A member of the government’s expert group advising on the controversial teacher training review has said the “very short timescale” proposed for implementing the changes presents “risks to teacher supply and quality”.
Professor Sam Twiselton, director of Sheffield Institute of Education at Sheffield Hallam University, made the comments after it was revealed that all teacher training providers could face a reaccreditation process in order to continue recruiting from September 2022.
Teacher training: All teacher trainers reaccredited in ITT ‘step change’
Exclusive: Teacher training providers may face DfE cull
Warning: Fears teacher training providers cull could hit supply
The long-awaited recommendations from the initial teacher training (ITT) market review, published by the Department for Education’s advisory working group on Monday, outlined how the sector could be radically reshaped over the course of the next academic year.
Plans for reform of teacher training
Its proposals fell into two main strands:
- To set out criteria for features of high-quality ITT; and
- To require all providers to go through a process of reaccreditation.
The DfE said in the accompanying consultation document that the reaccreditation process could be completed by September 2022.
But Professor Twiselton told Tes that the department was aware that she had “concerns” about the “deliverability” of the proposals.
“DfE know that while I support the report’s description of many of the features identified as components of high-quality ITE [initial teacher education], I have concerns about deliverability,” she said.
“The very short timescale, combined with the need to work through resource and partnership complexities, presents risks to teacher supply and quality. There may be unintended consequences that could lead to high-quality provision being squeezed out of the market and also areas of the country where ITE coverage is not sufficient.
“DfE have agreed that I will help them work through these implementation issues in the light of feedback from the consultation. I urge all concerned to feed in the key implementation issues they foresee with suggested alternatives that would mitigate them into the consultation.”
