Stage 3 - Reviewing your application and awarding the licence

What?

IfL has stipulated that all Professional Formation applications are to be reviewed before qualified or associate status is awarded. The Professional Formation review process is based on the processes developed in 2008 for reviewing members’ Continuing Professional Development (CPD) described in the document IfL Final Report of Pilot Audit, October 2008 and is conducted by a team of specially trained reviewers and moderators.

Following an initial review IfL and its moderators makes a decision as to whether an application has been successful, or has not sufficiently met the criteria.

Successful applications: will trigger the award of a certificate to the member along with feedback indicating evidence of good practice found.

Partially successful applicants: will be contacted by IfL to provide any additional evidence required to take the application forward. An application will usually be deemed partially successful for minor or practical discrepancies, such as a poor quality or illegible scans or photos.

Has not sufficiently met the criteria: in this case the member will receive reviewer feedback detailing constructive suggestions as to how the application might be developed for re-application or to highlight weaker areas for the applicant to consider so that the member may reapply in the next round if appropriate.

How?

The criteria against which applications were reviewed were based on those used in reviewing CPD but the emphasis was different for Professional Formation as the Professional Formation portfolio presents a picture of the applicant as a teacher and practitioner. The portfolio needs to contain sufficient information for judgements to be made, needs to be approved as the work of the applicant and should be relevant to both the review criteria and the role of the applicant.

Reviewers are asked to examine the evidence and evaluate whether the criteria have been met:

Sufficiency: does the portfolio contain the required evidence for standardised and personalised elements?

Authenticity: does the portfolio clearly relate to the member who has submitted it?

Relevance: is the portfolio relevant to the member’s work?

NOTE: Currently statistics based on the Research and Development phase of Professional Formation demonstrate that at the end of the review and moderation 68% of applicants achieve qualified status without further need for evidence. After the process of support with partially successful applicants the final figures for those awarded qualified status stands at 89% of submissions. Of those, 85% achieved QTLS and 4% achieved ATLS.