Observed Teaching Practice

Proof required

Submit a completed pre-observation record (using your university or school placement format, or a structured document of your own) capturing: the agreed learning objective; the one development focus for this observation; any agreed contextual adjustments; and both parties' signatures or digital confirmation.

What gets checked

• One specific development focus is named — not 'general teaching quality' or 'everything'; this focus shapes what the mentor watches for and what the post-observation debrief centres on
• Learning objective is measurable within the lesson — not 'students will understand X' but a specific observable outcome
• Contextual adjustments are specific to named learner profiles or circumstances — not generic classroom considerations

Common mistakes

• Treating the pre-observation conference as a formality and not recording the agreed development focus — without it, the observation loses its developmental purpose and becomes an inspection
• Setting an overly broad development focus (e.g. 'classroom management') rather than one specific and observable aspect of teaching — broad focuses cannot be meaningfully assessed in a single lesson

Resources

What a verifier looks for

• Current enhanced DBS clearance is a prerequisite — observed teaching involves direct learner contact. Confirm this is documented before accepting.
• Recognised safeguarding training module completion must be documented — verify module name and completion date.
• Pre-observation record must show both parties' agreement on a specific development focus — not a vague or post-hoc account of what was discussed.
• Mentor or observer must be a qualified professional: a registered teacher with QTS/QTLS, or a qualified university placement supervisor — peer observation does not meet this standard.
• Learner data in contextual information must be anonymised — class profiles may refer to 'a student with ADHD' or 'a student with EAL' but not by name.

Proof required

Submit: (1) the completed observer's structured observation record (your copy — showing domain ratings or written feedback mapped to the development focus and at least one other teaching standard); (2) your three in-lesson moments note (bullet format, 150+ words total); (3) a 100-word summary of the key feedback points from the post-observation debrief.

What gets checked

• Observer's record uses a named, structured framework — not free-form notes; it must map to at least the agreed development focus and one additional teaching domain
• In-lesson moments note is written contemporaneously or within 2 hours of the lesson — not reconstructed after the debrief, which would contaminate your independent analysis
• Debrief summary captures specific evaluative comments, not just praise — at least one developmental point from the mentor must be included

Common mistakes

• Writing the in-lesson moments note after the debrief — the debrief shapes your recollection, making the note retrospectively informed rather than independently reflective
• Treating the debrief as a performance review rather than a professional conversation — debrief is most effective when you bring your own analysis first and the mentor challenges or extends it

Resources

What a verifier looks for

• All SAFEGUARDING prerequisites apply — direct teaching occurred. Enhanced DBS, safeguarding training, and mentor attestation required throughout.
• Observer must be a qualified professional using a named observation framework — freelance or informal observation does not meet the professional standard for this milestone.
• In-lesson moments note must be independently produced before the debrief — check that it exists as a document with a timestamp or creation metadata predating the debrief.
• All learner references in the documentation must be anonymised — no student names, and descriptions should not combine details in ways that identify individuals.
• Peer observation or peer debrief is never acceptable for this milestone.

Proof required

Submit your developmental action plan (300–500 words using the headings above) plus your mentor's written comment on the plan (1–3 sentences, attributed to role not name).

What gets checked

• SMART goal is genuinely specific and measurable — 'improve questioning' is not SMART; 'increase wait time after questions from 0 to at least 3 seconds across 80% of Q&A exchanges' is
• Three actions are concrete and sequenced — they describe exactly what you will do in the next two lessons, not general intentions
• Evidence criterion is observable from outside your own perception — 'I will feel more confident' is not observable; 'learner responses to AfL questions will show at least 75% on-task engagement' is

Common mistakes

• Writing an action plan that repeats the lesson plan rather than addressing the professional development gap identified in the observation — the plan must target your teaching behaviour, not the lesson content
• Setting a SMART goal that can be satisfied by surface behaviour change without changing the quality of learning — the goal should target the cognitive demand on learners, not just the teacher's observable actions

Resources

What a verifier looks for

• All SAFEGUARDING prerequisites apply — this milestone documents practice from a real learner-contact session.
• Enhanced DBS, safeguarding training, and named mentor teacher sign-off required.
• Mentor's written comment must be substantive and evaluative — a signature confirming the plan was seen is not sufficient.
• SMART goal must be specific and measurable from learner evidence, not from teacher self-perception — check that the evidence criterion is externally observable.
• Action plan must address the professional development focus identified in the pre-observation conference — not general lesson improvement goals.
• Peer review of the action plan does not replace mentor teacher comment.