In Partnership with the University of
Glasgow
Dr Beth Dickson
Teacher Education Advancement Network
20 March 2014
Teaching Scotland’s Future (2011)
“Seventy-eight per cent of respondents to our online
survey (n=2381) indicated that the support they received
from the school during placements was 'very effective or
'effective'. Fifty-one per cent said that the support from
their university was 'very effective' or 'effective', but 20%
said support from the university was 'very ineffective' or
'ineffective'.
We need to find ways of encouraging and assuring a
more consistently high quality of placements within initial
teacher education.” (p.43)
“Here’s one I prepared earlier...”
• Scottish Government funding for partnership
• Set up a partnership with Glasgow City Council and some
of their schools
–
–
–
–
–
university tutors in the field for the duration of the placements
seminars
learning rounds
joint reporting
tutors assessed across sectors and disciplines
Aspirations






Clear definition of roles and responsibilities of
all partners
Development should be organic
Teachers and schools valuing and being
valued in their role in partnership
development
Immediate and in-depth evaluation of
partnership activities
Enhanced support
Improved communication
Planning
Meetings with Steering Group
 Identification of volunteer student
group
 Meeting of tutors with student group
 Clarification of programme
 Formation and ongoing work of
research team

Overview of Project: structure & content
• Professional Development
Seminars
• Learning Round Observations
• Joint Assessment Process
Seminars
• Wednesday 9-12 – students gather as a learning
community
• Seminar topics: Learning Round Process,
Communication, Reflective Evaluation, Positive
Relationships
• Seminar topic – theme of Learning Round
• Opportunity for students to communicate with
each other and with tutors
Learning Round Observations
 Students placed in small groups (3-5)
 1 student teacher is observed by LR group,
class teacher and tutor
 Nonjudgmental observations (20 minutes)
 Post observation discussion – focus on
observer’s practice
Joint Assessment
 Less emphasis on single observed visit
 Information on student’s progress gathered
through Learning Rounds, ongoing
communication and final assessed
observation
 Tutor and class teacher/principal teacher
devise single report and agree grades
Practicalities
• Additional tutor commitments
• Timetabling of observations
• Time required for assessed visits
and feedback
• Development of shared language
Strengths
• Increased support for students
• Quick resolution of problems
• Immediate and enhanced link between theory
and practice
• Improved communication channels
• Increased opportunities for critical reflection
• Stronger emphasis on valued role of school
partners
• Agreed assessment of student
Outcomes from the first evaluation
To co-construct and implement a new collaborative school
(and community) based partnership approach…;
Yes, for student
teachers…
To establish closer communication, shared understanding
and relationships;
Mutual engagement, but
communication..
To build capacity in the profession to engage with effective
practice-based and evidence -informed models of
professional learning…
Power of LRs and
seminars
To identify and evaluate the particular benefits for
partnership, for learning and professional development and
ITE/CPD policy
Yes, but limited so far –
complexity
To identify and evaluate the benefits of the co-construction,
co-learning and co-inquiry approach…;
Yes, but…
and sec. Subjects
To identify the methods by which scholarly output and
learning opportunities … can be increased, and with what
impact.
We’ll see…
12
Evaluations
and
Actions
Cross-cutting themes Evaluation 1
Of pilot cluster 20102011

Need for clearer
1.Communication
Response
Evaluation 2
Of ‘pilot’ cluster and 2
new clusters

Earlier written
information and
meetings for both new
clusters

Manage expectations

guidance
2. Level and types of
support



3. Professional
Learning
*Seminars
*Learning Rounds
*Joint reporting

4. Professional roles
and identities




5. Cultural change


Benefits of peer
support
Students wanted more
support
Teachers felt students
got more support

All parties thought
that students
benefitted
Some teacher did
Both tutors did

Students felt their
id.s were
strengthened
Tutors, HTs and
teachers did




Rolled out to 2 new
clusters


‘crit’ lesson

Concerns of secondary 
subject tutors
‘pilot’ cluster – reduction
in requests
new clusters – requests
for earlier communication
University tutors not in
scheme felt alienated
Student expectation still
high
University tutors not
involved felt need for
secondary subject visits
All parties thought
that students
benefitted
Teacher hesitation
about need for
secondary subject visit
Encouraged tutors to
encourage teachers
to give seminars

New relationships
between tutors and
teachers: ‘real
mentors’
No action
Series of seminars,
meetings and



No mention
Increased in severity
Leadership
Evaluation 1
Autumn 2011
For session 2010-2011
Action/Response



Policy
Experience
Scottish Government
Funding
(pp.5-13)
Crit lesson

2. Clarity and
realism of purpose
1. Communication
2. Support
4. Prof Learning



Extension
Development
Intensive work with local
authority partner

3. Commitment
and ownership
5.Cultural change

No action apart from 2 and
5.

Concerns of secondary
subject tutors
6 principles of
partnership
working (Hudson
and Hardy, 2002)
1. Need for
partnership



Evaluation 2
Autumn 2012 for session 20112012
Joint appointment with local 
authority
Discussions with University
of Strathclyde


Brief mention of the
necessity of local
authority commitment
(p,)
Importance of leadership
Second cycle requests
reduced
First cycle requests
similar
4. Developing and
maintaining trust
No mention in cc
Mentions of hesitancy

Second cycle in first cluster
and 2 new clusters

Positive expressions of
trust
5. Establishing clear
1. Communication
2. Support
4. Prof id



Earlier information
Earlier meetings
Intensive work with local
authority partner


Second cycle – embedded
First cycle – conventional
2. Support
Fact of Evaluation


Teacher attitudes
Fact of Evaluation



Fact of tutor visibility
Teacher attitudes
Fact of evaluation
and robust
partnership
arrangements
6. Monitoring, review
and organisational
learning
Donald McIntyre (2006)
• CNAA’s Undergraduate Initial Training Board (1978-1984)
• Collaborative Project on Teacher Education (1978)
between University of Stirling and Central Region
• The Primary Teaching Practice Project at Moray House
College (1980-1982)
“that teacher educators...had the opportunity to shape the
nature of the reforms to be made; but, with relatively few
exceptions, they failed to take this opportunity and
introduced reforms only minimally and reluctantly”
(2006:8)
Resolution
• 86% of students had said that they found the partnership
model of greater benefit to them than the conventional
model
• Continuing arguments
• Supportive university procedures and personnel
Next Steps
• Now working with University of Strathclyde and 8 local
authority clusters
– Benefits for teacher learning
• Won £300,000 from Scottish Government for posts to
embed partnership processes
Remaining Question: who are the teacher
educators?
• TSF (2011)
• Complementary roles for university-based and schoolbased teacher educators
• (Staffing in transition)
• Career-long teacher learning
• Masters-level profession
• School-based professional learning for teachers
• Professional Update (Standard for Career-long Learning)
Conclusion
• Visionary, entrepreneurial leadership
• Determination to innovate
• Ability to command resource
• Credibility with partners
BUT
• Same world, same pressures political and financial
• Realities of research-intensive universities
• How similar?
• How different?
References
Donaldson, G (2011) Teaching Scotland’s Future. Edinburgh: Scottish Government.
Hudson, B., Hardy, B. and Waddingham, E. (2002) Assessing Strategic Partnerships: The Partnership
Assessment Tool. London: Office of the Deputy Prime Minister.