Following trends elsewhere in the world (Cochran-Smith, 2001), Australia has experienced the expansion of standards-based evaluations within education contexts from students to teachers. Primarily focusing on beginning teachers (MACVIT, 2000), the intention is for standards frameworks to encompass all stages of the profession and direct teacher assessment, development and advancement (DEST, 2003a). State and National propositions and drafts for standards are appearing around Australia with plans for more to come (ASTA, 2002; Victorian Institute of Teaching, 2003; DEST, 2003a). Apart from purporting to provide a better framework for conceptualizing teaching as a career, such standards have been hailed as a way teaching can help promote a 'new professionalism' (DEST, 2003a). The rhetoric surrounding the teacher standards agenda suggests the promotion of teacher ownership of their own profession through 'distributed leadership', 'new knowledge' and 'transformational practice' (DEST 2003a, p17). Standards are described as a 'cornerstone' of this new model. This paper considers the emerging reality behind this rhetoric as standards move into the implementation stages, particularly those providing frameworks for beginning teachers. The call for teacher standards is not new, with people such as Lawrence Ingvarson commenting on the need for standards within Australia over many years (1993, 1995, 2000). The discourse surrounding standards for teachers appears to be dominated by education bureaucracies rather than the professional itself. International examples of standards also claim the right of teachers to monitor their own profession through standards frameworks. Such calls often cite examples of other professions or call on definitions and notions of a 'profession'. For example, James Kelly (2000), commenting on the processes of the National Board for Professional Teaching standards in the USA claimed that, 'accomplished teachers are the experts about teaching, after all' (p.18). In spite of many calls for standards to herald a new professionalism for teachers within Australia, and in spite of many agencies claiming to represent teachers in this development, it is not clear what 'professional ownership', or 'ownership by teachers' actually means in practice. Boston (2002) highlights this problem and explains that it is at least partially due to the 'fragmented' nature of the teaching profession. Using Judyth Sachs' (2002, 2003) understandings of 'managerialism' and 'activism', we suggest that the standards challenge teacher identity. Further, we examine the implementation of standards for early career teachers in the state of Victoria and observe the potential for increased conformity, control and a reduction in professionalism for teachers. This paper represents the place of teacher educators and researchers as 'activists' and is premised upon giving voice to teachers.