Portfolio Task 3 – Standard 3

The Quality Teaching Framework (QTF) consists of three domains with

characteristics of authentic and productive pedagogy. The QTF is based upon
education that embraces significance, intellectual quality and quality learning
environments, which pedagogically astute teachers strongly value. The simplicity
and guidance of the framework has given teachers a foundation and reference point
on which to reflect upon when teaching. This perhaps explains the acceptance of
such a framework when introduced fifteen years ago. The QTF now accompanies
the Australian Professional Standards for Teachers (APST) as a form of reflection.
Significance affects the contemporary teacher by ensuring that all teaching is
planned around students’ prior understandings of the world, their cultural
backgrounds and integrates knowledge across the curriculum and into their real
world (Lembke, 2018). Teaching is not simply transferring new knowledge to
children, as though they are currently uninformed. Children are experts, learners and
sharers. Therefore, it is vital to allow students the opportunity to voice and discuss
their understandings whether correct or incorrect. Students can then construct their
learning and gain a sense of agency. Significance results.
Intellectual quality consists of six elements centred around knowledge,
thinking, metalanguage and communication. It aims to provide academic rigour for all
students, regardless of their diversity. Deep knowledge and understanding of content
are imperative when advocating for higher order thinking. If a teacher lacks
knowledge about a topic, limitations are placed on students in their construction and
enquiry of the subject. Lacking understanding and confidence about mathematics
content in a past practicum caused students confusion and the lesson was limited.
Therefore, thorough topic review and planning must be implemented into all lessons.
Quality learning environments result from the framework domains. A safe and
positive environment results from positive relationships accompanied by high
expectations, productivity and support (New South Wales Department of Education
and Training, 2003).
QTF is a reflective tool to help reach the APSTs therefore, they are integrated
and overlap in many aspects. The APST involves seven standards and thirty-seven
focus areas. It would be easy for pre-service and experienced teachers to become
overwhelmed with the expectations of the standards. Perhaps this explains the
resistance from the teaching community toward the introduction of the standards,
over a decade ago. The standards have, however, proven successful in providing a
framework for knowledge, practice and professional engagement. The standards
also provide a language that can be called upon to discuss teaching practice and
analysis, particularly amongst colleagues (Loughland & Ellis, 2016). Teachers have
also used the standards as structure for reflection upon their work. Thus, acceptance
has developed over time.
The aim for pre-service teachers is to work toward meeting the APSTs in
preparation for transition to the profession (Hudson, Hudson, Weatherby-Fell &
Shipway, 2016). Knowing students, content, successful implementation, learning
environments, assessment and engaging with learning opportunities cover the
elements of both the QTF and APSTs. All of which begin once a pre-service teacher
begins their studies and continues over the life of their career. Hence, lifelong
learning, planning and implementation must be embraced, as required by APST
Standard 3.
An in-depth evaluation by The Australian Institution for Teaching and School
Leadership (AITSL) indicates that successful implementation of the APSTs requires
a positive attitude, awareness, use and intentions. It reveals that pre-service primary
teachers and less experienced primary teachers hold the most positive attitudes to
the APSTs (Australian Institute for Teaching and School Leadership and The
University of Melbourne, 2016). Therefore, all teachers must work towards similar
fresh positive attitudes, awareness and intent on utilising and reflecting upon the
frameworks to create successful quality teaching. A repertoire of evidence based on
the application of the frameworks and standards can then be built upon. Such
accountability will assist during accreditation and registration of quality teaching.

References

Australian Institute for Teaching and School Leadership and The University of
Melbourne. (2016). Final Report – Evaluation of the Australian Professional
Standards for Teachers (pp. 2, 3, 8). Melbourne, Victoria. Retrieved from
 https://www.aitsl.edu.au/docs/default-source/default-document-library/final-
report-of-the-evaluation-of-the-apst.pdf?sfvrsn=428aec3c_0

Hudson, S., Hudson, P., Weatherby-Fell, N., & Shipway, B. (2016). Graduate
Standards for Teachers: Final-year Preservice Teachers Potentially Identify
the Gaps. Australian Journal Of Teacher Education, 41(9), 135. Retrieved
from http://ro.ecu.edu.au/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3352&context=ajte

Lembke, C. (2018). Introduction to the Quality Teaching Framework (QTF)

and the Australian Professional Standards for Teachers. Lecture,
https://learn.scu.edu.au/webapps/bb-collaborate-
BB5b0cce5304466/recording/play?course_id=_140126_1&recordingId=62112
60&recordingFormat=1.

Loughland, T., & Ellis, N. J. (2016). Australian Professional Standards for Teachers
are useful to teacher education students, here’s how [Blog].
Retrieved from http://www.aare.edu.au/blog/?p=1857

New South Wales Department of Education and Training. (2003). Quality

teaching in NSW public schools (p. 9). Sydney, New South Wales:
Department of Education and Training Professional Support and Curriculum
Directorate.