Teacher education in the not-so-United Kingdom: educational policies and political devolution

Author(s):

Jean Murray(submitting)Gary Beauchamp(presenting)Linda Clarke(presenting)Moira Hulme

Conference:

ECER 2014

Network:

10. Teacher Education Research

Format:

Paper

Session Information

10 SES 12 B, In Teacher Education, Age Matters and So Does Policy

Paper Session

Time:

2014-09-05

09:00-10:30

Room:

B223 Sala de Aulas

Chair:

Linda Clarke

Contribution

As in many European nations, teacher education across the UK’s four nations (England, Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales) is under active development. Statutory requirements for initial teacher education (ITE), together with the sometimes tacit discourses and practices of the field, increasingly reflect differing assumptions about teaching, teacher learning and approaches to governance. These changes have been facilitated by political devolution, as possibilities for greater cross-national divergence in education policy have increased (Raffe 2005).

Submitted in an earlier form as a commissioned article for the BERA RSA Review of research-informed teacher education across the UK, this conference paper (revised and updated for ECER) explores in more depth the arrangements for ITE in the four UK nations. Our focuses are largely on explicit policy and practices or what Popkewitz (1987) terms the ‘public discourses’ of ITE across the UK. But following Ball (1994: 16), we see these as decoded, mediated and instantiated in practice in markedly differing ways within a nation, shaped by and acting to shape the perspectives of multiple stakeholders.

The paper has two major focuses: first, the declared teacher Standards (competencies/ competences) and their relationships to research-informed teacher education in each jurisdiction; and second, policy documentation and declarations, which reflect the ‘turn or (re)turn to the practical’ (Furlong and Lawn, 2011) in teacher education.

Method

The paper draws on a cross-national review of policies for initial teacher education in the UK. The original review was undertaken between April and June 2013 and was jointly funded by the British Educational Research Association (BERA) and the Royal Society for the encouragement of Arts, Manufactures and Commerce (RSA). The review addressed policy change from 1984 with a particular focus on: (a) the post-devolution period following referenda in Scotland and Wales in 1997 and Ireland in 1998; and (b) the impact of policy change under the Conservative-Liberal Democrat coalition government following the UK general election of May 2010. Policies outlining the teachers’ Standards/competences and statutory requirements for ITE were drawn from government sources and key agencies in each of the four nations: the then Teaching / Training Development Agency for schools (TTA/TDA) and the Department for Education in England; the Department for Education and Skills, Welsh Government; the Scottish Executive Education Department (SEED) and Scottish Government; and the Department of Education and Learning, Northern Ireland (DELNI). Materials produced by the General Teaching Councils of Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland were consulted; and, where appropriate, the publications of the school inspectorates (HMIE/Education Scotland, Ofsted, Estyn and the Education and Training Inspectorate Northern Ireland). The literature search was supplemented by key informant contact to address omissions and to check for accuracy at a time of fast moving change. The analysis presented here is informed by the approach to ‘home international’ comparison advanced by Raffe and Byrne (2005). The explication of points of policy convergence and divergence is guided by the analytical framework proposed by Martens et al. (2010), supplemented by due attention to ‘contextual comparison’ (Seddon and Levin 2013).

Expected Outcomes

Although all four set of Standards represent forms of ‘prescribed’ or ‘demanded’ professionalism (Evans 2011), we conclude that they differ in terms of provenance and content, carrying the inflection of national educational histories, politics and culture, and attitudes to research-informed ITE. The concept of ‘performative professionalism’ is evident to some extent in all the Standards, but demonstrated most clearly in England. Analyses indicate many iterations of the discourse of relevance, some country-specific, using differing language and rhetoric to discuss ‘relevance’ and reflecting differing views of ITE. All the nations now place increased emphasis on ‘practical’ and ‘relevant’ aspects of ITE, particularly the practicum. But in England such trends are intensified by specific structural and political factors and by a dominating culture of compliance and regulation. Our analyses identify some similarities across the four jurisdictions, but also that policy in England is diverging markedly from that elsewhere in the UK. This situation has implications for the future contribution of research-based models of ITE in England. The process of devolution in particular has allowed a growing polarisation reflecting how education can help each particular nation reflect and develop national identities (Billig, 1995). The nature of the discourses in Scotland and Northern Ireland also reflects broader concerns about social justice and cultural contexts of the individual countries and, in Scotland a continuing commitment to comprehensive education and the ‘tradition’ of the ‘democratic intellect’ (Davie, 1961). Policy discourses in Northern Ireland are framed by a situation where responsibility for ITE is shared between two government departments. As some nations/regions across Europe are diverging (e.g. Catalonia/Spain, Scotland/UK) in a ‘global trend towards devolution’ (Rodriguez-Pose and Gill 2003), this paper contributes to European debates about how political devolution processes may shape the instantiation of policies for ITE and contribute to the (re)creation of distinctive communal identities.

References

Anderson, B. (1991) Imagined Communities, London: Verso. Ball, S. (1994) Education Reform: a critical and post-structural approach. Buckingham: Open University Press. Billig, M. (1995) Banal Nationalism, London: Sage. Evans, L. (2011) The ‘shape’ of teacher professionalism in England: professional standards, performance management, professional development and the changes proposed in the 2010 White Paper. British Educational Research Journal, 37(5), 851-870. Furlong, J. & Lawn, M. (Ed.s) (2011) Disciplines of Education: their role in the future of education research. London: Routledge. Martens, K., Nagel, A., Windzio, M. & Weymann, A. (Ed.s) (2010) Transformation of Education Policy. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. Popkewitz, T. (Ed.) (1987) Critical Studies in Teacher Education: its folklore, theory and practice. London: Falmer. Raffe, D. (2005) ‘Devolution and divergence in education policy’. In Devolution in Practice: Public Policy Differences within the UK. Newcastle, IPPR North: 52-69. Raffe, D. & Byrne, D. (2005) Policy Learning From ‘Home International’ Comparisons. Centre for Educational Sociology, University of Edinburgh, Briefing No. 34, May 2005. Rodriguez-Pose, A. & Gill, N. (2003) ‘The global trend towards devolution and its implications’, Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy, 21 (3), 333-351. Seddon, T. & Levin, J.S. (Ed.s) (2013) Educators, Professionalism and Politics. Global Transitions, National Spaces and Professional Projects. London: Routledge.

Author Information

Jean Murray (submitting)

University of East London, United Kingdom

Gary Beauchamp (presenting)

Cardiff Metropolitan University

Cardiff School of Education

Cardiff

Linda Clarke (presenting)

University of Ulster

Moira Hulme

University of Glasgow

Search the ECER Programme

Search for keywords and phrases in "Text Search"
Restrict in which part of the abstracts to search in "Where to search"
Search for authors and in the respective field.
For planning your conference attendance you may want to use the conference app, which will be issued some weeks before the conference
If you are a session chair, best look up your chairing duties in the conference system (Conftool) or the app.