Introduction

The Guidelines for the accreditation of initial teacher education programs in Australia (Guidelines) support the Accreditation of initial teacher education programs in Australia: Standards and procedures (Accreditation Standards and Procedures).

The Australian Institute for Teaching and School Leadership (AITSL) published the Guidelines, which set out the:

• design, implementation and accreditation of initial teacher education (ITE) programs
• requirements for nationally accredited ITE programs
• conditions and supporting evidence required for national accreditation
• templates that providers must complete
• evaluation criteria for accreditation panellists (panellists).

The Guidelines:

• promote consistent assessment and rigour in the accreditation process
• support transparent and consistent accreditation processes across all jurisdictions.

The Guidelines apply to providers, panellists and teacher regulatory authorities.

For providers, the Guidelines:

• support providers to meet the National Program Standards outlined in the Accreditation Standards and Procedures
• are the basis for a provider’s application for accreditation
• describe the requirements and conditions all ITE providers must meet for program accreditation
• provide standardised application templates
• outline what evidence is needed to show compliance with the National Program Standards.

For panellists, the Guidelines:

• establish evaluation criteria for program assessment
• outline the types of evidence and further matters to consider for each National Program Standard
• guide informed decision-making against the National Program Standards.

For teacher regulatory authorities, the Guidelines:

• help make assessment procedures consistent nationwide
• establish minimum quality requirements
• promote transparency across all jurisdictions.

Flexibility, diversity and innovation are key principles underpinning the accreditation process. Providers are encouraged to be innovative in the delivery of programs to meet the diverse needs of pre-service teachers and the profession. The Accreditation Standards and Procedures and the Guidelines are therefore not intended to constrain the ability of providers to be innovative or to regulate their provision of higher education.

Accreditation process and stages

The Accreditation Standards and Procedures underpins accreditation for all ITE programs in Australia. The key components of accreditation are:

• the Australian Professional Standards for Teachers (Graduate level)
• core content
• teaching performance assessment.

ITE programs must:

• address these key components
• meet the 5 National Program Standards set out in the Accreditation Standards and Procedures.

Process

The Accreditation Standards and Procedures set out a nationally consistent process including

The procedures are on page 40, with elaborations to help complete the accreditation process.

Who	The teacher regulatory authority in each state and territory is responsible for accrediting ITE programs with trained accreditation panels. The accreditation process applies to all providers (self-accrediting and non-self-accrediting). Self-accrediting/legislative providers have the authority to accredit their own courses of study. They are: - established by law - governed by the Higher Education Support Act 2003 - registered by Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency (TEQSA). Non-self-accrediting providers do not have this authority. TEQSA must accredit and register these providers’ courses. Non-self-accrediting providers may be asked to provide evidence of TEQSA approval of courses submitted for professional accreditation by a TRA.
When	Program accreditation is cyclical, with accreditation periods not exceeding five years and undertaken in two stages. Where there are out-of-cycle extensions and changes, TRAs will notify AITSL of any extensions to the accreditation period and the reasons for the extension.
What	Providers must make sure that programs comply with the: - Accreditation Standards and Procedures - current Higher education standards framework (Threshold Standards) under the Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency Act 2011 (TEQSA Act 2011) and the Education Services for Overseas Students Act 2000.

Stages

Accreditation has 2 stages: Stage one and Stage two. It focuses on ITE program development, delivery, outcomes and improvement, with an emphasis on showing impact and continuous improvement during and at the end of an accreditation period.

Stage one applies to new programs that are being accredited for the first time. It explains what the program will do when it is accredited. Existing programs that have undergone significant change may also be reaccredited under Stage one.

Stage two applies to a program that has previously been accredited. It includes the providers’ analysis and interpretation of the evidence that they have collected over the program’s life.

Providers report yearly to support quality assurance measures and inform Stage two accreditation.

The National Program Standards apply to both accreditation stages. Stage two focuses on evidence of outcomes and continuous improvement. Accreditation at both stages is granted under the relevant regulatory scheme in each jurisdiction.

New or significantly changed programs

Providers must consult with the relevant regulatory authority to determine if the program is ‘new’. Providers must submit new programs for Stage one accreditation. A program may be new if the program meets one or more of the following conditions:

• significant changes to learning outcomes, structure, rationale
• significant changes to unit design, including replacement of units, core or otherwise
• the program is unable to transfer pre-service teachers from the original program into the new program
• the program is labelled as new in a review – this can be internally by the provider or externally by TEQSA
• the program is submitted for accreditation for the first time.

Preparing a Stage one application

Stage one applications must meet program and teaching standards. The evidence providers must submit covers all the National Program Standards and Teacher Standards (Graduate level). It can include:

• program maps
• unit outlines
• examples or descriptions of key assessments used to show impact on student learning
• citations of research used to inform program development, design and delivery
• the provider’s policy outlining selection criteria and entry procedures
• program structure (map or table) showing how the program covers the required content
• professional experience handbooks
• descriptions of how to collect, analyse and evaluate data, and how the results may be used to improve the program.

Providers will use the templates to complete their applications. The following table explains how each template assists providers in showing that they meet the:

• National Program Standards
• Teacher Standards (Graduate level)
• core content
• impact requirements.

	Which template to use	What it does
1	Application cover sheet (Template 1)	Contains high-level information about the program.
2	National Program Standards matrix (Template 2)	Shows where to find the evidence for each National Program Standard in the application.
3	Teacher Standards (Graduate level) matrix (Template 3)	Maps the evidence in the application against each of the Teacher Standards (Graduate level) in line with National Program Standard 2.1.
4	Plan for demonstrating impact (Template 4)	Describes pre-service teacher performance and graduate outcome measures that the provider will: - collect - report - use to show a program’s impact during and at the end of an accreditation period - use to develop and answer questions about improving that program. National Program Standards 5.1 and 5.2 describe the requirements for this template.
5	Stage two report (Template 5)	Applies to Stage two applications and synthesises evidence providers have analysed and interpreted.
6	Core content matrix (Template 6)	Maps evidence against each core content area in line with National Program Standard 2.2. Shows where to find the evidence for each core content area in the application. Helps providers address all core content areas.

Preparing a Stage two application

Stage two is for providers seeking reaccreditation. Once a program has been successfully accredited for Stage one it should not go through another Stage one accreditation. Providers will submit all subsequent reaccreditations for that same program for Stage two accreditation.

Stage two applications are the continuation of an existing accreditation and focus on improving programs and assuring program quality by collecting, analysing and interpreting evidence about a program’s impact as outlined in the previous Plan for demonstrating impact (Template 4). The impact statements from this plan will guide what evidence providers choose to show program impact in their Stage two applications.

In Stage two, providers must:

• provide only evidence for National Program Standards if the evidence has changed since the previous accreditation period
• document, evaluate, analyse and interpret data about the impact statements in the previous Plan for demonstrating impact (Template 4) from the accreditation period
• identify strengths, program changes, innovations and planned improvements based on this evidence in the Stage two report (Template 5).

Applications will include:

• pre-service teacher performance, evidence collected during the program
• graduate outcomes, achievements after learners complete the program.

The Stage two report (Template 5) outlines the interpretation of evidence used to show the program’s impact and support any proposed changes.

The following table explains what providers, panels and teacher regulatory authorities must consider when developing or assessing an application for Stage two accreditation.

None

Is the evidence in the application targeted towards supporting the Stage two report (Template 5)? Does it show any changes to how the provider meets the National Program Standards?

Does the provider’s interpretation of their data about the program’s impact support ongoing improvement and quality assurance? Does the previous Plan for demonstrating impact (Template 4) identify the data in the:

• impact statements
• data framework table?

Does the provider outline any unexpected challenges or associated impacts that are not in their previous Plan for demonstrating impact (Template 4)?

Does the provider include reporting data from the nationally consistent, transparent indicators?

Does the provider interpret and evaluate qualitative and quantitative data from the accreditation period? Does the provider coherently describe how they responded to challenges and used the data to inform new initiatives or develop/implement new ideas?

Does annual reporting from the previous accreditation period contribute directly to the application?

At Stage two, accreditation panels do not reassess previous accreditation decisions or decisions approved through annual reporting or other approval processes. The teacher regulatory authority will have been informed about the changes to the program during the previous accreditation period.

About the Guidelines

The Guidelines detail the elements for each National Program Standard and give further information to guide the selection, preparation and assessment of evidence providers use to meet these standards.

Elements:

Guidance for the preparation, submission and assessment of evidence in an accreditation application

Elements requiring verification:

Elements of the National Program Standard that must be present in the evidence provided

Elements requiring professional judgement:

Questions that must be considered in assessing whether the National Program Standard is met

Additional information:

Additional information to guide the preparation, submission, and assessment of the evidence provided in an accreditation application

Supporting evidence:

Evidence that could contribute to meeting the National Program Standard’s requirements (beside the mandatory evidence)

Further considerations:

Any further information needed to guide the preparation and assessment of accreditation applications

Templates for providers to complete

Stage one and Stage two applications have templates that providers must complete and include with their applications.

Note: The Stage two report (Template 5) only applies at Stage two of the accreditation process.

Template	Stage One	Stage Two
1 Application cover sheet	The Application cover sheet contains high-level information about the program. The Dean or Dean’s representative signs it. The teacher regulatory authority will publish some of this information on its website when it makes an accreditation decision for a program.
2 National Program Standards matrix	Providers use the National Program Standards matrix to map the evidence in their application against each of the National Program Standards. Panellists assess the matrix using the elements requiring verification and professional judgement.	Providers use the National Program Standards matrix to map the evidence in their application against only the National Program Standards being addressed. Panellists assess the matrix using the elements requiring verification and professional judgement.
3 Teacher Standards (Graduate level) matrix	Providers use the Teacher Standards (Graduate level) matrix to map the evidence in their application against each of the Teacher Standards (Graduate level), in line with National Program Standard 2.1. Panellists assess the matrix using the elements requiring verification and professional judgement for National Program Standard 2.1.	If the evidence has changed, providers use the Teacher Standards (Graduate level) matrix to map the evidence in their application against the relevant Teacher Standards (Graduate level). Panellists assess the matrix using the elements requiring verification and professional judgement for National Program Standard 2.1.
4 Plan for demonstrating impact	Providers use the Plan for demonstrating impact to describe how they will show the program’s impact over the accreditation period. This includes impacts on pre-service teacher performance and graduate outcomes measures. Panellists review the plan using the elements requiring verification and professional judgement for National Program Standard 5.1.	Future Plan for demonstrating impact Providers must submit a new or updated future Plan for demonstrating impact for the next accreditation period. Panellists review the future plan using the elements requiring verification and professional judgement for National Program Standard 5.1. Previous Plan for demonstrating impact Providers must submit the previous Plan for demonstrating impact from the previous accreditation period. Panellists use the previous plan to support the assessment of the Stage two report (Template 5).

Templates for providers to complete (Cont.)

Template	Stage One	Stage Two
5 Stage two report	Not applicable at Stage one.	Providers use the Stage two report to synthesise the evidence they have analysed and interpreted into a coherent evaluation. Providers compare their evidence with the previous Plan for demonstrating impact (Template 4) to: - identify the program’s strengths - highlight areas for improvement - identify any gaps in achieving the required program outcomes. The report covers the previous accreditation period and impact statements. Panellists assess the Stage two report using the elements requiring verification and professional judgement for National Program Standard 5.2.
6 Core content matrix	Providers use the Core content matrix to map the evidence in their application against the core content in line with National Program Standard 2.2. Panellists assess the matrix using the elements requiring verification for National Program Standard 2.2.	If the evidence has changed, providers use the Core content matrix to map the evidence in their application against the core content in line with National Program Standard 2.2. Panellists assess the matrix using the elements requiring verification for National Program Standard 2.2.

Framework to support ITE accreditation

Panel training

AITSL runs a national program, Becoming an ITE panellist. It equips panellists to make assessments against the National Program Standards using the Guidelines, including:

• becoming familiar with the Standards and Procedures that underpin the accreditation process
• structuring panel discussions and decisions
• supporting consistent judgements when assessing accreditation applications.

Annual reporting

This is a process of ongoing data collection for providers to:

• identify, investigate and address issues
• inform Stage two accreditation.

Templates

The templates included in the Guidelines help providers to present and organise evidence and panels to assess evidence against the National Program Standards:

• Template 1: Application cover sheet
• Template 2: National Program Standards matrix
• Template 3: Teacher Standards (Graduate level) matrix
• Template 4: Plan for demonstrating impact
• Template 5: Stage two report
• Template 6: Core content matrix

National accreditation process quality framework

National evaluation of:

• accreditation decision-making process
• consistency of decision-making.

National Program Standards

The National Program Standards describe what high-quality ITE programs must do across:

1. program rationale and structure

2. program design

3. program entry

4. professional experience

5. program outcomes and reporting.

National Program Standard 1: Program Rationale and Structure

1.1 Rationale and sequence

	Elements and further information	Details
	National Program Standard	The program development, design and delivery are based on: a. a documented evidence-based rationale of how the program will develop effective teachers who: i. meet the Teacher Standards (Graduate level) ii. successfully meet the learning outcomes and address the focus areas of the core content in Schedule 1 b. a coherent and sequenced delivery of program content (including professional experience, curriculum and pedagogical studies) that enables achievement of the Teacher Standards (Graduate level).
	Elements requiring verification	The evidence includes: a. a program rationale b. an evidence base for the program rationale c. a sequence for the delivery of program content.
	Elements requiring professional judgement	a. Has the rationale been informed by an authoritative evidence base, including peer-reviewed research and frequently cited research? b. Does the evidence base inform a program that will develop effective teachers who meet the Teacher Standards (Graduate level)? c. Does the evidence base inform a program that will develop effective teachers who meet the learning outcomes and focus areas of the core content? d. Is there coherent sequencing and alignment between professional experience, curriculum and pedagogical studies? e. Does the program rationale address all offered modes of delivery? f. Does the program rationale address professional experience for all offered modes of delivery?

🔍	Supporting evidence	• Program sequence (map or table) - Citations of research used to inform program development, design and delivery - Summary of graduate outcomes, including from previous or related programs and how this evidence has influenced program development - Completed Core content matrix (Template 6) - Completed Teacher Standard (Graduate level) matrix (Template 3)
❓	Further considerations	None

1.2 Developments and stakeholder perspectives

	Elements and further information	Details
	National Program Standard	The program design and delivery takes account of: a. contemporary and emerging developments in education, curriculum requirements, research, community expectations, local employer and national system needs, including workforce demands for teaching specialisations b. the perspectives of stakeholders such as: - employers - professional teacher bodies - practising teachers - relevant cultural and community experts.
	Elements requiring verification	The evidence identifies inputs into developing the program, including: a. approved curriculum covered in the program (for example, Australian, state/territory, system) b. stakeholder consultation.
	Elements requiring professional judgement	Does the program’s design and delivery address these elements: a. contemporary and emerging developments in education b. local employer and national system needs c. workforce demands, including teaching specialisations d. community expectations e. stakeholder needs (for example, employers, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander groups, community groups)? Does the program’s design and delivery consider relevant stakeholders’ perspectives?
	Supporting evidence	• Analysis of contemporary research, reports and policies about program development - Description of teaching specialisations in the program and reasons for including them - Evidence that specialisations on offer focus on curriculum areas that the workforce needs - List of curriculums covered in program (for example, Australian, state/ territory, system) and the relationship of program content to these curriculums - Program structure and content cover multiple settings or specialised teaching roles - Explanation of range, purpose and methods of stakeholder consultation, including how the program prioritises stakeholder perspectives - Evidence of meetings with external stakeholders, including list of stakeholders, meeting minutes and recommendations
	Further considerations	None

1.3 Program resourcing

	Elements and further information	Details
[x]	National Program Standard	The program resourcing: a. is consistent with the program’s rationale and expected outcomes b. supports the program’s teaching and assessment strategies c. prepares pre-service teachers for contemporary school environments and, where relevant, early childhood environments d. considers pre-service teachers’ learning and professional experience needs across all offered modes of delivery e. includes staff who have ongoing or recent school-based experience and, where relevant, experience in early childhood environments.
[x]	Elements requiring verification	The evidence identifies factors considered in program resourcing: a. teaching and assessment strategies b. modes of delivery c. staff with ongoing or recent school-based experience and, where relevant, early childhood environments.
🤔	Elements requiring professional judgement	Does the program resourcing: a. align with the program rationale and support achievement of the expected outcomes b. prepare pre-service teachers for schools / sites / settings c. enable equitable opportunities to achieve expected outcomes across all offered modes of delivery d. ensure pre-service teachers have access to teaching staff with ongoing or recent school-based experience and, where relevant, experience in early childhood environments?
🔍	Supporting evidence	• Program rationale • Description of how program resourcing complements the program rationale and expected outcomes • Explanation of how program resourcing differs for different modes of delivery and evidence of effectiveness across delivery modes • Evidence of graduate performance and outcomes across modes of delivery and how these have influenced program resourcing • Details of teaching staff’s relevant experience and how this experience will be used to meet program outcomes and prepare pre-service teachers • Resource allocation modelling
❓	Further considerations	Teaching staff may include staff not employed by the institution. For example, classroom teachers involved in delivering program units. ‘Ongoing or recent school-based experience’ and staff currency is described in the glossary. Refer to the teacher regulatory authority for further information. Resource allocation modelling involves determining the resources needed, identifying the resources available and allocating the resources efficiently.

1.4 Higher education qualification configurations

	Elements and further information	Details
	National Program Standard	Programs comprise at least 2 years of full-time equivalent (FTE) professional studies in education. They are structured so that a graduate undertakes a 4-year or longer FTE program(s) that leads to a higher education qualification(s) in one of the following configurations: a. a 3-year FTE undergraduate degree providing the required discipline knowledge, plus a 2-year FTE graduate-entry professional qualification b. an integrated degree of at least 4 years FTE comprising discipline studies and professional studies c. combined degrees of at least 4 years FTE comprising discipline studies and professional studies d. other combinations of qualifications, proposed by the provider and approved by the teacher regulatory authority in consultation with AITSL as equivalent to the above, that enable alternative or flexible pathways into the teaching profession.
	Elements requiring verification	The evidence comprises a program structure and content that: a. will result in a qualification that correlates with one of a, b, c or d in National Program Standard 1.4 b. includes required-discipline studies c. includes at least 2 years of FTE professional studies in education.
	Elements requiring professional judgement	Not applicable
	Supporting evidence	• Program structure and content of the qualification that graduates will get - Verification of institution or TEQSA approval
	Further considerations	None

1.5 Curriculum and learning areas

	Elements and further information	Details
	National Program Standard	Programs prepare pre-service teachers to teach the school curriculum and the learning areas of their chosen discipline and/or stage of schooling in accordance with Schedule 2. Discipline-specific curriculum and pedagogical studies are consistent with the core content outlined in Schedule 1.
	Elements requiring verification	The evidence includes: a. a program structure that includes units for required discipline-specific curriculum and pedagogical studies under Schedule 2. b. a statement confirming the discipline-specific curriculum and pedagogical studies are consistent with the core content in Schedule 1.
	Elements requiring professional judgement	a. Do the program units address the relevant learning areas’ requirements for all disciplines and stages of schooling that pre-service teachers are being prepared to teach?
	Supporting evidence	• Program structure that identifies where the content required under Schedule 2 for National Program Standard 1.5 is covered - Mapping provided in Core content matrix (Template 6) - Unit outlines
	Further considerations	This standard applies equally to entrants admitted under recognition of prior learning or credit transfer arrangements. Curriculum refers to the Foundation to Year 12 Australian Curriculum or alternative curriculum frameworks that the Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority (ACARA) has assessed as meeting the requirement of: - the Australian Curriculum - any curriculum authorised by jurisdictional authorities - the Early Years Learning Framework for Australia.

1.6 Combined programs and specialised teaching roles

	Elements and further information	Details
	National Program Standard	Combined programs prepare graduates for teaching across multiple education settings, e.g. early childhood/primary school or primary school/ secondary school (‘middle school’): a. programs that prepare graduates to teach in both early childhood settings and primary schools prepare teachers for teaching the curriculum across both contexts b. programs that prepare graduates for primary and secondary school teaching: - address all the requirements for primary teaching - address at least one major study or two minor studies in secondary teaching areas - Note: programs may have a stronger emphasis on teaching particular year levels (e.g. Years 5 to 9) c. programs that prepare graduates for teaching in other specialised teaching roles in schools and other education settings address the specific content and pedagogy of the specialisation.
	Elements requiring verification	The evidence provides a program structure that addresses the requirements for preparing teachers for multiple education settings, for example: a. early childhood and primary b. primary and secondary c. other specialised teaching roles.
	Elements requiring professional judgement	Not applicable
	Supporting evidence	Program structure (map or table) that identifies where the program covers the required content
	Further considerations	None

National Program Standard 2: Program Design

2.1 Teacher Standards (Graduate level)

	Elements and further information	Details
[x]	National Program Standard	Program design and assessment processes: a. identify where each Teacher Standard (Graduate level) is taught, practised and assessed b. require pre-service teachers to show successful performance against all the Teacher Standards (Graduate level) before graduation.
[x]	Elements requiring verification	The evidence includes: a. a completed Teacher Standards (Graduate level) matrix (Template 3) covering all 37 descriptors of the Australian Professional Standards for Teachers b. a Teacher Standards (Graduate level) map aligned to the program structure c. a statement confirming that successful performance against all Teacher Standards (Graduate level) is a requirement for graduation.
🤔	Elements requiring professional judgement	For each Teacher Standard (Graduate level): a. Taught Is there sufficient evidence that pre-service teachers are given the opportunity to acquire skills, concepts, and content for all components of the descriptor? b. Practised Is there sufficient evidence that pre-service teachers are given opportunities to consolidate their learning of all components of the descriptor after it has been taught? c. Assessed i. Do the critical task(s) assess each component of the descriptor? ii. Does the critical task allow for the assessment of the descriptor at Teacher Standards (Graduate level) in the relevant context? d. Are the descriptors sequenced within the program (i.e. across taught, practised and assessed) to allow pre-service teachers to show successful performance against all of the Teacher Standards (Graduate level) before graduation?
🔍	Supporting evidence	• Assessment framework that will be used to assess pre-service teachers’ achievement against the Teacher Standards (Graduate level) • Unit outlines, with Teacher Standards (Graduate level) listed for each unit, consistent with the Teacher Standards (Graduate level) map • Detailed assessment tasks and achievement criteria
❓	Further considerations	When assessing critical tasks consider the verb in the descriptor (for example, demonstrate, know and understand, implement, plan, describe) when making professional judgements

2.2 Core content

	Elements and further information	Details
	National Program Standard	Program design and assessment processes require pre-service teachers to successfully demonstrate knowledge of the core content and meet the core content learning outcomes as outlined in Schedule 1.
	Elements requiring verification	The evidence includes: a. a completed Core content matrix (Template 6) b. a statement confirming that successfully demonstrating knowledge of the core content and meeting the core content learning outcomes is a requirement for graduation.
	Elements requiring professional judgement	Not applicable
	Supporting evidence	Providers should list one or two examples of where pre-service teachers will demonstrate knowledge and meet the Learning Outcomes of the core content. Evidence can include: - Taught: - Unit outlines including unit content and Learning Outcomes/objectives - Reading lists - Learning activities - Practised - Learning exercises and activities - Assessment tasks - Assessed - Assessment tasks, including assessment criteria
	Further considerations	None

2.3 Teaching performance assessment – design

	Elements and further information	Details
[x]	National Program Standard	The program includes a final year teaching performance assessment that: a. reflects classroom teaching practice including planning, teaching, assessing, and reflecting b. is a valid assessment of the content of the Teacher Standards (Graduate level) c. has clear, measurable and justifiable achievement criteria that discriminate between meeting and not meeting the Teacher Standards (Graduate level) d. is a reliable assessment that includes appropriate processes for ensuring consistent scoring between assessors e. includes a moderation process to support consistent decision-making against the achievement criteria.
[x]	Elements requiring verification	The evidence includes: a. a copy of the Australian Moderation and Assessment Advisory Committee’s (AMAAC) endorsement report, or b. a copy of the (former) Expert Advisory Group’s (EAG) endorsement report.
[x]	Elements requiring professional judgement	Not applicable
[x]	Supporting evidence	Not applicable
[x]	Further considerations	The AMAAC (formerly the EAG) assess all teaching performance assessments against the requirements of National Program Standard 2.3, within the Accreditation Standards and Procedures. To address an individual ITE program’s approach to implementing a teaching performance assessment, accreditation panels receive a report of the AMAAC’s assessment. This report includes implementation evidence requirements, which an accreditation panel must see to confirm the provider reliably implements the teaching performance assessment. The panel must consider program-level considerations outlined in this report. Before 2024 and the establishment of AMAAC, advice about TPAs was provided by the EAG. The EAG’s advice remains current until a revision to a TPA requires endorsement by AMAAC.

2.4 Teaching performance assessment – implementation

	Elements and further information	Details
	National Program Standard	Providers implement a final-year teaching performance assessment at a point in the program that ensures pre-service teachers have the best opportunity to meet its outcomes. All pre-service teachers are required to successfully complete a teaching performance assessment before graduation. Providers participate in cross-institutional moderation activities.
	Elements requiring verification	The evidence includes a statement confirming: a. that pre-service teachers must successfully complete a teaching performance assessment before graduation b. where the teaching performance assessment is in the program’s structure c. participation in cross-institutional moderation activities.
	Elements requiring professional judgement	a. Does the placement of the teaching performance assessment mean pre-service teachers can successfully meet its outcomes? b. Has the TPA been considered by EAG or AMAAC?
	Supporting evidence	• Program structure (map or table) that identifies where the required content is covered - AMAAC / EAG reports
	Further considerations	None

2.5 Pre-service teacher support mechanisms

	Elements and further information	Details
	National Program Standard	The program is designed to address the learning needs of all pre-service teachers and has mechanisms in place (where reasonable) to support any cohort or individual who may be at risk of not being able to participate fully in the program or achieve its expected outcomes.
	Elements requiring verification	The evidence identifies: a. mechanisms to identify the needs of all pre-service teachers in the program, including those needing further support b. details of support for all pre-service teachers, including those needing further support c. confirmation that the program design aligns with the Recognition of prior learning (RPL) in initial teacher education (ITE) Framework.
	Elements requiring professional judgement	a. Will the mechanisms adequately identify pre-service teachers’ needs, including those needing further support? b. Is appropriate support available to address all pre-service teachers’ learning needs, so they can participate fully in the program?
	Supporting evidence	• Description of the process to identify pre-service teachers’ learning needs, including for those needing further support - Details of support provided, such as academic skills support - Summary of past outcomes of the support, how providers used this information to improve the support and how providers will use it to inform support in the program under consideration - Compliance documents, such as policy frameworks for diversity, equity and inclusion, disability policy documents and reasonable adjustments policies
	Further considerations	None

2.6 Literacy and Numeracy Test for Initial Teacher Education Students

	Elements and further information	Details
[x]	National Program Standard	Initial Teacher Education graduates will possess levels of personal English language literacy and numeracy broadly equivalent to the top 30% of the Australian adult population and/or possess high levels of Australian First Nations language proficiency. a. The Literacy and Numeracy Test for Initial Teacher Education Students (LANTITE) is the primary means of demonstrating that pre-service teachers have met the required standard of English language literacy and numeracy. b. Providers must support pre-service teachers’ access to LANTITE. Pre-service teachers who are required to undertake LANTITE must attempt it before the end of the first year of their initial teacher education program. c. For Australian First Nations language speakers, recognition of First Nations language proficiency by a relevant cultural authority is an acceptable alternative to LANTITE. d. Providers must have an established process to confirm recognition of First Nations language proficiency. e. Providers must give targeted assistance to pre-service teachers who need support to achieve the required standard before graduation.
[x]	Elements requiring verification	The evidence identifies: a. mechanisms to confirm providers support pre-service teachers to attempt the LANTITE by the end of their first year of the program b. mechanisms to confirm pre-service teachers are aware of the First Nations language speakers alternative to the LANTITE c. an established process for the provider to confirm recognition of First Nations language proficiency by a relevant cultural authority d. targeted assistance for pre-service teachers needing support to achieve the required literacy and numeracy standards before graduation e. mechanisms to confirm that only pre-service teachers who pass the LANTITE or have First Nations language proficiency recognised by a relevant cultural authority are eligible to graduate. The evidence includes: f. a statement confirming that pre-service teachers are not eligible to graduate from the program without passing the LANTITE or showing First Nations language proficiency.
[x]	Elements requiring professional judgement	a. Will the targeted assistance described help pre-service teachers further develop their personal literacy and numeracy skills to achieve the required standard before graduation?
[x]	Supporting evidence	• Evidence of the effectiveness of support provided - A rationale for the placement of the LANTITE in the program structure
[x]	Further considerations	None

National Program Standard 3: Program Entry

3.1 Program entry rationale

	Elements and further information	Details
	National Program Standard	Providers describe their program entry requirements which are consistent with the program’s rationale including: a. the selection mechanisms used b. threshold entry scores applied c. any exemptions used.
	Elements requiring verification	The evidence describes the program entry requirements, including: i. selection mechanisms used ii. threshold entry scores applied iii. any exemptions used
	Elements requiring professional judgement	a. Do the program entry requirements align with the program rationale in National Program Standard 1.1? b. Have providers clearly explained threshold entry scores and exemptions? c. Are there clear expectations about entry requirements for the program irrespective of entry pathway?
	Supporting evidence	Outline and justification of the selection mechanisms and exemptions
	Further considerations	Entrant selection is primarily the provider’s responsibility, especially for self- accrediting providers. See the TEQSA Act 2011. Providers may also select entrants using diverse alternative entry schemes, which the Accreditation Standards and Procedures call ‘exemptions’. These alternative entry schemes may draw on a variety of factors, including: - special aptitude (academic or non-academic) - prior study - relevant past work or community experience - disadvantage (for example, low socioeconomic status, regional or rural origin, first-in-family students) - promotion of equity groupings (for example, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples).

3.2 Program entrant selection criteria

	Elements and further information	Details
	National Program Standard	Providers apply selection criteria for all entrants that are evidence-based and consistent with: a. engagement in a rigorous higher education program b. the program’s requirements c. subsequent success in professional teaching practice.
	Elements requiring verification	The evidence identifies: a. the selection criteria b. that providers apply selection criteria consistently to all entrants.
	Elements requiring professional judgement	a. Are the selection criteria consistent with all of the following: i. the evidence base ii. engagement in a rigorous higher education program iii. the program’s requirements iv. subsequent success in professional teaching practice? b. Are there processes to evaluate the effectiveness and ongoing suitability of the selection criteria?
	Supporting evidence	• Outline of the selection criteria that the chosen selection mechanisms assess - Provider’s policy outlining selection criteria and entry procedures - Evidence of the performance of cohorts admitted through different mechanisms and at different performance levels in the selection criteria - Description of the evidence base for the selection mechanis
	Further considerations	None

3.3 English language proficiency requirements

	Elements and further information	Details
	National Program Standard	Program entrants must meet English language proficiency requirements for teacher registration in Australia, either on entry to or on graduation from the program.
	Elements requiring verification	The evidence identifies: a. mechanisms to assess English language proficiency, as required for teacher registration, either on entry to or on graduation from the program.
	Elements requiring professional judgement	a. Will the mechanisms mean that the English language proficiency requirements for teacher registration are assessed and met either on entry to or on graduation from the program?
	Supporting evidence	Provider policies and procedures for ensuring the English language proficiency requirements are assessed and met
	Further considerations	Framework for Teacher Registration in Australia

3.4 Graduate-entry prerequisites

	Elements and further information	Details
	National Program Standard	Entrants to graduate-entry programs have a discipline-specific bachelor or equivalent qualification relevant to the Australian Curriculum or other recognised areas of schooling provision including: a. for secondary teaching, at least a major study in one teaching area and, preferably, a second teaching area comprising at least a minor study, or b. for primary teaching and combined primary/early childhood programs, at least one year equivalent full-time student load (EFTSL) study relevant to one or more learning areas of the primary school curriculum.
	Elements requiring verification	The evidence identifies: a. processes to confirm entrants to graduate-entry programs have prior qualifications consistent with the requirements for secondary, primary or combined primary/early childhood programs.
	Elements requiring professional judgement	a. Does the admission process confirm all entrants to graduate-entry programs have the required qualifications?
	Supporting evidence	Provider’s admissions policy, outlining requirements for entry into graduate programs
	Further considerations	None

National Program Standard 4: Professional Experience

4.1 Professional experience and formal partnerships

	Elements and further information	Details
	National Program Standard	Formal partnerships, agreed in writing, are developed and used by all providers, schools, professional experience sites and systems, to enable and support quality professional experience. These partnerships: - outline placement components and planned experiences - specify roles and responsibilities for all parties - identify key contacts for day-to-day administration.
	Elements requiring verification	The evidence identifies: a. formal partnerships, agreed in writing, for every school / professional experience site that specify: i. details of the main points of contact between the provider and school or professional experience site ii. roles and responsibilities of all professional experience participants iii. components of professional experience placements and planned experiences.
	Elements requiring professional judgement	a. Do the formal partnerships support the delivery of quality professional experience for all participants?
	Supporting evidence	• Formal written partnerships, such as memorandums of understanding, signed professional experience partnership agreements or other documents - Professional experience handbook
	Further considerations	Australian Professional Experience Guidelines

4.2 Professional experience components

	Elements and further information	Details
	National Program Standard	The professional experience components of the program are relevant to a classroom / learning environment and: - include at least 80 days in undergraduate and double-degree initial teacher education programs; and at least 60 days in graduate-entry programs - comprise supervised and assessed teaching practice undertaken over a substantial and sustained period that is mostly in Australia and mostly in a recognised school setting - provide opportunities for pre-service teachers to observe and participate purposefully in a school / professional experience site as early as practicable in the program - are as diverse as practicable (within and/or across settings) - are designed to support pre-service teacher participation in employment- based and/or flexible pathways (if applicable).
	Elements requiring verification	The evidence identifies professional experience components that include: a. at least 80 days in undergraduate and double-degree initial teacher education programs and at least 60 days in graduate-entry programs for all pre-service teachers b. professional experience mostly undertaken in Australia and mostly in a recognised school setting.
	Elements requiring professional judgement	a. Are there processes in place to ensure that pre-service teachers are supervised and assessed during all placements? b. Does the structure of placements allow for professional experience to happen over a substantial and sustained period? c. Does the program structure provide opportunities for pre-service teachers to observe and participate purposefully in the school or professional experience site as early as practicable in the program? d. Does the approach to placements ensure they are as diverse as practicable? e. Does the approach to placements support the employment-based or flexible pathways offered in the program (if applicable)?
	Supporting evidence	• Program outline showing the structure and distribution of placements, including the number of days for each placement - Professional experience handbooks - Description of the focus for each placement - Description of strategies for ensuring a diversity of placements - Description of ways to confirm all pre-service teachers completing professional experience outside of Australia or outside a recognised school setting have the opportunity to meet the Teacher Standards (Graduate level)

Further considerations

Australian Professional Experience Guidelines

If a provider chooses to allow pre-service teachers opportunities to do placements outside Australia or a recognised school setting in line with National Program Standard 4.2:

• providers must have a rationale for how the pre-service teachers will have the opportunity to practise and demonstrate the Teacher Standards (Graduate level)
• the pre-service teacher must be supervised by a teacher who has a strong working knowledge of the Teacher Standards (Graduate level).

4.3 Professional experience communication

	Elements and further information	Details
	National Program Standard	For every professional experience placement, regardless of delivery mode, location or associated employment arrangements, there are clear mechanisms for the provider to communicate to the school / professional experience site: a. The knowledge, skills and experiences pre-service teachers have already developed b. The expected learning outcomes for the pre-service teacher of each placement.
	Elements requiring verification	The evidence includes communication mechanisms that: a. outline placement-specific requirements b. apply to all the program’s delivery modes.
	Elements requiring professional judgement	a. Are there mechanisms for the provider and the school or professional experience site to communicate about: i. the pre-service teacher’s knowledge, skills and experiences, developed throughout the program ii. the expected learning outcomes of each placement? b. Does the organisation and supervision of professional experience align with the specific delivery mode?
	Supporting evidence	• Description or examples of communications to schools or sites - Protocols for managing pre-service teachers’ progress throughout their placements - Professional experience handbooks - Description of the focus for each placement
	Further considerations	Australian Professional Experience Guidelines

4.4 Professional experience and the Teacher Standards (Graduate level)

	Elements and further information	Details
	National Program Standard	Providers work with their schools / professional experience sites to assess pre-service teachers’ achievement against the Teacher Standards (Graduate level) and associated core content including: a. identifying the Teacher Standards (Graduate level) and core content to be assessed b. providing assessment tools, protocols, practices and guidelines c. clarifying expectations and roles in assessment, particularly designated roles for supervising teachers d. timely identification of pre-service teachers at risk of not satisfactorily completing their placement, ensuring appropriate support for improvement.
	Elements requiring verification	The evidence includes communication mechanisms that: a. the descriptors of the Teacher Standards (Graduate level) and core content that the supervising teachers will assess directly during each professional experience placement b. arrangements meeting the requirements for National Program Standard 4.4 b, c and d.
	Elements requiring professional judgement	a. Does the provider engage with schools or professional experience sites to confirm there are: i. clear processes and expectations for the assessment of pre-service teachers ii. designated roles for supervising teachers to assess pre-service teachers? b. Will the assessment tools, protocols, practices and guidelines enable supervising teachers to differentiate which pre-service teachers meet and do not meet the Teacher Standards (Graduate level) and core content requirements? c. Are there processes to promptly identify and support pre-service teachers at risk of not satisfactorily completing their placement?
	Supporting evidence	• Partnership documents - Professional experience handbooks - Assessment and reporting templates, including criteria for judging performance - Outlines for professional experience units - Evidence guides and frameworks
	Further considerations	Australian Professional Experience Guidelines

4.5 Professional experience for schools or sites

	Elements and further information	Details
	National Program Standard	Providers support schools / professional experience sites by: a. identifying and providing professional learning opportunities for supervising teachers b. ensuring provider staff (who preferably have current or recent experience in teaching) are available to offer guidance and support.
	Elements requiring verification	The evidence includes communication mechanisms that: a. professional learning opportunities to support supervising teachers b. designated provider staff to support supervising teachers.
	Elements requiring professional judgement	a. Do supervising teachers have sufficient access to designated provider staff for support? b. Do provider staff have current or recent experience in teaching (preferable) to support supervising teachers?
	Supporting evidence	• Descriptions of professional learning programs: for example, professional learning modules on the Teacher Standards (Graduate level), core content, mentoring and supervision of pre-service teachers - Descriptions or examples of support provided to schools, sites or early childhood settings in selecting supervising teachers - Descriptions of support from provider staff, including the qualifications and teaching experience of these staff - Professional experience handbooks
	Further considerations	Australian Professional Experience Guidelines

National Program Standard 5: Program Outcomes and Reporting

National Program Standard 5.1 has reporting requirements to consider when judging against National Program Standard 5.2. There are requirements for pre-service teacher performance and graduate outcomes.

Pre-service teacher performance

The following table outlines mandatory evidence and minimum reporting requirements for pre-service teacher performance. A provider’s plan must specify a range of evidence across multiple areas to support their demonstration of impact at the end of the accreditation period. Providers must prioritise evidence that shows pre-service teachers’ achievements in demonstrating a positive impact on student learning.

Aggregated teaching performance assessment evidence:

• Aggregation of student results

• Number of students doing the assessments

Data from the nationally consistent, transpar-ent indicators:

• Performance of the program based on nationally consistent indicators for pre-service teachers

Aggregated assessment data from other assessments where a pre-service teacher is required to show an impact on student learning:

• Distribution of student results

• Number of students doing the assessments

Graduate outcomes

There are 2 types of mandatory evidence for graduate outcomes.

Type 1: participation in and evaluation of data from any national and jurisdictional data collections or surveys (see National Program Standard 5.3).

Type 2: collection and evaluation of evidence of showing program impact on graduate outcomes. Graduate impact on student learning is included in this evidence if data is available. Providers must use data from multiple sources, for example:

• employment data
• registration data
• provider case studies or surveys
• any other type of outcomes data that providers can reasonably link to information on program improvement, graduate outcomes or positive impact on student learning.

5.1 Plan for demonstrating impact

	Elements and further information	Details
	National Program Standard	All accreditation applications include a plan for demonstrating program outcomes in relation to pre-service teacher performance and graduate outcomes, including program impact. The plan identifies processes for how providers will select, collect, use, analyse and evaluate evidence of program delivery to inform future program improvements. This will include mandatory evidence required by Program Standard 5.2, unless this data is not reportable due to the nature and size of the cohort.
	Elements requiring verification	The evidence includes a Plan for demonstrating impact (Template 4) that sets out: a. impact statements that will be used to show program outcomes in relation to pre-service teacher performance, graduate outcomes and program impact b. specific data the provider will collect and report on for all outcomes identified in the impact statements, including mandatory evidence of pre-service teacher performance and graduate outcomes c. processes for how the provider will select, collect, use, analyse and evaluate data relevant to assessing program delivery, including mandatory evidence of pre-service teacher performance and graduate outcomes.
	Elements requiring professional judgement	a. Will the planned analysis and use of the selected data show the program outcomes set out in the impact statements? b. Will the data nominated for collection show: i. stated program objectives ii. program rationale (National Program Standard 1.1) iii. proposed processes to drive program improvement? c. Where applicable, has the provider used previous evaluations to inform the development of future plans? d. Do the processes for collection, analysis and evaluation of data support program improvements?
	Supporting evidence	• National and jurisdictional data collections - Descriptions of how providers will collect, analyse and evaluate data and how they may use results to improve the program - Reports from teaching performance assessment and other benchmarking activities - Plan for demonstrating impact (Template 4) Context section - Survey and data collection instruments - Providers may include other evidence relevant to their Plan for demonstrating impact (Template 4)
	Further considerations	None

5.2 Evidence of program outcomes and impact

	Elements and further information	Details
	National Program Standard	Evidence of program outcomes, including impact, is provided, evaluated and interpreted at the end of each accreditation period. The interpretation of evidence includes identified strengths, program changes and planned improvements for the next accreditation period. The evidence requirements include, at a minimum, aggregated data on: a. assessment data from the teaching performance assessment for all pre-service teachers b. data from the nationally consistent, transparent indicators c. any other pre-service teacher performance and impact data as identified in the Plan for Demonstrating Impact.
	Elements requiring verification	The evidence includes a Stage two report (Template 5) with: a. an introduction b. the assessment data from the teaching performance assessment for all pre-service teachers c. the performance of the program based on nationally consistent, transparent indicators for pre-service teachers. d. the program’s performance for pre-service teacher performance and impact, based on data from other assessments identified in the Plan for demonstrating impact (Template 4).
	Elements requiring professional judgement	a. Has the provider included the number of graduates and interest areas to enable appropriate data aggregation? b. Do the evaluation and interpretation of evidence in the Stage two report (Template 5) identify program strengths, any changes to the National Program Standards (from the National Program Standard Matrix (Template 2)) and planned improvements?
	Supporting evidence	• Survey and data collection instruments - Summary of key annual reporting data - Summary of program changes during the accreditation period - Graduate testimonials, for example through surveys or alumni channels
	Further considerations	None

5.3 Annual reporting and data collection

	Elements and further information	Details of what to prepare
	National Program Standard	Providers report annually to the relevant teacher regulatory authority on: a. data as identified in the Plan for Demonstrating Impact b. changes to the program. Providers also submit data and information for national and/or jurisdictional collections and participate in quality assurance activities as required, such as: ◦ to support local and national teacher workforce supply reporting ◦ program and provider benchmarking ◦ to build a cumulative database of evidence relating to the quality of teacher education in Australia.
	Elements requiring verification	The evidence includes: a. a statement confirming the provider complies with annual reporting requirements (Template 1).
	Elements requiring professional judgement	Not applicable
	Supporting evidence	Not applicable
	Further considerations	None

National accreditation procedures

The Accreditation Standards and Procedures contain the ministerially agreed procedures. AITSL have copied the procedures in the following sections and included relevant elaborations.

Six-step national accreditation procedure sequence, progressing from program application through accreditation panel, accreditation report, accreditation decision, provider obligations, and evaluation and review.

1. Program application

Purpose: Outline the steps a provider must take to prepare their program application.

1.1 Preparation and timeframes

Details

Providers are required to submit applications for accreditation to the teacher regulatory authority. Generally, providers must apply for accreditation to the relevant teacher regulatory authority no later than 8 months before either: - the program’s commencement - the program’s accreditation expires. Teacher regulatory authorities support providers to prepare Stage one and Stage two applications, ensuring they contain the required evidence and documentation. Before starting an application, providers should: - discuss the program with the teacher regulatory authority - read and understand the Guidelines for the accreditation of initial teacher education programs in Australia (Guidelines). The Guidelines support implementation of the Accreditation Standards and Procedures. The Guidelines: - include templates, advice and guidance materials to support providers, teacher regulatory authorities and accreditation panels - promote consistent assessment and a rigorous accreditation process.

Elaborations

Timelines for submitting applications Providers should contact their teacher regulatory authority about timelines. If providers submit their applications after the 8-month timeframe, the accreditation process may not be completed before the proposed start date or current accreditation expiration date. If a provider thinks that they cannot meet this timeline, it should contact its teacher regulatory authority to discuss the timing of accreditation. If a non-self-accrediting provider wants to have its programs accredited at the same time as other accreditation requirements, it should contact the teacher regulatory authority as early as possible.

1.2 Combined programs and early childhood settings program applications

Details:

Programs that prepare graduates to teach in early childhood settings also need to meet the Australian Children’s Education & Care Quality Authority’s requirements.

Elaborations:

Providers delivering combined Early Childhood and Primary programs may be asked to provide evidence of ACECQA approval of the early childhood component of a program by the TRA.

1.3 Cross-jurisdictional programs

Details

Providers delivering or intending to deliver an on-campus program across multiple jurisdictions must apply to the teacher regulatory authority in the jurisdiction where the provider is formally established or governed. This teacher regulatory authority becomes the lead teacher regulatory authority. The lead teacher regulatory authority is responsible for: - sharing the application with relevant teacher regulatory authorities - confirming that the program meets jurisdictional requirements for on campus delivery in each jurisdiction.

Elaborations

Requirements for cross-jurisdictional programs Formal legislation typically creates, governs and recognises providers, such as universities. But some providers are non-self-accrediting or other organisations. Delivery across jurisdictions needs to deal with all possibilities. Self-accrediting providers: Cross-jurisdictional delivery is where the legislation of one or more Australian jurisdiction establishes, governs or recognises a provider. Universities are typical examples of self-accrediting providers. For cross-jurisdictional delivery, the provider must nominate the teacher regulatory authority: - that formally established, governed or recognised the provider - where it will submit the application for accreditation – this becomes the lead teacher regulatory authority. For each jurisdiction the provider will deliver a program in, the provider also notifies the relevant teacher regulatory authority of its intention to apply for program accreditation. The lead teacher regulatory authority then takes responsibility for accrediting the program. AITSL supports the teacher regulatory authority, so that the accreditation panel is representative of all jurisdictions where the program is to be delivered. The lead teacher regulatory authority shares the application with the relevant teacher regulatory authorities. If a program is delivered across multiple jurisdictions, those jurisdictions’ teacher regulatory authorities can participate in the ongoing monitoring and reporting processes. Non-self-accrediting providers: A non-self-accrediting provider is typically a corporation (corporate provider) but may be an individual or an unincorporated entity (non-corporate provider). A corporate provider delivering or intending to deliver a program across jurisdictions must submit its accreditation application to the teacher regulatory authority where the provider is registered and has its principal place of business. The relevant teacher regulatory authority becomes the lead teacher regulatory authority. A non-corporate provider delivering or intending to deliver a program across jurisdictions must submit its accreditation application to the teacher regulatory authority where the provider has its largest enrolment. The relevant teacher regulatory authority becomes the lead teacher regulatory authority. If providers deliver programs on campus across jurisdictions, whether self-accrediting or non-self-accrediting, the lead teacher regulatory authority will ask the relevant teacher regulatory authority to confirm whether the programs have addressed jurisdictional requirements. For more information about the accreditation of programs across jurisdictions, please contact the relevant teacher regulatory authority.

1.4 Application submission

Details

Applications are submitted to the teacher regulatory authority, and include:

• a completed application using the templates provided in the Guidelines (and/or those provided by the teacher regulatory authority)
• full program documentation in support of the application
• any additional evidence that demonstrates the program meets the National Program Standards.

The teacher regulatory authority will review the application and determine whether it:

• includes all relevant documents
• addresses all accreditation requirements.

If there are any gaps, the teacher regulatory authority will liaise with the provider to clarify or add information.

For cross-jurisdictional programs, the lead teacher regulatory authority will share the application with relevant teacher regulatory authorities to ensure it addresses jurisdictional requirements.

Elaborations

Submitting more than one program for accreditation

Teacher regulatory authorities can assess multiple programs at once.

Providers must submit a separate application for each program. But if providers have closely related programs, teacher regulatory authorities may choose to assess multiple programs from one provider at the same time.

For applications for closely related programs with several common units, providers can either:

• include them in a single application
• submit them as separate applications.

If providers are unsure whether to include closely related programs in one application, they should liaise with the teacher regulatory authority about the best approach. Providers can submit several applications at the same time.

If different panels consider separate applications for closely related programs, the teacher regulatory authority must check that the panels give consistent advice about the common components.

Eligibility and compliance check

Once the teacher regulatory authority receives an accreditation application, it should initially decide the program’s eligibility based on the completeness of the documents, ensuring that the provider has:

• responded to all National Program Standards
• responded to all Teacher Standards (Graduate level)
• responded to all core content requirements
• provided evidence for any further jurisdictional requirements
• made sure supporting documents are labelled, paginated and in order.

Role of the teacher regulatory authority – Stage two only

Before the panel assessment and as part of the application completeness check, a teacher regulatory authority may:

• verify that the key data included in the Stage two report (Template 5) matches the annual reporting data that the provider has supplied
• ask the provider to correct any inconsistencies.

Teacher regulatory authorities may also choose to provide accreditation panels with further documents, such as confirmation of program changes and strengths identified during the accreditation period.

2. Accreditation panel

Purpose: Detail the process of establishing panels and explain their role.

2.1 Preparation of panellists

Details

Teacher regulatory authorities identify and nominate individuals to train as initial teacher education accreditation panellists (panellists). Panellists are chosen from across the teaching profession, including schools and providers. AITSL trains panellists, equipping them to assess applications against the National Program Standards. AITSL also provides panellist refresher training and specialist training for panel chairs.

Elaborations

Panellists’ experience and qualities Panellists assess whether a program meets each of the National Program Standards, based on the evidence provided. All panellists must have: - knowledge and understanding of education, preparation of pre-service teachers and teaching - research, analytical and evaluation skills, including the ability to analyse and interpret data and written information - the ability to use support materials to help them decide accreditation status - the ability to clearly and concisely convey observations and findings in writing - the capacity to make unbiased conclusions about an application for accreditation using the National Program Standards, the Teacher Standards (Graduate level) and core content. Timeframe, responsibility and training expectations for panellists Panellists are typically appointed for 2-year terms, which can be extended if their teacher regulatory authority supports this. Panellists must commit to being on an accreditation panel, in line with jurisdictional processes. Further, the teacher regulatory authority must maintain its list of panellists. At a minimum, the accreditation process includes time for reading and analysing the initial submission and supporting documents, attending a face-to-face or virtual panel meeting and reading the draft or interim accreditation report. Panellists may also need time for reading and analysing subsequent documents. For example, a provider’s responses to show gaps, issues or changes the panel identifies. Potential panellists must complete the national learning program before they can sit on an accreditation panel. Trained panellists must complete refresher training if: - 2 years have passed since they completed their initial training without serving on a panel - 2 years have passed since they participated on a panel - the teacher regulatory authority asks them to do it. The teacher regulatory authority can grant exceptions for panellists completing refresher training.

Elaborations (Cont.)

The national learning program

AITSL delivers a national learning program to ensure panellists have the necessary skills and knowledge to fulfil their role. After successfully completing the training, panellists will:

• comprehensively understand the accreditation process
• understand what their personal biases and conflicts of interest are and how to manage them
• understand the National Program Standards, Teacher Standards (Graduate level) and core content
• understand the different roles involved in the accreditation process: teacher regulatory authorities, executive officers, providers, panellists, panel chairs, interstate panellists and AITSL
• be able to assess evidence against the National Program Standards, Teacher Standards (Graduate level) and core content.

Panel chair training

AITSL delivers panel chair training. Trained panellists must complete this training before being appointed as panel chair.

After successfully completing the training, panel chairs will understand:

• their dual roles as a panellist and panel chair
• their leadership role on the panel
• their role in recognising and minimising bias and maximising the reliability of judgements
• potential challenges faced by the panel chair.

2.2 Convening a panel

Details

The relevant teacher regulatory authority convenes a panel to assess the application.

Accreditation panels comprise a minimum of 4 panellists, including:

• a chair, nominated by the teacher regulatory authority
• an interstate panellist to support consistency in assessments across jurisdictions.

Each panel includes people with a range of expertise and experience relevant to the program being assessed, such as:

• initial teacher education provider staff
• jurisdictional education authority or teacher employer staff
• principals or school leaders
• registered teachers
• specialists or experts in relevant education areas.

When needed, panels can co-opt people with specific expertise to provide advice.

The teacher regulatory authority advises AITSL that an application has been received and nominates the panellists and panel chair. AITSL organises an interstate panel member.

An executive officer from the relevant teacher regulatory authority, who has completed panel training, supports each panel.

For cross-jurisdictional programs delivered on-campus, the panel should include representatives from every jurisdiction where the program will be delivered.

Elaborations

Interstate panellists

An interstate panellist supports consistency across jurisdictions. The teacher regulatory authority tells AITSL that the panel is convening and asks for the nomination of at least one interstate panellist. The teacher regulatory authority forwards the agreed request form to AITSL specifying the following:

• the accrediting authority
• details of the panel meeting
• expertise needed from the panellist
• program details.

When AITSL receives the request, it seeks nominations for an interstate panellist. Then, AITSL selects and contacts one of the nominated panellists.

Once the nominee has agreed to participate as an interstate panellist, AITSL organises and funds the needed travel, accommodation and relief teacher payments. AITSL tells the requesting jurisdiction about these details.

There may be circumstances where a teacher regulatory authority asks for a specific interstate panellist. In these circumstances, the teacher regulatory authority asks AITSL to organise and fund the panellist’s travel and accommodation and payment for relief teachers.

For cross-jurisdictional programs offered on campus, teacher regulatory authorities may form an accreditation panel with more interstate representation. AITSL organises and funds the travel and accommodation for these panellists and payment for relief teachers.

Panels for cross-jurisdictional programs generally have at least one panellist from each jurisdiction in which the program is delivered and an interstate representative organised by AITSL.

In some instances, the lead teacher regulatory authority may consult directly with other relevant teacher regulatory authorities, making sure the panel represents each jurisdiction and telling AITSL who is on the panel.

2.3 Individual panellist assessment

Details

Before the panel meets, each panellist: - receives a copy of the application and any supporting documentation provided by the teacher regulatory authority - individually reviews all the documentation and makes a determination against each National Program Standard, using the Guidelines to support their judgements.

Elaborations

Jurisdictional requirements for panellists Teacher regulatory authorities may have additional jurisdictional requirements for panellists. The TRA will advise panellists of any requirements. Assessing Stage two applications Stage two applications focus on evidence of outcomes and improvement. At Stage two, panellists focus on the evidence of program outcomes, continuous improvement and quality assurance, and how these inform future program design. Although Stage two applications, in particular the Stage two report (Template 5), draw on the analysis of program data, the panel’s role is not to statistically analyse this data in detail.

2.4 Panel meeting

Details

At the panel meeting, panellists discuss their individual determinations against the National Program Standards. To gain accreditation, panellists must agree the program meets all National Program Standards. If the panel finds that a National Program Standard is not met, or further evidence or clarification is required, this is noted in the draft accreditation report (see section procedures 3.1). Interaction between a panel and the provider occurs at the discretion of the teacher regulatory authority. The panel may undertake a site visit, hold a teleconference/ videoconference or meet face-to-face with key provider personnel to seek further information in support of an application.

Elaborations

Not applicable

3. Accreditation report

Purpose: Outline the role of the executive officer, panel and provider in preparing the accreditation report.

3.1 Draft report

Details

The executive officer prepares a draft accreditation report on behalf of the panel: - outlining performance against each National Program Standard - identifying any areas where the panel needs further information. Once the panel approves the draft accreditation report, the teacher regulatory authority sends the report to the provider. The provider responds to the draft report and works with the teacher regulatory authority to decide a timeframe for their response (typically 6 weeks). This time allows providers to: - address any evidence gaps - clarify any identified issues - action changes to address the panel’s findings. If a panel identifies that further evidence is required to support an application, the number of requests to the provider for further information will generally be limited to two occasions.

Elaborations

Not applicable

3.2 Final report

Details

The panel assesses the provider’s response to the draft report and agrees on its final decision. The executive officer prepares a final report on behalf of the panel outlining the accreditation recommendation. A panel can recommend that a program: - be accredited because it has met all National Program Standards - be accredited subject to conditions and timeframes, e.g., if required by jurisdictional legislation - not be accredited, specifying which National Program Standards the program has not met. The final report is approved by the panel and submitted to the teacher regulatory authority.

Elaborations

Not applicable

4. Accreditation decision

Purpose: Explain how accreditation decisions are made and outline the next steps once a program is approved.

4.1 Role of teacher regulatory authority

Details

The teacher regulatory authority bases its decision on the panel’s final accreditation report and advises the provider of the outcome. For cross-jurisdictional programs, the lead teacher regulatory authority shares the accreditation decision with relevant teacher regulatory authorities. The teacher regulatory authority sets the length of accreditation for each program (no longer than 5 years). The teacher regulatory authority sends AITSL a summary of the final report.

Elaborations

Not applicable

4.2 Appeals

Details:

Providers can appeal the accreditation decision in line with the relevant teacher regulatory authority’s legislative, policy and administrative requirements.

• Elaborations: Not applicable

4.3 Program extensions

Details:

The teacher regulatory authority notifies AITSL of any extensions to the accreditation period and the reasons for the extension.

• Elaborations: Not applicable

4.4 Publication of accredited ITE programs

Details:

AITSL publishes a list of all accredited initial teacher education programs. Teacher regulatory authorities publish a summary of each accreditation decision, using an agreed national template.

• Elaborations: Not applicable

5. Provider obligations

Purpose: Outline the requirements providers must meet for their accredited programs.

5.1 Annual reporting

Details

Providers report annually to the relevant teacher regulatory authority on: - data as identified in the Plan for Demonstrating Impact (Program Standard 5) - changes to the program. Providers also submit data for national and/or jurisdictional collections as required. For cross-jurisdictional programs delivered on campus across multiple jurisdictions, the lead teacher regulatory authority is responsible for ongoing monitoring, moderation and reporting processes. Other relevant teacher regulatory authorities can also take part in these processes. If annual reporting identifies a risk, the teacher regulatory authority may request more information from the provider. In high-risk cases, the teacher regulatory authority may ask a provider to reapply for program accreditation ahead of schedule (where legislatively possible).

Elaborations

Under National Program Standard 5.3, all providers must report yearly to the teacher regulatory authority on their accredited programs. This allows the teacher regulatory authority and provider to identify, investigate and address any issues before reapplying or applying for Stage two accreditation. Annual reporting also contributes to the evidence required for showing impact at the end of each accreditation period. In line with National Program Standard 5.3, annual reporting includes: a. data identified in the Plan for demonstrating impact (Template 4) b. changes to the program. Providers also submit data and information for national and jurisdictional collections and participate in quality assurance activities as needed, such as: - supporting local and national teacher workforce supply reporting - benchmarking for programs and providers - building a cumulative evidence database about the quality of teacher education in Australia. Accreditation duration Annual reporting might show a teacher regulatory authority an area of risk within a program. In this case, it may ask the provider to start the accreditation process early, where legislatively possible. The teacher regulatory authority will forward AITSL a summary of the accreditation report, including the duration of the next accreditation period and any conditions that apply to the accreditation.

5.2 Program changes

Details

Accreditation is granted on the basis that the program will continue to be implemented as accredited by the teacher regulatory authority. Providers must notify the teacher regulatory authority about any changes they wish to make to an accredited program. The teacher regulatory authority then decides whether: - the program continues to meet the National Program Standards and is approved by the teacher regulatory authority - the change is significant and requires a Stage one accreditation application.

Elaborations

Teacher Regulatory Authorities will provide advice to providers on program change processes in jurisdictions.

6. Evaluation and review

Purpose: Outline the processes for evaluating aspects of national accreditation.

6.1 Evaluation and review

Details

AITSL, in partnership with teacher regulatory authorities, teacher employers, providers and other key stakeholders, undertakes a range of activities to determine if the accreditation process is having the desired impact on program quality and the preparation of graduates over time. This includes: - evaluating and reviewing the Accreditation Standards and Procedures periodically - evaluating accreditation panels’ training and operation - coordinating and collating authoritative research and evidence on the quality assurance of initial teacher education - analysing data collected through the accreditation process. Reports detailing the outcomes of this work will be made available to Education Ministers (or delegates) as needed.

Elaborations

Teaching Performance Assessments and the Australian Moderation and Assessment Advisory Committee (AMAAC) The 2023 Strong Beginnings report from the Teacher Education Expert Panel recommended introducing national cross-institutional moderation and benchmarking to confirm a consistent standard of performance assessment for graduates (TEEP, 2023). The Australian Government commissioned AITSL in June 2024 to support the Initial Teacher Education Quality Assurance Oversight Board (ITEQAOB) with this work. The AMAAC advises AITSL and the ITEQAOB. It replaced the Expert Advisory Group (EAG) in 2024. The AMAAC’s main role is to establish and assure the quality of a nationally agreed benchmarking activity for the endorsed teaching performance assessments. The AMAAC also advises AITSL about its advice to teacher regulatory authorities about new teaching performance assessments. Teaching Performance Assessments and the Expert Advisory Group The EAG was established to advise teacher regulatory authorities about assessing teaching performance and meeting the requirements of National Program Standard 2.3. All ITE programs include a teaching performance assessment that the EAG has endorsed.

Schedules and Australian Professional Standards for Teachers

This section includes key components of the Accreditation Standards and Procedures:

Schedule 1 – Core content

Schedule 2 – Equivalent full-time student load (EFTSL) requirements

Australian Professional Standards for Teachers (Graduate level).

Schedule 1 – Core content

Core Content 1 – The Brain and Learning

1.1 Knowledge of what it means to be a ‘novice’ learner in comparison to an ‘expert’. Knowledge of and skill in the related implications for practice.

Novice vs expert learners

1.1.1. The difference in the process of knowledge acquisition in the brain of a novice vs the brain of an expert. This should be taught with reference to the development of mental models and schemas.

1.1.2. The features of biologically primary vs biologically secondary knowledge acquisition and the importance of teacher-led instruction for biologically secondary knowledge acquisition.

1.1.3. The foundations of how a student’s brain develops from early childhood through to young adult, including the development of executive functions and the implications for teaching.

1.2 Knowledge of the most efficient and effective process of knowledge acquisition in the brain, including the function of memory and the concept of cognitive overload.

How the brain learns and retains information

1.2.1. The cognitive process of learning, including how the brain moves information through working memory into long-term memory, how to optimise this process and the potential barriers to this process.

1.2.2. The limits of working memory including how cognitive overload occurs, and the common causes of cognitive overload.

1.2.3. The most effective teaching practices to reduce cognitive overload, including explicit instruction, scaffolding, and clearly structured content that connects new information to prior learning.

1.3 Knowledge of the process that occurs in a novice brain during progression towards mastery. Knowledge of and skill in the need to adjust practice in response.

How the brain masters knowledge

1.3.1. How the brain applies attained knowledge to solve problems by accessing memory or combining and re-combining memory to generate possible solutions.

1.3.2. Why teaching practices must adapt as a student’s familiarity with the knowledge of a subject increases, including when to move from scaffolded practice to independent practice, and why this is important.

1.3.3. How to develop and use worked examples for students who are unfamiliar with a subject, followed by more challenging problem-solving activities as students become more familiar with the knowledge of a subject.

1.4 Knowledge and understanding of common neuromyths and the impact of their perpetuation.

Neuromyths

1.4.1. How to identify common neuromyths that are related to education (e.g. multiple intelligences, left vs right brain, learning styles, 10% of the use of our brain) and describe the evidence that disproves them.

1.4.2. The negative impacts of making instructional choices based on neuromyths, including how neuromyths conflict with current understandings of how the brain learns.

Schedule 1 – Core content (Cont.)

Core Content 2 – Effective Pedagogical Practices

2.1 Knowledge of and skill in planning and sequencing content and tasks so that they become increasingly challenging and incorporate spacing and retrieval practice.

Planning and sequencing

2.1.1. The key features of coherent and deliberate planning and sequencing of tasks and lessons including curriculum-aligned learning objectives, clear descriptions of how students will show evidence of mastery, the common progression of learning in a subject area and the critical curriculum knowledge needed for students to progress.

2.1.2. How to plan a sequence of lessons that incorporate spacing and retrieval practice, build upon each other, meet students where they are in their learning and help students retrieve past learning and consolidate it in long-term memory.

2.1.3. How to sequence tasks within a lesson that build upon each other, meet students where they are in their learning and help them understand the progression of skills needed to attain mastery.

2.2 Knowledge of and skill in explicit teaching, modelling and scaffolding practices that support how a student’s brain learns.

Explicit modelling and scaffolding

2.2.1. The research base that shows explicit teaching, modelling and scaffolding practices are highly effective and attend best to how a student’s brain learns.

2.2.2. How to effectively begin instruction of a task through using a clear explanation of what students are expected to learn, chunked into small, manageable tasks with well-defined goals.

2.2.3. The importance of presenting all information required to complete these chunked tasks in one place and at one time, excluding information not directly related to the task, to reduce cognitive overload.

2.2.4. How to explicitly model new skills and content through ‘worked examples’ that clearly demonstrate how to complete the task, followed by a progressive removal of scaffolding as students become more proficient.

2.2.5. How to develop and deliver appropriately challenging recall practice to promote retention and plan to include ample opportunities to practise in a lesson or sequence of lessons.

2.2.6. Why independent problem-solving is only effective once a student approaches proficiency (i.e. after ample opportunities to practise progressively challenging tasks) and why independent problem-solving should not represent a large proportion of teaching and learning time.

Schedule 1 – Core content (Cont.)

Core Content 2 – Effective Pedagogical Practices

2.3 An ability to effectively select a range of evidence-based assessment practices to evaluate progress, adjust instruction, provide targeted feedback, and support learning.

Assessment and feedback

2.3.1. How to pitch an introductory lesson at an appropriate level, before starting a new unit of work, by identifying where a student is in their learning through assessing what they know, or think they know.

2.3.2. How to use formative assessment practices to gather and interpret information about student learning as learning is taking place – for example, use of simple, low-key assessments such as exit slips, quick quizzes or targeted oral questioning to prompt students to articulate their reasoning and identify common student misconceptions.

2.3.3. How to design summative assessment to assess students against a standard or benchmark to gain an understanding of the level of mastery attained.

2.3.4. How to produce and use developmental rubrics with criteria tailored to the specific task and/or work samples so that students understand what is expected.

2.4 Appropriate subject matter expertise in the effective teaching of literacy, including the explicit teaching of phonics in early reading and the explicit teaching of reading and writing in subjects other than English.

Literacy

2.4.1. How to deliver effective reading instruction that attends to how the brain learns to read through systematic and explicit teaching practices for the following elements: phonemic awareness, phonics, fluency, vocabulary, comprehension and oral language.

2.4.2. The research that shows explicit reading, and writing comprehension instruction tailored to discipline-specific content improves students’ academic understanding and engagement with material, as well as their overall academic performance.

2.4.3. How to explicitly deliver reading and writing instruction through discipline and discipline-specific curriculum and pedagogical studies as outlined in standard 1.5.

Schedule 1 – Core content (Cont.)

Core Content 2 – Effective Pedagogical Practices

2.5 Appropriate subject matter expertise in the effective teaching of numeracy including the explicit teaching of mathematics and building of fluency, understanding, problem-solving and reasoning.

Numeracy

2.5.1. A conceptual understanding of the six strands of mathematics: number, algebra, geometry, measurement, statistics and probability; and the four proficiencies: understanding, fluency, problem solving and reasoning.

2.5.2. The research that shows numeracy is a fundamental component of learning, discourse, and critique across all areas of the curriculum and improves students’ understanding of and engagement with material within and beyond the mathematics curriculum.

2.5.3. How to deliver explicit numeracy instruction followed by a progressive removal of scaffolding as students become more proficient through a combination of underpinning mathematical concepts and skills (numerical, spatial, graphical, statistical, and algebraic); mathematical thinking and strategies; and general thinking skills as appropriate to discipline and discipline-specific curriculum and pedagogical studies as outlined in standard 1.5.

2.5.4. The importance of independent problem-solving once a student approaches proficiency in underpinning mathematical concepts

2.6 Knowledge of theory of an MTSS framework, the direct relationship to evidence-based teaching practices and skill in how to practically implement tier 1 in the classroom.

Multi-tiered systems of support (MTSS)

2.6.1. The fundamental elements and underpinning theory of a multi-tiered system of support and why it is effective.

2.6.2. How a multi-tiered framework works in a classroom setting, with the opportunity to observe implementation of a multi-tiered framework.

2.6.3. The research evidence showing the positive impact of high-quality instruction delivered by the classroom teacher as a protective measure in reducing the need for further intervention.

Schedule 1 – Core content (Cont.)

Core Content 3 – Classroom Management

3.1 A strong understanding of the role of rules and routines in establishing a structured, safe, and positive classroom environment.

Rules and routines

3.1.1. How to develop and use effective rules and routines, or cues that are focused on creating learning habits that encourage students to respond quickly to instructions to reduce wasted learning time.

3.1.2. When and how pre-service teachers can practise using rules and routines in a professional experience setting so that they are best supported to transition to the classroom.

3.1.3. The research evidence that shows the impact of developing and reinforcing clear and well-defined rules and routines and why rules and routines need to be explicitly taught and reinforced to students to be effective.

3.1.4. Specific examples of rules and routines that are shown by the research to be effective and how to use them in a lesson. This could include what can be used at the beginning and end of lessons (e.g. ‘do-nows’, lesson reflections), for different types of learning activities (e.g. protocols for small group or class discussions such as ‘pair shares’, ‘jigsaws’ or ‘I do, we do, you do’) and for transitions (e.g. protocols for moving quickly from one activity to the next).

3.2 A clear understanding of the efficacy of proactive practices in preventing misbehaviour and/or disengagement, including the role of high-quality instruction as a proactive practice.

Proactive practices – behaviour and engagement

3.2.1. The research evidence that shows the positive impacts clear and high expectations have on student behaviour and achievement and why it results in improved motivation, better self-accountability and understanding of consequences.

3.2.2. The research evidence that shows the relationship between effective pedagogical practices and increased positive behaviour including why specific practices are particularly effective in preventing undesired behaviour.

3.2.3. Practices should include the use of structured lessons, clear and explicit instruction, effective questioning that encourages participation, reducing cognitive load and use of specific and positive feedback that acknowledges student effort.

Schedule 1 – Core content (Cont.)

Core Content 3 – Classroom Management

3.3 An ability to practise and apply proactive practices, including setting high expectations, building positive relationships, providing structure, and setting ambitious, achievable and personalised goals.

Proactive practices – high expectations and goal setting

3.3.1. How to effectively set ambitious and achievable student goals including how to collaborate with students to set goals, and what consistent and persistent reinforcement looks like in the classroom so that those goals can be realised.

3.3.2. The research evidence that shows the positive impact of building positive relationships on classroom behaviour and student outcomes.

3.3.3. How to plan and implement practices that create a predictable and safe environment for students by reducing variance in classroom envi-ronment – for example, classroom arrangement, consistent location of prompts, consistent use of space, visible rules, and routines.

3.4 An ability to practise and apply techniques that positively and effectively manage behaviour in classroom contexts, including the use of calm, consistent and proportional responses, behaviour modelling and feedback that gives attention to the desired behaviour rather than the undesired behaviour.

Managing behaviour

3.4.1. The research evidence that shows why consistent and proportional responses to student behaviour to reinforce expectations and maintain safety is most effective when paired with verbal and non-verbal calm, expected, and escalating responses.

3.4.2. How to effectively model desired behaviour (such as respectful interactions, being organised, and being on time) and how to explicitly point to this modelling to prompt positive behaviour by setting and reinforcing expectations.

3.4.3. How to pre-plan and rehearse responses including the use of early intervention techniques such as simple prompts, pre-corrections and verbal feedback, which reinforce high expectations in the classroom and which focus on expected behaviour. Opportunities should also be provided to practise in a practicum setting.

3.5 A foundational understanding of common whole-school behaviour frameworks

Whole-school behaviour frameworks

3.5.1. Examples of common ‘whole school approaches’, processes or frameworks for positive behaviour and how a teacher engages effectively with these frameworks.

Schedule 1 – Core content (Cont.)

Core Content 4 – Responsive Teaching
Core Content
4.1 First Nations peoples, cultures and perspectives	4.1.1	The content covered in the Australian Curriculum Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Histories and Cultures cross-curriculum priority across stages and subjects.
4.1 First Nations peoples, cultures and perspectives	4.1.2	The diversity within and across First Nations people including culture, perspective, language, history and varied impact of colonisation on different groups.
4.1 First Nations peoples, cultures and perspectives	4.1.3	The research evidence that shows the positive impact of engaging with communities and families to drive successful outcomes for First Nations students and teach what appropriate engagement with families and communities can look like in practice.
4.1 First Nations peoples, cultures and perspectives	4.1.4	Explicitly teach the concept of cultural safety and explore practical examples of what it can look like in a classroom context.
4.1 First Nations peoples, cultures and perspectives	4.1.5	Cover content related to local First Nations context developed in collaboration with local First Nations groups with appropriate and authentic subject matter expertise.
4.2 Cultural responsiveness, including EAL/D students	4.2.1	The concept of positionality through engagement in critical self-inquiry for both academic writing and as a core mechanism of effective ongoing professional teaching practice.
4.2 Cultural responsiveness, including EAL/D students	4.2.2	The concept of ongoing intercultural development and the importance of self-reflection and reflexivity as ever-evolving career practices.
4.2 Cultural responsiveness, including EAL/D students	4.2.3	About the cultural diversity within classrooms and communities in Australia, and in the local context, to understand and value the perspectives of diverse groups including EAL/D and First Nations students.
4.2 Cultural responsiveness, including EAL/D students	4.2.4	How biases and assumptions about diverse groups and worldviews affect practices, behaviours, and attitudes in the classroom and how these biases adversely impact specific groups.
4.3 Family engagement for learning	4.3.1	The research evidence that outlines the most effective approaches for engaging with families to promote learning appropriate to student stage of learning.
4.3 Family engagement for learning	4.3.2	Practices schools may employ, including two-way positive communication, light-touch learning updates and collaborative planning and problem solving, and understanding the role and responsibil-ity of an individual teacher in these practices.

Schedule 1 – Core content (Cont.)

Core Content 4 – Responsive Teaching
Core Content
4.4 Diverse learning needs, including students with disability	4.4.1	The research evidence that shows how practices outlined in the core content are highly effective for the vast majority of students, particularly those with additional needs or from disadvantaged backgrounds.
4.4 Diverse learning needs, including students with disability	4.4.2	The legislation, regulations, policies and obligations related to inclusion and support including international agreements (e.g. the UN Convention on Children’s Rights, 1989), and legal entitlements as defined by the Commonwealth Disability Discrimination Act 1992 and core educational policy such as the Disability Standards for Education, 2005, which state that students with disability should have the same opportunities and choices in their education as students without disability.
4.4 Diverse learning needs, including students with disability	4.4.3	The evidence-based approaches to cater for specific needs and disabilities that a teacher may encounter during their career, with a focus on needs with high prevalence in Australian classrooms. Content should be developed in collaboration with appropriate subject matter expertise from a range of disciplines – for example, linguistics, psychology, health, and education.

Schedule 2 – Equivalent full-time student load requirements

Primary programs

All primary programs must include study in each of the learning areas of the primary school curriculum sufficient to equip teachers to teach across the years of primary schooling.

Undergraduate programs – mandatory content requirements

Discipline and discipline-specific curriculum and pedagogical studies¹ comprise at least one half of the program (i.e. normally two years of full-time-equivalent study), including at least:

a. English/literacy – discipline and discipline-specific curriculum and pedagogical studies:

At least one-half of a year EFTSL, including at least one-eighth of a year EFTSL for early reading instruction²

• b. Mathematics/numeracy – discipline and discipline- specific curriculum and pedagogical studies: At least one-quarter of a year EFTSL
• c. Science – discipline and discipline-specific curriculum and pedagogical studies: At least one-eighth of a year EFTSL

The remainder of the program may be structured to include extension or specialist studies in priority areas or related curriculum areas.

Graduate entry programs – mandatory content requirements

Graduate entry programs must include one year of full-time-equivalent study of discipline-specific curriculum and pedagogical studies across the learning areas of the primary school curriculum, including at least:

a. English/literacy – discipline-specific curriculum and pedagogical studies:

At least three-eighths of a year EFTSL, including at least one-eighth of a year EFTSL for early reading instruction²

• b. Mathematics/numeracy – discipline- specific curriculum and pedagogical studies: At least one-quarter of a year EFTSL
• c. Science – discipline-specific curriculum and pedagogical studies: At least one-eighth of a year EFTSL

These programs may include up to one quarter of a year of full-time-equivalent study of relevant discipline studies as elective units which could be undertaken by applicants who do not fully meet prerequisite discipline study requirements.

1. Discipline-specific curriculum and pedagogical studies contribute to the requirement for at least two years of equivalent full-time student load (EFTSL) in professional studies outlined in Program Standard 1.4.

2. Early reading instruction should address evidence-based practice across the following elements: phonemic awareness, phonics, fluency, vocabulary, comprehension and oral language.

Secondary programs

Discipline-specific curriculum and pedagogical studies must prepare graduates to teach across the years of secondary schooling.

Undergraduate programs – mandatory content requirements

Secondary programs must provide a sound depth and breadth of knowledge appropriate for the teaching area(s) the graduate intends to teach.

These programs must provide discipline studies:

• a. of at least a major study in one teaching area, and: Equivalent to three-quarters of a year EFTSL³
• b. preferably a second teaching area, which must comprise at least a minor study.: Equivalent to half a year EFTSL⁴

In addition, these programs must include:

c. discipline-specific curriculum and pedagogical studies.5	At least one-quarter of a year EFTSL for each teaching area

Graduate entry programs – mandatory content requirements

These programs must provide:

a. discipline-specific curriculum and pedagogical studies.5	At least one-quarter of a year EFTSL for each teaching area

These programs may include up to one quarter of a year of full-time-equivalent study of relevant discipline studies as elective units that could be undertaken by applicants who do not fully meet prerequisite discipline study requirements.

3. Study undertaken for a major study will be equivalent to a total of three-quarters of a year of successful EFTSL, usually comprising sequential discipline study taken over three years. In most programs, this equates to six units, with no more than two at first-year level and no fewer than two units at third-year level.

4. Study undertaken for a minor study will be equivalent to a total of half a year of successful EFTSL, usually comprising sequential discipline study taken over two years. In most programs, this equates to four units, with no more than two at first-year level.

5. Discipline-specific curriculum and pedagogical studies contribute to the requirement for at least two years of EFTSL in professional studies outlined in Program Standard 1.4.

Australian Professional Standards for Teachers

The Teacher Standards (Graduate level) describe the professional knowledge, practice and engagement for the first career stage defined in the Australian Professional Standards for Teachers.

PROFESSIONAL KNOWLEDGE		PROFESSIONAL PRACTICE			PROFESSIONAL ENGAGEMENT
1	2	3	4	5	6	7
Know students and how they learn	Know the content and how to teach it	Plan for and implement effective teaching and learning	Create and maintain supportive and safe learning environments	Assess, provide feedback and report on student learning	Engage in profes-sional learning	Engage profes-sionally with col-leagues, par-ents/carers and the community
1.1 Physical, social and intellectual development and characteristics of students Demonstrate knowledge and understanding of physical, social and intellectual development and characteristics of students and how these may affect learning.	2.1 Content and teaching strategies of the teaching area Demonstrate knowledge and understanding of the concepts, substance and structure of the content and teaching strategies of the teaching area.	3.1 Establish challenging learning goals Set learning goals that provide achievable challenges for students of varying abilities and characteristics.	4.1 Support student participation Identify strategies to support inclusive student participation and engagement in classroom activities.	5.1 Assess student learning Demonstrate understanding of assessment strategies, including informal and formal, diagnostic, formative and summative approaches to assess student learning.	6.1 Identify and plan professional learning needs Demonstrate an understanding of the role of the Australian Professional Standards for Teachers in identifying professional learning needs.	7.1 Meet professional ethics and respon-sibilities Understand and apply the key principles described in codes of ethics and conduct for the teaching profession.
1.2 Understand how students learn Demonstrate knowledge and understanding of research into how students learn and the implications for teaching.	2.2 Content selection and organisation Organise content into an effective learning and teaching sequence.	3.2 Plan, structure and sequence learning programs Plan lesson sequences using knowledge of student learning, content and effective teaching strategies.	4.2 Manage classroom activities Demonstrate the capacity to organise classroom activities and provide clear directions.	5.2 Provide feedback to students on their learning Demonstrate an understanding of the purpose of providing timely and appropriate feedback to students about their learning.	6.2 Engage in professional learning and improve practice Understand the relevant and appropriate sources of professional learning for teachers.	7.2 Comply with legislative, administrative and organisational requirements Understand the relevant legislative, administrative and organisational policies and processes required for teachers according to school stage.
1.3 Students with diverse linguistic, cultural, religious and socioeconomic backgrounds Demonstrate knowledge of teaching strategies that are responsive to the learning strengths and needs of students from diverse linguistic, cultural, religious and socioeconomic backgrounds.	2.3 Curriculum, assessment and reporting Use curriculum, assessment and reporting knowledge to design learning sequences and lesson plans.	3.3 Use teaching strategies Include a range of teaching strategies.	4.3 Manage challenging behaviour Demonstrate knowledge of practical approaches to manage challenging behaviour.	5.3 Make consistent and comparable judgements Demonstrate understanding of assessment moderation and its application to support consistent and comparable judgements of student learning.	6.3 Engage with col-leagues and improve practice Seek and apply constructive feedback from supervi-sors and teachers to improve teaching practices.	7.3 Engage with the parents/carers Understand strate-gies for working effectively, sensi-tively and confiden-tially with par-ents/carers.
1.4 Strategies for teaching Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students Demonstrate broad knowledge and understanding of the impact of culture, cultural identity and linguistic background on the education of students from Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander backgrounds.	2.4 Understand and respect Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people to promote reconcilia-tion between Indig-enous and non-Indigenous Australi-ans Demonstrate broad knowledge of, understanding of and respect for Aborigi-nal and Torres Strait Islander histories, cultures and lan-guages.	3.4 Select and use resources Demonstrate knowledge of a range of resources, including ICT, that engage students in their learning.	4.4 Maintain student safety Describe strategies that support students’ wellbeing and safety working within school and/or system, curriculum and legisla-tive requirements.	5.4 Interpret student data Demonstrate the capacity to interpret student assessment data to evaluate student learning and modify teaching practice.	6.4 Apply profession-al learning and improve student learning Demonstrate an under-standing of the rationale for contin-ued professional learning and the implications for improved student learning.	7.4 Engage with professional teaching networks and broader communities Understand the role of external professionals and community representatives in broadening teachers’ professional knowledge and practice.

Australian Professional Standards for Teachers (Cont.)

PROFESSIONAL KNOWLEDGE		PROFESSIONAL PRACTICE			PROFESSIONAL ENGAGEMENT
1	2	3	4	5	6	7
Know students and how they learn	Know the content and how to teach it	Plan for and implement effective teaching and learning	Create and maintain supportive and safe learning environments	Assess, provide feedback and report on student learning	Engage in profes-sional learning	Engage profes-sionally with col-leagues, par-ents/carers and the community
1.5 Differentiate teaching to meet the specific learning needs of students across the full range of abilities Demonstrate knowledge and understanding of strategies for differentiating teaching to meet the specific learning needs of students across the full range of abilities.	2.5 Literacy and numeracy strategies Know and understand literacy and numeracy teaching strategies and their application in teaching areas.	3.5 Use effective classroom communication Demonstrate a range of verbal and non-verbal communication strategies to support student engagement.	4.5 Use ICT safely, responsibly and ethically Demonstrate an understanding of the relevant issues and the strategies available to support the safe, responsible and ethical use of ICT in learning and teaching.	5.5 Report on student achievement Demonstrate understanding of a range of strategies for reporting to students and parents/ carers and the purpose of keeping accurate and reliable records of student achievement.
1.6 Strategies to support full participation of students with disability Demonstrate broad knowledge and understanding of legislative requirements and teaching strategies that support participation and learning of students with disability.	2.6 Information and Communication Technology (ICT) Implement teaching strategies for using ICT to expand curriculum learning opportunities for students.	3.6 Evaluate and im-prove teaching programs Demon-strate broad knowledge of strate-gies that can be used to evaluate teaching programs to improve student learning.
		3.7 Engage parents/carers in the educative process Describe a broad range of strategies for involving parents/ carers in the educative process.

Glossary

The following table defines terms used in the Guidelines.

Term	Definition
Accreditation of initial teacher education programs in Australia: Standards and procedures (Accreditation Standards and Procedures)	Requirements for national accreditation of an initial teacher education (ITE) program. They confirm all ITE graduates meet the Australian Professional Standards for Teachers at the Graduate career stage. This is the foundation of accreditation.
Aggregated data	Data combined into related groups to inform at a broad level rather than an individual one. Aggregated data can include both qualitative (non-numeric) and quantitative (numeric) information.
Appropriate	Is likely to achieve what is intended. Used in the context of the National Program Standards.
Approved curriculum	The approved content to be covered in a classroom or education setting, including at least one of the following: - the Foundation to Year 10 Australian Curriculum, with the senior years Australian Curriculum or jurisdiction-specific senior years curriculum - alternative curriculum frameworks that the Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority (ACARA) has assessed as meeting the Australian Curriculum’s requirements - the Early Years Learning Framework for Australia - any early years, primary, middle years or secondary curriculum authorised by jurisdictional authorities. See also: - Curriculum - Curriculum and pedagogical studies - Discipline studies - Discipline-specific curriculum and pedagogical studies.
Assessed – for ‘taught, practised, assessed’	The opportunities within a program for pre-service teachers to perform against each of the Teacher Standards (Graduate level) and core content learning outcomes.
Australian Institute for Teaching and School Leadership (AITSL)	An organisation that leads Commonwealth, state and territory governments in promoting teaching and school leadership excellence, funded by the Australian Government. AITSL is a public company limited by guarantee under the Commonwealth Corporations Act 2001.

Australian Moderation and Assessment Advisory Committee (AMAAC):

An AITSL committee that advises teacher regulatory authorities about meeting National Program Standard 2.3 requirements for teaching performance assessments. The AMAAC also expertly advises the Teacher Education Quality Assurance Oversight Board (ITEQAOB) and AITSL on:

• suitable ways to benchmark teaching performance assessments
• risk management for consistent teaching performance assessments.

Australian Professional Standards for Teachers (Teacher Standards):

The Teacher Standards outline the key elements of quality teaching. They explain the knowledge and skills teachers must have at 4 career stages: Graduate, Proficient, Highly Accomplished and Lead. All ITE program graduates in Australia must show that they meet the Teacher Standards at the Graduate career stage. This is the foundation of the accreditation process. See also: Teacher Standards (Graduate level).

Authoritative – for an evidence base:

Evidence that experts recognise or accept as true or reliable. See also:

• Evidence
• Evidence base.
• Blended: An ITE program that combines online and in-person learning. Classroom:

Environment where teaching and learning happen, including:

• classrooms in schools
• virtual classrooms
• learning spaces in early childhood settings.

Combined degree:

A program of at least 4 years consisting of an undergraduate degree in discipline studies and an undergraduate teaching qualification. For example, Bachelor of Arts/Bachelor of Education. See also: Integrated degree.

Combined program:

A program that prepares graduates for teaching across multiple education settings, such as early childhood/primary school or primary school/secondary school (‘middle school’). For example, Bachelor of Education (Primary and Early Childhood).

Community – for stakeholders:

Individuals or groups with diverse perspectives, representing the wider social, political and cultural context of the ITE program.

• Contemporary: Currently relevant and applicable.

Glossary

Term	Definition
Core content	Essential content for pre-service teachers in ITE programs to be prepared for the classroom and to best support students. Core content reflects the knowledge and evidence-based practices that help ITE students meet the Teacher Standards (Graduate level) and have the greatest impact on student learning.
Critical task – for Teacher Standards (Graduate level)	An assessment task the provider identifies as core to showing a Teacher Standard (Graduate level) descriptor or component of a descriptor. Evidence comes from the unit outlines, which de-scribe the task and criteria for judgements. One critical task may capture multiple descriptors.
Cross-jurisdictional programs	ITE programs that providers deliver on campus across multiple jurisdictions.
Current, ongoing or recent	• Current – now - Ongoing – including periodic or sessional - Recent – within the last 5 years
Curriculum	Includes: - the Foundation to Year 12 Australian Curriculum or alternative curriculum frameworks that ACARA has assessed as meeting the requirements of the Australian Curriculum - any curriculum jurisdictional authorities authorise - the Early Years Learning Framework for Australia. See also: - Approved curriculum - Curriculum and pedagogical studies - Discipline studies - Discipline-specific curriculum and pedagogical studies.
Curriculum and pedagogical studies	Study of the content and teaching of a discipline aligned with approved curricula which ITE programs prepare pre-service teachers to teach. See also: - Approved curriculum - Curriculum - Discipline studies - Discipline-specific curriculum and pedagogical studies.

Data:

Information, especially individual facts, statistics, numbers or items of information, collected, organised and interpreted in a specific context to support decision-making. Data includes qualitative (non-numeric) and quantitative (numeric) information. See also:

• Evidence
• Evidence base.
• Delivery mode: How teaching and learning happen. For example, face-to-face, on-campus, online, blended or mixed modes, flexible. Discipline studies:

Study of content (concepts, structure and developments) of a branch of knowledge or subject area. For example, science or mathematics. See also:

• Approved curriculum
• Curriculum
• Curriculum and pedagogical studies
• Discipline-specific curriculum and pedagogical studies.

Discipline-specific curriculum and pedagogical studies:

Study of the content and teaching of a specific discipline aligned with approved curriculums which ITE programs prepare pre-service teachers to teach. See also:

• Approved curriculum
• Curriculum
• Curriculum and pedagogical studies
• Discipline studies.

Diversity – for professional experience placements:

IPlacements in a range of different demographic or geographic settings and bands of schooling. For example:

• urban, regional and rural
• high and low socioeconomic status
• early years, upper primary, middle school and senior school. See also: Employment-based pathway.
• Early childhood settings: Pre-school or kindergarten (prior to school).
• Emerging: A new development, which people may not see as contempo-rary.

Glossary

Employment-based pathway:

A pathway into teaching that combines academic study and employment. See also: Diversity – for professional experience placements.

Evidence:

Information used to substantiate a claim, such as:

• documents
• research
• qualitative (non-numeric) and quantitative (numeric) data. See also:
• Authoritative – for an evidence base
• Data
• Evidence base
• Peer-reviewed research.

Evidence base:

Body of objective information (i.e. evidence) used to develop an argument, point of view, justification or position. It can include peer-reviewed or frequently cited research. See also:

• Authoritative – for an evidence base
• Data
• Evidence
• Peer-reviewed research.

Executive officer (EO):

Officers from teacher regulatory authorities who administer and advise each accreditation panel. See also: Teacher regulatory authority.

Exemptions – for program entry:

Justifiable inclusion of an ITE student that does not meet the set requirements. If there are jurisdictional selection requirements or guidelines, the executive officer(s) notify the panel and provide needed documents.

Expert Advisory Group (EAG):

The expert advisory group that formerly provided advice teacher regulatory authorities on teaching performance assessments. In 2024, the AMAAC replaced the EAG. See also: Australian Moderation and Assessment Advisory Committee (AMAAC).

• Fit for purpose: Appropriate for the intended use, as judged by a panellist.

Term	Definition
Frequently cited	Research that people commonly refer to in academic contexts.
Graduate outcomes	Evidence collected after pre-service teachers complete a program about the impacts of its graduates. For example, graduate performance in particular employment settings. See also: - Impact - Pre-service teacher performance - Program impact.
Impact	Evidence of a program’s impact on: - pre-service teacher performance - graduate outcomes - other areas of overall program impact. See also: - Graduate outcomes - Impact statements - Pre-service teacher performance - Program impact.
Impact statements	Provider-developed, measurable statements based on: - program outcomes for pre-service teacher performance - graduate outcomes - program impact - targeted interest areas - minimum reporting requirements - mandatory evidence requirements. See also: Impact.
Initial teacher education (ITE) programs	Entry-level teaching qualifications completed at the undergraduate or postgraduate level. The relevant teacher regulatory authority accredits all ITE programs in Australia, showing that they meet the requirements in the Accreditation of initial teacher education programs in Australia: Standards and procedures.
Initial teacher education (ITE) provider	A higher education institution that either: - has one or more accredited ITE programs - is seeking accreditation for one or more accredited ITE programs.

Glossary

Term	Definition
Initial Teacher Education Quality Assurance Oversight Board (ITEQAOB)	An expert advisory body that oversees a systematic approach to assessing and improving the quality, consistency and outcomes of ITE programs.
Integrated degree	A program of at least 4 years, consisting of an undergraduate degree in discipline studies and a postgraduate teaching qualification. For example, Bachelor of Arts/Master of Teaching (Secondary). See also: Combined degree.
Jurisdictional requirements	Jurisdiction-specific requirements that the evidence will need to address in the accreditation process.
Learning environment – for early childhood settings	Non-school-based early learning environments, which can include: - early childhood services - other sites where teaching and learning happen. See also: Classroom.
Major study	Study equivalent to three-quarters of a year of successful EFTSL, usually comprising sequential discipline study over 3 years. In most programs, this is 6 units, with no more than 2 units at first-year level and at least 2 units at third-year level.
Minor study	Study equivalent to half a year of successful EFTSL, usually comprising sequential discipline study over 2 years. In most pro-grams, this is 4 units, with no more than 2 units at first-year level.
Moderation	A practice that supports quality assurance to show reliable and comparable scoring and judgements. There are various types of moderation, including: - statistical moderation, which is common in exam systems - social consensus moderation, where teachers/raters review and discuss their judgements in small teams, using an established common standard or benchmark - cross-institutional moderation, where assessors rate authentic samples from multiple institutions in a blind review process, with fully de-identified samples, including removal of the host institution’s original score.

Term	Definition
Nationally consistent, transparent indicators	A practice that supports quality assurance to show reliable and comparable scoring and judgements. There are various types of moderation, including: - statistical moderation, which is common in exam systems - social consensus moderation, where teachers/raters review and discuss their judgements in small teams, using an established common standard or benchmark - cross-institutional moderation, where assessors rate authentic samples from multiple institutions in a blind review process, with fully de-identified samples, including removal of the host institution’s original score.
Nationally consistent, transparent indicators	Relevant nationally consistent indicators, aligned to accreditation requirements, to encourage improvements and provide visibility for prospective students of different ITE programs. The 4 categories are: 1. selection - diverse, high-achieving cohorts in areas the workforce needs 2. retention - retention of students from entry to graduation in ITE 3. beginning teachers’ preparedness - perceived preparedness for entry into the teaching profession and student satisfaction with the quality of their program 4. transition - graduates and early career teachers’ employment outcomes.
Non-self-accrediting provider or non-legislative provider	Non-self-accrediting providers do not have the authority to accredit their own courses, unlike self-accrediting providers. TEQSA must accredit and register non-self-accrediting providers’ courses. See also: Self-accrediting provider or legislative provider.
Ongoing	See: Current, ongoing or recent.
Online program	An ITE program delivered wholly online
Panellist	Members of accreditation panels who assess ITE accreditation applications against the National Program Standards. All panellists complete the national training program, Becoming an ITE accreditation panellist.

Glossary

Peer-reviewed research:

Research evaluated by a group of experts in the appropriate field. See also:

• Evidence
• Evidence base.

Practised – for ‘taught, practised, assessed’:

The opportunities within a program for pre-service teachers to consolidate their learning of:

• all components of a Teacher Standard (Graduate level) descriptor after it has been taught
• core content learning outcomes.

Pre-service teacher:

A student enrolled in an accredited ITE program. See also: Initial teacher education (ITE) programs.

Pre-service teacher performance:

Pre-service teachers’ achievement in a program against the Teacher Standards (Graduate level), including the pre-service teacher’s positive impact on student learning. Evidence of pre-service teacher performance is collected from within an ITE program and includes aggregated assessment data. See also:

• Graduate outcomes
• Impact
• Program impact
• Program outcomes.

Professional experience:

The component of an accredited ITE program that is workplace learning in an education setting relevant to the program.

• Professional experience site: A classroom or learning environment. Professional learning:

Teachers and school leaders’ informal or formal learning to improve their individual professional practice.

Professional studies in education:

Covers:

• discipline-specific curriculum and pedagogical studies
• general education studies
• professional experience. See also: Discipline-specific curriculum and pedagogical studies.

Program impact:

The impact of an ITE program, based on evidence of pre-service teacher performance and graduate outcomes. See also:

• Graduate outcomes
• Impact
• Pre-service teacher performance
• Program outcomes.

Program outcomes:

A program’s intended outcomes set out in the provider’s Plan for demonstrating impact (Template 4), including:

• the graduates’ effectiveness as teachers
• pre-service teachers’ successful performance against the Teacher Standards (Graduate level) before graduation
• completion of a final-year teaching performance assessment before graduation
• specific program objectives.

Program rationale:

Evidence-based justification of program development, design and delivery. The program rationale describes how the program will develop effective teachers who meet the Teacher Standards (Graduate level), including having a positive impact on student learning. See also: Rationale – for the approach to program entry.

• Provider: See: Initial Teacher Education (ITE) provider.
• Rationale – for the approach to program entry: Evidence-based justification for program entry, including selection mechanisms, threshold entry scores and exemptions.
• Recent: See: Current, ongoing or recent.
• Recognised school setting: A registered school setting that is committed to providing a quality and safe learning environment for all students.
• Recognition of prior learning (RPL): An assessment of an individual’s prior learning to determine whether to grant credit for a program. RPL includes formal, informal and non-formal learning. Reliable – for a teaching performance assessment:

How well an assessment tool produces stable and consistent results, regardless of who makes the assessment. In this case, how well the teaching performance assessment accurately measures pre-service teacher learning of the Teacher Standards (Graduate level), regardless of who does the assessment.

Glossary

Required content:

Mandatory content for the specific program and stage of school-ing in line with Schedule 2 for National Program Standard 1.5.

• Resourcing: Allocation and use of human, physical, financial or virtual resources. Resource allocation modelling:

A systematic approach that helps a provider determine how to allocate its resources.

School-based experience – for provider staffing:

Engagement with an educational environment, such as:

• teaching experience
• research at a school, site or early childhood setting
• assessment of pre-service teachers on professional experience.

School, site, early childhood setting or education setting:

Any setting for children and young people’s teaching and learning, including:

• early childhood settings
• primary, middle and secondary schools
• online and distance education settings.

Self-accrediting provider or legislative provider:

Legislative providers have the authority to accredit their own courses of study. They are:

• established by law
• governed by the Higher Education Support Act 2003
• registered by TEQSA. See also: Non-self-accrediting or non-legislative provider.

Specialised teaching roles:

Teaching roles other than regular classroom roles: For example:

• English as a second language (ESL)
• English as an additional language or dialect (EALD)
• support teaching for learning difficulties or special education.

Stage two report (Template 5) findings:

Outcomes of the impact statements from the previous Plan for demonstrating impact that align with the data framework table. Findings should identify program changes, innovations and planned improvements.

Staff currency:

The amount of recent experience a staff member has working in a classroom setting.

Stages of schooling:

Groupings of year levels in education systems, defined by:

• national early years frameworks and the Australian Curriculum
• jurisdictions.

Stakeholders:

Individuals or groups with an interest in the development, design and delivery of ITE programs. External stakeholders include:

• parent groups
• system-based employers
• independent associations and employers
• non-government organisations
• ITE graduates
• teacher regulatory authorities
• supervising teachers. Internal stakeholders include:
• program directors
• course coordinators
• tutors
• professional experience coordinators
• other academic and professional staff
• pre-service teachers.

Student – for student learning:

Learners in the formal stages of schooling (Foundation to Year 12 equivalent) or in an early childhood and care setting.

Student learning:

The impact that a pre-service teacher or graduate has on student learning in an education setting.

• Substantial: A significant amount of time. Supervising teacher:

A registered teacher responsible for mentoring or coaching, providing feedback to and assessing pre-service teachers during work-based learning at professional experience sites.

• Sustained: Continuing for an extended time or without interruption. Taught – for ‘taught, prac-tised, assessed’:

The opportunities within a program for pre-service teachers to acquire skills, concepts and content for all components of a Teacher Standard (Graduate level) descriptor and the core content learning outcomes.

Glossary

Term	Definition
Teaching performance assessment	A tool to assess the practical skills and knowledge of pre-service teachers against the Teacher Standards (Graduate level) in the final year of their ITE program. Under National Program Standards 2.3 and 2.4 in the Accreditation Standards and Procedures all pre-service teachers must successfully complete a rigorous teaching performance assessment that covers the breadth of teaching practices before graduation.
Teacher regulatory authority (TRA)	The statutory authority in each state and territory that: - leads and implements that jurisdiction’s ITE accreditation process - registers teachers.
Teacher Standards (Graduate level)	The Graduate career stage of the Australian Professional Standards for Teachers makes explicit the knowledge, skills and attributes expected of graduates of nationally accredited programs. Graduates who have completed a nationally accredited ITE program have met the Teacher Standards (Graduate level). See also: Australian Professional Standards for Teachers (Teacher Standards).
Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency (TEQSA)	Australia’s independent national quality assurance and regulatory agency for higher education. TEQSA registers and evaluates the performance of higher education providers against the Higher Education Standards Framework. TEQSA also accredits programs at non-self-accrediting higher education providers.

Connect with us

Requests for information and queries about this document can be sent to info@aitsl.edu.au

AITSL has a range of useful tools and resources available on our website for teachers and leaders. You can also subscribe to AITSL Mail to have the latest news and resources delivered straight to your email inbox.

• aitsl.edu.au
• aitsl.edu.au/subscribe
• linkedin.com/company/aitsleduau
• facebook.com/aitsl
• instagram.com/aitsleduau/

aitsl.edu.au Telephone: +61 3 9944 1200 Email: info@aitsl.edu.au

AITSL is funded by the Australian Government

---

© 2025 AITSL. Licensed under CC BY-NC-ND 4.0.