1. A Framework for collaborative relationships Summary and reflections from the 15th February discussions

2. IOE Rated by Ofsted as ‘outstanding’ for its secondary, GTP and further education ITE provision, and as ‘good’ with ‘outstanding’ features for its primary ITE provision Trains around 1,200 school teachers each year The largest postgraduate provider of ITE nationally The scale of this provision enables the IOE to support excellent teams across a range of subject areas A major centre for CPD and award-bearing and professional courses for education practitioners A significant resource for education research and development 2

3. London schools 1.1m pupils More than 60% come from a minority ethnic group 38% have a first language other than English 42% are eligible for Free School Meals (DCSF 2008) 3,018 schools 80 nursery schools; 1,786 primary schools; 376 secondary schools; 51 Academies; 1 City Technology College; 145 special schools; 506 independent schools; 73 Pupil Referral Units Ofsted’s ‘outstanding’ providers list for 2009/10 includes 121 London schools and 137 schools in the South East (DCSF 2010; Ofsted 2011) See spreadsheets for East of England and South East data 3

4. London teachers 64,100 teachers 31,090 teaching assistants c11,000 trainee teachers About 11,000 people train to become teachers in London each year: 6,000 through undergraduate BEd courses 4,000 through PGCEs 1,000 through the GTP route 400 through Teach First (from 2011) At present, this is shared between 30 providers of ITE. The smallest provider trains around 15 teachers a year, the largest around 1,200 4

5. Schools White Paper Provides a direction of travel – a school-centred system, based on school- to-school support – but is light on detail Offers the opportunity to shape and influence the policy Two questions: What do we want to retain from current ITE/CPD relationships and arrangements? How might we move forward? 5

6. Current ITE/CPD provision – what aspects should we retain? and develop? GTP Valued by schools: attracts good quality candidates; develops trainees’ skills effectively; supports CPD in schools Need to develop the model in terms of: the workload it creates for schools, which limits capacity the second placement, which is currently too short to offer any benefit, but disruptive to the ‘home’ school and the trainee extending the theoretical input and time for reflection and engagement with education research 6

7. PGCE Strengths: two placements; brings new ideas to schools; offers greater support for trainees than the GTP, especially for those who are straight out of university Support for involving schools in selecting PGCE trainees to a greater extent Support for improving coverage of sixth form teaching as part of the PGCE (and GTP) Need for closer partnership working and greater co-ordination of the respective inputs of the HEI and school Overall, must avoid polarisation – seeing schools as providing practical training and HEIs as providing theoretical training. Trainees and schools would value greater support in bringing the two together – throughout ITE, the NQT year and CPD 7

8. Issues specific to cluster models 8 High cost of commissioning at level of individual school Cluster working would enable GTP trainees to experience other schools – cross-phase and cross-sector Cluster working could also facilitate ‘professional studies’ input for trainees Clusters could be precarious, with schools leaving and new schools joining on a regular basis Working closely with other schools, especially as a Teaching School, could raise capacity issues in terms of maintaining the performance of the lead school Value of having external oversight of cluster working, as well as external input

9. HEI contributions HEI support is valued by schools, particularly in relation to academic stretch, theoretical input, education research, action research, mentor training and support, subject knowledge/pedagogy expertise, leadership development, knowledge management and accredited CPD, including masters programmes HEIs are also able to bring cross-school, national and international knowledge and expertise to ITE and CPD Preference among some for a hub model – as a means of providing strong co-ordination and quality assurance Potential for HEIs to support hubs and clusters, and in doing so help manage the transition to the new arrangements and support coherence Potential for HEI staff to be catalysts for the sharing of practice across schools – interest in having HEI staff allocated to schools and spending more time in school 9