Strategic Board for Teacher Education minutes: April 2025

Attendees and apologies

• Orlando Hiejmer-Mason, Scottish Government (SG)
• Zak Tuck, Scottish Government
• Laurence Findlay, Aberdeenshire Council
• Sheena Devlin, Association of Directors of Education in Scotland (ADES)
• Stuart Bain, Convention of Scottish Local Authorities (COSLA)
• Duncan Lawrie, Teacher
• Lesley Whelan, Education Scotland
• David Burgess, Education Scotland
• Anne Keenan, Educational Institute for Scotland (EIS)
• Pauline Stephen, General Teaching Council for Scotland (GTCS)
• Tara Lillis, NASUWT
• Barrie Sheppard, National Parents Forum for Scotland (NPFS)
• Graham Hutton, School Leaders Scotland (SLS)
• Zoe Robertson, Scottish Council of Deans of Education (SCDE)
• Barbara Couper, Scottish Catholic Education Service (SCES)
• Lorraine Davidson, Scottish Council for Independent Schools (SCIS)
• Seamus Searson, Scottish Secondary Teachers’ Association (SSTA)
• Khadija Mohammed, University of the West of Scotland
• Stuart Robb, Scottish Government
• David Leitch, Scottish Government
• Annabella Balloch, Scottish Government
• Emma Bunting, Scottish Government

Apologies:

• Jonathan Cunningham, Association of Heads and Depute in Scotland (AHDS)
• Archie Glen, Community Trade Union

Items and actions

Welcome and Introductions

The Chair welcomed members to the meeting.

The Chair explained that there had been a longer than usual gap between meetings, primarily due to seeking to coordinate the date with the planned summit on SBTE Workstream 3, which is now taking place on 14 May.

Item 1 - Minutes of 26 September 2024 / Matters Arising

Members suggested two updates to the minutes:

• point 5 - bullet 5. Secretariat to change ‘routes into teaching’ (which usually refers to qualifications) to ‘provision’ as a more accurate description of this element of the workstream.
• page 4 - Cab Sec noted 'focus should be on delivery of the Framework'... a suggestion that could be re-emphasised to help consider that push for resource, commitment and investment.

Action - Secretariat to update the minutes from 26 September 2024 meeting and publish on SG website.

Updates were provided on the actions from the previous meeting on 26 June 2024, as summarised in the table in Annex A.

Actions

• Workstream 2 - University of Edinburgh leading work across SCDE to gather data on issues, barriers and what attracts applicants to teaching. Report on this work to be shared with SBTE, when it is finalised.
• SG to undertake a review of the Teach in Scotland website and update as required.

Matters Arising

There were no matters arising.

Item 2 - Workstream 1 (WS1) - Workforce Planning

SG provided an overview of activity that has taken place under WS1 and a summary of key findings. Key points are summarised below:

• the intended outcome was for local and national teacher resource demands and challenges to be better understood to improve longer-term workforce planning
• challenges and opportunities of moving from the current annual workforce planning process to a longer-term approach were highlighted, including
  • engagement and data being required nationally, locally and possibly at school level
  • potential to commission further research
  • and the role of the new joint Education and Childcare Assurance Board (ECAB) in strategic workforce planning
• primary recruitment challenges were highlighted, including oversupply and difficulties in securing permanent posts
• secondary recruitment challenges were highlighted, including
  • vacancies in certain subjects being readvertised multiple times
  • schools adapting curriculum choice to available staffing
  • rurality bringing additional challenges
  • and ITE secondary intake targets not being met for the majority of subjects

This was followed by discussion, with members making a range of points:

• there was a request to hold a separate ‘insights session’ to provide an opportunity to make sense of the data presented at SBTE and gain insights into what it means
• there is likely to be ‘hidden data’ regarding secondary headteachers stopping trying to recruit in certain areas for certain subjects due to challenges filling vacancies and therefore some subjects being removed from the curriculum
  • there was a suggestion that further analysis could be done at secondary level to address this
• recruitment can’t be considered in isolation - also need to consider falling pupil rolls and configuration of the learning estate and in the context of the commitment to reduce class contact time
• concern about ‘creative solutions’ where subjects may be being delivered digitally, when there is not a contractual provision requiring such at Scottish Negotiating Committee for Teachers (SNCT). Innovation is important, however some current innovation may not comply with GTCS legal requirements
• there are inextricable links between this work and other SBTE workstreams, in particular Workstream 3 and the Teacher Education and Development Framework are part of workforce planning and shouldn’t be considered in isolation
• it was highlighted that there are inconsistencies around access to data and the need to address this locally and nationally. There is potential to do positive work around data mapping across the sector. Data sharing agreements would likely be required
• there was a question over whether this work is core to SBTE or does it sit better with other groups, such as the Teacher Workforce Planning Advisory Group or the Headteacher Recruitment and Retention Working Group
• the focus of this work can’t just be about numbers. For example the system needs to respond to what teachers are telling us they need – demonstrated by the increase in the number of induction teachers taking the flexible route (50:50 split with Teacher Induction Scheme (TIS))
• issues around supply merit further exploration. For example, some supply lists are closed to post-induction teachers and GTCS are seeing more supply teachers direct submitting their professional update, rather than going through local authority processes
• question over whether we have the right structures in place and the correct strategic connections between groups to deliver what the sector requires. For example, the workforce planning process currently doesn’t provide Initial Teacher Education (ITE) targets before UCAS deadlines
• SLS highlighted a survey they have undertaken regarding shortage subjects, with a third of vacancies being in English and Maths, which impacts on the curriculum and attainment
• it was highlighted that there is an increase in Additional Support Needs (ASN) in schools, and an upward trend in issues around behaviour in schools and these are an important part of the context when mapping teacher education and taking a strategic overview
• we shouldn’t be paralysed by not having all the coherent, consistent data we require. This should be the outcome but we can’t wait on having this to make strategic decisions to move forward
• Chair reflected on appetite and energy around this work. It is clear there is the need to explore data gaps and a need for greater coherence on how the various workstreams, groups and structures fit together. We also need to consider if SBTE is the place for broader workforce strategy        

Actions

• Workstream 1 - Secretariat to set up an ‘insights session’ to provide an opportunity to make sense of the data presented at SBTE and gain insights into what it means. Session to be held soon, invite open to all SBTE members, and opportunity for members to contribute additional data in advance
• SLS to share with the Secretariat, a report of survey regarding shortage subjects when it is finalised

Item 3 - Workstream 3 (WS3) - Framework for Teacher Education and Development

WS3 leads provided an overview of the workstream:

• over the past two years we have worked together as a group, including stakeholder workshops, to consider what a Teacher Education and Development Framework could look like
• led to development of a draft Framework (included in papers today), with a 2-page executive summary
• this is a long-term, focussed piece of work, which we have decide, as a system, we’re committed to do
• the shorter paper sets out a table of priorities, in a suggested logical order. Some of these priorities are significant pieces of work in their own right and will require workplans, lead agencies or bodies to take them forward

This was followed by discussion, with members making a range of points:

• comment regarding priority 2 re developing and exploring a programme of support and flagged the leadership and mentoring programme for Black and Minority Ethnic (BAME) teachers and potential research around this and suggestion it would be good to see this work reflected under priority 2
• the role of professional associations and SNCT should be reflected in the paper. Also that proposals are predicated on the need for resourcing, teachers having time to engage and the goodwill of the workforce
• early and clear communication with the workforce will be important, particularly when there are already concerns about workload. Benefits will require to be emphasises this can’t be change for the sake of change
• a next phase of the work will be on who leads the various elements and what the roles of existing groups and structures are, such as SNCT
  • WS3 leads keen to pick up resourcing points with SG
  • there is also a need for an engagement /  communications plan to sit alongside the Framework. This is a significant piece of work

• reflection that there was support for the key phases of the Framework when discussed at ADES and also when sense-checked with small groups of headteachers in Aberdeenshire
• some members welcomed the Framework, particularly the mapping of career phases and reiterated the challenge of teachers having time to engage, alongside all other demands on their time. When marketed it needs to be presented as being supportive to staff, rather than another demand
• WS3 leads reflected on some of the key themes. There is a need for more mapping and making connections to other work, such as that highlighted by University of West of Scotland. It will be important to consider how to share the Framework with other key groups and to ensure that the benefits and opportunities are highlighted
• work is required to understand financial implications and potential to use current budgets differently to support this work. Also important to identify organisational leads to take ownership of the priorities within the paper

Actions

• Members to provide written feedback to the Secretariat, on the Workstream 3 paper and the priorities
• Workstream 3 leads to reflect on feedback. Consider next steps, identify leads for priorities, look to publish Framework and share with other key education strategy / reform boards and groups

Item 4 - Centre for Teaching Excellence (CfTE)

Viki Kelly, SG Education Reform, and Professor Margery McMahon, University of Glasgow joined the meeting. They presented an overview of the CfTE, key points included:

• core purpose is to support pedagogical development, working with teachers to develop connections between research and evidence
• CfTE co-designed with teachers, unions professional associations and other bodies, to develop the aim and objectives
• a focus on creating a digital infrastructure that underpins the CfTE, and creating a platform to support professional learning at scale
• next steps include continued engagement with profession to identify areas of research focus, developing core locations, including planning for thematic hub areas, and working on the official launch of the centre

The Chair highlighted the close connections between the CfTE and the work of SBTE, particularly around Workstream 3 and how important it will be to strengthen this connection moving forward.

Item 5 - Any other business (AOB)

Members flagged that they had questions regarding the Education and Childcare Assurance Board (ECAB) and were disappointed this had been removed from the agenda due to a lack of time. Concerns that the ECAB could be interpreted as government and employers removing themselves from tripartite bargaining forum in order to make decisions.

Action - ECAB to be included on agenda for next SBTE meeting

Members asked for an update on the review of the TIS. SG updated that advice is with the Cabinet Secretary and can update members when there is further information.

Members suggested that 1.5 hours was insufficient time to get through the business of the SBTE and that future meetings should be longer to ensure there is time for full and detailed engagement and discussion on each agenda item.

Action - future SBTE meetings to allow enough time for a full discussion on all agenda items. Secretariat to issue a doodle poll for an in-person or hybrid meeting before school summer holidays

Date of future meetings

23 June 2025

SBTE Secretariat

May 2025