Playing Chess When You Only Have a Couple of Pawns: Policy Advocacy in Teacher Education

Background: In recent years, intermediary organizations have increasingly influenced educational policy. Among other proposals, they have promoted teacher education redesign based on technocratic values and stringent accountability measures. In response to these policy changes and the intensifying crisis in the teaching profession, teacher educators have been called to engage in policy debates. Yet, to date, few studies have explored how teacher educators participate in policy advocacy. Purpose/Research Question: The purpose of this study is to examine variations in teacher educators’ efforts to influence policymaking decisions. Using the conceptual framework of policy advocacy, the study addresses the following research question: How do teacher educators engage in policy advocacy? Research Design: The study utilizes multiple case study methodology and incorporates four cases. Through a qualitative analysis of interviews, policy artifacts, policy documents, and videos of official policymaking and legislative meetings, we document how teacher educators seek to influence the direction of teacher education reforms by engaging with policymakers, the public, and other policy actors. We compare advocacy activities of different teacher educators and note the varying outcomes these activities produce. Findings: Our study shows that teacher educators engaged in information campaigning through research briefs, policy reports, letter writing, and sharing personal stories. Although some attempted to engage the public, most focused their efforts on building relationships with decision-makers. Despite those efforts, study participants were rarely consulted when new policies were conceptualized. Our study also points to a contrast between groups that worked to disrupt policy agendas of intermediary organizations and those that aligned their advocacy work with them. Those who attempted to advocate against the measures promoted by intermediary organizations faced more challenges than those who formed coalitions with intermediary organizations. Conclusions: Our study sheds light on the paradox teacher educators faced when they engaged in policy advocacy. Resisting the agendas of intermediary organizations (IOs) made policy advocacy more challenging for teacher educators. But coalitions with IOs could co-opt teacher educators’ voices toward technocratic agendas of teacher education reform.