Widespread concerns about teach quality and performance of education systems in comparative perspective has fueled debates about the most effective ways of recruiting, developing, and retaining teachers (OECD, 2005; Eurydice, 2006).  In this context, a particular ‘fast-track’ model of teacher recruitment and preparation has emerged in nearly fifty countries across the world since 2007.  These programmes, modeled after Teach For America and Teach First in the U.S. and U.K. respectively, recruit high-achieving graduates in to teach for two years in under-performing schools after completing a summer training.  Teach For All (TFAll), a global organization established in 2007, helps social entrepreneurs adapt the model, find local bases of support with which to launch it, and share of ‘best practice’ across the network.  While TFAll claims forty-six programmes as members, a number of ‘shadow’ Teach For/First programmes exist that are not officially members of the TFAll network (e.g., Teach For Canada, TEACH South Africa, Teach First Norway).  Yet, such programmes are united in their stated ‘mission’ to ensure that children have access to quality educational opportunities by bringing a new pool of talent into teaching, developing such recruits into leaders, and building cross-sector support for educational innovation.

This international spread of the TFA/Teach First models and Teach For All represent a global education policy that is moving, mutating, and shaping educational practice and policy on multiple levels.  Research into this network of programmes is emerging, providing analyses of individual programmes (e.g., Friedrich, 2014), the discourse across TFAll organizations (Ahmann, 2015; Ellis et al., 2016), and the wider implications of the expanding network (e.g., Olmedo, Bailey and Ball, 2013; Londe, Brewer and Lubienski, 2015; Straubhaar and Friedrich, 2015).  The plethora of studies of Teach For America – while at times polemic – suggest such programme acts ‘as catalysts for particular forms of civic engagement’ and as ‘gateways to leadership, policy and advocacy for particular groups’ (Scott, Trujillo and Rivera, 2016).

TFAll and its related programmes have become a prominent global policy despite persistent questions concerning the training, effectiveness, and retention of their teachers.  How and why are these programmes appearing?  In what ways are TFAll programmes being adapted in different national contexts?  And how are these programmes and their network affecting educational policy and practice within and across Europe and beyond?  This two-part symposium begins to explore these questions from various national settings and perspectives.

The first session of this two-part symposium focuses on the roots of the TFAll programmes and the circumstances of their emergence in different European contexts.  First, Rauschenberger’s paper examines the origins and evolution of Teach For America and the circumstances surrounding its first transfer into the U.K. context as Teach First in 2002.  She highlights how the transfer resulted in two contrasting models from which TFAll would later be further used and adapted.  Next, Nesje’s paper focuses on the unique case of Teach First Norway and considers how and why the government established the initiative with the national oil company, Statoil in 2010.  She illuminates how, despite not being a TFAll member, the programme works closely with Teach First U.K. but is still finding its place in Norway’s teacher educational landscape.  Thirdly, Subasi’s paper examines Teach For Austria, which was founded in 2012, and provides a detailed look at the programme’s scope, achievements, and criticism within the Austrian national context.  Finally, Noland’s paper provides a comparative look at the emergence of Teach For Belgium and Teach For France in 2014 and 2016 respectively.  She examines  ways in which these two programmes’ contrasting origins and national settings shape their message, impact, and create new tensions within the educational sphere.  

Ahmann, C. (2015) ‘Teach For All: Storytelling “Shared Solutions” and Scaling Global Reform’, Education Policy Analysis Archives (23). Ellis, V. et al. (2016) ‘Teaching other people’s children, elsewhere, for a while: the rhetoric of a travelling educational reform’, Journal of Education Policy, 31(1), pp. 60–80. doi: 10.1080/02680939.2015.1066871. Eurydice (2006) Quality Assurance in Teacher Education in Europe. Brussels: Eurydice European Unit, p. 94. Friedrich, D. S. (2014) ‘Global Microlending in Education Reform: Enseñá por Argentina and the Neoliberalization of the Grassroots’, Comparative Education Review, 58(2), pp. 296–321. doi: 10.1086/675412. Londe, P. G. L., Brewer, T. J. and Lubienski, C. A. (2015) ‘Teach For America and Teach For All: Creating an Intermediary Organization Network for Global Education Reform.’, Education Policy Analysis Archives, 23(27), pp. 1–28. Olmedo, A., Bailey, P. L. J. and Ball, S. J. (2013) ‘To Infinity and beyond …: Heterarchical Governance, the Teach for All Network in Europe and the Making of Profits and Minds’, European Educational Research Journal, 12(4), pp. 492–512. doi: 10.2304/eerj.2013.12.4.492. Scott, J., Trujillo, T. and Rivera, M. D. (2016) ‘Reframing Teach For America: A conceptual framework for the next generation of scholarship’, Education Policy Analysis Archives, 24.