Policy makers as experts and teachers in need of reform: a critique of ‘evidence-based’ reforms of initial teacher education in Australia

Andrew Deuchar
{"title":"Policy makers as experts and teachers in need of reform: a critique of ‘evidence-based’ reforms of initial teacher education in Australia","authors":"Andrew Deuchar","doi":"10.1007/s13384-024-00757-6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>In 2023 the Australian government mandated reforms to initial teacher education (ITE) courses across Australia. The key rationale of the <i>Strong Beginnings Report</i> is to better prepare teachers for the classroom and help stem the flow of teachers leaving the profession. This article suggests that the <i>Strong Beginnings Report</i> mobilises forms of evidence that privilege bureaucratic intervention over teachers’ insight and capacity. Using Bacchi’s ‘What’s the problem represented to be?’ approach to policy analysis, I argue that the <i>Report</i> selectively draws on evidence to position teachers as underprepared for the classroom and in need of reform. It does this by (i) suggesting that one of the main reasons teachers leave the profession is because they have inadequate skills, (ii) downplaying the broader social, economic and political context in which teacher attrition occurs, and (iii) deprofessionalising teaching by casting it as a technical process. Building on works that critique the impacts of standardisation, regulation and oversight in educational reform, I contend that the proposed reforms will do little to improve ITE or address teacher attrition. More than this, they will work to further discredit teachers and undermine the value of public education.</p>","PeriodicalId":501129,"journal":{"name":"The Australian Educational Researcher","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Australian Educational Researcher","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s13384-024-00757-6","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In 2023 the Australian government mandated reforms to initial teacher education (ITE) courses across Australia. The key rationale of the Strong Beginnings Report is to better prepare teachers for the classroom and help stem the flow of teachers leaving the profession. This article suggests that the Strong Beginnings Report mobilises forms of evidence that privilege bureaucratic intervention over teachers’ insight and capacity. Using Bacchi’s ‘What’s the problem represented to be?’ approach to policy analysis, I argue that the Report selectively draws on evidence to position teachers as underprepared for the classroom and in need of reform. It does this by (i) suggesting that one of the main reasons teachers leave the profession is because they have inadequate skills, (ii) downplaying the broader social, economic and political context in which teacher attrition occurs, and (iii) deprofessionalising teaching by casting it as a technical process. Building on works that critique the impacts of standardisation, regulation and oversight in educational reform, I contend that the proposed reforms will do little to improve ITE or address teacher attrition. More than this, they will work to further discredit teachers and undermine the value of public education.

作为专家的决策者和需要改革的教师:对澳大利亚初始师范教育 "循证 "改革的批判
2023 年,澳大利亚政府要求对全澳的初始教师教育 (ITE) 课程进行改革。强势开端报告》的主要理念是让教师更好地为课堂教学做好准备,并帮助阻止教师离职潮。本文认为,"强势开端报告 "调动了各种形式的证据,将官僚干预置于教师的洞察力和能力之上。利用巴奇的 "问题是什么 "的政策分析方法,我认为,该报告有选择地利用证据,将 教师定位为课堂教学准备不足,需要改革。为此,报告(i)认为教师离职的主要原因之一是他们的技能不足,(ii)淡化了造成 教师流失的更广泛的社会、经济和政治背景,(iii)将教学视为一个技术性的过程, 从而使教学非专业化。在批评教育改革中的标准化、管理和监督的影响的基础上,我认为,拟议的改革对改善信息技术教育或解决教师流失问题几乎没有帮助。不仅如此,改革还会进一步败坏教师的声誉,损害公共教育的价值。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信