Wider Professional Practi ce

Professional Standards Portfolio

Welcome….
To the final module!
Wider Professional Practice - Activity
• In this final module, you are to produce a ‘Professional Standards Portfolio’
• Provides evidence against all standards
• Templates & folders in your Online Portfolio
• Activity:
– In 3 groups, list types of evidence for each standard
– As many as you can:
• Group 1: Domain A
• Group 2: Domain B
• Group 3: Domain C
• ANY evidence about your practice is acceptable!
Session Intentions
• Intentions:
– Review the expectations of the module Wider Professional
Practice

• Implementation:
– Update and prioritise evidence list for portfolio
– Review and discuss the requirements of the brief
Starter
• In relationship to your Professional Standards Portfolio:
• What descriptors would constitute:
–Highly Valid Evidence (Team 1)
• E.g. Evidence has been produced independently directly about your practice (i.e. an observation report)

–Less Valid Evidence (Team 2)

• E.g. Evidence has been produced by or with you (i.e. one of your lesson plans)

–Invalid / Unusable Evidence (Team 3)

• E.g. Evidence applies to all teachers, not just you (i.e. centralised scheme of work)
Highly Valid Less Valid Invalid
Activity: Evidence Portfolio

• In Teams, based on the validity criteria

1. Score each type of evidence:
• Highly Valid ( + )
• Valid ( = )
• Less Valid ( - )
2. Add other forms of evidence if you think of them (and score)
3. Each team works through their peer’s domain:
• Group 1: Domain A
• Group 2: Domain B
• Group 3: Domain C
Understanding Task 1

• Prepares for QTLS

• Primary evidence for the ‘Fitness to Practice’ board
• Provide evidence of practice, development & reflection
against each of the Prof. Standards
• For each domain, review the evidence:
– How strongly does the evidence relate to the standards?
– How strongly does the evidence show you meet that
standard?
– How valid is the evidence you are presenting?
What does it look like?
• In the example that follows, there are 3 pieces of evidence per
standard, the expectation is now 1-2 per standard
• The grade attributed has been ‘blanked out’
What does it look like?
What does it look like?
What does it look like?
How to approach it

Stage 2: Strongest
• 1. Go through your post- Evidence • 1. Review what remains
session reflections • 2. Gather evidence purely
• 2. Review evidence already • 1. Gather strong pieces of on what is left
mapped in the professional evidence not already used • 3. Use evidence that is
standards log (from & beyond ITE) either less strong, or less
• 3 Use that evidence • 2. Review to see how these direct if necessary
could be used to address a
standard or standards
Stage 1: Obs Stage 3: Filling
Mapping Gaps
Grading Each Standard
• Strength in practice supported by clear and valid
1: Outstanding
evidence
• Strength in practice, but evidence to support it is
2: Good
not diverse or consistently valid
• Either:
3: Requires • Not yet a strength in practice
Improvement • Strength in practice, but not effectively
supported by evidence
• Not a strength in practice and no evidence of
4: Inadequate: either practice or development
• Don’t use this!
Process for Task 1

• Get evidence for each standard (1-2)

• Grade each standard based on the metric provided
• Produce a written evaluation for the evidence for each domain
• Propose the final action plan:
– Medium term (all others have been short term)
– Reference planned future qualifications
– Reference own key area(s) for development going forward (medium term)
• Done!
• Time given in each lesson to complete (last hour = 6hrs)
Guidance

• Common Questions:
–Can I use the same piece of evidence for more than one
standard?
–How do I reference evidence in the index?
–Can I highlight or annotate the evidence for clarity?
–Do I need to reference wider reading and research in the
review of evidence
… All answered in the FAQ in the brief