In the field of educational research, it is widely accepted that trust constitutes one of the key drivers of policy reform, teacher professionalism and innovation in teaching (e.g., Van Maele & Houtte, 2014). In a recently published collective volume by Ehren and Baxter (2021a) on global perspectives in comparative education, trust is conceptualised as one of the three building blocks of education system reform, along with accountability and capacity. The authors argue that trust ‘underpins the nature of teachers’ work, while it also acts as a lubricant for effective collaboration and relations in a school context’ (Ehren & Baxter, 2021b, p. 11). In addition, they mention that the professionalisation of teachers and the consideration of the individual needs of the students require ‘a degree of trust in teachers’. This is also applicable to the vocational education and training (VET) sector. For example, Avis (2003, p. 320) emphasises that ‘high trust relations could set the context in which innovative practices develop’ in VET. In order to implement such trust relations, however, a ‘re-formed teacher professionalism’ would be necessary, which grants teachers more autonomy and freedom of action than in the prevailing ‘performative culture’. Likewise, O’Leary (2013, p. 711) calls for ‘a greater degree of autonomy and trust’ to VET teachers to enhance professional development.

This paper aims to show how dis/trust-building processes are shaped by ongoing standards-based education reforms, affecting VET teacher professionalism and subjectivity. Internationally, VET reforms often focus on producing ‘work-ready’ human capital and generating economic progress (Atkins, 2017). The dominance of neoliberal logics in policy-making has implications for the way in which the value and purpose of VET is conceptualised. Increased standardisation, control, and performance management create a rather instrumentalist and regulatory environment that arguably neglects conversations about what is educationally desirable (Biesta, 2009). This may affect the professional self-understanding of teachers, whose capacity to take pedagogical risks is constrained. It raises questions about the creation and maintenance of professional trust, where embracing vulnerability is central to coping with complexity and uncertainty.

So far, little is known about the ways to which current reforms (re)produce trust or distrust towards VET teachers and what impact these changes have on teachers’ professional self-understandings (Donovan, 2019). We therefore seek to explore VET teachers’ experiences of being trusted within educational policy frameworks by addressing the research questions of how current standards-based reforms create a culture of dis/trust in VET and what impact this has on teacher professionalism. Drawing on Niklas Luhmann’s (2017) seminal work on system trust, we propose a distinct perspective for examining teacher professionalism in VET. Luhmann (2017, p. 9) characterises trust and distrust as a process of ‘complexity reduction’ in an environment of uncertainty. Trust refers to the capacity to accept the vulnerability associated with placing confidence in others (Möllering, 2006), enabling freedom of action and tolerating ambiguity. Distrust, on the other hand, is based on ‘negative expectations’ (Skinner et al., 2014, p. 208) of others and aims to avoid uncertainty by setting strict boundaries for acceptable behaviour. The conditions for trust are situated at ‘symbolic thresholds’ (Kroeger, 2019, p. 119); if these are too narrowly defined, it can lead to the evolution of distrust and a ‘crisis of trust’ (Möllering, 2013, p. 299). In this paper, the theory of system trust is used as a fruitful conceptual tool for exploring how educational policy creates thresholds of trust and thus sets the conditions for professional recognition within VET. It allows for an analysis of the ways in which standards-based reforms promote a culture of dis/trust and thereby shape teachers’ self-conceptions.

Methodologically, we conceptualise trust as a process of ‘becoming’ (Möllering, 2013, p. 293) and focus on the ways in which teachers’ subjectivities are influenced by policy mechanisms of dis/trust-building. We are therefore interested in teachers’ professional self-descriptions in the context of current educational reforms. In order to answer the research questions, a re-reading of qualitative data emerging from two projects which explored aspects of teacher professionalism in two European countries. Each of the two datasets consists of in-depth, narrative-based, semi-structured interviews with vocational teachers from full-time VET schools in Austria and further education colleges in England. By analysing teachers’ narratives from both countries, we sought to identify similarities and differences in the processes of being and becoming a teacher, to highlight tendencies that are not only unique to the respective national contexts, but also to other education systems facing neoliberal reforms. The aim of the interviews was to elicit narratives about VET teachers’ perceptions of current standards-based reform mechanisms and their implications for processes of becoming (see in detail Donovan, 2019; Hautz, 2022). All interviews were structured by open-ended questions that allowed flexibility in the interview situation and space for teachers to share their personal experiences. Interviewees across the sample discussed their professional biographies, the changes they had experienced in professional demands, their professional self-conceptions, their personal views on school and teacher quality, their views on current reform measures, and their perceptions of professional trust. Each interview lasted between fifty and ninety minutes. The interviews were fully transcribed and anonymized. The analysis of the interview data was guided by trust theory and was carried out in a systematic and interpretive process employing thematic analysis (Braun & Clarke, 2006). Through the teachers’ narratives, symbolic thresholds of trust were explored in order to gain an understanding of how teachers experience current reforms and how conditions of professional recognition are defined in VET. Three key thresholds for granting or withdrawing of professional trust emerged from the data: documentation, subordination and modes of legitimate self-expression. Based on the analysis, we hope to show how examining these issues from a trust perspective can reveal the emotional consequences of standards-based reforms in the lives of teachers who are subject to them.

Initial findings of the study show that, despite considerable differences between Austria and England in the organisation, structure and aims of their respective VET systems, there is a common trend towards standardisation of VET that is re-shaping the professional recognition of teachers. Recent centralised, standards-based VET policies in both countries have eroded trust in the professional autonomy of teachers, influencing their everyday practice and professional self-understanding in very similar ways. Increased accountability and control mechanisms, which symbolically replace trust, lead teachers to feel ‘restricted in their freedom’ (Hautz, 2022, p. 223) and limited in their individual creativity. By having to constantly document their activities and being subordinated to ongoing surveillance, teachers experience a growing climate of distrust based on ‘suspiciousness and anxiety’ (Sztompka, 2019, p. 32). This has the effect of shrinking the spaces in which teachers can feel vulnerable enough to take the pedagogical risks needed to innovate. Furthermore, the narrowly defined boundaries of legitimate self-expression imposed by current VET reforms make VET teachers feel insecure about their professional identity, leading to alienation and impacting on teachers’ wellbeing. Overall, this paper illustrates that attempts to standardise VET strategy fuels the need to achieve existential security by deriving the simple from the over-complex, creating tensions in the cultivation of trust. We suggest that this constitutes a ‘crisis of trust’ in VET teacher professionalism, as what it means to be and become a professional in VET is called into question by emerging systems of meta-governance which threaten to undermine pedagogical integrity. Due to a high-stakes accountability environment, teachers are less willing to stand out, more reluctant to risk of making mistakes and more likely to do a standard duty, which implies the danger of de-professionalisation and hinders innovation and novelty in VET settings.

Atkins, L. (2017). The odyssey: school to work transitions, serendipity and position in the field. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 38(5), 641–655. https://doi.org/10.1080/01425692.2015.1131146 Avis, J. (2003). Re-thinking trust in a performative culture: the case of education. Journal of Education Policy, 18(2), 315-332. https://doi.org/10.1080/02680930305577 Biesta, G. (2009). Good education in an age of measurement: on the need to reconnect with the question of purpose in education. Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability, 21, 33–46. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11092-008-9064-9 Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa Donovan, C. (2019b). Distrust by design? Conceptualising the role of trust and distrust in the development of Further Education policy and practice in England. Research in Post-Compulsory Education, 24(2-3), 185–207. https://doi.org/10.1080/13596748.2019.1596414 Ehren, M., & Baxter, J. (2021a). Trust, accountability and capacity in education system reform: global perspectives in comparative education. Routledge. Ehren, M., & Baxter, J. (2021b). Trust, accountability and capacity: three building blocks in education system reform. In M. Ehren & J. Baxter (Eds.), Trust, accountability and capacity in education system reform: global perspectives in comparative education (pp. 1–29). Routledge. Hautz, H. (2022). The ‘conduct of conduct’ of VET teachers: governmentality and teacher professionalism. Journal of Vocational Education & Training, 74(2), 210–227. https://doi.org/10.1080/13636820.2020.1754278 Kroeger, F. (2019). Unlocking the treasure trove: how can Luhmann’s theory of trust enrich trust research? Journal of Trust Research, 9(1), 110–124. https://doi.org/10.1080/21515581.2018.1552592 Luhmann, N. (2017). Trust and power. Edited by C. Morgner & M. King. Polity. Möllering, G. (2006). Trust: reason, routine, reflexivity. Emerald. Möllering, G. (2013). Process views of trusting and crisis. In R. Bachmann & A. Zaheer (Eds.), Handbook of Advances in Trust Research (pp. 285–305). Edward Elgar. O’Leary, M. (2013). Surveillance, performativity and normalised practice: the use and impact of graded lesson observations in Further Education colleges. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 37(5), 694–714. https://doi.org/10.1080/0309877X.2012.684036 Skinner, D., Dietz, G., & Weibel, A. (2014). The dark side of trust: when trust becomes a ‘poisoned chalice’. Organization, 2(1), 206–224. https://doi.org/10.1177/1350508412473866 Sztompka, P. (2019). Trust in the moral space. In M. Sasaki, M. (Ed.), Trust in contemporary society (pp. 31–40). Brill. van Maele, D., Forsyth, P., & van Houtte M. (2014). Trust and school Life: the role of trust for learning, teaching, leading and bridging. Springer.