1

IOP Scotland response to the General Teaching

Council for Scotland’s review of the

memorandum on entry requirements to

programmes of initial teacher education

November 2023

Which aspects of the entry requirements do you wish to be kept and why?

IOP does not wish to see a diminishing of the minimum entry requirements for entry to any ITE course of SCQF level

6 in English and SCQF level 5 in mathematics. IOP also does not wish a diminishing of the requirement of a

minimum of 80 SCQF credit points at level 7 including a minimum of 40 SCQF credit points at level 8 for entry into

PGDE routes, although it supports greater flexibility with regard to how these could be split across qualifications, see

question 5.

Which aspects of the entry requirements do you wish to be added and why?

could also allow greater flexibility regarding top-up courses as referred to in section 2 of the memorandum.

2. Related to 1 above, physics, together with biology and chemistry, does not have any specific requirements in

section 6 of the memorandum. Potential entrants to the PGDE Physics with Science route can have a wide

range of degree qualifications including engineering disciplines as well as a wide range of physical science

courses. There should be some leniency in how we ascribe content of engineering (and other science) degrees

to physics. Compared to applicants to ITE, it is relatively easy for practising teachers with other subject

degrees to then gain the required academic credits for an additional teaching qualification in physics through

top-up courses, such as those provided by the Open University. Given that physics ITE routes have consistently

missed Scottish Government recruitment targets for many years, IOP considers that it would be advantageous

them to also be used for career-long professional learning purposes to allow those who already meet the ITE

entrance criteria but nevertheless have gaps in their subject knowledge, such as engineers who have not

studied particle physics or astrophysics, and for those wishing to gain an additional teaching qualification in

physics.

2

3. In section 4(iii) of the memorandum there is a statement which encourages universities to expect at least one

SCQF level 5 qualification in either a modern language and/or a science subject. Prior to CfE, thanks to the

curriculum guidelines in place, it was likely that applicants would have SCQF level 5 qualifications in both a

modern language and a science. However, due to the increased flexibility allowed within CfE and the reduced

2021, 2022; Holroyd & Harlen, 1996).

4. This statement is not one asking for a change to the memorandum but raises our concerns about the lack of

appropriate provision to help address those issues discussed in the three points above. Few would argue that

those exiting ITE are fully formed expert teachers (Berliner, 2004; Kraft & Papay, 2014). This is of course why

we have continuing support through the Teacher Induction Scheme during the probationary period and a

requirement for CLPL. There is a need for high-quality subject-specific career-long professional learning. IOP

has commissioned and published reports on this, see https://www.iop.org/about/publications/subjects-

matter and

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/356459829_Subjects_Matter_for_Scotland_An_Evidence_Paper.

be viewed the other way around, the top-up courses for entrants to ITE could also be used for CLPL and allow

participants to accumulate credits counting towards a Masters degree in subject-specific pedagogy for

example. This applies equally as well in the primary sector as in secondary and a programme of high-quality

CLPL would enhance the knowledge, skills and confidence of primary teachers in the STEM subjects regardless

of ITE entrance qualifications or the content included during the limited time available in ITE courses. IOP

would support and encourage the development of a range of accredited courses and programmes which could

be used to widen access into teaching and enhance the teaching and learning of those already in the

profession. The provision of high-quality subject-specific CLPL is likely to enhance the retention of teachers

complementing any work to address recruitment in shortage subjects (Allen & Sims, 2017).

2018/19

Education Scotland. (2022).

Professional Learning in STEM: Findings from the Annual STEM Practitioner Survey

2020/21 - Early learning and childcare, primary, secondary and ASN

Holroyd, C., & Harlen, W. (1996). Primary teachers’ confidence about teaching science and technology.

Papers in Education

(3), 323–335.

Kraft, M. A., & Papay, J. P. (2014). Can Professional Environments in Schools Promote Teacher Development?

Explaining Heterogeneity in Returns to Teaching Experience.

Education Evaluation and Policy Analysis

(4),

476–500.

Which aspects of the entry requirements do you wish to be removed and why?

3

What are your views about the initial considerations gathered so far?

Theme i

IOP has no particular view on this issue but generally supports moves towards consistency and clarity.

Theme ii

IOP has no particular view on this issue but generally supports the recognition of the importance of both

qualifications and professional values in becoming a teacher.

Theme iii

IOP supports moves towards consistency and clarity.

Theme vi

IOP supports this change. Relevant and appropriate credits should be recognised and accepted whether they be

part of an undergraduate, a post-graduate degree, or a relevant ‘top-up’ course. See our response to question 5

above.

4

Questions and comments