Quality assurance

Where there is a pattern of the recommendations for Proficient Teacher not being consistent with quality benchmark criteria or not meeting the requirements, we may monitor the school’s or service’s accreditation recommendation processes for a period of time and provide support where appropriate. If a school or service is identified for monitoring, NESA will review all recommendations before making a decision.

Our monitoring measures include:

• providing initial feedback to a school or service about specific areas where compliance with or quality of teacher accreditation recommendations could be improved
• providing time and opportunities for the school or service to address the areas identified for improvement
• providing subsequent feedback to the school or service about their progress and improvement in the identified areas.

We will advise the school or service when monitoring is no longer required.

Where NESA identifies a compliance or quality issue with a recommendation for Proficient Teacher we will:

• review all relevant documentation related to the teacher accreditation recommendation and may seek additional information from the school or service
• provide written feedback to the principal or service director outlining the compliance or quality issue
• advise the principal or service director and employer of the period of monitoring that may be implemented for all teacher accreditation recommendations
• provide written feedback on progress and improvement during the monitoring period on recommendations completed
• advise the principal or service director and employer when monitoring is no longer required.

NESA monitors the assessment of HALT modules on an ongoing basis as HALT Assessors and External Assessors complete them. NESA will address any identified issues by providing relevant feedback and training to HALT Assessors and/or External Assessors to ensure the assessment of HALT applications are valid, reliable and are consistent with the Standards at the higher levels.

NESA also has quality assurance processes in place to assure NESA recognised programs are aligned with the HALT Standards and the program application, and will provide feedback to the program provider on any areas within the recognised program that needs development.

There are 3 types of audits that may be conducted before an accreditation decision is made:

1. Random selection of submitted applications based on pre-set parameters. Learn more about our pre-decision audits below.
2. Random selected schools. NESA advises the schools selected the year before that their teacher accreditation records and recommendations for Proficient Teacher will be audited based on audit criteria during the year.
3. Schools identified for monitoring through previous audit findings or school registration inspections that do not show compliance with teacher accreditation requirements.

Pre-decision audits

We randomly select Proficient Teacher applications before making an accreditation decision. Our audit findings do not restrict teachers from teaching. The vast majority of the selected samples demonstrated practice at Proficient Teacher in our past audits.

During a pre-decision audit we:

• determine whether the randomly selected applications meet accreditation requirements in line with the TA Manual
• notify principals and teachers of the pre-decision audit outcome. If our audit finds that a teacher has not met the requirements for Proficient Teacher accreditation, they will need to revise and resubmit their application. However, this resubmission will not affect their ability to teach.
• work closely with principals who are supporting supervisors, and their teachers who need to resubmit.

Audit criteria

When auditing Proficient Teacher applications before making a decision, we look at the following criteria:

• the submitted documentary evidence accurately reflects the practice described in the selected Proficient Teacher Standard Descriptors
• application of practice at Proficient Teacher is visible in the documentary evidence
• examples of the impact of practice on student/child learning are included in the collection of documentary evidence
• annotations clearly explain how the documentary evidence demonstrates the practice described in the selected Standard Descriptors
• annotations clearly explain how the practice impacted on student/child learning relevant to the selected Standard Descriptors.
• examples of professional reflection are included in the collection of documentary evidence and/or the annotation(s).
• the observation report describes practice against the selected Proficient Teacher Standard Descriptors.

The important role of principals and service directors in pre-decision audits

Principals and service directors have an important role to play in pre-decision audits. Their knowledge and understanding of each teacher’s practice is vital in helping teachers should they need to resubmit their application.

We strongly encourage discussing our feedback with teachers and their Accreditation Supervisor. Our past audits have found that teachers often need the most support with:

• annotations that clearly explain how the documentary evidence demonstrates the practice described in the selected Standard Descriptors
• where examples of the impact of their practice on student/child learning are included in the collection of documentary evidence.

Our research on characteristics of effective documentary evidence helped establish a benchmark for practice at Proficient Teacher. This research may help you in supporting your teachers.

Schools or services will be included in risk-based audits of selected records after NESA has made the accreditation decision based on the recommendation for Proficient Teacher by principals or service directors. These risks could be informed by:

• previous recommendations that did not demonstrate the characteristics of effective documentary evidence benchmarks
• an identified pattern of accreditation recommendations that puts at risk fairness, validity or reliability
• issues raised as a consequence of an inspection NESA completed.

The outcome of a risk-based audit will not impact the accreditation status of individual teachers. However, we will share audit findings with the relevant stakeholders including the principal or service director.

We conduct a quarterly audit of a stratified randomised sample of records submitted across all schools or services. Data includes a representative proportion of records from early childhood, primary and secondary teachers from the follow sectors:

• NSW Government
• NSW Non-government Independent
• NSW Non-government Systemic
• Early childhood.

The outcome of the audit will not impact the accreditation status of individual teachers. However, we will share audit findings with the relevant stakeholders including the principal or service director.

Our annual audit reports include audit criteria.

We audit Proficient Teacher accreditation records in the teachers’ NESA online account (eTAMS) to determine whether the accreditation requirements are being met. This includes checking that:

• teachers’ practice meets the Standards for Proficient Teacher
• principals or service directors are making recommendations in line with the TA Manual within the required timeframe
• feedback and support is provided to teachers whose teaching practice is not consistent with the Standards before the end of their accreditation timeframe.

Records we audit include:

• annotated documentary evidence
• observation reports
• feedback to the teacher which has been provided through the teacher’s eTAMS account
• Accreditation Supervisor declarations.

We audit teachers' PD logs to determine whether the maintenance of accreditation requirements are being met.

We will request PD records from selected teachers who submitted their maintenance to determine that their log complies with the requirements set out in the TA Manual.

Teachers must retain their PD log for up to 12 months after they submit their maintenance of accreditation.

NESA audits HALT accreditation records in the teachers’ NESA online account (eTAMS) or documentation provided by providers of NESA recognised programs to determine whether the requirements in relation to accreditation are being met, including that:

• HALT Assessors and External Assessors are making valid, reliable and consistent assessment decisions on the basis of the HALT assessment criteria
• feedback provided in the HALT Module Reports is consistent with assessment decisions
• NESA recognised program(s) is coherent with the program application from the program provider.

We audit the following records:

• documentary evidence submitted directly to NESA as part of the modules through the teacher’s eTAMS account
• HALT Assessors' Module Reports
• External Assessors' Site Visit Reports
• examples of evidence that have been developed by participants of a NESA recognised program.

We audit teachers’ PD logs to determine whether the requirements in relation to maintenance of accreditation are being met.

We will request PD logs from selected teachers who have submitted their maintenance to determine that the log complies with the requirements set out in the TA Manual.

Teachers must retain their PD log for up to 12 months after they submit their maintenance of accreditation.