The start of term seems like a long time ago now, doesn’t it? But actually, we’re just a couple of months into the new academic year, and with that, the new Early Career Framework.
Yes, in September 2021, the term newly qualified teacher ceased to exist and early career teacher (ECT) took its place. There are other differences besides a name change: ECTs are now entitled to a two-year programme of support through the Early Career Framework (ECF) which is delivered through regional providers.
The fundamentals of the programme are that ECTs are given access to quality professional development opportunities and mentorship. The aim is that after two years ECTs will have gathered enough evidence to demonstrate that they have met the teaching standards. Each ECT is provided with a mentor and with this mentor weekly observations, feedback and meetings are undertaken to assist the ECT in their development of the core skills required to be a successful teacher.
More on the Early Career Framework:
Now that the first half term is over and done with, and we’ve delivered more than eight weeks of the programme, now is the time to review how it’s going and ask what’s gone well and also question what hasn’t.
Early Career Framework: what’s worked and what hasn’t
So, what has gone well? From the standpoint of an ECT, the ECF could easily be viewed as a godsend and something that NQTs have been needing, and asking for, for years. It replaces the NQT action plan, which at times becomes a stale document, reflecting the goals of a trainee teacher and not the nitty gritty of life as an early career teacher in the classroom; on the ground day in and day out.
Similarly, the weekly mentor meetings (which are a non-negotiable of the ECF) means that ECTs can rely on the consistent approach to their development which they were privy to in their training year. As part of these mentor meetings, the purposeful role play to allow ECTs to practise specific areas of their practice and the 15-minute weekly observation feedback that accompany them allow ECTs to focus on small actionable steps rather than whole lesson observations with lots of development points that they have little idea how to fix.
But, having said that, from a mentor’s perspective, the ECF has increased workload. Ambition Institute, the training provider we use, requires mentors to watch the same instructional videos, engage with the same online content and read the same extracts of learning as their ECTs; so that they can use these in their coaching sessions during the mentor meeting time.
This was a burden at the start of the year, but I am finding, along with other mentors following the programme, that this is having an impact on our own practice in much the same way as it is for the ECTs. I’m having to practise what I preach and reflect on how I deliver instructions or direct attention, for example. Although I have been doing this for seven years now and considering myself to be a reflective practitioner, I am having to have a deeper look at the fundamentals of my own practice and explore how reviewing these elements can make me a better teacher and a better coach.
One major drawback, and for some the biggest issue of the ECF, is the prescriptive nature of the programme. The ECF expects that all ECTs are working at the same level and at the same pace as each other. However, in the real world, this isn’t the case. We all know that the level at which an ECT is practising is entirely dependent on their levels of experience, how much and how well they engaged with their training programme, the support that they are given in a school setting and the opportunity that they have had to observe others and see good practice first hand.
There are more experienced and more competent ECTs working through the programme and finding it not entirely beneficial as they need to focus on different areas. The programme doesn’t have room for this, nor does it have room for mentor meetings based around wellbeing and the all-important debrief of how a week has gone. These conversations, particularly given the climate in which an ECT is trained, are so important and often crucial and are having to be done in a mentor’s own time rather than in the weekly mentor meetings.
All in all, weighing it all up, and without speaking too soon, the ECF has been a much needed and positive move forward for training teachers and mentors alike. It has paved the way for the growth of supported and practised teachers who watch and learn from others’ practice before implementing it in their own classroom. This process of implementation is slow and rehearsed and built on a foundation of ECTs feeling confident in the classroom, and this can only be a good thing.
