An investigation into the induction period which
considers the perspectives of NQTs and their
induction tutors
Ruth Barrington, Bath Spa University College
Paper presented at the British Educational Research Association Conference,
Cardiff University, September 7-10 2000
Introduction
The first year of teaching is considered to be fundamental in that this is the period where the Newly
Qualified Teacher establishes what they expect from both themselves and their children. It is also a
time where there is greatest potential for further development as the Newly Qualified Teacher is seen
to be at their most receptive and highly motivated to learn (Earley,1996.) There has been a concern
that the potential opportunities for the professional development of the Newly Qualified Teacher at this
time has not been exploited fully to enhance their teaching and it has been felt that
“induction forms the weakest link in the professional development of teachers.” (Mahoney,
1996, p141)
Although many schools did provide an induction programme for their NQTs there was a lack of
consistency across the country and this was seen to be a missed opportunity. As a result of this, for
teachers who gained their Qualified Teacher Status after May 1999 there is now a statutory requirement
for them to complete an induction period in school. One of the key aims of this is to ensure that all
NQTs obtain equity in the induction that they receive (Holmes, 1999). DfEE (1999) provides details of
these statutory requirements which includes support which must be provided for the NQT as well as
various monitoring and assessment procedures which are used to judge the NQTs performance against
the induction standards.
The induction period for a full-time NQT usually lasts for one academic year. Its purpose is to support
each NQT as they enter the profession, to ensure that the NQT can sustain a good standard of teaching,
to further develop their skills of self evaluation and to establish a good pattern of continual professional
development (op sit).
The induction tutor
The head teacher assigns an induction tutor to each NQT. The role of the induction tutor is to support
the NQT, monitor his/her progress and to assess him/her formatively and at the end of the induction
period summatively against the Qualified Teacher Status Standards (TTA, 1998) and additional
Induction Standards. (DfEE, 1999)
The induction programme
Each NQT is provided with an individualised induction programme. In order to be able to carry out
this programme the NQT’s teaching timetable is reduced to 90% of the normal average teaching time
thus leaving 10% to be allocated to an induction programme. Funds are provided to support this
programme and particularly to provide the supply cover needed to release the NQT. It is intended that
the programme is negotiated between the NQT and the induction tutor (op sit). The purpose of the
induction programme is to support the overall purposes of the induction period as identified above. It
should build on the NQT’s strengths and areas of development. As a starting point the NQT will have
identified these, in negotiation with their Initial Teacher Training institution, within their Career Entry
Profile.
1
Observations of the NQT’s teaching and follow-up discussion
The induction tutor usually carries out the NQT observations. The first observation occurs within the
first four weeks where the NQT is in a full-time post. Subsequent observations occur at least once
during each half term. The focus of the observation is agreed between the NQT and the induction tutor
in advance. The choice of focus is informed by requirements of the induction period as well as the
NQT’s indicated objectives for development.
Following the observation there is a discussion between the NQT and induction tutor in order to
analyse the lesson based on the agreed focus. The induction tutor takes on the role of a critical friend.
A written summary of the discussion is kept. It refers to the NQT’s objectives for development and
indicates strengths as well as indicating where further action is required (op sit).
Professional review of progress
The professional review of progress is a formal statutory requirement of the induction period which
occurs at regular intervals, at least one during each half term. It includes a discussion between the
induction tutor and the NQT that reviews the NQTs progression towards set objectives as well as
identifying new objectives. Sometimes when the objectives are reviewed they may need to be revised
to take account of the NQT’s individual and possibly changing needs as well as the Induction
Standards and the specific school context (op sit).
It identifies what support is required in order for the NQT to meet these new objectives. The key
points are recorded in the Career Entry Profile or another similar format (op sit).
Summative assessment meetings
The summative assessment meetings are statutory requirements and take place between the head
teacher or his/her representative and the NQT and normally they occur towards the end of each term.
The meetings are important milestones for the NQT in acknowledging the progress towards successful
completion of the induction period. The extent to which the NQT has consistently met the standards
for Qualified Teacher Status and for the induction provides the focus for these meetings. A formal
document is sent to the LEA summarising the main points of each meeting. Within the final meeting a
recommendation is made by the head teacher to the LEA as to whether the NQT has successfully met
all the standards and therefore completed their induction period (op sit).
The research activity
My research focuses on primary NQTs and their induction tutors within one LEA. I was able to gain
access to them, as I have been involved in delivering a training package to meet their needs during the
induction period. I used questionnaires as the main source of data collection, although additional
informal opportunities were also used. In most instances, similar or identical questions were used
within the NQT and the Induction tutor questionnaires. This enabled me to make comparisons between
the responses from both parties and to check factual information. The main questionnaire was
completed in early November 1999 with a supplementary questionnaire in June 2000. As I had
planned that the questionnaires were to be filled out mainly during session time I did receive a good
level of returns but it is still a very small-scale study. I received 17 completed questionnaires from
Induction tutors and 10 completed questionnaires from NQTs in November 99 and 14 and 13 responses
from induction tutors and NQTs respectively in June 2000.
The questions from the questionnaires are related to the following themes:

Background information about the NQTs and their induction tutors

Induction period

Standards

Career Entry Profile

Induction programme

Observations
2

Collecting evidence of the Standards

Professional review of progress

Summative assessment meetings
These themes will provide the structure of my discussion and will be supported by responses to the
research questions and I will also draw on the supplementary questionnaire and field notes where
relevant.
Background information
The NQTs
All NQTs had gained Qualified Teacher Status the previous academic year.
In which year group did the induction tutor and Newly Qualified Teacher teach?
Where an induction tutor is a class teacher they were almost always teaching within the same key stage
and in most cases they were teaching the same year group. There was one exception to this where the
Newly Qualified Teacher taught year 1 and the induction tutor taught year 6.
The induction tutors
When and how did you acquire the role?
All Induction tutors acquired the role of induction tutor between July and September 99, once an NQT
had been appointed. This was delegated by the head teacher or in minority of cases the head teacher
took on the responsibility.
What is your role within the school?
The majority of induction tutors (11 out of 17) were subject coordinators. About a quarter of them
were head teachers and a small proportion were Deputy heads and Coordinators for Key stage 1.
Sometimes these responsibilities overlapped and about half of them had two areas of responsibility
with one teacher having responsibility for three areas (deputy head teacher, assessment and music).
How many years have you been teaching?
% of induction tutors
Number of years that induction tutors have been
teaching
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Less than 3
years
Between 3 and 5 Between 5 and
years
10 years
More than 10
years
Figure 1
3
Just over half of the induction tutors had more than ten years of experience. There is, however, quite a
sizeable minority of teachers with under five years teacher experience and some of these did express
some concerns about their role.
“… with only 3 years experience, I don’t feel I always have enough background to draw upon to
offer assistance.”
There are guidelines available concerning the appointment of the induction tutor such as
“The most important consideration is that the role is taken by an appropriately experienced
colleague …”(TTA, 1999a, page 12).
The interpretation of “appropriately experienced” is left to the discretion of the head teacher and could
perhaps relate to length of teaching experience or experience within a similar age range to the Newly
Qualified Teacher.
Have you ever worked with students during their final placements? / Have you
worked with students during their final placements within the last two years?
More than half (10 out of 17) of the Induction tutors had worked with students during final placements
and about half (8) had worked with a student within the last two years. This means that their student
would have been assessed against the Qualified Teacher Status standards in order to pass the final
school experience.
The induction period
Please provide a brief outline of what you knew about the induction period.
Almost all NQTs and many of the Induction tutors had some knowledge of the induction period. A
small minority of Induction tutors indicated that they had read “Circular 5/99” (DfEE, 1999) and one
had been on a course about the induction period. There were, however, differences in the areas that the
two groups chose to highlight within their descriptions. The dominant view expressed by the NQTs
was related to the assessment and monitoring aspects of the role against the induction standards.
“I understood essentially about the set up of the year, that I would be observed and assessed
regularly to ensure I had satisfied the induction standards.” (Newly Qualified Teacher)
Only one NQT referred to the support aspect in their description.
More than half of the Induction tutors indicated that they had some knowledge of the induction period
and only one of them referred to assessment in that the NQTs would need “to prove themselves”. This
group tended to refer to the support elements associated with the period.
“10% release time – not much else” (Induction tutor)
“My role is to support the NQT, have regular meetings, help planning, etc! (Induction tutor)
“1st year in school and useful for identifying opportunities for further professional
development.” (Induction tutor)
The induction tutor’s role is one of having day-to-day responsibility for supporting, monitoring, and
assessing their Newly Qualified Teacher. (TTA, 1999a). In describing the induction period the
induction tutor has focused on the support aspects of their role. It is important that the induction tutor
has strong interpersonal skills such as
“being approachable, positive, supportive” (TTA, 1999 d, p11)
Almost a third of the Induction tutors acknowledged that they had little or no knowledge about the
induction period. There are two likely reasons for this, firstly this was the first year of such statutory
requirements, with their publication in May 99, and secondly they had only recently gained this
responsibility themselves. By contrast the NQTs are likely to have been aware of their impending
induction period during their training and would have been likely to receive some detail about it
4
towards its completion. In addition, NQTs would have had a vested interest in knowing about the
expectations of this year, as it would have implications for their future professional development.
At the beginning of the school year how did you feel about your role in the
induction period?
% of induction tutors
Induction tutors and NQTs feelings about the induction
period at the beginning of term
100
80
60
40
20
0
Very apprehensive
Very confident
Feelings
Induction tutors
NQTs
Figure 2
For both the NQTs and the induction tutors the most common feeling was one of reasonable
confidence, however, in comparing the two groups it is evident that the overall trend is that the NQTs
feel more confident than the induction tutors as more than half the induction tutors indicate at least
some apprehension about this period.
There is an expectation that the induction tutor will have a good knowledge of their responsibilities
(Holmes, 1999) as well as a good understanding of the induction period requirements (TTA, 1999a). In
fact, Holmes (1999) suggests that the Newly Qualified Teacher can expect
“a carefully selected induction tutor/mentor … who knows the exact details of their role.” (Page
127)
From the responses to the previous question it is likely that this expectation, which does not match the
reality of the induction tutors knowledge of the induction period, would cause them to feel
apprehensive. The induction tutors have had little time to acclimatise to their role.
By contrast the NQTs have recently been successful in gaining Qualified Teacher Status and this may
have an impact on their feelings of confidence.
Now that you have been teaching/working with your NQT/IT for more than half
a term how do you now feel about your role in the induction period?
% of induction tutors
or NQTs
Induction tutors' and NQTs' feelings about the induction
period after half a term
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Very apprehensive
Very confident
Feelings
Induction tutors
NQTs
Figure 3
5
By half term more than three quarters of Induction tutors and almost all NQTs felt at least confident
with about half the NQTs feeling very confident. Overall the NQTs felt more confident than the
induction tutors. About a quarter of the Induction tutors still indicated that they felt slightly
apprehensive about the induction period.
When comparing Figure 2 with Figure 3 both the NQTs and the induction tutors have gained in
confidence over the half term period. There is also less apprehension amongst the induction tutors at
this stage than at the beginning of the period. This is probably based on increased familiarity with the
induction period.
How familiar were you with the QTS standards within the induction standards
at the beginning of the school year? / How familiar were you with the
induction standards (beyond QTS standards) at the beginning of the school
year?
% of induction tutors and
NQTs
Familiarity with QTS standards at the beginning of the
year
100
80
60
40
20
0
Not familiar at
all
Very familiar
Level of familiarity
Induction tutors
NQTs
Figure 4
% of induction tutors
and NQTs
Familiarity with induction standards beyond QTS
standards at the beginning of the school year
100
80
60
40
20
0
Not familiar at
all
Very familiar
Induction tutors
Level of familiarity
NQTs
Figure 5
At the beginning of the year (Figure 4) the vast majority of the NQTs were familiar or very familiar
with the QTS standards. The level of familiarity with the standards amongst the induction tutors varied
considerably. Almost all those who had worked with a student during their final school experience
indicated that they were at least familiar with the standards.
In Figure 5 the overall trend is that the NQTs have a greater level of familiarity with the induction
standards than the induction tutors. Neither group considered themselves very familiar with these
standards. The dominant perspective for NQTs was one based on some familiarity, whereas the
dominant perspective for the induction tutors was one of unfamiliarity.
6
The differences in familiarity may be because the NQTs training has been based on a culture, which
assesses them against standards. The induction tutors will have only been exposed to such standards if
they had worked with a student, on their final practice, in particular.
7
How familiar are you now with the QTS standards? / How familiar are you now
with the induction standards (beyond QTS standards)?
% of induction tutors or
NQTS
Familiarity with QTS standards after half a term
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Induction tutors
NQTs
Not
familiar at
all
Very
familiar
Level of familiarity
Figure 6
% of induction tutors
and NQTS
Familiarity with induction standards after half a
term
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Induction tutors
NQTs
Not
familiar at
all
Very
familiar
Level of familiarity
Figure 7
Figure 6 shows that all NQTs continued to consider themselves to be at least familiar with the
Qualified Teacher Status standards. The vast majority of induction tutors also considered themselves
now to be at least familiar with these standards.
Figure 7 shows that all NQTs and the majority of induction tutors considered themselves to be at least
familiar with the induction standards with a minority of induction tutors feeling less familiar. This
graph shows a similar overall pattern of familiarity to the previous graph, which focuses on the
Qualified Teacher Status standards.
In comparison with the beginning of the school year there has been an increase in familiarity with these
standards amongst the induction tutors across all standards. They will now have had some time to
assimilate their new role and time to become familiar with the standards that they will be assessing
their Newly Qualified Teacher against.
8
Please provide a brief outline of what you knew about the role of the Career
Entry Profile (CEP).
About two thirds of the NQTs had received lectures and other input at their ITT institution so they did
feel that they had some understanding of the role of Career Entry Profile. A similar proportion of
Induction tutors also had some knowledge of the Career Entry Profile. The themes covered were
similar across the two groups. Below are some examples of responses.
“I understood that the Career Entry Profile would give the induction tutor an awareness of their
NQTs experience through college and highlight where support may be needed” (Induction tutor)
“I knew it set targets to work on but hadn’t seen one before” (Induction tutor)
“it was very important for my first year of teaching, enabling me to monitor my progression
and further my professional development.” (Newly Qualified Teacher)
“To inform my induction programme” (Newly Qualified Teacher)
Most of this group of Induction tutors (6) acknowledged that they gained their knowledge through
having a student on final placement with them. One NQT referred to working on their Career Entry
Profile with their school experience mentor at the end of final school experience.
A sizeable minority of Induction tutors acknowledged that they knew very little or nothing about the
Career Entry Profile (6 out of 17) with a small proportion of these knowing nothing at all. About a
third of the NQTs felt that they knew very little about the role of the CEP when they began the
induction period and some of this group felt that they had been provided this information very late at
the end of their course.
How useful has the CEP been in supporting you in putting together an NQT
induction programme?
% of Induction tutors and NQTs
Perceptions of usefulness of the Career Entry Profile in
supporting the induction programme
60
50
40
Induction tutors
30
NQTs
20
10
0
Not very
useful
Very useful
Perceptions of usefulness
Figure 8
There is a contrast in responses between NQTs and the induction tutors with the majority of induction
tutors finding the Career Entry Profile useful and the vast majority of NQTs perceiving it as less useful.
Please comment on why it was/was not useful.
The Career Entry Profile is set up to provide
“A source of information about the Newly Qualified Teacher’s strengths, areas for development
and prior experience; and
9
A format for recording, revising and monitoring both the agreed professional development
objectives and the action plan that will support them” (TTA, 1999b, p5)
From the responses to this question both groups have focused on the first of these areas of provision.
Although targets were set and an action plan was carried out and reviewed this was not perceived as
part of the Career Entry Profile but a separate entity, which is discussed under ‘Professional Review of
Progress’. The comments below therefore need to be seen in the light of the first of the aboveidentified areas of provision.
Those Induction tutors and NQTs who viewed the Career Entry Profile as useful indicated that it was a
helpful starting point as it provided strengths and weaknesses and was valuable in initial setting of
targets and the preliminary planning of the induction programme. A minority within this group
indicated recognition of the need to change it based on needs as the NQT progressed.
“Highlights NQTs strengths and weaknesses and therefore areas for development and therefore
informs induction planning” (Induction tutor)
“Gave us a ‘bench mark’ to get started. Actually we have found the need to change the original
targets” (Induction tutor)
“It was a tool to begin to identify areas which needed to be targeted” (Newly Qualified Teacher)
The majority of NQTs and a minority of Induction tutors did not find the Career Entry Profile useful in
supporting their induction programme. Many of them recognised that the areas that were identified
towards the end of the NQTs Initial Teacher Training course were less of a priority now. Sometimes
this was related to different circumstances in different schools and that the NQTs own needs were
continually changing.
“Because every school works differently, things I found a problem as a student are not now
problems now I have my own class” (Newly Qualified Teacher)
“NQTs demands/needs had altered since entering teaching profession” (Induction tutor)
One Newly Qualified Teachers felt that other agendas had influenced their induction programme such
as school targets rather than the NQTs needs identified on Career Entry Profile.
The induction programme
Has your NQT received 10% reduction in his/her teaching load to enable
him/her to carry out a jointly planned induction programme? / How is the
timing of this organised? (Eg a particular time slot each week, varied timings
dictated by the content of the induction programme, etc)
All NQTs received 10% reduction in their teaching load. They were all allocated half a day a week,
usually a particular morning or afternoon, to carry out the induction programme but in most cases this
was flexible to enable response to the NQTs particular needs.
“1/10 each week, usually an afternoon, but not specified to allow flexibility for
observations/discussions with other staff” (Induction tutor)
“varied timings – dictated by planned content of induction programme” (Induction tutor)
Which of the following have been drawn upon in order to put the induction
programme together? (A list was provided for individuals to tick)
All induction tutors and NQTs confirmed that wide ranges of sources were used to inform the induction
programme. The following were drawn upon in the vast majority of instances: Career Entry Profile,
Formal observations, Regular and Informal discussion time, Induction training, Induction standards,
Professional review of progress. The school’s needs were raised by about half of both groups. The
only discrepancy between the two groups was related to informal observations where the vast majority
10
of induction tutors recognised it as a useful source for the induction programme whereas only about
half of the NQTs acknowledged its role.
Who has been involved in putting together the induction programme?
The induction tutors were always involved in putting together the induction programme and the Newly
Qualified Teacher was also involved in almost all but not every case. Head teachers were involved in
about half the instances.
It is recommended that the Newly Qualified Teacher contributes to the development of their induction
programme and their professional development (TTA 1999b) but there was not any stated expectation
concerning the head teacher’s involvement in this process.
11
List below three elements, that have been included in the induction
programme, that you feel have been particularly useful for your NQT.
Almost all NQTs and the vast majority of Induction tutors felt that observing other experienced
teachers was the most valuable activity in the induction programme.
It is recognised that the Newly Qualified Teacher has now had sufficient experience of teaching to
avoid many of the pitfalls that the student teacher may fall into (Fish, 1995) whilst observing other
teachers. They are likely to be aware that
“observations need to focus not on how to reproduce the teaching observed, but on using what is
seen as a means for the [Newly Qualified Teacher] to consider his/her own preferred approaches
…having a clear purpose for observation is vital to its usefulness.” (Fish,1995, p116 and 117)
As part of the induction programme, any observations carried out by the Newly Qualified Teacher
should have been the result of planning to meet particular targets within the NQTs action plan and
therefore should meet the above criteria.
About a third of NQTs and induction tutors highlighted the subsequent discussion and feedback with
these colleagues as useful. Holmes (1999) acknowledges that the chance to observe followed by an
opportunity to analyse with the teacher why particular techniques were effective is particularly
valuable.
A small proportion of Induction tutors acknowledged the benefits to the Newly Qualified Teacher of
sharing with other NQTs through the support programme provided by Bath Spa University College. A
minority of NQTs also acknowledged this.
Almost half the induction tutors recognised that their weekly and day-to-day meetings were an
important element of the programme. Regular contact with the Newly Qualified Teacher is recognised
as an important feature of the induction tutors role (TTA, 1999a). This was also identified by NQTs in
a minority of cases.
About a quarter of the induction tutors highlighted the value of meetings with SENCOs and help with
writing IEPs. This was also raised by a minority of NQTs. In order to gain Qualified Teacher Status
the Newly Qualified Teacher would have gained some experience in this area working alongside an
experienced teacher. By the end of their induction period the Newly Qualified Teacher will be
expected to manage independently (TTA, 1999c).
Time for planning was identified by under a quarter of Induction tutors. This is a further theme
identified within the induction standards with an expectation that the NQT will take into account a
range of pupils’ needs such as those who are “underachieving, very able, not fluent in English” (DfEE,
1999, Annex A)
Time to go through school policies was identified by a minority of NQTs. This again a theme
identified within the induction standards and there is recognition that the induction period needs to
provide opportunity for the Newly Qualified Teacher to implement school policies over a longer period
of time than was available to them as a student (TTA, 1999c).
Behaviour management is identified in a minority of instances by Induction tutors and NQTs.
There were many areas which were identified by an individual NQT.
“Mentoring is an individualized form of training, often conducted on a one-to-one basis, which
needs to be tailored to the needs of the individual” (Brooks & Sikes, 1997, p35)
The NQTs recognised that the programme provided them with time to work on individual issues.
Where have you felt that you have/your NQT has needed most support?
Although there is some apparent overlap between this question and the previous one this question does
allow the responses to include issues not covered by formal planned induction programme.
12
There is a contrast in apparent priority of particular themes. Although there is duplication in the
themes covered between the induction tutors and NQTs there does seem to be a difference in how often
a particular theme was raised as an area requiring support. Holmes (1999) recognises that support
“covers curriculum issues as well as day-to-day job management” (p129)
Under the theme of day-to-day management, behaviour management was identified as the most
common theme (6 out of 17) by Induction tutors, but it was only identified by one NQT. This contrasts
with Holmes who suggests that
“one of the areas of greatest concern for new teachers is behaviour management” (Holmes,
1999, p137)
Classroom management and organisation was identified by almost a third of the induction tutors but
was not mentioned by any NQT. School policies was an important issue for a third of the NQTs and
was also raised by Induction tutors but had a lesser prominence.
With regard to curriculum issues, just under a quarter of each group identified requiring support with
planning particularly for children with Special Educational Needs in conjunction with writing their
IEPs. A small minority within both groups also highlighted assessment and target setting.
There were also particular needs cited by individual Newly Qualified Teacher such as
“Organisation of support staff and other adults in the classroom, particularly in carrying out
practical art work and creative activities”.(Newly Qualified Teacher)
The theme of managing adults is identified within the induction standards and is considered to be a
skill that the NQT will have begun to develop but the induction period should provide opportunity to
develop this over an extended period (DfEE, 1999 and TTA, 1999c)
Formal mechanisms within the induction period
The observation process
How many formal observations have taken place? / Who has carried out the
formal observations in your school?
Although the statutory requirement is that one observation will have taken place during the first 4
weeks and two across the whole of the autumn term for full time NQTs the vast majority of NQTs had
received two or more observations by half term with one NQT receiving 5 observations.
In all cases where more than two observations had taken place additional people had been involved
such as head teacher, another teacher, LEA advisor.
All NQTs had been observed by their induction tutor and about half had additionally been seen by the
Head teacher. In individual instances other parties had been involved such as an LEA advisor and a
subject coordinator.
List below no more than three aspects of the observation process that you
have found particularly useful.
When carrying out observations, both Induction tutors and NQTs referred to a particular focus being
useful in order to collect specific information.
“Unfocused observation, without a clear purpose is generally demoralising and counterproductive” (Haggar, Burn and McIntyre, 1993, p26)
Many different areas of focus were identified here such as
“Gaining important information on relationships with children and delivery of planning.”
(Induction tutor)
13
as well as delivery of planning, class management, behaviour management, and teaching matching the
planning. A small minority of Induction tutors also referred to the observation as a support structure to
help with behaviour or class management
“A chance to actually see what is happening after discussing a concern during a weekly
meeting.” (Induction tutor)
A positive feature identified by about two thirds of the NQTs was the reassurance gained from the
process. This was also acknowledged by a minority of induction tutors (3 out of 17).
“Positive feedback is both reassuring for Newly Qualified Teacher and motivating.” (Induction
tutor)
“Positive feedback – it is nice to have compliments” (Newly Qualified Teacher)
Part of the reason for the need for this reassurance may be that
“Being observed is always a slightly uncomfortable experience” (Fish, 1995, p119)
even if the focus of the observation is well set up and it is clear that the process is
“essentially a learning experience rather than as assessment.” (Fish, 1995, p119)
After the observation more than half of Induction tutors and NQTs saw discussion and feedback to the
NQT as a valuable part of the process.
“specific focus by induction tutor to give most helpful feedback” (Induction tutors)
“An opportunity to be given constructive feedback from other professionals” (Newly Qualified
Teacher)
“Being able to talk through certain aspects of the lesson” (Newly Qualified Teacher)
An induction tutor’s role is to be both supportive and challenging. To be effective the induction tutor
needs to be comfortable with both of these aspects. Challenge should be perceived as a positive part of
the process rather than be seen as a destructive element (Fish, 1995). There is however, a danger that
the observer, in order to avoid potentially undermining the NQTs confidence, may be disinclined to
criticise or challenge the Newly Qualified Teacher and may focus on providing the Newly Qualified
Teacher with praise (Brooks & Sikes, 1997).
Over a quarter (5 out of 17) referred to the process as providing opportunity for citing further targets
for future development and another minority (3 out of 17) indicated that it provided evidence of
progress in particular areas and provided evidence of gaining particular standards.
A further benefit of the observation process was identified as one of conveying the value of the
teacher’s role
“Formal observation gives due credit to the importance of the job.” (Induction tutor)
Only one Induction tutor referred to “Picking up little things not part of observation”.
Are you involving your NQT in monitoring his/her progress against the
induction standards? / How are you recording evidence of your/ your NQTs
progress against the standards?
All parties felt that NQTs were involved in the process of monitoring their progress against the
induction standards. Holmes recommends that the
“NQT should be fully involved and actively participate in self-monitoring and assessment
against the standards for Qualified Teacher Status and the Induction Standards” (Holmes, 1999,
p119)
Most Induction tutors are using the standards as a checklist and noting where evidence can be found.
The majority referred to some of the formal elements of the induction process such as targets,
14
observations and reports as evidence. Some made reference to drawing on discussion and one
indicated that they required the NQT to keep track.
Many NQTs indicated that they monitored their progress against the induction standards in conjunction
with their induction tutor by making notes against particular standards. About a third of NQTs kept
track of evidence in an induction file. A sizeable minority of NQTs were referring to their informal
written notes and summaries of discussions and weekly meetings with induction tutor and less than a
quarter referred to discussions with head teacher, notes from observations and lesson plans. One
Newly Qualified Teacher referred to work sampling and another to evaluations.
Although the induction tutor has day-to-day responsibility for collecting and collating evidence and for
keeping formal records of the decisions that have been made, it is envisaged that the NQT has full
involvement in the process. The NQTs self assessment could form part of the evidence which the
induction tutor collects (TTA, 1999, a &c)
As the NQTs have already satisfied the Qualified Teacher Status standards within their training a “light
touch” is recommended rather than instigating a detailed reassessment of these (DfEE, 1999 and TTA,
1999c). The induction tutor will need to collect evidence of the induction standards, in particular,
however
“As much as possible of the evidence should derive from everyday teaching, management and
professional development processes, rather than being created in addition to the normal work of
the school.” (TTA, 1999c, p8)
It is recommended that the collection of evidence should therefore be kept to a minimum
“to illustrate progress and achievement in relation to the Induction Standards.” (TTA, 1999c,
p15)
The induction tutors records are drawn upon by the head teacher who is responsible for making the
final recommendation (TTA, 1999c). A constructive approach would therefore be for the head teacher
to agree with the induction tutor and Newly Qualified Teacher the range and quality of evidence
required (TTA, 1999c).
The professional review of progress
How many professional reviews of progress have taken place for your NQT so
far? / Who has been involved in the meeting/s to review the NQTs progress?
In all cases at least one professional review of progress had taken place and in about half the cases their
had been two reviews of progress. The induction tutor was always present and in under half of cases
the head teacher was there as well. In about a quarter of instances the induction tutor was the head
teacher and in one of these instances the LEA advisor was present.
DfEE (1999) recommends considering a third party involvement where the induction tutor is the head
teacher. This could be a teacher from another school or an LEA advisor. The purpose of this would be
to provide extra reassure to the head teacher that the assessment is fair.
List below no more than three aspects of the professional review of progress
that you have found particularly useful.
The majority of induction tutors identified it as an opportunity to review targets and focus on strengths
and progress to date. The identification of new targets and the focus on areas for further development
were also identified by about half as a valuable part of the process. The majority of NQTs felt it was a
useful means of tracking achievement (7 out of 10). Many also felt it useful that it focused on areas for
development and subsequent setting of further targets (7) as well as gaining personal feedback and
reassurance from the process
A minority of Induction tutors identified this meeting as a valuable opportunity to focus on induction
standards.
15
“Checking assessment judgements against other knowledge, including the learner’s selfassessment, might increase the accuracy of that assessment.” (Fish, 1995, p150)
The meeting does enable all parties involved to compare their perceptions of progress.
Summative assessment meeting
Please indicate the date of the summative assessment meeting? / Who is/was
involved in the summative assessment meeting?
The first summative meeting took place between 17th November and 2nd December. In addition to the
induction tutor, more than half the head teachers were also present at this meeting.
If this meeting has taken place, list below no more than three aspects of the
summative assessment meeting that you have found particularly useful.
About half the Induction tutors abstained from this question as they had not yet carried out this
meeting, however all NQTs responded. The majority of Induction tutors who responded identified
reviewing targets set and achievements as one of the most useful elements of this meeting some also
referred to the value of relating these achievements to the standards. A minority of Induction tutors
referred to the value for them of involving the head teacher in the process. About half of the NQTs
perceived its usefulness as being one of reassurance through a formal meeting. For about a third of the
NQTs felt it would provide them with valued opportunity for discussion and feedback on progress. A
small proportion highlighted setting targets as an important role of this meeting. Other issues were
raised on an individual basis.
“… any assessment procedures in learning employed ought to assist – even maximise– the
educational development of the learner whatever other intentions they also fulfil” (Fish, 1995,
p149)
Although details are provided concerning the focus of this statutory meeting it does seem that the value
of the meeting was considered in a broader context enabling additional identified benefits to be gained.
It is recommended that if the head teacher is the induction tutor then a third party should be involved at
these formal assessment meetings. (Holmes, 1999 and DfEE, 1999). Under the professional review of
progress there was an example cited where an LEA advisor did become more involved in a formal part
of the induction process
Are there any elements within either the observation process, the professional
review of progress or the summative assessment meetings that you have
found unhelpful? / Additional comments:
The majority of Induction tutors and almost all NQTs did not comment on the first of these sections.
“It is useful for the NQT and a supportive framework but it is a lot of extra work for induction
tutor. It can be difficult as a full time classroom teacher to monitor effectively and give the
time.” (Induction tutor)
This quote highlights the two main themes identified by both groups. The main strength identified by
induction tutors was (4 out of 17) the usefulness of the process to the NQT.
“I think the non-contact time is excellent and for NQTs who may have not been supported well I
think the package highlights their needs” (Induction tutor)
The support structures were viewed positively by NQTs such as
“I do feel very privileged to be in a position where I am able to take advantage of the experience
of other professionals in order to develop my own practice. I think the 10% non-contact time is
crucial in allowing you time to observe other teachers teaching.” (NQT)
16
“The support I have received from my induction tutor, head teacher and all the staff has been
excellent.” (NQT)
The assessment structures were viewed less positively by NQTs eg
“I have found it more of an extra pressure than support, although obviously it offers some
support. The targets and structure of the programme make it incredibly formal, whereas I feel a
less formal atmosphere would be more beneficial” (NQT)
“I feel it is a lot of extra work. … I do not agree that we should be writing lesson plans for ‘so
many’ lessons a term – my planning file is up-to-date and thorough, therefore this should be
enough. Also I don’t agree that we should collect examples of pupils’ work. Again, all my
pupils books are thoroughly marked and in the classroom, so I shouldn’t need to photocopy and
file it.” (NQT)
“The school are very thorough and have taken this process very seriously, however I have felt at
times bulldozed into a programme that is focused on the standards and not on my specific
needs.” (NQT)
Although all of these quotes from NQTs relate to the assessment process through some of them there
seems to be a concern about expectations and as a result creation of additional work for the NQT.
“…I still feel that the NQTs are sometimes treated as students and not as professionals. We
would like to have our 3/4 years at University recognised” (NQT)
This was an issue which was raised informally on occasions. It may be related to a continuation of the
assessment process against further standards.
About a quarter of the Induction tutors raised the issues of time constraints for the induction tutor and
acknowledged the extra work involved. Holmes (1999) warns us that
“If your induction tutor/mentor is not supported in his/her work, time constraints may mean that
your induction depends heavily on the goodwill of colleagues.” (p129)
Within the supplementary questionnaire almost all induction tutors raised a concern over this issue.
They identified time as the main constraint which prevented them from giving the support that was
needed to their NQT.
Conclusions
Almost all induction tutors taught within the same key stage as their NQT. The majority of induction
tutors were subject coordinators and more than half of them had more than ten years experience in
teaching and many had worked with students on final placement recently. By contrast some of the less
experienced teachers who were carrying out this role raised concerns at the outset about whether they
were “appropriately experienced” to be able to provide the necessary support.
Most NQTs and Induction tutors had some knowledge about this period although there was a difference
in emphasis within their responses. The dominant view expressed by NQTs related to assessment and
monitoring whereas amongst the Induction tutors it was the support element which was highlighted.
There were a small proportion from both groups who felt that they knew little about the process.
The dominant feeling within both groups was one of “reasonable confidence” about their role in the
induction period although a significant minority of induction tutors felt “very apprehensive”. Feelings
of confidence increased amongst both groups as the term progressed. Overall the NQTs indicated that
they had greater confidence than the induction tutors.
The NQTs tended to have a greater familiarity with the Qualified Teacher Status standards than the
induction tutors. This was particularly evident initially and less so as the term progressed. The trend
was similar with the induction standards although initially some NQTs also acknowledged little
familiarity. By half term the majority of both groups were reasonably familiar with both sets of
standards.
17
Knowledge of the Career Entry Profile was varied with the majority of NQTs and induction tutors
having some insight into its role. This insight had been gained by NQTs through lectures at their Initial
Teacher Training institution and by induction tutors through their role in supporting students on final
placements in the recent past. Some Induction tutors and NQTs felt that they knew very little about the
role of the Career Entry Profile.
There was marked difference in perceived usefulness of the Career Entry Profile in supporting the
induction programme with Induction tutors generally being much more positive about its role than the
NQTs. Recognition was given to changes in the NQTs needs from the time of filling in the Career
Entry Profile to the start of planning the induction programme.
A wide range of sources were drawn upon in order to inform each NQTs induction programme.
Induction tutors more readily acknowledged the role that informal observations played in informing the
programme. In about half the instances the Head teacher was involved in putting together the induction
programme alongside the NQT and induction tutor. A range of different elements was seen as useful
and many of these were of an individual nature. Both groups, however, identified some elements,
frequently. For instance, observing more experienced colleagues was perceived by the majority of
NQTs and induction tutors to be the most valuable element of the induction programme. Weekly
meetings and day-to-day contact was identified as important amongst about half the induction tutors
and a smaller proportion of NQTs. Other issues raised by a significant minority included gaining
support from SENCOs, time for planning and reading through school policies.
Areas where NQTs needed support covered day-to-day management as well as curriculum issues.
Support with behaviour management was recognised by about a third of the Induction tutors but was
only referred to by one NQT. A similar pattern was repeated with classroom management and
organisation being identified by about a third of Induction tutors and no NQTs. Implementing school
policies was also raised, mainly by NQTs. The main curriculum support required was identified by
both groups as related to planning, particularly for Special Educational Needs.
Formal mechanisms within the induction period
All NQTs had been observed on at least two occasions, and in about half the cases the head teacher had
observed in addition to the Induction tutor. All felt that the observation process provided an
opportunity to accumulate specific evidence. About half of both groups referred to the value of the
feedback after the observation and the majority of NQTs and a minority of induction tutors valued
gaining reassurance from such a process. It was also valued by a significant minority of induction
tutors as a source of future targets.
Both parties were involved in collating evidence of the NQTs achievement of the standards. Induction
tutors tended to be using the standards as a checklist and noting where evidence was found. NQTs
seemed to be making notes and collecting evidence in files. From the responses generally perceptions
of the task seemed more onerous to NQTs than to Induction tutors.
The head teacher often took part in the professional review of progress meeting. In about a quarter of
the cases the head teacher was the induction tutor. Where separate individuals carried out these roles
the head teacher met with the NQT and induction tutor in the majority of instances. Perceptions of its
role were similar across both groups, as one of tracking progress but the emphasis tended to differ
between them with induction tutors tending to focus more on reviewing targets and citing strengths and
the NQTS focus on setting targets and focusing on areas of development.
From those who responded, the role of the summative meeting was perceived generally as one of
acknowledging achievement. A sizeable minority of NQTs recognised that they valued the formal
opportunity to gain feedback and reassurance about progress. Many Induction tutors did not respond to
this question, possibly because the meeting had not taken place at that time. However all NQTs did
respond.
Overall, both groups felt that the induction period was valuable for the NQT. The support structures
were viewed favourably by NQTs but the assessment structures were viewed less favourably and there
was some anxiety about the additional workload for them as well as a feeling by some that they were
still responded to as if they were a student. Time constraints were the most frequently identified
concern by Induction tutors. This they felt prevented them from giving sufficient support to meet the
18
NQTs perceived needs. NQTs did not raise any issues in connection with the role of the Induction
tutor.
Recommendations
The head teacher does need to consider carefully what constitutes the experience the induction tutor
needs in order to be considered to be appropriately experienced. Issues to consider are
 the number of years that the Induction tutor has been teaching,


whether it is important that the NQT and induction tutor have the same or similar year groups
where a further NQT is appointed in the future in the same school should the Induction tutor
this year be encouraged to build on their experience or should it be a roving responsibility
perhaps based on year group taught.
Those Induction tutors who had worked with a student on their final school experience were more
familiar with the standards and the process of assessing against them. Working with such a student on
final practice would be a useful preparation for taking on the role of induction tutor. Part of the role of
working with a student could include focusing explicitly on their Career Entry Profile. This would give
the induction tutor greater understanding of its role. It would also enable its value to be perceived more
clearly by NQTs. In order for this to be practicable the role of the Career Entry Profile would need to
be clarified to the student and their teacher prior to the final school experience by the Initial Teacher
Training institution.
The role of the Career Entry Profile does need to be defined more carefully to both parties. They do
need to be aware that Section B provides a starting point as a focus for the induction tutor but to be
aware that there is flexibility in reviewing these themes in the light of the NQTs changing needs.
The Induction tutors needs to have knowledge about their role and responsibilities as well as an
understanding of the induction period requirements prior to their first meeting with their NQT. Those
who undertake the role for their second year, will have this year’s experience to draw upon. It may
also be possible for new Induction tutors to draw on the experienced Induction tutors knowledge.
In terms of costs of the induction period, money has been allocated to allow release time for NQTs. It
would be beneficial for some funding to be provided for Induction tutors to enable them to be regularly
released from the classroom in order to carry out their role.
The role of the head teacher does need to be carefully considered. There is minimal expectation of the
head teachers involvement in the process, however they are ultimately responsible for recommending
whether the NQT passes the induction period. Many head teachers did involve themselves in elements
of the process such as planning the induction programme, carrying out observations, formal meetings
such as the professional review of progress and the summative assessment meetings. The induction
tutors indicated that they found this involvement as valuable.
A further useful input would be in guiding the Induction tutor and NQT on what evidence is required in
order to minimise their additional workload.
It does need to be recognised that the NQT may feel the need for reassurance, particularly in the early
stages. This could potentially create a tension for the induction tutor in managing the balance between
being supportive and being challenging, as a critical friend.
Bibliography
Bleach K (1999) The Induction and Mentoring of Newly Qualified Teachers. A new deal for teachers
Londong: David Fulton
Brooks V & Sikes P (1997) The Good Mentor Guide Buckingham: Open University Press
DfEE (1999) Circular No: 5/99. The Induction Period For Newly Qualified Teachers. London: DfEE
Earley P (1996) Competence Frameworks and Profiles for Newly Qualified Teachers within Hustler D
& McIntyre D (1996) Developing Competent Teachers. Approaches to professional competence in
teacher education London: David Fulton
19
Fish D (1995) Quality Mentoring for student teachers. A principled approach to Practice. London:
David Fulton
Haggar H, Burn K & McIntyre D (1993) The school mentor handbook. London: Kogan Page
Holmes E (1999) Newly Qualified Teachers. The definitive guide to your first year of teaching
London: HMSO
Mahoney P (1996) Competences and the first year of teaching within Hustler D & McIntyre D (1996)
Developing Competent Teachers. Approaches to professional competence in teacher education
London: David Fulton
TTA (1999a) Supporting Induction for newly qualified teachers. Overview 1999-2000 TTA
TTA (1999b) Supporting Induction for newly qualified teachers. Support and monitoring 1999-2000
TTA
TTA (1999c) Supporting Induction for newly qualified teachers. Assessment 1999-2000 TTA
20