对 "强势开端 "初始师范教育改革的批判:在 "行之有效 "运动中将神经科学规定为核心课程

Andrew Skourdoumbis, Emma Rowe
{"title":"对 \"强势开端 \"初始师范教育改革的批判:在 \"行之有效 \"运动中将神经科学规定为核心课程","authors":"Andrew Skourdoumbis, Emma Rowe","doi":"10.1007/s13384-024-00743-y","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>The paper studies the rise of neuroscience in initial teacher education, paying attention to the relatively recent Australian Government (2023) report titled ‘Strong Beginnings’. In taking up a critical policy sociology lens, we focus on the first priority within the reforms, which is mandating brain science and the ‘brain and learning’ as core curriculum within initial teacher education. The reforms will embed standardised curriculum into initial teacher education and tie this curriculum to graduate teacher standards, bracketed within prescribed texts, ideologies and agendas. The reforms are positioned within the ‘what works’ movement, increasing accreditation and certain types of evidence, and the role and authority of intermediary organisations, including the Australian Institute for Teaching and School Leadership (AITSL). It promotes research that has been paid for by the think tank Centre for Independent Studies and aligned with the Australian Education Research Organisation and Education Endowment Foundation. In this paper, we endeavour to highlight how the singular and narrow focus on brain-based approaches is not only reductionist, but also potentially generative of oppressive technologies. The mandating of standardised curriculum and brain science undermines educators, including initial teacher educators, and bolsters private interests in education. The standardisation of core curriculum, which will be tied to accreditation processes and graduate teacher standards, is underpinned by a punitive-accountability based approach. Furthermore, whilst it is less visible, these reforms contain brain science tropes redolent of eugenics and deficit framings of low socio-economic status students.</p>","PeriodicalId":501129,"journal":{"name":"The Australian Educational Researcher","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A critique of ‘Strong Beginnings’ initial teacher education reforms: mandating neuroscience as core curriculum within the ‘what works’ movement\",\"authors\":\"Andrew Skourdoumbis, Emma Rowe\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s13384-024-00743-y\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>The paper studies the rise of neuroscience in initial teacher education, paying attention to the relatively recent Australian Government (2023) report titled ‘Strong Beginnings’. In taking up a critical policy sociology lens, we focus on the first priority within the reforms, which is mandating brain science and the ‘brain and learning’ as core curriculum within initial teacher education. The reforms will embed standardised curriculum into initial teacher education and tie this curriculum to graduate teacher standards, bracketed within prescribed texts, ideologies and agendas. The reforms are positioned within the ‘what works’ movement, increasing accreditation and certain types of evidence, and the role and authority of intermediary organisations, including the Australian Institute for Teaching and School Leadership (AITSL). It promotes research that has been paid for by the think tank Centre for Independent Studies and aligned with the Australian Education Research Organisation and Education Endowment Foundation. In this paper, we endeavour to highlight how the singular and narrow focus on brain-based approaches is not only reductionist, but also potentially generative of oppressive technologies. The mandating of standardised curriculum and brain science undermines educators, including initial teacher educators, and bolsters private interests in education. The standardisation of core curriculum, which will be tied to accreditation processes and graduate teacher standards, is underpinned by a punitive-accountability based approach. Furthermore, whilst it is less visible, these reforms contain brain science tropes redolent of eugenics and deficit framings of low socio-economic status students.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":501129,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The Australian Educational Researcher\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-09\",\"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/s13384-024-00743-y\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Australian Educational Researcher","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s13384-024-00743-y","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文研究了神经科学在初始师范教育中的兴起,并关注了澳大利亚政府(2023 年)最近发布的题为 "强有力的开端 "的报告。从批判政策社会学的视角出发,我们将重点放在改革的首要任务上,即规定将脑科学和 "大脑与学习 "作为初始教师教育的核心课程。改革将在初始师范教育中嵌入标准化课程,并将该课程与毕业教师标准挂钩,将其置于规定的文本、意识形态和议程之中。改革的定位是 "什么有效 "运动,增加认证和某些类型的证据,以及包括澳大利亚教学与学校领导研究所(AITSL)在内的中介组织的作用和权威。它所推动的研究由智库独立研究中心(Centre for Independent Studies)支付费用,并与澳大利亚教育研究组织(Australian Education Research Organisation)和教育捐赠基金会(Education Endowment Foundation)保持一致。在本文中,我们将努力强调单一而狭隘地关注以大脑为基础的方法不仅是还原论的,而且还可能产生压迫性技术。对标准化课程和脑科学的强制要求损害了教育工作者(包括初始教师教育工作者)的利益,助长了教育领域的私人利益。核心课程的标准化将与认证程序和毕业教师标准挂钩,其基础是一种以惩罚-问责为基础的方法。此外,尽管不太明显,但这些改革包含了脑科学的陈词滥调,充满了优生学和对社会经济地位低下的学生的赤字框架。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
A critique of ‘Strong Beginnings’ initial teacher education reforms: mandating neuroscience as core curriculum within the ‘what works’ movement

The paper studies the rise of neuroscience in initial teacher education, paying attention to the relatively recent Australian Government (2023) report titled ‘Strong Beginnings’. In taking up a critical policy sociology lens, we focus on the first priority within the reforms, which is mandating brain science and the ‘brain and learning’ as core curriculum within initial teacher education. The reforms will embed standardised curriculum into initial teacher education and tie this curriculum to graduate teacher standards, bracketed within prescribed texts, ideologies and agendas. The reforms are positioned within the ‘what works’ movement, increasing accreditation and certain types of evidence, and the role and authority of intermediary organisations, including the Australian Institute for Teaching and School Leadership (AITSL). It promotes research that has been paid for by the think tank Centre for Independent Studies and aligned with the Australian Education Research Organisation and Education Endowment Foundation. In this paper, we endeavour to highlight how the singular and narrow focus on brain-based approaches is not only reductionist, but also potentially generative of oppressive technologies. The mandating of standardised curriculum and brain science undermines educators, including initial teacher educators, and bolsters private interests in education. The standardisation of core curriculum, which will be tied to accreditation processes and graduate teacher standards, is underpinned by a punitive-accountability based approach. Furthermore, whilst it is less visible, these reforms contain brain science tropes redolent of eugenics and deficit framings of low socio-economic status students.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
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