Review of Qualifications for Learning Professionals in England: Phase 2 Interim outcomes March 2011

Phase 2 – general outcomes General request that the outcomes are kept as simple as possible, especially given the pressures on funding Guidance for employers welcomed

Section 2 – Generic teaching qualifications: PTLLS

PTLLS – comments Support for inclusion of 1:1 teaching Considerable support from ACL and WBL, especially related to the Assessor award and ‘matching’ to L&D units BUT Concern that higher credit value will lead to over-teaching/assessing What constitutes ‘micro-teaching’ NB we are going to re-structure the content slightly so more emphasis on teaching roles and on assessment

CTLLS

CTLLS - comments Levels of support generally the same for Level 3 and Level 4 CTLLS, with considerable support from ACL Like the principles of matching but not necessarily the specific units HOWEVER Some concern about whether Level 3 needed, as Level 4 gives better progression to DTLLS Some feel GLH/credit value too high Structure possibly too complex/confusing

DTLLS

Although generally supported comments limited about why Some (eg ACL) wished to see CTLLS as Part 1 Split on reduction of teaching hours HEIs do not support it (but did not say why) General concern about credit transfer between QCF/FHEQ (NB support for current points of transition)

Approach to CPD Agreement in principle for voluntary, flexible CPD with chunks of learning of various sizes and at a range of levels Support for a number of specific awards Proposed for consideration: –Family learning –Dealing with behavioural difficulties –Low level Award for trainers delivering work-based skills sessions –Workplace learning –Personal learning and thinking skills –Train the trainers (2) –Mentoring trainee teachers –Embedding Equality and Diversity in the classroom

Proposals for subject-specific CPD

Qualifications framework Must be well-designed, easily accessible, easily navigable Ongoing management? 80% of respondents supported the title "Qualifications for Teaching and Learning Professionals”

Section 3 – subject specific qualifications Considerably less respondents identifying themselves as specialists so these responses still being verified HOWEVER: Generally, specialists very supportive of the proposals

Qualifications to evidence the subject specific entry criteria Very supportive, BUT Concern mainly about lack of trainers to deliver the Awards One proposal that Awarding Organisations combine the two Level 3 Awards in English in order to be able to offer a Certificate.

‘Additional’ Diplomas Positive comments: – agree broadly with introduction of optional units Negative comments: – too complex – existing qualifications are fit for purpose – difficult to translate the proposed new structure into a coherent programme

Partly integrated routes Positive comments: – agree broadly with introduction of optional units Negative comments: – too complex – existing qualifications are fit for purpose – difficulty of translating the structure into a coherent programme

Fully integrated routes No specific comments

New qualifications – Literacy and Language Broadly welcomed (especially the Additional Diploma) Important to develop ways for specialists who have qualified in either literacy or ESOL to add the other subject area without having to take another qualification

Subject specific qualifications – teaching practice requirements Positive: 100 hours of teaching practice makes the qualifications more accessible Negative: sufficient practice in the classroom critical to successful teacher education