1. RFT: 12/33 National Professional Standards for Teachers Evaluation Briefing session 17 September 2012

2. >Welcome and introduction >Background –AITSL –National Professional Standards for Teachers >National Professional Standards for Teachers Evaluation Initiative requirements >Tender requirements >Procurement process > Questions and Answers

3. Engage an organisation and/or consortium with demonstrated experience and expertise to design, develop and deliver a nationally focused, credible and innovative evaluation to determine the: usefulness effectiveness of implementation impact of the National Professional Standards for Teachers

4. to… inform ongoing work to support effective and sustainable implementation and application of the Standards demonstrate uptake and benefit of standards referenced approaches to students, teachers, schools and states and territory organisations and the broader community enhance credibility and awareness of the Standards.

5. AITSL works with the education community to: set and maintain standards lead and influence improvement support and recognise quality We don’t... act as a regulator produce educational resources for use by children employ teachers formulate the national curriculum

6. National Professional Standards for Teachers Background

7. The National Professional Standards for Teachers is a public statement of what constitutes teacher quality. The Standards define the work of teachers and make explicit the elements of high-quality, effective teaching in 21st-century schools, which result in improved educational outcomes for students.

8. Dual purpose: improvement accountability Career progression: Graduate Proficient Highly Accomplished Lead

9. Graduate career stages of the NPST are the foundation for accreditation of Initial Teacher Education programs National approach endorsed by MCEEDYA in April 2011 AITSL works with relevant stakeholder to develop materials and processes to support he transition which commenced in 2012.

10. Proficient career stages of the NPST provide the foundation for the approach to the registration and renewal of registration of teachers National approach endorsed by MCEEDYA in October 2011 AITSL is working with key stakeholders to develop a governance framework for implementation to enable commencement of the approach from 2012

11. The lead and highly accomplished career stages of the NPST form the foundation for the voluntary process of certification Approach was endorsed by SCSEEC in April 2012 AITSL is working with stakeholders to confirm transition and deeming arrangements, develop materials to support implementation in 2013

12. The NPST (together with the National Professional Standard for Principals and Professional Learning Charter) underpin the Australian Performance and Development Framework The Framework aims to: improve teacher effectiveness and student outcomes through the development of a culture in schools focused on continuous teacher performance appraisal, growth and improvement The Framework was endorsed by SCSEEC in August 2012

13. The NPST and the Australian Charter for the Professional Learning of Teachers and School Leaders communicate the role of professional learning in improving teacher and school leader practice The Charter was endorsed by SCSEEC in August 2012 AITSL works with stakeholders to develop and range of resources to support the implementation of the NPST

14. A launching place for Standards related content Development of further supporting documentation for users and uses of the Standards Additional information on corporate AITSL website www.aitsl.edu.au

15. Project requirements

16. >Determine the: –usefulness –effectiveness of implementation –impact of the National Professional Standards for Teachers.

17. >Design, develop and deliver >Longitudinal and discrete modules >Commence: November 2012 Conclude: December 2015 >Organisation/consortia/subcontracting

18. StagesFocusIndicative timeframe Phase 1: Evaluation design & development Development of evaluation plan and design November – December 2012 Phase 2 - 4: Evaluation and Implementation Conduct of evaluation in relevant phases including; longitudinal elements and discrete modules of evaluation, and analysis and synthesis and preparation of reports January 2012- December 2015 Phase 5Separately commissioned concluding synthesis of the evaluation to contextualise findings in current policy context January 2016 – May 2016

19. Research Questions UsefulnessStructureProcessImpact Strands of activity Accreditation (ITE)RegistrationCertificationPerformance & DevelopmentProfessional Learning Support materials and resources Levels teacher/ school leaders SchoolCommunityJurisdictionNational

20. FocusIndicative timeframe Phase 1: Evaluation design & development Development of evaluation plan and design November – December 2012 Phase 2 - 4: Evaluation and Implementation Conduct of evaluation in relevant phases including; longitudinal elements and discrete modules of evaluation, and analysis and synthesis and preparation of reports January 2012- December 2015 Separately commissioned concluding synthesis of the evaluation to contextualise findings in current policy context January 2016 – May 2016

21. >Research Framework –Research goals –Research questions –Methodologies – appropriate balance of: Conventional and innovative modes, methods and data collection Qualitative and quantitative External and self-evaluation Formative and summative outcomes Potential to build capacity –Consider the context ie implementation timeframe & existing standards referenced approaches –Consider use of existing data and materials –Value for money

22. >Shared responsibility of consultant and AITSL: –Consultant: communication directly related to design, development and delivery –AITSL: broader scale communication, including project outcomes

23. >Evaluation Plan >Evaluation Implementation - for each phase –sub-plan –develop, deliver and monitor –complete technical reports –Progress reports

24. TypeFrequency Progress reports - verbal and writtenMonthly and quarterly Technical reportsFor specific modules Face-to- face presentationAt least x 2 times per year Presentations to AITSL BoardIf and when required

25. >AITSL Board >National Professional Standards for Teachers Evaluation project team >AITSL Internal Reference Group

26. >Organisation and or consortium >Relevant high level experience and expertise >Project director >Sub-contractors

27. MilestoneIndicative timeframe Commencement of contractNovember 2012 Draft project plan - Consultant and AITSL meeting November 2012 Targeted testing of planBy early December 2012 Final project plan - presentationBy mid December 2012 AITSL and consultant-led communicationMid December 2012/January 2013 Implementation of Evaluation – Phases 2-4January 2013- December 2015 Consultant presentations to AITSLJune and November 2013,14,15 Project completionDecember 2015.

28. Tender requirements

29. >High level evaluation plan: –Evaluation framework – alignment between evaluation goals, research questions and methodologies –Explanation of how the questions will be determined –Identification and explanation of modes, methodologies and data collection for each phase and where appropriate each strand of activity –Identification of the focus of each phase Demonstration of understanding of Australian education context and work of AITSL >Communications plan overview >Personnel >Risks and risk management strategy >Breakdown of costs >Referees >Additional information requested in Clause 5

30. Tender assessment

31. >Two stage process: –Assessment of written tenders –Presentation by short-listed tenders >Contractual agreement scope subject to AITSL funding MilestoneIndicative date RFT closesWednesday 10 October 2012 Stage 1 Assessment completed Late October 2012 Stage 2: Assessment completed By early November 2012 Offer to successful respondentBy mid November 2012

32. Questions and Answers

33. Bronwyn Burr Manager: Policy and Programs research@aitsl.edu.au 07 3010 0111