Thread by @apf102

Some thoughts on ITT/ITE: a thread on changing my mind based on evidence.

When I first completed my teacher training, I felt I felt woefully unprepared for the first school I worked in. I was leading a department of one with little guidance and the behaviour was awful /1

For many years I held my training responsible. In some ways it was. I had little subject specific input and was asked to do like very little subject specific reading. This was highlighted in my 3rd year when I joined a highly trained dept. /2

There was also definitely an emphasis on learning styles and other edu fads so common in the mid 00s. Sometimes these were critically evaluated, other times not. /3

However I also had my own views on education. I deeply believed in the need for history to be more active and engaging (and still do), but I was not a critical consumer of everything I was given. Nor did I engage very deeply with the additional reading I could have done /4

My behaviour training was also OK (like much in that period). I couldn’t really blame it for the problems I was facing: the school systems were just not there. This was evident when the SLT changed radically in year 2 and behaviour suddenly became manageable /5

https://twitter.com/apf102/status/1413438168905527297

In my second dept I was nurtured by @BarbaraHib @katiehall1979 and @NicolaDevey whose training via @Counsell_C and @LTUPGCE helped me fill those subject specific gaps /6

This made me begin to question my view that all ITT was poor. Then as I began to work as a mentor with @LTUPGCE and SCITT trainees the picture was broadened again. @LTUPGCE trainees in the Iate early 2010s were getting great critical pedagogical input via @canuckclogger /7

The SCITT and other HEI picture was less rosy. But actually there were vast differences based on individual trainees and the beliefs they brought to training. Some trainees were open to my subject focused mentoring - others were fully on the VAK bandwagon. /8

When I eventually moved into ITT myself in 2016 I was still convinced that most ITT was poor. Over the last 5 years, working with colleagues and other providers I have seen the picture is far more complex /9

There ARE issues in ITT in relation to placements, mentors being given time for their roles, and particularly in relation to subject specific input in secondary. However this is not a universal picture. Surveys run by multiple groups have interrupted my thinking /10

Most people I speak to are either ecstatic or very unhappy with their ITT. Most people surveyed sit more in the upper centre - generally happy. Most Ofsted reports show similar. Most external examining does too. /11

https://twitter.com/apf102/status/1413438137230143488

The biggest issues at the heart of good secondary ITE lie, in my view, with high quality mentoring (with appropriate time being given) and high quality subject specific training which unifies school and non-school elements. The Market Review does not solve this. /12

If we really want to reform ITE then we need to speak with knowledge. We cannot sit outside ITE (as teachers or consultants) and claim it is all bad when the evidence does not show that. Equally we cannot sit inside and claim it’s all great for the same reason.

https://twitter.com/apf102/status/1413438203281952769