Assessing the impact of virtual school visits in initial teacher education

Project overview

Ensuring trainee teachers received effective, high-quality training has been essential in developing great educators. In England, one key element of this training has been Intensive Training and Practice (ITaP). ITaP was designed to provide trainees with focused exposure to specific foundational aspects of the curriculum, offering immediate feedback, expert support, and strengthening the link between evidence and practice.

Starting from the 2024/25 academic year, all initial teacher education programmes in England were required to include ITaP. An early pilot of ITaP, conducted by the National Institute of Teaching in 2022, revealed that hybrid delivery of certain aspects of this training helped with scale and consistency. However, the evidence base concerning the effectiveness of remote or blended learning in teacher education remained limited, and further research was needed to determine how best to implement ITaP at a national level.

This mixed-methods evaluation study compared the effectiveness of two modes of implementing exposure to expert research-informed practice and immersion in a live teaching environment as part of the ITaP programme: virtual school visits and in-person school visits. The study aimed to better understand the challenges and opportunities associated with both approaches.

Research aims

• Estimate the relative effectiveness of a virtual school visit, in comparison with an in-person school visit, as part of the delivery of Intensive Training and Practice in initial teacher education in England.
• To build theory about how a school visit works to achieve the aims of ITAP, and to understand mechanisms of impact for virtual and in-person delivery in achieving these aims.

Summary of findings

The evaluation indicated no significant advantage of in-person visits over virtual visits in trainees’ grasp of key evidence-based teaching techniques, such as questioning and scaffolding. Both modalities had a comparable impact on trainees’ ability to prepare and apply these skills, as well as their self-efficacy, which increased over time regardless of modality. Whilst trainees generally preferred in-person visits and rated them as more useful, the overall usefulness of both formats was acceptable. These findings suggest that virtual delivery can provide a viable alternative without compromising the quality of trainees' learning.

However, the two formats demonstrated distinct strengths. Virtual visits allowed for greater focus on specific teaching techniques, with tutors playing an active role in guiding observation and deconstruction. Additionally, virtual delivery provided access to a wider range of school contexts, overcoming geographical barriers. In contrast, in-person visits were valued for creating a more immersive “real-life” classroom experience, where trainees could more easily observe pupil responses, classroom dynamics, and informal interactions with teachers to understand their decision-making.

The evaluation identified five key mechanisms through which both delivery modes achieved their impact: enabling observation of “real-life” practice, ensuring the practice is intentionally shaped for trainee learning, providing tutor support for effective observation, helping trainees understand the reasoning behind teaching decisions, and showcasing the impact of teaching on pupil learning. The study concludes that combining the strengths of both virtual and in-person visits can enhance ITaP design, making teacher training more effective, accessible and scalable.

Key takeaways

• We did not find any evidence that virtual visits were less effective than in-person visits for building trainees' understanding of questioning and scaffolding, readiness to apply learning, and self-efficacy.
• Virtual visits provided structured focus and exposure to diverse classroom contexts, while in-person visits enhanced the "real-life" feel and ease of accessing lesson content and classroom dynamics.
• Both modalities supported key mechanisms, such as understanding observed practice, intentional shaping of learning opportunities, expert-guided observation, and seeing the impact on pupil learning.
• High-quality audiovisual setups, intentional lesson planning for virtual visits, and balancing tutor guidance with trainee autonomy were identified as critical for effective delivery.

Project team

• Dr Lydia Lymperis, Research Fellow, NIoT
• Dr Ellen Turner, Head of Evaluation and Observational Research, NIoT
• Emily Beach, Head of ITE Faculty, NIoT
• Dr Calum Davey, Executive Director of Research, NIoT
• Dr Georgina Hudson, Research Fellow, NIoT
• Dr Rob Nash, Head of Psychological Research, NIoT
• Alex Swartz, Research Assistant, Independent

-