1 / 41

DoE/SACE Task Team Draft Revised Proposals for A Simpler CPTD System

DoE/SACE Task Team Draft Revised Proposals for A Simpler CPTD System. Presented to ETDP-SETA Provisioning Chamber 5 July 2010. What is the CPTD system responding to?.

tamyra
Download Presentation

DoE/SACE Task Team Draft Revised Proposals for A Simpler CPTD System

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. DoE/SACE Task TeamDraft Revised Proposals forA Simpler CPTD System Presented to ETDP-SETA Provisioning Chamber 5 July 2010

  2. What is the CPTD system responding to? • Necessity to involve all teachers in PD as part of Skills Development Act/principle of lifelong learning/ critical levels of school performance. (provide information on Service providers, courses) • Necessity to ensure quality and relevance of PD activities- endorsement system • Need to measure and acknowledge participation- sign points system)

  3. Introductory comments (3)Access • Our CPTD system is for all SACE registered teachers (later for all SACE-registered educators) • It must make sense to teachers on all points of the spectrum of • Professional education • School resources • Community resources

  4. Introductory comments (4)Context The CPTD system must be particularly responsive to: • The historic legacy of unequal education • Deep continuing inequalities in school, community and PED resources • Deep inequalities in teacher preparation, competence, confidence, professionalism • Uneven PD provision and support

  5. Introductory comments (5)Challenge The CPTD design challenge is therefore to develop a system that is • Simple • Intelligible • Helpful • Efficient for a teacher wanting to do her best in a school and community with few resources -- or with many

  6. Introductory comments (6)Goal The goal of the CPTD system is that teachers will be able to • reflect on their own professional competence • identify their own development needs; and • access appropriate opportunities for professional development

  7. Design assumptions (1) • Within a national dialogue on learner performance and system needs, priorities for teacher development will be set by • The teacher, for herself • The school, for its staff members • The employer, for employees • Teacher unions, for their members • Professional associations, for their specialisations • SACE, for the profession • Government, for the system

  8. Design assumptions (2) • Teachers value self-development for professional competence • Teachers are assisted to undertake self-evaluation of their PD needs and opportunities • Principals and SMTs take responsibility for their own and their teachers’ PD • As a condition of employment, teachers have and exercise their right to sufficient PD time

  9. Design assumptions (3) • Professional development is most effective in communities of practice: in schools, networks, associations • Teachers will have access to an increasing number of appropriate TD activities of good quality • Teachers will undertake and report their professional development honestly • In the trial phase (first six years) SACE will monitor (not audit) TD uptake and performance

  10. Design assumptions (4) In summary, our starting points are: • The teacher is at the centre of the CPTD system • CPTD must be reasonable and meaningful to teachers and the learning needs of their learners • Teachers must not be given more admin hassle • CPTD system management must be lean, credible, professional and efficient: the SACE CPTD Unit must be professionally strong

  11. Basic elements of the CPTD system • Teachers maintain a personal PD portfolio • Teachers engage in three types of PD activity • Teacher initiated (Type 1) • School initiated (Type 2) • Externally initiated (Type 3) • SACE allocates PD points to PD activities as incentive and for monitoring purposes • Each teacher has personal SACE PD points account • Target: each teacher aims to achieve 150 PD points every three years

  12. The PD points target (1) • Each 3 year cycle is discrete: no rolling cycles • SACE awards Certificate of Achievement for successful completion of 150 points per cycle • SACE monitors sample of PD portfolios annually; also analyses teachers’ achievement trends through CPTD-IS system • No SACE sanctions for non-performance for first six years of CPTD system operation

  13. The PD points target (2) • For the duration of the Pilot, no sub-targets (minima) by year or type of activity • Importance of all three types to be emphasised in Pilot • Pilot will yield evidence of actual activities across the three types • Sub-target issue to be reviewed on completion of Pilot

  14. The Personal PD Portfolio (1) • Each teacher keeps a user-friendly personal PD portfolio • The PD portfolio is the teacher’s own property • The PD portfolio is available to all teachers, manually or electronically • Teachers to be trained in use of portfolio: this will aid PD promotion and awareness • PD portfolio has guidance notes and template for recording activities and PD points

  15. The Personal PD Portfolio (2) • Guidance notes will demonstrate how to achieve the 3-year target by combining activities in all three types (teacher/school/external), even in resource-poor schools • A teacher will be expected to engage in Type 1 and 2 activities each year, and Type 3 when available

  16. The Personal PD Portfolio (3) • In the PD portfolio the teacher records • her personal evaluation of PD needs • her personal Type 1, 2 and 3 PD activities • her personal reflections on her development in relation to her professional needs • her PD point score by Type 1, 2 and 3 • The PD portfolio improves motivation: “This is what I can do. This is what I need. This is what I have done”.

  17. The Personal PD Portfolio (4) The PD portfolio • is signed by the teacher only • may be reviewed for developmental or monitoring purposes only by • a principal or SMT member • an employer; or • n authorised SACE representative

  18. Pre-allocation of PD points (1) • For simplicity and manageability, all PD points are pre-allocated by SACE according to a points table for each type • Each type of activity (Type 1/2/3) has appropriate activity categories • Each activity category has a points allocation

  19. Allocation of PD points (2) Proposed points values are a matter of judgment, not science, based on: • Importance of all three types of activity • Teachers’ access to activities, including availability of external provision (Type 3) • Participation in Types 1 and 2 activities is recognised as valuable and rewarded • Recognition of teachers’ workload • Duration • Simplicity, manageability

  20. Allocation of PD points (3) Type 1 (Teacher initiated) activity categories: • Reading/listening/viewing 5 pts per term • Attending/participating 10 pts per year • Writing/researching/developing/ presenting 10 per term • Marking/assessing (external) 5 pts per term • Kick-starting/leading 5 pts per term • Mentoring/coaching 5 pts per term

  21. Allocation of PD points (4) Type 2 (School initiated) activity categories: Participation in: • Meetings 10 pts per year • Workshops (1/2-2 days) 5 pts per workshop • Projects (max. 80 points over 3 yrs) • New 10 points per term for first year • Continuing 5 points per term

  22. Allocation of PD points (5) Type 3 (External initiated) activity categories: Points allocation based on SACE approved provider assessment of SACE endorsed activities • Workshops ½ day 5 points 1 day 7 points 2-5 days 10 points

  23. Allocation of PD points (6) Type 3 (External initiated) activity categories (continued): • Short courses/qualifications 1-3 weeks 10 points 1 month 12 points 3 months 15 points 6 months 20 points

  24. Allocation of PD points (7) Type 3 (External initiated) activity categories (continued): • Longer qualifications 1 year (FTE) 30 points 2 years (FTE) 50 points 3 years (FTE) 70 points 4 years (FTE) 90 points

  25. Reporting of PD points • Self-reporting of PD points by teachers to SACE is not feasible given the volume of reports, poor availability of computers in schools, and SACE capacity • Also CPTD-IS does not provide for it • So, Type 1 and Type 2 points should be reported annually by the school principal to SACE, either electronically or by mail or fax, on a simple form • SACE will require a scanner to handle volume • Type 3 points to be reported electronically to SACE by each approved provider

  26. Approval of external providers (1) External providers must be • SACE approved • to offer SACE endorsed activities • which have a PD points value pre-allocated by SACE These are three separate operations

  27. Approval of external providers (2) • Approval is a decision by SACE that a provider meets its criteria and is fit to offer quality PD activities • All providers must apply for SACE approval when they submit activities for endorsement • Only “SACE Approved Providers” may provide SACE endorsed PD activities

  28. Approval of external providers (3) • Providers fall in two categories • Accredited by a Quality Council • Not accredited by a Quality Council • Category A providers: approval is in principle automatic, but they must still be approved to offer X and Y activities

  29. Approval of external providers (4) • Category B providers are likely to comprise • Professional associations • Unions • National and provincial DoEs • NGOs • Private providers • All must apply for SACE approval if they intend to provide activities themselves • SACE is not a provider

  30. Approval of external providers (5) SACE applies an appropriate set of criteria similar to accreditation • Provider/Endorsement Unit screens for formal compliance • SACE Evaluators Panel screens provider for approval to offer X and Y activities • Evaluators make site visits and interview providers’ presenters • Evaluators report and recommend

  31. Approval of external providers (6) • Criteria for approval of Category B providers: • Purpose statement • Financial viability • Physical resources • Facilities for delivery of activity • Staff expertise, qualifications, experience • Track record/ evaluations/references • Details of activities • Any other relevant information

  32. Approval of external providers (7) • External providers must sign up to a SACE Code of Practice as a condition of SACE approval • Compliance with code of practice will be a condition of maintaining approval status • Monitoring of providers will include monitoring for compliance with code • Only SACE approved providers must be engaged and funded by employers

  33. Endorsement of Type 3 activities (1) • SACE endorsement criteria • Fitness of purpose (relevance, appropriateness) • Fitness for purpose (effectiveness of outcome) • Quality • Each criterion has appropriate rubrics • Evaluation panels evaluate application against rubrics and report with recommendation

  34. Endorsement of Type 3 activities (2) 1. Fitness of purpose (relevance, appropriateness) • Aligns with identified system needs • Strengthens subject competence • Strengthens professional practice • Promotes professional commitment, responsibility • Promotes system transformation

  35. Endorsement of Type 3 activities (3) 2. Fitness for purpose (effectiveness of outcomes) • Addresses identified needs of target learning area/subject/social or institutional conditions • Addresses identified needs of target audience (admission requirement may be specified) • Appropriate assessment procedures for content/method/target audience (including demonstrated professional learning where appropriate)

  36. Endorsement of Type 3 activities (4) • Quality • Teaching/learning strategies (incl. mode of delivery) • Related to content and outcomes • (Wherever possible) participatory, related to teaching/learning situation of target audience • Learning materials/resources • Suitable to audience and outcomes, user-friendly • Presenters/facilitators • Well qualified, experienced, knowledgeable about teaching/learning conditions of target audience

  37. Endorsement of Type 3 activities (4) • Evaluators will recommend Endorsed/Not endorsed on each application • SACE Provider Support & Endorsement Unit will use evaluators’ comments on rubrics when giving feedback to providers after Endorsement Sub-committee’s decision

  38. Endorsement of Type 3 activities (5) • SACE Endorsement Sub-Committee receives evaluator’s report and recommendation • Endorsement Sub-Committee endorses an activity for X years (depending on activity) • That means a SACE Approved Provider’s rating is only good for the period of endorsement of the activity • So, both SACE provider approval and SACE endorsement of activities have a shelf-life

  39. Evaluators • When funds available, SACE must: • Advertise for expressions of interest by area of specialisation • Sift response • Provide 3-day training/selection/standardisation workshop to invitees (+ refresher workshops ) • Issue appointment letter, certificate • Preferably have provincial evaluator panels, two evaluators per activity • For Pilot, appoint maybe 30 evaluators

  40. Monitoring and evaluation • SACE to design feedback instrument for providers • To use for development and improvement • To retain for five years • SACE to design feedback instrument for participants to report direct on CPTD-IS • SACE monitoring system to be Piloted • Formal external evaluation of CPTD system after 3 years of operation

  41. Thank you

More Related