(Also known as Codes of Practice)

�

�

WHAT SHOULD THEY DEAL WITH?

�

One might reasonably expect a code of practice to concern itself with:

�

�

�

Relationship with students

�

�

�

�

This might concern bullying, harassment and inappropriate behaviour; fair and inclusive treatment; provision of reliable and valid information regarding relevant practices & processes; competent transfer of knowledge & skills; academic and personal tutorial support.

�

�

�

Relationship with colleagues

�

�

�

�

This might concern sharing accurate information regarding procedures and processes; establishing a supportive and collaborative environment; respect for intellectual property.

�

�

�

Relationship with employing organisation

�

�

�

�

This might concern Quality Assured processes (relating to such matters as: timekeeping, record keeping, learning delivery, assessment practice, reporting, inclusion, differentiation, sustainability, etc.)

�

It should also be borne in mind that the relationship between tutor and organisation is two-way.� The tutor has a right to expect, amongst other things: appropriate and reliable information; efficient administrative support for themselves and their students; timely and adequate training.

�

�

�

Relationship with the Professional body, other National bodies and the public.

�

�

�

�

This might concern readiness to comply with reasonable requests relating to upholding the principles of the Code of Practice (and providing evidence of such).

�

�

�

�

It might also be reasonable to expect the Code to concern itself with �academic standards� (relating to competence, expertise and currency of subject specialism) as well as with �standards of teaching and learning� (relating to competence, expertise and currency of teaching practice and pedagogy.)

�

�

�

HOW MUCH DETAIL?

�

If the detail is too prescriptive then �codes of conduct� become not �guiding principles� but �sets of rules�.� As such, they would appear to detract from the concept of �professionalism�.

�

There is a temptation for regulation to become too detailed (particularly that set by employing bodies � who are rightly concerned with establishing credibility with accrediting and inspection agencies).� �Over fussy� regulation (often justified as part of the employing organisation�s QA processes) can become obtrusive.� It is the constant complaint of the FE tutor that there is too much �paperwork�.� This can sour the relationship between �tutors� and their �bosses�.� More importantly, it can have a knock on effect for the tutors� self perception � causing them to view themselves not so much as conscientious practitioners but as mere cogs in a machine.� This does little to promote an ethos of �professionalism�.

�

An example might be the number of hours of CPD that tutors/trainers are expected to undertake in order to maintain their academic and pedagogic currency.� Whereas there can be no arguing with the fact that CPD is an essential constituent of ongoing professionalism, attempts to stipulate �how much� � especially in terms of �hours� � undermine the tutor�s professional judgement.� Anyone who has attended training events (of whatever kind in whatever context) will acknowledge that the number of hours� attendance bears little relation to the quality and usefulness of the training.� Similarly, the amount of time spent in private research bears little relation to the usefulness of the results.� Any such attempts to quantify qualitative concepts will fall short � and once again will undermine the tutor�s professional judgement.

�

Hours and hours spent trawling through dry, academic tomes might yield little that is useful or usable.� On the other hand, a single hour reading a knowledgeable and incisive journal article could challenge and shape a lifetime of practice.

�

�

WHO POLICES THE CODE?

�

It has been suggested that one of the marks of professionalism is �self regulation� � but what is meant by that?

�

It could be argued that colleges & training organisations are ideally placed to ensure that their employees adhere to the appropriate Code of Conduct.� However, where there were instances of dispute this would place them in an untenable position.

�

Whereas it can be argued that individual teachers are capable of demonstrating professionalism individually - many of them setting and upholding standards "above and beyond" what can reasonably be expected - it has to be acknowledged that not all teaching staff are as capable or as conscientious.� Hence, it is necessary to establish an independent professional body to be responsible for "self-regulation."

�

Such a body will earn the respect of the professionals it represents and regulates only if it can demonstrate that it truly does represent the interests of the profession as a whole and not merely those of their paymasters.� The regulatory body must also be seen as being constituted of practising professionals.� Once it is perceived to be "yet another bureaucratic organisation" administered by "suits", it will cease to be effective because it will lose credibility.

�

�

TRAINING & DEVELOPMENT AGENCY FOR SCHOOLS (TDA)

�

�

�

N.B. TDA was superseded by the Teaching Agency in 2012

�

The "Code of Conduct and Practice for Registered Teachers" developed by the General Teaching Council for England (GTCE) states that registered teachers:

�

�

�

�

1. Put the wellbeing, development and progress of children and young people first.

�

2. Take responsibility for maintaining the quality of their teaching practice

�

3. Help children and young people to become confident and successful learners

�

4. Demonstrate respect for diversity and promote equality

�

5. Strive to establish productive partnerships with parents and carers

�

6. Work as part of a whole-school team

�

7. Co-operate with other professional colleagues

�

8. Demonstrate honesty and integrity and uphold public trust and confidence in the teaching profession

�

�

The resultant Code elaborated on these principles.

�

�

INSTITUTE FOR LEARNING (IfL)

�

�

�

Click here for IfL Code of Professional Practice webpage

Click here for IfL Code of Practice (pdf)

�

�

�

The IfL Code of Conduct lists 7 "behaviours" expected of members.

�

�

�

�

Behaviour 1: PROFESSIONAL INTEGRITY

�

The members shall:

1. meet their professional responsibilities consistent with the Institute�s Professional Values;

2. use reasonable professional judgement when discharging differing responsibilities and obligations to learners, colleagues, institution and the wider profession;

3. uphold the reputation of the profession by never unjustly or knowingly damaging the professional reputation of another or furthering their own position unfairly at the expense of another;

4. comply with all reasonable assessment and quality procedures and obligations;

5. uphold the standing and reputation of the Institute and not knowingly undermine or misrepresent its views nor their Institute membership, any qualification or professional status.

�

�

�

�

Behaviour 2: RESPECT

�

The members shall at all times:

1. respect the rights of learners and colleagues in accordance with relevant legislation and organisation requirements;

2. act in a manner which recognises diversity as an asset and does not discriminate in respect of race, gender, disability and/or learning difficulty, age, sexual orientation or religion and belief.

�

�

�

�

Behaviour 3: REASONABLE CARE

�

The members shall take reasonable care to ensure the safety and welfare of learners and comply with relevant statutory provisions to support their well-being and development.

�

�

�

�

Behaviour 4: PROFESSIONAL PRACTICE

�

The members shall provide evidence to the Institute that they have complied with the current Institute CPD policy and guidelines.

�

�

�

�

Behaviour 5: CRIMINAL OFFENCE DISCLOSURE

�

Any member shall notify the Institute as soon as practicable after cautioning or conviction for a criminal offence. The Institute reserves the right to act on such information through its disciplinary process.

�

�

�

�

Behaviour 6: RESPONSIBILITY DURING INSTITUTE INVESTIGATIONS

�

A member shall use their best endeavours to assist in any investigation and shall not seek to dissuade, penalise or discourage a person from bringing a complaint against any member, interfere with or otherwise compromise due process.

�

�

�

�

Behaviour 7: RESPONSIBILITY TO THE INSTITUTE

�

The members shall at all times act in accordance with the Institute�s conditions of membership which will be subject to change from time to time.

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�

�