The Masters in Teaching and Learning: a revolution in teacher education or a bright light quickly extinguished?

Transcription

1 Journal of Education for Teaching ISSN: (Print) (Online) Journal homepage: The Masters in Teaching and Learning: a revolution in teacher education or a bright light quickly extinguished? Diana Burton & Ruth Goodman To cite this article: Diana Burton & Ruth Goodman (2011) The Masters in Teaching and Learning: a revolution in teacher education or a bright light quickly extinguished?, Journal of Education for Teaching, 37:1, To link to this article: Published online: 20 Jan Submit your article to this journal Article views: 939 View related articles Citing articles: 11 View citing articles Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at Download by: [ ] Date: 08 January 2016, At: 11:53

2 Journal of Education for Teaching Vol. 37, No. 1, February 2011, The Masters in Teaching and Learning: a revolution in teacher education or a bright light quickly extinguished? Diana Burton* and Ruth Goodman Faculty of Education, Community and Leisure, Liverpool John Moores University, Liverpool, UK Taylor CJET_A_ sgm and Francis (Received 17 June 2010; final version received 20 October 2010) / Journal Original 2011 Taylor February DianaBurton D.M.Burton@ljmu.ac.uk & of Article Francis Education (print)/ for Teaching (online) Summer 2009 saw the introduction in England of the Masters in Teaching and Learning (MTL). Funded in full by the Training and Development Agency for Schools, the MTL aims to improve the quality of teaching and to raise standards in schools. In this paper we discuss what the MTL might mean both for in-service teacher education and initial teacher training. We explore issues relating to the structure and delivery of MTL including the tension between standardisation and personalisation of its content as well as the lack of focus on research and the costs of this to its reputation and appeal of the qualification. Furthermore, we question the extent to which newly qualified teachers are ready to benefit from undertaking the MTL and consider how availability criteria may give rise to equity issues. With these concerns in mind we discuss the future of the MTL and whether this Labour initiative will have a chance to prove itself under a Conservative-led coalition government at a time of severe austerity. Keywords: teacher education; Masters in Teaching and Learning (MTL); postgraduate professional development (PPD); continued professional development (CPD); personalisation; funding Introduction Since the early 1980s, the ubiquitous standards agenda within the English education system has spawned a plethora of government initiatives aimed at raising attainment. Yet, with many schools struggling to meet performativity targets and the persistence of an achievement gap in education (Strand 2008), it is clear that these initiatives have not yielded the desired results. In 2008, the then Labour government turned to teacher professional development to address the issue. In a major overhaul of teacher education the notion of a Masters in Teaching and Learning (MTL) was conceived. Fully funded by the Training and Development Agency for Schools (TDA), the proposed aim of the MTL is to improve teacher quality to raise standards in education, narrow gaps in attainment and give children better life chances (TDA 2008) and according to the TDA, Further improving the quality of teaching and learning is key to our ability to do this (DCSF 2008, 12). The MTL is largely a classroom-based qualification. Participants will be supported by an in-school coach as well as a tutor at a higher education institute (HEI). The intention is to facilitate teachers understanding of factors that might impact on each pupil s potential for academic achievement with the aim of creating a positive, safe and effective learning environment. For example, MTL content includes both understanding *Corresponding author. d.m.burton@ljmu.ac.uk ISSN print/issn online 2011 Taylor & Francis DOI: /

3 52 D. Burton and R. Goodman the social and cultural reasons why some children and young people from disadvantaged backgrounds and from Black and minority ethnic groups may have low prior attainment or come to school unprepared to learn and a range of inclusive and personalised teaching, learning and assessment strategies to remove barriers to learning and enable all children and young people to make good progress (TDA 2009d, 16). Whilst doubt has been reported as to the meaning of personalised learning and what it entails (Burton 2007), it is clear how the content of the MTL might better prepare teachers for cultural diversity in the classroom and this specific emphasis on removing barriers within teachers in-service development signals an important governmental steer. Teacher education: a major overhaul The introduction of the MTL clearly represents an immense overhaul of in-service teacher education but it comes at a time when other major changes are also being suggested for initial teacher training (ITT). At present, the teaching profession in England can be entered via a number of different routes either by training to be a teacher whilst completing a degree, i.e., training as an undergraduate, or by engaging in some form of teacher training following completion of a non-teaching undergraduate degree. However, a recent report by the Children, Schools and Families Committee on Training for Teachers indicated that while undergraduate teaching routes would continue for primary education, for secondary education postgraduate and Employment Based Initial Teacher Training (EBITT) routes were deemed preferable with a suggestion that undergraduate routes be cut (House of Commons 2010). As the report comments, entry requirements for undergraduate training routes are often low. This observation is supported by the research of Burghes et al. (2009) who examined data relating to teacher recruitment, employment and retention in England in contrast to a set of comparable countries including elsewhere in Europe as well as the USA and New Zealand. Burghes et al. found England to be unique in allowing prospective teachers to study education as a subject in the form of an undergraduate qualification without having undertaken intensive study of the subject they will teach, at degree level for three to four years. Furthermore, teachers in England were overall the least well educated. With regard to their secondary school qualifications, for instance, the report claims that prospective teachers in England were only required to have achieved two GCSEs (English and maths). This claim was, however, refuted by the Universities Council for the Education of Teachers (UCET) who make clear that in addition, ITT candidates require relevant A levels or equivalent and primary ITT trainees also require GCSE science (cited in Vaughan 2009). The report also revealed low retention rates with 30% 50% of teachers in England leaving teaching at the beginning of their career with a further 12% leaving throughout. Arguably, if prospective teachers are at least 21 years of age prior to beginning ITT then they may be more aware of what a career in teaching would involve and have greater life skills and experience to help them cope in the profession. It is possible then that both standards and retention rates may be raised if teachers require an undergraduate, non-teaching degree before being eligible for postgraduate teacher training. The Training for Teachers report (House of Commons 2010) also recommends a phased move towards only those graduates holding at least an upper-second class degree being admitted for Postgraduate Certificate in Education (PGCE) teacher training. On the one hand, consistent with the suggestion of the elimination of undergraduate

4 Journal of Education for Teaching 53 routes for secondary education, this raising of entry requirements may be seen as a step towards the formation of a high quality teaching workforce. Well developed subject knowledge is, however, just one of the requirements for becoming an effective teacher. Other qualities such as excellent communication skills, empathy, stamina and knowledge of how children learn and can be motivated are arguably just as important for becoming an effective practitioner, but are not necessarily reflected in high university grades. Additionally, raising entry requirements reduces the number of potential ITT at a time when the primary school population is growing. In this context, the introduction of the MTL could help make up the deficit in the more generic skills development occasioned by a move from four-year undergraduate to one-year postgraduate ITT. However, its introduction may also trigger significant changes to the structure of the PGCE. At present, the majority of UK higher education institutions offer PGCEs with 60 masters (M level) credits. Hence, upon completion of the PGCE, teachers who wished to continue on to do a masters could transfer these 60 credits towards the 180 credits required for a masters degree. However, the MTL will only allow 30 M level credits to be transferred across from the PGCE. Consequently, current PGCE students who are completing courses with 60 (or sometimes more) M level credits will only be able to use 30 of these as a contribution to the MTL. Thus the MTL could undermine the status of the PGCE as an academic postgraduate teaching qualification and lead to a change in the structure of PGCE awards with only 30 credits validated at M level. This seems a backward step in forging an interface between the academic and practical elements of teacher training which, on the face of it, is what MTL is trying to achieve. Such normalisation creates a situation in which new and existing teachers will both hold qualifications bearing the same title but which consist of different structure and content. However, MTL developers within TDA argue that by taking the pressure off M level units in the PGCE, student teachers will be able to spend more time concentrating on the comprehension of fundamental teaching skills. There is no evidence cited that this reversion is necessary and indeed it seems to run counter to an emphasis on reflecting on practice through the deployment of principles derived academically. In addition to its impact on the PGCE, the proposed MTL has major implications for existing masters programmes within Postgraduate Professional Development (PPD) provision. On the introduction of the MTL in 2010, government funding of traditional education masters degrees may well be terminated, leaving the MTL exclusive in its status as a masters in teaching and learning. Indeed, a review of the future of PPD funding is stipulated in both the TDA s implementation plan setting out how they will address professional development strategy (TDA 2009b) and in the TDA remit in which they state we expect the TDA to inform and agree with DCSF future plans for the PPD considering its appropriateness beyond 2011 in the light of the roll-out of the MTL (TDA 2009c, 6). These changes in funding policy will remove any element of choice as to which masters teachers decide to do. Thus the introduction of the MTL promotes the standardisation of post-qualification teacher education and ensures that all teachers are exposed to largely the same professional development. Many teacher educators have argued for some time that, as in Northern Ireland and in Scotland, teachers continued professional development (CPD) should be approached more systematically and valued more highly, but sceptics may ponder whether this standardisation of postgraduate development is a government strategy designed to wrest further control from teachers and HEIs. Arguably, since the 1980s

5 54 D. Burton and R. Goodman the English education system has become increasingly more state controlled (Keep 2006) and, as Furlong (2008) argues, initial teacher education is inexplicably tied in with a government s political agenda. Similarly, there is debate over the political agenda behind government-funded PPD. As Coombs and Sorenson (2009) propose, the TDA views PPD as having multiple purposes. On the one hand PPD is perceived as having the ability to modify teacher behaviour and develop practitioner practice. On the other is the more unsettling perspective of how PPD can be used as a link to performance management and school based targets. Thus, government-funded PPD could be perceived as a further move towards greater state control of the education system. Yet with a new Conservativeled government now in power the trend for state control may alter. Paradoxically, the Thatcherite Conservative government was responsible for many acts that took power from schools to the state, for instance, the introduction of the National Curriculum with its still contested national assessment regime. Such moves were prompted by a goal to raise standards in education and open up a free market in which schools would be in competition with each other. Now such a market exists, however, the new Conservative-led government speaks of creating a big society not a big government in which We will give public sector workers back their professional autonomy (Conservative Party Manifesto 2010, 35). The notion of centrally controlled teacher professional development could be viewed as at odds with the Conservative ethos of returning power back to the professionals. Thus, although at the time of writing, the Conservative-led government has not made its position on the MTL clear, if the qualification is not perceived as consistent with the new government s agenda then it may not be funded. Cuts in public expenditure will, of course, compound this. Furthermore, if the MTL is a standard component of in-service teacher training, teachers may perceive it as a straightjacket that limits study choice and, in turn, their motivation to undertake masters level study may decrease. Meanwhile, HEIs have to construct and validate the new MTL at a time when their existing successful masters programmes are vulnerable to PPD funding cuts. The distribution of funding for MTL is a challenge for HEIs since approximately 60% of the total unit of funding per MTL participant is allocated directly to the school for participant s time, learning opportunities provided by the coach and other school input (TDA 2010a). The remaining 40% of the funds are allocated to the HEI for their provided learning opportunities, and for MTL provider management. This division of funds is unlikely to be looked upon favourably by HEIs which, in the current climate, will gain little financial benefit from the MTL compared to traditional masters courses. Moreover, the 11,500 per capita cost of MTL by comparison with standard PPD funding of circa 2000 per masters raises serious issues for the new government at a time of severe funding restraint. Delivering MTL In terms of delivery, the MTL emphasises the importance of shared expertise with a focus on increasing links and communications between local authorities, national agencies, national specialist organisations and other MTL providers which, again, is breaking welcome new ground but will take time to develop. However, much confusion surrounds how this novel collaborative approach will become manifest in practice. Given such a fundamentally different vehicle for teacher development, however,

6 Journal of Education for Teaching 55 it should be no surprise that the principles and guiding framework of the MTL are perhaps a little confused. While the MTL contains a set of core modules mandatory for all candidates there is also opportunity for providers to tailor non-mandatory modules to teachers on the basis of the needs of their school. Essentially then, we see a paradox between the emphases on standardisation and personalisation. The needs of teachers, stemming from the individual requirements of the schools in which they teach, may not be adequately accounted for within the standard approach of the MTL. Whether or not this is an issue will depend on the way in which MTL providers choose to deliver the programme. There is debate around the extent to which teacher professional development should be personalised in order to be effective. In an examination of variation and effectiveness of teacher professional development, Day and Gu (2007) conclude that effective continued professional development must be highly tailored to the personal, workplace and external scenarios which impact on a teacher s practice. Somewhat inconsistent with this conclusion, in an evaluation of the effectiveness of CPD, Ofsted (2006) reports that CPD is too personalised to the individual needs of teachers as they perceive them. Aside from such debate, however, the extent to which providers can effectively personalise their MTL programme is likely to depend on the numbers of NQTs they have on their courses, the diversity of their needs and the availability of tutors and mentors. The MTL is expected to take three years to complete (although it can take up to five). In a review of Continued Professional Development (CPD) Robinson and Sebba (2005) concluded that more prolonged CPD provided greater opportunity to develop increased depth of theory and better integration of theory with practice. As the MTL is completed over a sustained period it may be more effective than previous approaches at improving knowledge and changing attitudes and beliefs and could result in more permanent changes in practice. Further support is provided by an evaluation of the TDA s Postgraduate Professional Development programme from which reported a positive impact of postgraduate training on both pupils and teachers. It could be viewed as paradoxical then to offer full funding to the MTL prior to any assessment of whether the benefits of PPD are replicated (and enhanced) via the new qualification. Since its conception, the MTL has struggled to get off the ground. The qualification is being offered to newly qualified teachers as they start their first teaching post with the intention that the qualification will be available to all teachers in time. Originally proposed to begin in September 2009, the MTL has been delayed for a year with its first round due to begin in summer term The MTL is currently available to newly qualified teachers (NQTs) and some new heads of department working in the North West of England and in schools that are receiving National Challenge funding. In March 2010 the Department for Children, Schools and Families (DCSF) changed the eligibility criteria for MTL enrolment by removing the date of QTS from MTL eligibility (previously this meant that the MTL was only available for those who gained QTS in ). Consequently, newly qualified teachers taking up a post in an eligible school, regardless of when they obtained their qualification, are now eligible for the MTL (TDA 2010b). Two issues arise with the timing of MTL. First, the TDA proposes that enrolling NQTs on the MTL as soon as they begin to teach would serve to cement their teaching knowledge setting them up for the rest of their career. An alternative perspective here is that expecting NQTs to begin the MTL as soon as they start to teach may actually be too early for them to benefit from what it has to offer. By starting the MTL

7 56 D. Burton and R. Goodman immediately, NQTs will not have had time to establish themselves in their role. However, it is possibly the period in which they will be experimenting with teaching styles and approaches to learning, so systematic reflection could support this. There are, however, reports that some NQTs are being told they cannot enrol on the course (Maddern 2010a) with heads worried, that at the start of their first post, new teachers will be under a great deal of pressure to prove their worth and to balance effectively the range of their new responsibilities. This alone is likely to be a very stressful period without the added pressure of beginning a new qualification. Hence, rather than being looked upon favourably by NQTs, the MTL may be seen as an obstacle or burden causing an excessive workload, and shifting their focus from teaching. Possible consequences involve stress and time pressures requiring teachers to work long hours. When discussing this issue, Graham Holley, chief executive of the TDA (Holley 2010) emphasised the support the NQTs would receive which teachers said they need during the early stages of their career. Similarly, John Carr, director of the MTL at the TDA, argues that, rather than adding to teachers workload, the MTL will actually make life easier for NQTs as it will develop upon what they are already doing and will make them feel more prepared for teaching (TES 2009). Allowing new teachers a period of time to settle into their new post, even if by a single term, however, might place them in a better position to benefit optimally from the MTL as well as reducing the stress of beginning their new role. Second, the availability of trained coaches to support NQTs progress with the MTL is unlikely to meet demand in the first instance. TDA was at first resolute that this coach training would be centralised but ultimately asked HEIs to conduct the training of their own respective coaches, using as a basis the National Framework for Coaching and Mentoring and principles for coaching established via consultation with stakeholders (CUREE/TDA 2009). It will be the responsibility of the coach to demonstrate relevance to classroom and daily practice while a university-based tutor will provide wider perspective and ensure work is masters level. This may be a way of finally getting hold of the whole issue of inconsistent mentoring in itt, given that this has been a problem (or perhaps an inevitability) identified by Ofsted since the onset of school-based itt in The intention is to have one coach to one NQT in the same school, if possible, so the resource implications are immense, especially as it is not the intention for the induction tutor to play both roles. There is a view from some, however, that capacity will not be an issue because for teachers to pass through Threshold status (where they undertake an assessment conducted by the head teacher, to demonstrate that they meet the standard required to move through the threshold from the core to the upper pay scale) they must all demonstrate an ability to coach. In theory this is true but it is not always the case that post-threshold teachers possess the right personality or attitude to take on this work. A further issue here is that the coaches employed, and identified by schools, will not necessarily hold an equivalent qualification. Both the National Union of Teachers and the National Association of Head Teachers condemn the employment of coaches who do not themselves hold a masters degree and who therefore have not been through the process of studying at that level (cited in Maddern 2010b). This raises concerns over the validation of the MTL because, if coaches do not possess at least masters level qualifications then they are arguably not suitably qualified to be involved in HEI provision at postgraduate level, nor likely to be viewed as such by the HEIs themselves. Further, while the experienced teachers may be most suitable to

8 Journal of Education for Teaching 57 advise NQTs on classroom practice it is not clear exactly how the coach role differs from that of the induction tutor. Indeed, as Holley (2010) admits, induction tutors will be have to be used initially while numbers of coaches are being built up. The introduction of the MTL has been further complicated by uncertainties over student numbers, funding levels and mechanics and general resource implications for schools and HEIs. Key commentators repeatedly queried how well prepared the TDA and provider consortia were for MTL to commence in the north west in September 2009 and in National Challenge schools in January 2010 (Maddern 2009), identifying in particular the time pressures inherent in preparing to bid for and implement the MTL. Concerns continue to be raised about the adequacy of the funding for HEIs who will run the courses, the costs of and appointment timelines for the in-school coaches and the difficulties of resourcing the additional time that NQTs will need outside the classroom in order to complete the course. The introduction of the Rarely Cover policy (WAMG 2009) further complicates this issue. The Rarely Cover policy states that staff should cover for colleagues only rarely in cases where there has not been time to bring in a supply teacher, which thus makes it increasingly difficult for staff to be freed from lessons for staff development purposes. Consequently, the policy means that schools must bring in a supply teacher each time at a cost of around 200 a day if they want to send a member of staff on training. As a consequence, fewer teachers are being released for training, a position which will almost certainly extend to NQTs, impeding their chances of successful MTL engagement. For serving teachers the MTL raises an important equity issue. At present, MTL funding is only being offered to newly qualified teachers as they start their first teaching post and not to existing teachers, many of whom will not possess a masters level qualification. They may also miss out on the opportunity to acquire one if they do not achieve it in the remaining years of funded PPD provision. The TDA s MTL documentation states that no teacher would be penalised for not having a Masters level qualification. We envisage that as more teachers gain MTL we would expect this to be a factor when employers are recruiting (DCSF 2008). So, in theory, teachers who are not NQTs and will miss out on the MTL will not be disadvantaged in terms of pay or career progression. However, employers are highly likely to take into consideration differences in candidates postgraduate qualification experience so a candidate who has a masters qualification may be more attractive to employers. Hence, the initial plan of making the MTL available only to NQTs poses a social justice issue which the TDA must be quick to address either by extending safeguards about PPD funding or by making MTL available to existing teachers as well as to NQTs. Raising the status of the teaching profession A key objective of the MTL is to improve standards in schools by raising the status of teaching which, in turn, will increase the appeal of a career in teaching to high quality candidates. The aspiration then is to recruit a new, high quality teaching workforce more suited to the needs of today s pupils. However, for the MTL to raise the standards of teaching it must be perceived by potential teachers as a credible course, comparable to other masters qualifications. One factor which may compromise this perception is the emphasis of the MTL on being practice-based. The MTL aims to provide high quality, practice-based learning opportunities tailored to the individual needs of teachers in the context of their school. The rationale for such an applied

9 58 D. Burton and R. Goodman approach is that, by providing practice-based teaching, teachers will be able to see how what they are learning applies to teaching in their own classroom. Assessment of the MTL will be to a large extent, practice-based, for example, through reflective presentations or through classroom resources developed by teachers to assist pupil learning. This is at one and the same time exciting and challenging for providers developing the MTL programmes. Whilst the masters needs to be practice-based in order to impact on teaching quality in the classroom, it must also be academically stringent, balancing its academic and applied components so it meets the masters qualification criteria of the Quality Assurance Agency (QAA) for Higher Education. If it is not academically as well as practically robust then it has no chance of improving pupils chances or raising the status of teaching as a career. In its advice to TDA and DCSF, UCET (2008) recommended that MTL content should be checked against QAA descriptors and that QAA should be invited to verify that MTL content matches the descriptors. This has proved to be a challenge for the HEIs designing the programmes as M levelness is keenly scrutinised by university validation panels to safeguard standards across the sector. This difficulty may well be exacerbated by the apparent omission from the MTL framework of a mandatory research component. As raised in the Children, Schools and Families Committee report (House of Commons 2010), there is a concern that the MTL s status as a masters could be compromised by having no research dissertation. With its emphasis on the development of self-reflection, it seems counter-intuitive that the MTL framework does not harness the potential of action research by teachers to reflect on and develop their own practice. For example, there is a wealth of evidence to support the value of action research in teacher development (see for example, Bartlett and Burton 2006). TDA argues that the MTL will enable teachers to develop an open and questioning mindset through an enquiry and practice-based approach which will enable teachers to embrace change, challenge and opportunity (TDA 2009d). However, the framework does not include any core research modules, seemingly overlooking a perfect opportunity to allow teachers the time and resources to complete a piece of action research as part of their training. The inclusion of action research may be particularly important since one cost of the possible demise of the BEd is the loss of the research dissertation. While the BEd includes an extensive piece of research into an aspect of teaching, the PGCE and MTL do not have a mandatory research component. MTL providers may, however, choose to encourage their NQTs to engage in a piece of action research which could help inform their classroom practice where they have the flexibility to do so, i.e., in non-core modules. It can be argued that to be respected and to make a significant contribution to professional development, the MTL ought to embrace a discrete research element, particularly if it is to compare with existing masters courses. Without this the MTL could be considered to be lacking in substance. While the omission of a dissertation may help reduce the workload for the MTL making it plausible to complete the masters whilst working full time in a new role, the absence of a mandatory research component brings into question the extent to which the qualification truly warrants masters status and whether the qualification has the kind of content that really will make a difference to the quality of teaching that takes place in our schools. If potential teachers share such scepticism about the MTL then it could fail in its purpose of raising the status of teaching in order to attract higher calibre candidates.

10 Journal of Education for Teaching 59 Finally, even if it is possible to overcome all the practical and bureaucratic issues that plague the MTL, the question still remains as to whether the MTL alone is sufficient to restore a feeling of professionalism amongst the teaching workforce. When examining factors that impact on teachers morale and sense of professionalism, Day, Flores, and Viana (2007) reported mixed findings. They found that teachers felt an increased sense of professionalism with regard to continued learning and the importance of vocationalism. Opportunity for CPD was commonly cited as strengthening their sense of professionalism. With this in mind, the MTL does stand a chance of impacting positively on teacher perceptions of their profession. However, while CPD may be linked to an enhanced sense of professionalism, this is not necessarily sufficient to compete with the negative impact on professionalism generated by the everincreasing workload and pressure to meet targets and raise standards. As Arthur et al. (2009) argue, there is a tension between the desire to improve the status of teachers and a performance management approach with increased pressure to raise standards which are likely to serve to reduce teacher status. Conclusion So, to what extent will the MTL help raise the quality of teachers and, in turn, the achievement of learners? As we have seen, there are a myriad of practical issues associated with the MTL including whether the NQT year is the best time for teachers to start the course, whether there are enough trained staff to act as coaches for the NQTs and whether these coaches should hold an equivalent qualification to the one they will be coaching on. Additionally there are issues with time. For instance, there has already been a year s delay in the start of the MTL course bringing into question its planning and preparation and whether a course structure put together so hastily is a good basis for a revolution in teacher education. Aside from such practicalities, there are also concerns about the achievability of personalisation which is so central to the MTL in the context of vastly diverse pupil needs. As the MTL gets underway, the real key to its future success will be whether it is supported by the newly elected, Tory-led coalition government. Although the MTL is a Labour initiative, the overall goal the course sets is shared by the new government which also wishes to enhance the prestige of the teaching profession (Conservative Manifesto 2010, 5). At the time of writing it is unclear whether the MTL will be part of its strategy for achieving this. The manifesto does explicitly state Conservative support for Teach First and for the creation of Teach Now, an EBitT route which will build upon the Graduate Teacher Programme and MTL may be seen to inhabit the same ideological space. Thirty million pounds has been made available for the first two years of the MTL (TDA 2009a) and the TDA is reviewing how funds may be spent from onwards (TDA, letter to PPD providers, 29 March 2010). With the government focused on cutting public spending and traditional masters courses being less than a fifth of the MTL cost, the diversion of MTL funds is a real possibility. Furthermore, the government s stated ethos of big society not big government and the notion of passing power back to the people does not sit entirely comfortably with an initiative that will create government funded, standardised teacher professional development. In short, the future of the MTL looks increasingly unstable on a number of fronts and it a very clear example of how politically motivated interference with professional concerns can lead to a hugely costly

11 60 D. Burton and R. Goodman development only to be quickly sacrificed (potentially) on the altar of a different ideology and funding context. References Arthur, L., H. Marland, A. Pill, and T. Rea School culture and postgraduate professional development: Delineating the enabling school. Professional Development in Education 1 19: ifirst Article. Bartlett, S., and D. Burton Practitioner research or descriptions of classroom practice? A discussion of teachers investigating their classrooms. Educational Action Research 14: Burghes, D., J. Howson, J. Marenbon, J. O Leary, and C. Woodhead Teachers matter: Recruitment, employment and retention at home and abroad. London: Politeia. Burton, D Psychopedagogy and personalised learning. Journal of Education for Teaching 33: 1. Conservative Party The Conservative manifesto: An invitation to join the government of Britain. Conservative-Party-Manifesto-2010.pdf. Coombs, S., and S. Sorensen Whither postgraduate professional development? Towards a theoretical framework to guide long-term teacher development in England. Professional Development in Education 1 7: ifirst Article. CUREE, and TDA Postgraduate professional development programme quality assurance strand research report Year 3. London: TDA. Day, C., M.A. Flores, and I. Viana Effects of national policies on teachers sense of professionalism: findings from an empirical study in Portugal and England. European Journal of Teacher Education 30: Day, C., and Q. Gu Variations in the conditions for teachers professional learning and development: Sustaining commitment and effectiveness over a career. Oxford Review of Education 33: DCSF Being the best for our children: Realising talent for teaching and learning. Children.pdf. Furlong, J Partnership, policy and politics: Initial teacher education in England under New Labour. Teachers and Teaching 14: Holley, G Will masters make NQTs fly or crash. TES, March 5. article.aspx?storycode= House of Commons Children, Schools and Families Committee Training of teachers, HC 275-I, fourth session of London: The Stationary Office. Keep, E State control of the English education and training system playing with the biggest train set in the world. Journal of Vocational Education and Training 58: Maddern, K The masters plan that s falling apart. TES, March Maddern, K. 2010a. Masters course blocked by heads, claim tutors. TES, March Maddern, K. 2010b. Unions slam move to allow unqualified mentors to supervise masters degree. TES, January 8. Ofsted The logical chain: Continuing professional development in effective schools. London: Ofsted. Robinson, C., and Sebba, J A review of research and evaluation to inform the development of a new postgraduate professional development programme.

12 Journal of Education for Teaching 61 Strand, S Minority ethnic pupils in the longitudinal study of young people in England: Extension report on performance in public examinations at age 16. DCSF research report rr-029. London: Department for Children, Schools and Families. TDA Masters in teaching and learning. mtl.aspx. TDA. 2009a. The masters in teaching and learning. pdf/m/mtl_faqs.pdf. TDA. 2009b. Professional development implementation plan. resources/pdf/p/pd%20strategy%20implementation%20plan.pdf. TDA. 2009c. Remit letter annex a. remit_letter_2009_annex_a.pdf. TDA. 2009d. The national framework for masters in teaching and learning. tda.gov.uk/upload/resources/pdf/m/mtl_national_framework_and_glossary.pdf. TDA. 2010a. The launch of the masters in teaching and learning (MTL): North west region. TDA. 2010b. Am I eligible for the MTL? TDA. 2010c. Postgraduate professional development (ppd) funding arrangements for ay 2010/11 [letter] TES The masters in teaching and learning degree. resources/pdf/m/mtltes.pdf. UCET Masters in teaching and learning: Making it work. UCET advice to TDA and DCSF. Vaughan, R State of the nations: Are England s teachers bottom of the league? TES WAMG Rarely cover implementation process guidance. org/wamg_guidance.aspx.