1. Learning from an in depth look at recruitment and selection during 2018 ITE inspections
UCET Conference 7 November David Storrie HMI
Recruitment and selection

2. The rigour of the recruitment process
ITE inspection handbook - paragraph 147, page 44
Inspectors must consider the rigour of the recruitment and selection process in:
Recruiting trainees with the potential to meet the need of local, regional and national employers and the wider educational community.
Selecting candidates with appropriate qualifications, relevant subject/specialist knowledge and the potential to met the relevant professional standards by the end of their training.
Placing applicants on a training programme that makes best use of their skills, aptitudes and previous experience and develops their subject knowledge where appropriate.
Explain inspectors nationally have been gathering additional evidence for Ofsted – examining recruitment and selection – this is significant work given recruitment is a priority area nationally with many partnerships not filling all places allocated.
Recruitment and selection

3. Emerging areas for improvement from summary of verbal feedback proformas - 1
The ability of partnership staff involved in recruitment and selection processes to follow agreed policies and procedures.
The need for regular review of recruitment and selection policies.
The rigour of the recruitment process in identifying and then taking action to meet individual trainees’ needs.
The clarity of expectations about training requirements, provided for applicants, at the recruitment and selection stage.
Analysis of the summaries of verbal feedback documents Ofsted provides to ITE partnerships at the end of stage 1 of an inspection indicated the following common emerging areas for improvement across all 4 phases inspected in the summer term of 2018.
Ofsted would like to remind all partnership delegates that these summaries are confidential documents provided at the end of stage 1 and they should not be shared externally. These documents will be watermarked to this effect in 2018 as a reminder.
All of these summary documents are quality assured by the regional SHMI for ITE before being sent to the provider’s representative at the end of stage 1 of the inspection.
The emerging areas for improvement at stage 1 become the key lines of enquiry at stage 2 together with an additional line of enquiry focusing on how well newly qualified teachers/ former trainees were prepared for their role as teachers by their training, transition documentation and the partnership’s liaison with employing settings, schools, colleges etc.
Inspectors are interested in the impact of actions taken for the cohort of trainees inspected who will be NQTs or former trainees at stage 2 as well as improvements made to training for the subsequent cohort and any evidence of impact available up to the date of the stage 2 inspection.
It would be helpful if partnerships reviewed these areas in their partnership meetings/ at their strategic boards to consider what they could do to enhance these areas of partnership provision.
Recruitment and selection

4. Emerging areas for improvement from summary of verbal feedback proformas - 2
The recruitment of different under-represented groups.
The identification of suitable candidates for the Assessment Only route.
The need for a clear strategic view about the number of trainees partnerships would like to, or be able to, recruit in different phases and subjects.
That planned improvements to recruitment and selection are actually implemented in 2018/19.
Analysis of the summaries of verbal feedback documents Ofsted provides to ITE partnerships at the end of stage 1 of an inspection indicated the following common emerging areas for improvement across all 4 phases inspected in the summer term of 2018.
Ofsted would like to remind all partnership delegates that these summaries are confidential documents provided at the end of stage 1 and they should not be shared externally. These documents will be watermarked to this effect in 2018 as a reminder.
All of these summary documents are quality assured by the regional SHMI for ITE before being sent to the provider’s representative at the end of stage 1 of the inspection.
The emerging areas for improvement at stage 1 become the key lines of enquiry at stage 2 together with an additional line of enquiry focusing on how well newly qualified teachers/ former trainees were prepared for their role as teachers by their training, transition documentation and the partnership’s liaison with employing settings, schools, colleges etc.
Inspectors are interested in the impact of actions taken for the cohort of trainees inspected who will be NQTs or former trainees at stage 2 as well as improvements made to training for the subsequent cohort and any evidence of impact available up to the date of the stage 2 inspection.
It would be helpful if partnerships reviewed these areas in their partnership meetings/ at their strategic boards to consider what they could do to enhance these areas of partnership provision.
Recruitment and selection

5. Reminder from DfE about ITT Criteria 1.3
We would like to remind ITT providers and lead schools that they must not reject candidates who are suitable to train to teach due to a lack of prior school experience. They should also ensure entry criteria are clear and concise.
This requirement is outlined in section C1.3 of the ITT criteria, which states: ‘Prior experience in a school is not required. However, where candidates have been able to gain experience in schools, providers might find reports from those schools helpful. Lack of school experience should not be a reason for rejecting an otherwise suitable applicant’.
Set out the reminder for colleagues about ITT criteria C1.3 Remind attendees that Ofsted does not look at compliance as a simply paper based exercise. Inspectors look to triangulate evidence of compliance through all their inspection activities. It is important to ensure policies and practices are implemented and not simply a document in a folder.
Recruitment and selection

6. 10 major perceived barriers to recruitment – 1
Proliferation of routes/providers and cumbersome application process.
Finance and costs.
Competition from and attitudes of other local SCITTs.
Available places and their location.
Teacher workload and stress.
Explain that our work nationally this year has found 10 major perceived barriers to the recruitment of trainee teachers.
Recruitment and selection

7. 10 major perceived barriers to recruitment – 2
Lower volume of potential applicants.
Lower conversion rates of offers to recruitment and volumes of candidates turning up for interviews.
Constant changes to DfE policy.
Recruiting from potential groups.
Negative perceptions of teaching as a career.
Recruitment and selection

8. Positive action taken to improve recruitment (1)
New locations/partnerships.
Working with prospective candidates and applicants.
Targeting potential new applicants.
Recruitment events.
Advertising and promotional materials.
Inspectors have found a range of positive actions being taken by partnerships nationally to drive improvements in recruitment. Highlight that the DfE have recently published materials that aim to support partnerships advertise training and drive recruitment.
Recruitment and selection

9. Positive action taken to improve recruitment (2)
Use of social media.
Developing links with particular agencies.
Investing in different training routes.
Using ex-trainees as ambassadors.
Marketing the uniqueness of partnerships to ensure accurate perceptions.
Recruitment and selection

10. Trainees’ perceptions of the rigour of the recruitment process (primary)
School Direct (salaried) trainees felt they had the most rigorous recruitment and selection process (85%).
Positive response rates for the other routes were lower:
School Direct 80%
Postgraduate 76%
Undergraduate 70%.
Nationally the trainee survey has shown a high proportion of trainees believe that their course has a reigorous recruitment process. However, there is variation evident across different training routes nationally. Partnerships should consider why some trainees do not believe the selection process was rigorous and how it can be improved further.
Recruitment and selection

11. Trainees’ perceptions of the rigour of the recruitment process (secondary)
85% of secondary trainees perceived their recruitment and selection process was rigorous.
School Direct trainees were most positive about the rigour of their recruitment and selection process (88%).
Postgraduate (85%) and undergraduate (84%) trainees had similar perceptions.
School Direct (salaried) (81%) trainees were least positive about the rigour of the process.
There a less marked difference in the views of secondary trainees.
Recruitment and selection

12. Initial teacher education framework beyond December UCET Conference 7 November David Storrie HMI

13. The current ITE inspection framework:
introduced an outcomes driven framework.
Universal inspection of all partnerships/phases in a six year cycle ending December 2018.
Current framework includes a thematic dimension and focused monitoring inspections.
Revised two-stage model started in June 2014 with a focus on improvement.
Inspection of programmes leading to the award of Early Years Teacher Status (EYTS) started in April 2015.
Talk through slide setting the context for our current inspection ITE framework.
Beyond December 2018

14. The internal context
Discussions about the need to ensure that Ofsted’s ITE remit effectively reflects:
Ofsted’s agreed view of the purpose of inspection and its role as a force for improvement
our strategy of being intelligent, responsible and focused.
Link to Ofsted’s curriculum work: do we place sufficient emphasis on:
inspecting providers subject knowledge, curriculum intent, implementation and impact of training
inspecting trainees’ subject knowledge and understanding of curriculum development?
Beyond December 2018
The ITE Remit: Beyond December 2018

15. What’s happened so far?
Internal and external expert advisory groups established.
Initial discussions on future developments have been held with:
HMCI
The Minister for School Standards
DfE colleagues
ITE partnerships at regional events during March 2018
ITE inspectors at April national conference
Education Inspection Framework (EIF) team
Legal team.
Beyond December 2018

16. What do we need to consider for a new framework
What do we need to consider for a new framework? Internal and external expert advisory groups
a two-staged model of inspection
the impact of training on the teacher workforce
compliance, partnership engagement and governance arrangements
mentoring capacity in different phases/settings
trainees’ in depth subject knowledge and understanding of curriculum development
the frequency of inspection and notification periods
Beyond December 2018

17. What do we need to consider for a new framework
What do we need to consider for a new framework? ITE partnerships and inspectors
quality, professional dialogue and support to improve
inspector workforce needs more ITE specialists
the impact of the partnership on the wider educational context
reducing the burden
dissemination of Ofsted’s findings to the sector
reports are more useful than grades
more proportionate and prioritised inspections
go beyond the DfE’s teachers’ standards and ITT core content
trainees rather than newly qualified teachers (NQTs)
(EIF implications)
observations of centre-based training
Beyond December 2018

18. Risks and timing
Future proofing against shifts in emphasis in ITE and education policy:
recruitment, retention and workload priorities
‘strengthening of QTS’
teaching apprenticeships
DfE work on ITE provider accountability
DfE internal review of ITE in FE.
Learning from EIF developments and research
Learning from work on the importance of the curriculum
Time for research, development work, surveys and pilots.
Beyond December 2018

19. Discussion
Do we continue with an approach which inspects each ITE partnership in the same way within an inspection cycle or move to more proportionate and prioritised inspections of ITE?
Your views?

20. Additional discussion points
What could a differentiated ITE inspection model look like?
What could be included in new risk assessment criteria for a future inspection framework?
Should we continue to inspect all phases offered by an ITE partnership at the same time?
What should be covered in the content of ITE training?
Beyond December 2012