Individual schools have their own approaches to subject knowledge development and the focus of support is frequently directed towards trainees’ short-term teaching objectives, rather than developing their understanding of subject pedagogy.

p.6

The quality of training

12. The assignments make a good contribution to the coherence of the training. The marking of assignments makes it clear to trainees how well they have met the success criteria.

p.7

The quality of training

13. Procedures for monitoring and assessing the trainees against the Standards are satisfactory. The quality of the written feedback on lessons is extremely variable. Chronological accounts are usually written which tend to be descriptive rather than evaluative and in which targets for development are not clearly expressed. The end- of term summative reports are rather general and can lack important detail. There is also some ambiguity as to whether mentors are reporting achievement of the Standards or progress towards meeting them. It is difficult to see the links between the targets of the weekly meetings, the lesson observations reports and the subject audits, as they are not brought together in the form of a training plan for the trainee.

p.7

The quality of training

14. A stronger feature of assessment is the system for the compilation of the professional development portfolio. Trainees provide good evidence of their meeting the Standards with thoughtful self-analyses of what they have achieved and the checking of evidence by mentors and professional tutors is good.

p.7

The quality of training

15. There has been some over-estimation by the partnership of trainees’ capability in planning, evaluation and subject knowledge. On the other hand the recent adoption of criteria for the judgement of clusters of Standards has improved the capability of school staff to make accurate judgements. The pass/fail borderline is secure.

p.7

Management and quality assurance

16. Course applicants are provided with good information about the provision. The equal opportunities and race relations policy of Suffolk Local Education Authority is adopted and the targets agreed with the Training and Development Agency (TDA) for the recruitment of minority ethnic trainees are met. Necessary checks on applicants are made and the Requirements are met. Suitable general criteria for the selection of trainees are applied in both the initial selection and during the interviewing process. The process results in the recruitment of suitable applicants.

p.7

Management and quality assurance

17. In procedures that are consistent across all subjects, all candidates are interviewed in the specialist lead school, with the panel including a subject specialist. School-based tasks provide a useful context and evidence for the ensuing interviews. Subject tests and a written test of literacy are adopted for all trainees. Pre-course individual tasks are set, shared with lead subject mentors, and supplemented with useful advice. 18. Over the last year the arrangements for managing the partnership have been strengthened and the new course leader has successfully established a common sense of purpose. The maintenance of the partnership over large distances continues to present particular organisational challenges and these have been partly met by the establishment of assistants to some lead subject mentors. The course leader has been proactive in visiting headteachers to promote the benefit to schools

p.7

Management and quality assurance

19. The selection of schools for placements is good. There are particular strengths in the partnership’s lead subject schools and in its use of training schools. There is good intervention when placements are not working well or where some additional support is needed. Day-to-day communications between the central office and the partner schools are good. The consortium is adopting a virtual learning environment to complement the existing well-used e-mail systems.

p.8

Management and quality assurance

20. The current roles and responsibilities of partnership staff are clear. The key role of the lead subject mentors is being constantly improved and adapted with plans for them to have an increased quality assurance role in schools. However the role of the professional tutor in the quality assurance of school based training is undeveloped. The consortium has recently revised and improved its committee structure to manage and support the programme. It has improved the documentation defining the committees and their distinctive roles with the result that there is improved communication at a strategic level across the partnership. The committees meet each term and carry out their functions as intended. The partnership agreement has also been revised in order to iron out ambiguities of role.

p.8

Management and quality assurance

21. Although the arrangements for mentor training are satisfactory, with lead subject mentors visiting those who have not been able to attend training sessions, the partnership needs to consider how best to improve the quality and focus of the training outcomes, particularly those arising from mentor meetings and lesson observations.

p.8

Management and quality assurance

22. Some aspects of quality assurance are good. An example is the monitoring of the work of lead schools and lead subject mentors by the course leader. Another is the regular joint observation by the lead subject mentor and the school subject mentor, a process which leads to good outcomes and discussion. When it occurs, the system of joint observation by first and second school mentors is also effective in moderating judgements about trainees’ teaching. The group marking by mentors of assignments provides both good training experiences and the establishment of common practices. There are secure systems for lead subject mentors and cluster managers to check the support for trainees in schools. However, these arrangements have a gap after the spring half term. In several settings, the lack of scrutiny after this date led to weaknesses in the quality and frequency of meetings, target setting and in the quality and frequency of formal lesson observations. These

p.8

Management and quality assurance

were not detected or dealt with effectively.

p.8

Management and quality assurance

23. Appropriate internal and external moderation arrangements are in place. External examiners visit three times during the year to consider assignments and observe a small number of trainees in school, including any borderline cases. They provide advice and seek the views of trainees on the quality of the provision.

p.8

Management and quality assurance

24. The partnership responds well to internal and external evaluation. Its commitment to improve its practice is evident at all levels. There is extensive use of trainee questionnaires to evaluate central and school-based training. These are analysed by the course leader. Where appropriate feedback is given to lead subject mentors: an overview is taken to the management group for action. These actions have led to many examples of course improvement.

p.9

Management and quality assurance

25. The current annual improvement plan is written in an appropriate form with targets, success criteria, tasks, and timescales set out clearly. An appropriate subject development plan has been set out for science and will be carried forward in the other subjects.

p.9

Management and quality assurance

26. Benchmarking is at an embryonic stage. The course leader has begun to use data to start in-house discussion about differences with other school-based providers, based on TDA data. Links have been established with two other providers to compare and improve quality.

p.9