A major reform of teacher training has been built and planned since the last three decades in French-speaking Belgium, based on extensive qualitative research conducted with multiple actors of the field, denouncing the quality of teacher education and the consequences for school teaching and learning, deemed in deep crises (Dufrasne et al., 2013). However, after having been decreed in 2019, the policy implementation was adjourned in 2020 with a three-year delay. Amidst political (non) decision-making and budgetary tensions, concerned actors in organizations, such as in Universities, Higher Education Training Colleges and Schools, voice ambiguity (scientific articles, white papers, press) about the policy implementation of teacher training reform (Demeuse et al., 2020) in what is a vast (post-Bologna) field of restructuring the French-speaking Belgian educational systems (landscape decree, 2013).

The collective problematization resulting in a policy plan (Dufrasne et al., 2013)  determines a successful collective action in reforming teacher training: “Firstly, faced with the rapid and profound changes in society, the increasing complexity of modes of 'regulation', the multiple crises (of state structures, public finances, etc.), the 'decline of institutions' (as a whole), and finally the growing influence of the market (especially in education), the tendency has been, for quite a few years now, to think about 'institutions' (Dubet, 2002) and to approach their problems, in a defensive mode, within the framework of a mainly organizational vision. Secondly, for their (educational) institutions (with a lowercase letter) to overcome this, institutional actors need to think of themselves more as Institutions (with a capital letter), without underestimating or approaching organizational contingencies in an amateurish way.” (Dufrasne et al., 2013:81).
How are organizations involved in the reform process tackling this overarching call of Institutional (capital letter) change? Czarniawska (2017) proposes that a key driver of organizational change can be imitation that rests on translation. Having reached common problematization after years of negotiations and research in the field, the policy cycle (Parsons, 1995) seems to stagnate on the level of interessement (Callon, 1986), a necessary step in ascertaining common and shared interests in action. In his description of processes of translation, Michel Callon (1986) delineates four steps (problematization, interessement, enrolment and mobilization) that enable a cycle of collective action, which we propose can be applied to analyzing policy processes.

This paper explores firstly whether problematization discourse for teacher training reform has maintained an Institutional (with a capital letter) ideological note, and therefore is repeatedly revised to re-problematize and re-define common “problems” (Callon, 1986). Various working and evaluation groups were created by the French-speaking government since 2019 in order to re-evaluate the problematization part of the policy process (avant-projet de décret, 2019).” We are interested to what extent these working groups are representing real interest groups. The idea of the role, scope and efficiency of interest groups in a policy process of associative democracy is explored (Sarugger, 2002).

Secondly, a hypothesis is put forward that by not being able to produce concrete interest devices (here modes of organizing the reform, through restructuring, negotiating and collaborating), different interest groups are “refusing the transaction by defining its identity, its goals, projects, orientations, motivations, or interests in another manner.” (Callon, 1986: 204). How are actors organizing concretely what is not only an ideological but a profound organizational reform? This paper examines through critical policy discourse analysis (Hyatt, 2013) initial reform problematization that was formulated, and describes what kind of challenges and tensions issue for different actors in A) (re-) creating groups of interest (Sarugger, 2010) and in B) proposing concrete interest devices (Callon, 1984) for implementing teacher training reform.

Firstly, we undertake a secondary analysis of policy discourse from legal texts, notes and plans commissioned by the Belgian French-speaking government concerning the reform for teacher training since 2013, using critical discourse analysis (Wodak and Meyer, 2001). Moreover, the aspect of policy imitation (Czarniawska, 2017) of neighboring countries through translation is explored by looking briefly at scientific discourse about teacher training reform in France and other European countries. Secondly, scientific papers, as well as press releases and white papers issued by various Belgian education actors involved in the reform are examined to analyze policy discourse about reactions to the most recent policy steps regarding the reform. Thirdly, we will retrace the creation of working – and evaluation group(s) commissioned by the government for the policy assessment process, and look at the composition, objectives and outputs of these groups. These three types of secondary data will be assessed to explore the two main research questions; how diverse groups of actors are represented in the reform policy process, and whether their interests are taking form in concrete interest devices (Callon, 1984). In this sense, we are interested in how policy-based organizing creates distinctions of interests, roles and responsibilities, which may result in inner-organizational (Smith & Tushman), but also intra-organizational contradictions.

This is work in progress. Results are planned for February/March 2021, and will be presented in the Conference if the paper is accepted.

Callon M. (1984) Some Elements of a Sociology of Translation: Domestication of the Scallops and the Fishermen of St Brieuc Bay. The Sociological Review. 1984;32(1_suppl):196-233. doi:10.1111/j.1467-954X.1984.tb00113.x Corvellec H., Eriksson-Zetterquist U. (2017) Barbara Czarniawska: Organizational Change - Fashions, Institutions, and Translations. In: Szabla D., Pasmore W., Barnes M., Gipson A. (eds) The Palgrave Handbook of Organizational Change Thinkers. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-49820-1_72-2 Demeuse, M., Derobertmasure A., et Bocquillon, M. (2018) Accompagner ou initier une réforme ? Quelle place pour les chercheurs et les spécialistes de la formation initiale des enseignants dans la redéfinition de celle-ci dans le contexte belge francophone ? In: Recherche(s) et changement(s) : dialogues et relation, Cépaduès Dubet F., Le déclin des institutions, Paris, Seuil, 2002. Dufrasne, M. ; Degraef, V. ; Franssen, A. ; Van Campenhoudt, Luc. Evaluation qualitative, participative et prospective de la formation initiale des enseignants en fédération Wallonie-Bruxelles. (2012) http://hdl.handle.net/2078.3/140363 Décret définissant le paysage de l'enseignement supérieur et l'organisation académique des études D. 07-11-2013 M.B. 18-12-2013 Hyatt, D. (2013), "The Critical Higher Education Policy Discourse Analysis Framework", Theory and Method in Higher Education Research (International Perspectives on Higher Education Research, Vol. 9), Emerald Group Publishing Limited, pp. 41-59. https://doi.org/10.1108/S1479-3628(2013)0000009006 Note au Gouvernement de la Fédération Wallonie-Bruxelles, Avant-Projet de décret modifiant le décret du 7 février 2019 définissant la formation initiale des enseignants Note rectificative au Gouvernement de la Fédération Wallonie-Bruxelles, Note d’orientation relative à la réforme de la formation initiale des enseignants. Parsons, D. W. 1995. Public policy: an introduction to the theory and practice of policy analysis. Aldershot, UK: Edward Elgar. Saurugger Sabine, (2002) « L'expertise : un mode de participation des groupes d'intérêt au processus décisionnel communautaire », Revue française de science politique, 2002/4 (Vol. 52), p. 375-401. Saurugger Sabine, (2010) « Groupe d'intérêt », dans : Laurie Boussaguet éd., Dictionnaire des politiques publiques. 3e édition actualisée et augmentée. Paris, Presses de Sciences Po, « Références », 2010, p. 309-316. URL : https://www.cairn.info/dictionnaire-des-politiques-publiques--9782724611755-page-309.htm Wodak, R., & Meyer, M. (2001). Methods of critical discourse analysis (1st ed.). SAGE Publications, Ltd https://www.doi.org/10.4135/9780857028020