Part 4 report
- Executive summary
- Performance management processes and pupil feedback
- Performance and quality
- Professional development and support
- Career development and retenion
Executive summary
This report relates to Part 4 of the Newly Qualified Teacher (NQT) Quality Improvement study commissioned by the Training and Development Agency for Schools (TDA) which focuses on the third year of teaching. The analysis below presents findings relating to four key themes: performance management; teacher performance; professional development and support; and career development. A mixed method approach to data collection was used incorporating case studies and national surveys of senior leaders and third year teachers. The data analysed and reported below consists of:
- Data from visits to 50 case study schools (21 primary, 23 secondary, 4 special and 2 independent schools) in May and June 2010. Interviews were conducted with 46 third year teachers, 48 senior leaders and 28 line managers (where this was different from the senior leader).
- Data from surveys of senior leaders in 500 schools (325 primary, 136 secondary, 26 independent and 13 special schools) were gathered in Autumn 2009. Responses were also gathered from 298 third year teachers in the same schools (156 primary, 133 secondary, 4 special and 5 independent school teachers).
Performance management processes and pupil feedback
The majority of schools in our case study sample follow a standard performance management process which includes a meeting at the beginning of the year to review and set targets, lesson observations and mid year reviews. Overall, primary schools follow a standard process in line with regulations which tends to be informal, whereas secondary schools tend to adopt a more formal and structured approach. In some secondary schools, the processes are closely linked with quality assurance and CPD. One independent school followed the standard process and the other did not have a process at all. All four special schools in our sample followed a process similar to primary schools.
Our survey data showed that both senior leaders and third year teachers felt that progression is measured over time via performance management; this was consistent with our case study findings. Our case study data also showed that primary schools were more likely to use pupil progress meetings as a way of measuring performance and secondary schools more likely to use results and data tracking. Both independent schools in our sample indicated that they did not measure performance over time.
Thirty one third year teachers commented on the usefulness of performance management. Of those, around one third did not find it useful and almost half of these preferred the informal support from within their department rather than the performance management process itself. The remaining two thirds highlighted that they did find the process useful especially the target setting, observations and some found the process useful in terms of reflecting on their practice.
Primary schools were more likely to carry out three lesson observations per year and secondary one or two observations per year as part of performance management. As might be expected, headteachers and deputy head teachers carry out observations in primary schools, whereas line managers and heads of departments do so in secondary schools. Primary schools indicated that they are more likely to carry out additional informal observations and secondary schools additional formal observations. The majority of schools used an Ofsted style grading structure when giving feedback.
In terms of pupil feedback, primary schools tend to use a formal process including pupil questionnaires and surveys; eight primary schools indicated that they did not get pupil feedback at all. Secondary schools also use formal methods to obtain pupil feedback via questionnaires and the pupil council; however, they were more likely to use informal methods such as feedback in lessons. Seven secondary schools did not use pupil feedback as a way of measuring performance.
Performance and quality
Clearly the successful progression of third year teachers from the NQT year is dependent on a combination of individual and school factors. Expectations of third year teachers differ between secondary schools on the one hand and primary and special schools on the other. In the special school additional responsibility is anticipated at an earlier stage and this is reflected in the expectations of line and senior managers. The key individual factors leading to enhanced performance among third year teachers are:
1. Personal characteristics - this is usually identified within the first two years of a teacher's career and can have an impact on how individual teachers develop. This is usually associated with enhanced confidence as teachers become more experienced in the classroom and the wider school environment
2. Skills - third year teachers are expected to have developed classroom management, curricular and pedagogic assessment skills - reflectiveness, relationships with colleagues and pupils, time management
3. Aspirations/motivation - drive, ambition, empathy and rapport with pupils
4. Knowledge/understanding - third year teachers are expected to have a good understanding of assessment systems and wider school policies and contexts
5. Personal circumstances - relationship issues including the need to move because of partners' work commitments, taking time out from careers to have children etc can all impact on the progress of third year teachers.
Interrelating with these individual factors are those relating to the organisation of the school, specifically the degree to which senior leaders are able and willing to support teachers thorough the provision of training and CPD opportunities and internal promotions and responsibility points. The provision of opportunities to progress careers is a contingent function allied to the context of the school and individual performance, but equally important is the organisational context. Senior leaders and line managers believe they have the capacity to develop third year teachers and see it is a key part of their role to develop their own staff.
Our Part 3 Report The Second Year of Teaching found 'individual characteristics were found to contribute more to the variation in perceived quality and performance than ITE route, and this tendency becomes stronger as teachers progress in their careers' (Report 3, p.19). Not surprisingly this perception is also evident among interviewees in relation to teachers in their third year of teaching who report that any residual impact continues to decline over time in relation to factors such as the personality of the third year teacher and the school organisation including the support and opportunities context.
Professional development and support
Third year teachers in our case study schools were subject to the same PD and support strategies and processes as other teachers in the school. Although senior leaders in most schools made no distinction between the PD and support provided for third year teachers and other teachers, in a small group of schools senior leaders had different expectations of the types and amount of PD and support third year teachers should engage in compared to other teachers. Only one school had a dedicated PD programme for third year teachers.
School PD and support strategies were driven by a combination of factors: PM, school needs, national initiatives, individual needs, teachers' new roles and responsibilities and individual interests. As a consequence they were often fluid. The relative importance of different drivers varied across the schools. PD and support for all teachers, particularly in-school training, was becoming more personalised.
The most frequently available type of support available to third year teachers was support from a head of department or equivalent. Other frequently available forms of support were being observed and associated feedback, team work with experienced teachers and in-school programmes. However, third year teachers perceived that less PD and support was available to them than their senior leaders claimed was in place. More support was available to third year teachers in primary schools than secondary schools. In a few schools third year teachers had no access to external PD activities due to budgetary constraints.
Over their school career to date the PD activity that most third year teachers had participated in was in-school training. The next most frequently taken up types of PD were external short courses and in-school coaching, undertaken by just over half of the survey respondents. The take up of LA training was much higher in primary schools than secondary schools. Third year teachers engaged more often in collaborative activity and networking, within and beyond the school, to support their development, than they did in their NQT or second year of teaching. More teachers, particularly in secondary schools, were participating in leadership programmes and masters programmes in their third year than in their second year.
Uptake of PD and support depended on the interaction between school related factors and individual characteristics. Third year teachers identified encouragement, suggestions and information from senior and middle leaders to be the most important factors supporting the uptake of PD and support. The main barriers to uptake were funding, cover and time.
Individual teachers displayed different attitudes to engagement in PD and support that could broadly be described as active or passive. In some schools teachers who proactively sought out PD and support accessed more opportunities than teachers who did not. Approximately one fifth of the case study third year teachers were dissatisfied with the amount of PD and support available to them. However, the vast majority were positive about the quality and usefulness of the PD and support they had participated in. Senior leaders were more critical of quality and usefulness, particularly of LA and some other external courses.
Few schools had robust systems for measuring the impact of PD and support, but many pointed to links between third year teachers' engagement in PD and support and positive outcomes. The most frequently mentioned outcomes were changes in classroom practices and/or implementing new ideas and materials. There were also examples of changes in practice beyond the classroom and development in teachers' attitudes and attributes. About one third of the case study third year teachers made links between their engagement in PD and support and positive outcomes for their pupils.
Career development and retention
Only a third of third year teachers surveyed had no additional responsibility, about 40% having some kind of unpaid responsibility and 25% having some kind of paid responsibility. This overall finding masked major differences between school types here: 90% of primary teachers had some level of responsibility, compared with about half of secondary teachers, but only 16% of primary third year teachers compared with 38% of secondary teachers were paid for it. Case study data indicated that support for new responsibility - whether paid or unpaid - was important for third year teachers.
Most of the case study teachers planned in the longer term to become middle leaders, with a third (15) aspiring to senior leadership. The six teachers who didn't have clear plans or intended to stay in the classroom were all female and in primary or special schools. Over three quarters of the male case study respondents aspired to senior leadership, compared with 15% of female teachers. A number of third year teachers could be characterised according to their "work life orientation" - either having a career orientation (13 teachers) a personal orientation (6) or a mixed orientation (20). All nine of the male teachers for whom we could ascertain an orientation had a career orientation, whereas the female teachers were split between the three groups.
Looking to the future, around 40% intended to stay in their current school in the short term, 40% expected to move (mostly for promotion, although in a very small number of cases for family or personal reasons) and the rest hoped to stay or were not sure. Reasons given for leaving included promotional opportunities (cited by 56% of case study respondents), professional development (17%), relocation (11%) with smaller numbers reporting issues related to pressure, support, pupil behaviour and personal and other reasons. There were differences between senior leaders and the third year teachers, indicating that – whilst promotion is the most important reason given for leaving amongst all groups - the teachers themselves focus much more on issues of support and development in considering whether to leave their current schools.
Turning to retention in the school, we also asked our case study interviewees about reasons why third year teachers might stay in their current schools. As with reasons for leaving, being given promotion/responsibility was the most common reason given for staying, i.e. preventing early career teachers leaving (45% of respondents). The other reasons related more to the broader feel of the school and are rather different when compared with reasons given for leaving – support (26%), development (38%), enjoyment (20%), colleagues (13%), school ethos (11%) were all seen to be important for significant numbers of respondents. Again, there were some differences between senior leaders and third year teachers here. Senior leaders were more likely to cite promotion, development and support as reasons to stay, whereas teachers themselves – whilst also seeing these issues as being very important – were not as likely to cite them. For teachers, the support of colleagues and the team and – most strikingly – being settled were important factors not emphasised as often by leaders.
We examined patterns in relation to school deprivation as measured by entitlement to school meals, and found some patterns. In particular respondents in schools with more deprived catchments were much more likely to cite enjoyment, the headteacher, support, and team and colleague as being important factors in deciding whether to stay in a school. They were less likely to cite the school being a good training ground compared with others. This indicates that teachers working in such schools may have differing priorities compared with others.
Looking to retention in teaching, around 70% of the third year case study teachers saw their long term careers in teaching, with none definitely intending to leave in the short term.
Read the full report