The consultation period for the structure, priorities and organisation of the Institute of Learning and Teaching is proving very useful, including, as it does, the airing of differing views and dilemmas as in The THES (May 15).
A body such as the ILT, established both by and for the sector, will benefit from regular consultation and rigorous debate. One issue may require clarification. There has been reference to a requirement of 300-400 hours continuing professional development to remain "in good standing" of institute membership. In my view this would be too onerous a burden if it implied that amount of classroom or programmatic attendance. It does not, and broadly refers to the amount of time the reflexive practitioners would engage with their professional development, an element of which could include formal attendance.
Roger King Chair, ILT Planning Group