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, we 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 we identify 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 TA Delegate outlining the compliance or quality issue
• advise the principal or TA Delegate 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 TA Delegate and employer when monitoring is no longer required.

We monitor the assessment of HALT modules as HALT Assessors and External Assessors complete them. We will address any issues by providing feedback and training to HALT Assessors and External Assessors. This ensures the assessment of HALT applications are valid, reliable and consistent with the higher level Standards.

We also have quality assurance processes in place to assure NESA recognised programs are aligned with the HALT Standards and the program application. We will provide feedback to the program provider on any areas within the 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. We advise 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 or TA Delegates 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 or TA Delegates 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 TA Delegates in pre-decision audits

Principals and TA Delegates 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 we have made the accreditation decision based on the recommendation for Proficient Teacher by principals or TA Delegates. 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 we 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 TA Delegate.

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 TA Delegate.

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 TA Delegates 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 a random selection of teachers’ Professional Development (PD) logs quarterly. This verifies that teachers are taking part in ongoing PD related to the Standards.

We conduct 2 types of audits:

• a monitoring audit where we give 6-month notice to randomly selected teachers to submit their PD log
• a compliance audit where randomly selected teachers receive a 28-day notice to submit their PD log after their maintenance of accreditation decision.

We ask teachers to either complete their PD log in eTAMS or provide their completed PD log as an attachment to an email. A NESA PD log template is available. In both cases, teachers must confirm what has been completed to us via email.

We look for the following:

• logged PD contains the required information
• logged PD is aligned to the Standards
• the NESA PD Framework supports the types of PD logged.

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

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

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

We audit the following records:

• documentary evidence submitted directly to us as part of HALT modules in 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.