Former Education Minister Evarist Bartolo had a clear vision for the education sector and particularly for initial teacher training. His vision may have been built over a span of years since he led the Education Ministry twice, in the short term of the Labour administration of 22 months from 1996 to 1998 and later during the return of the Labour Party in Government in 2013. In 2014, the Faculty of Education within the University of Malta started to shift its initial teacher training to the 3+ 2 model, raising the teaching qualification to Masters level. This move was in line with the developments in other European countries. Meanwhile in 2015 the Education Ministry established the Institute for Education by transforming a unit in the Ministry tasked with professional development and extending its remit as a separate entity. These developments shaped initial teacher training in the past decade.

The vision for initial teacher training was very clear. The Faculty of Education was to cater for young students who, after finishing their first general degree in any area, could pursue a two-year Masters with the Faculty enabling them to join the teaching profession. It had also a parallel and dedicated programme for students who wanted to specialise in primary years teaching. On the other hand, the Institute for Education was to cater for employees in the teaching profession who were providing services as supply grades and who would benefit from further qualifications to enable them to obtain regular teaching status.

Another remit of the Institute referred to professional development of new recruits, new appointments and of educators in general, effectively expanding the model of professional development previously run centrally by the Ministry. The seemingly clear vision was however not clear for most. From the onset, the rift between the newly established Institute and the University of Malta was evident. The Institute board composed also of representatives from the University of Malta was perhaps the forum where the rifts were exposed most, so much that its composition had to be changed within few months in office, rendering it almost ineffective. 

The implementation of the vision was certainly problematic. The direction towards the 3+2 model of the Faculty of Education, despite implemented was not attracting the stipulated number of applicants. Teachers could still join the profession by using previous course criteria without the need of the Masters qualification. This window was left open through the Education Act to enable supply grades to obtain regular status in the shortest route possible. However, with the two-tier approach and the shorter route which was preferred by students, the two institutions started offering courses which lead to the full teaching qualification without the need of the Masters degree.

This move was initiated by the Institute for Education which offered a replica Bachelor of Education course at part-time level which attracted a number of students who were already in employment.  The Faculty of Education's reply was a Bachelor course for Early Childhood education which not only did include a Masters level to access the teaching profession, but it removed the (Honours) extension of one year which was included in previous Bachelors courses.

With this lowering of qualification levels, private course providers started eyeing the sector by designing Bachelor courses for initial teacher training. The result is a mess. The pegging with the former Bachelor of Education (Honours) degree is lost, although the Education Act still refers to it. Students following the Masters in Teaching and Learning (MTL) are at times using the window in the law by following the course for just one year, obtaining an exit qualification which enables them to obtain regular teaching status.  This mess was compounded by the recent recommendation of the Commissioner for Education within the Office of the Ombudsman. An administrative mistake in the levelling of the former Postgraduate Certificate in Education (PGCE) which affected 400 graduates led the Commissioner to issue a recommendation to the University of Malta to offer a course to this group to top-up the level of qualification from MQF 6 to MQF 7. Despite the faculty to refuse a recommendation by the Commissioner, the Education Ministry and the University heeded the recommendation and have just notified affected teachers about a new course at MQF7 which fulfils the Commissioner's recommendation. Although not stated but clearly implied, this course will lead to nothing else than the pleasure in re-training in pedagogical and educational theories which have evolved since the time of their former studies.

The Commissioner and the Education Ministry through the University of Malta's decision may have ticked a box, but they have compounded further the problem of initial teacher training and departed from the vision of the former Education Minister, which has since become unrecognisable. The desired upgrading of initial teacher training through the 3+2 model looks more distant than it was 10 years ago.

Marco Bonnici is President of the Malta Union of Teachers