RFT: 12/33
National Professional Standards
for Teachers Evaluation
Briefing session
17 September 2012
> Welcome and introduction
> Background
– AITSL
– National Professional Standards for Teachers
> National Professional Standards for Teachers Evaluation Initiative
requirements
> Tender requirements
> Procurement process
>
Questions and Answers
Engage an organisation and/or consortium with demonstrated
experience and expertise to design, develop and deliver a nationally
focused, credible and innovative evaluation to determine the:
• usefulness
• effectiveness of implementation
• impact of the National Professional Standards for Teachers
to…
• inform ongoing work to support effective and sustainable
implementation and application of the Standards
• demonstrate uptake and benefit of standards referenced
approaches to students, teachers, schools and states and territory
organisations and the broader community
• enhance credibility and awareness of the Standards.
AITSL works with the education community to:
•
set and maintain standards
•
lead and influence improvement
•
support and recognise quality
We don’t...
•
act as a regulator
•
produce educational resources for use
by children
•
employ teachers
•
formulate the national curriculum
National Professional Standards for Teachers
Background
The National Professional Standards for Teachers is a public
statement of what constitutes teacher quality.
The Standards define the work of teachers and make explicit the
elements of high-quality, effective teaching in 21st-century schools,
which result in improved educational outcomes for students.
Dual purpose:
• improvement
• accountability
Career progression:
• Graduate
• Proficient
• Highly Accomplished
• Lead
Graduate career stages of the NPST are
the foundation for accreditation of Initial
Teacher Education programs
National approach endorsed by
MCEEDYA in April 2011
AITSL works with relevant stakeholder to
develop materials and processes to
support he transition which commenced in
2012.
Proficient career stages of the NPST
provide the foundation for the approach
to the registration and renewal of
registration of teachers
National approach endorsed by
MCEEDYA in October 2011
AITSL is working with key stakeholders
to develop a governance framework for
implementation to enable
commencement of the approach from
2012
The lead and highly
accomplished career stages of
the NPST form the foundation
for the voluntary process of
certification
Approach was endorsed by
SCSEEC in April 2012
AITSL is working with
stakeholders to confirm
transition and deeming
arrangements, develop materials
to support implementation in
2013
The NPST (together with the National Professional
Standard for Principals and Professional Learning
Charter) underpin the Australian Performance and
Development Framework
The Framework aims to: improve teacher effectiveness
and student outcomes through the development of a
culture in schools focused on continuous teacher
performance appraisal, growth and improvement
The Framework was endorsed by SCSEEC in August
2012
The NPST and the Australian Charter
for the Professional Learning of
Teachers and School Leaders
communicate the role of professional
learning in improving teacher and
school leader practice
The Charter was endorsed by
SCSEEC in August 2012
AITSL works with stakeholders to
develop and range of resources to
support the implementation of the
NPST
•
A launching place for
Standards
related content
•
Development of further
supporting documentation
for users and uses of the
Standards
•
Additional information on
corporate AITSL website
www.aitsl.edu.au
Project requirements
> Determine the:
– usefulness
– effectiveness of implementation
– impact of the National Professional Standards for
Teachers.
> Design, develop and deliver
> Longitudinal and discrete modules
> Commence: November 2012
Conclude: December 2015
> Organisation/consortia/subcontracting
Stages
Focus
Indicative
timeframe
Phase 1:
Development of evaluation plan and
Evaluation design design
& development
November –
December 2012
Phase 2 - 4:
Evaluation and
Implementation
Conduct of evaluation in relevant
phases including; longitudinal
elements and discrete modules of
evaluation, and analysis and synthesis
and preparation of reports
January 2012December 2015
Phase 5
Separately commissioned concluding
January 2016 –
synthesis of the evaluation to
May 2016
contextualise findings in current policy
context
Research Questions
Usefulness
Strands of activity
Accreditation (ITE)
Structure
Registration
Certification
Process
Levels
teacher/
school
leaders
School
Jurisdiction
National
Performance & Development
Professional Learning
Community
Support materials and resources
Impact
Focus
Indicative
timeframe
Phase 1:
Development of evaluation plan and
Evaluation design design
& development
November –
December 2012
Phase 2 - 4:
Evaluation and
Implementation
January 2012December 2015
Conduct of evaluation in relevant
phases including; longitudinal
elements and discrete modules of
evaluation, and analysis and synthesis
and preparation of reports
Separately commissioned concluding
January 2016 –
synthesis of the evaluation to
May 2016
contextualise findings in current policy
context
>
Research Framework
– Research goals
– Research questions
– Methodologies – appropriate balance of:
•
•
•
•
•
Conventional and innovative modes, methods and data collection
Qualitative and quantitative
External and self-evaluation
Formative and summative outcomes
Potential to build capacity
– Consider the context ie implementation timeframe & existing standards referenced
approaches
– Consider use of existing data and materials
– Value for money
> Shared responsibility of consultant and AITSL:
– Consultant: communication directly related to design,
development and delivery
– AITSL: broader scale communication, including project
outcomes
> Evaluation Plan
> Evaluation Implementation - for each phase
–
–
–
–
sub-plan
develop, deliver and monitor
complete technical reports
Progress reports
Type
Frequency
Progress reports - verbal and written
Monthly and quarterly
Technical reports
For specific modules
Face-to- face presentation
At least x 2 times per year
Presentations to AITSL Board
If and when required
> AITSL Board
> National Professional Standards for Teachers Evaluation project
team
> AITSL Internal Reference Group
> Organisation and or consortium
> Relevant high level experience and expertise
> Project director
> Sub-contractors
Milestone
Indicative timeframe
Commencement of contract
November 2012
Draft project plan - Consultant and AITSL
meeting
November 2012
Targeted testing of plan
By early December 2012
Final project plan - presentation
By mid December 2012
AITSL and consultant-led communication
Mid December
2012/January 2013
Implementation of Evaluation – Phases 2-4
January 2013- December
2015
Consultant presentations to AITSL
June and November
2013,14,15
Project completion
December 2015.
Tender requirements
>
High level evaluation plan:
–
–
–
–
Evaluation framework – alignment between evaluation goals, research questions and methodologies
Explanation of how the questions will be determined
Identification and explanation of modes, methodologies and data collection for each phase and where appropriate each strand of
activity
Identification of the focus of each phase
Demonstration of understanding of Australian education context and work of AITSL
>
Communications plan overview
>
Personnel
>
Risks and risk management strategy
>
Breakdown of costs
>
Referees
>
Additional information requested in Clause 5
Tender assessment
>
Two stage process:
– Assessment of written tenders
– Presentation by short-listed tenders
Milestone
Indicative date
RFT closes
Wednesday 10 October 2012
Stage 1 Assessment
completed
Late October 2012
Stage 2: Assessment
completed
By early November 2012
Offer to successful respondent By mid November 2012
>
Contractual agreement scope subject to AITSL funding
Questions and Answers
Bronwyn Burr
Manager: Policy and Programs
research@aitsl.edu.au
07 3010 0111