• Home

• About the resources

• Mentoring

• ILPs

• In your organisation
• Models
• Resources
• ILP centres

• Blackpool and the Fylde College
• Canterbury Christ Church University
• Castle College Nottingham
• Chesterfield College
• City College Birmingham
• College of West Anglia
• Craven College
• Lewisham College
• Manchester Metropolitan University
• Newcastle College
• Nottingham Trent University
• Oxford Brookes University
• Sheffield Hallam University
• Thurrock and Basildon College
• Tower Hamlets College
• University of Brighton
• University of Central Lancashire
• University of Leicester
• University of Northumbria
• University of the West of England

• Teaching observation

• Models

• Pilot centres

 

 

Thurrock and Basildon College - Case Study - The Development of an ILP Process within Initial Teacher Training

 

The proposed changes to the Initial Teacher Training (ITT) process outlined in ‘Reforming Initial Teacher Training in the Learning and Skills Sector’ raised a number of issues. The proposals outlined implications for ITT practitioners, learners, colleges’ human resource (HR) departments etc. and these formed a backcloth to our pilot.

 

The pilot offered us the opportunity to highlight and investigate these issues with particular reference to the development and use of an Individual Learning Plan (ILP). We quickly acknowledged that this initiative had implications beyond ITT. 

 

Key idea
"The ILP is the process at the core of ITT provision and an essential part of the reforms.  It has ‘spill over’ into initial assessment; numeracy/literacy/ICT; Continuing Professional Development (CPD); reflective practice; HR; learning & teaching strategies; tracking; information sharing and matters of accessibility to this information."

 

As well as being at the core of ITT, an ILP affords the opportunity to incorporate the identification and recording of learners’ needs into the learning process.  We felt that often ITT has been organised on a provider agenda and has not resembled the more consumer orientated model that is increasingly becoming the norm for other provision. We acknowledged that ITT is mostly part-time and thus individual/tutorial support severely limited.  Yet many learners need this.

 

The issue is that learners are selected for ITT once they are employed and in reality recruitment resembles an ‘open access’ model.  Many learners initially lack the academic skills and experience to be successful and this makes the experience difficult.  They need the benefits that an ILP process can offer, but resources at present do not appear adequate to deliver this model.  The proposals rightly strengthen the focus on the individual learner approach with the clear identification of subject mentors.  However the pilot group were sceptical that the changes would give the new teacher an opportunity which would enhance their understanding of how this move to more individualised learning can be beneficial and implemented.  This in turn will impact upon their performance as a teacher.