Sep 11, 1998 - Arthur Wise (1979) has critically explored the issue of increased ...... Education and Pedagogy, London, Lawrence and Wishart. Simon, B.
OCCASIONAL PAPER No. 11 September 1998 THE ENGLISH EXCEPTION? INTERNATIONAL PERSPECTIVES ON THE INITIAL EDUCATION AND TRAINING OF TEACHERS Professor Bob Moon, The Open University Acknowledgements My thanks to Professor John Furlong (School of Education, Bristol University) and Dr. Birgit Pepin (Centre for Research in Teacher Education, The Open University) who gave detailed critiques of early drafts of this pamphlet. Many thanks also to the following international colleagues who provided information and guidance on their national systems of initial teacher education: Alain Bouvier, Director, IUFM, Lyon, France Sheila Hughes, University of Strathclyde, Scotland Elizabeth Lazarus, University of Bristol, UK Carlos Marcello, University of Seville, Spain Peter Nentwig, University of Kiel, Germany Hannele Niemi, University of Helsinki, Finland John O'Brien, University of Limerick, Ireland Paul Shaker, Fresno State University, USA Tony Taylor, Monash University, Australia Introduction The development and improvement of teacher education is now a global concern. The focus of interest varies from one context to another, but most countries have teacher education as a policy priority. In many industrially developed countries the concern is with the supply and quality of teachers. In the developing world the need to upgrade teacher qualifications, particularly in the primary sector, is also a major issue. Amongst teacher educators in England there has always been an interest in the models and approaches adopted by other countries and systems. More recently preoccupation with national events appear to have lessened activity. The number of articles published around the theme, as measured by the British Education Index, has dropped considerably over the last decade. The interest of policy makers has always been vicarious. HMI at the beginning of the 1990s published reports of study visits to examine teacher education in France and Germany (HMSO, 1989; HMSO, 1993). A recent Education and Employment Select Committee report,
however, on The Professional Status, Recruitment and Training of Teachers (HMSO, 1997) made no reference to developments outside of England. This pamphlet provides an international perspective on recent debates surrounding teacher education. Reference is primarily made to neighbouring European community countries but examples from elsewhere in the world have been included to broaden the analysis. In England* government and government agencies have made significant changes to the control, structure and content of initial teacher education and training. This discussion seeks to provide a broader international focus within which the progress of these reforms and other aspects of initial education and training can be evaluated. Historical context Formal teacher education in Europe has at least a 300 year history. Jean Baptiste de la Salle established the first 'école normale' at Reims at the end of the 17th Century (Johnson, 1968). The earliest indication of the need for teacher education in Germany occurred in the will of Duke Ernst of Sachsen-Gothia at around the same time, in 1675, and the first training seminars (Lehrerseminar) were established in Gotha in 1698 (Neather, 1993). In England formal training dates back to 1798 with the establishment of a teacher training college in Southwark. In the USA teacher education developed at the beginning of the nineteenth century. The first public institution was created in 1839 in Lexington, Massachusetts under the title, later to be widely adopted, of a 'normal school'. Expansion was more haphazard than in Europe, with more rapid development in the northern than southern states. By the early years of this century, however, not only had the need to prepare elementary teachers become widely accepted but, additionally, the normal schools had extended their interest to secondary teachers and, in some instances, other professional groups (Judge, 1994). Through the first half of the twentieth century 'teacher training' institutions of one sort or another became established in most countries. The orientation was strongly primary. In some countries, England for example, the church retained a significant influence. In others such as France the école nomale, like the écoles elementaire, represented the strongly secular 'laique' tradition of public education. The next significant phase in the history of teacher education was the move to give the Universities the responsibility for preparing secondary and, a little later, primary teachers. This process was largely completed in the USA in the middle years of the century. In
Europe a parallel trend has been clearly identifiable (Neave, 1992) although the time scale has stretched from the 1960s through to the present decade. In France, for example, it was only with the establishment of the Instituts Universitaires de Formation des Maîtres (IUFM) in the 1990s that it could be argued this process had been completed. The move to place teacher education in the University has had its detractors. In the early 1960s, in Germany, the Senate of one university, Erlangen, responded to the idea of establishing a faculty of teacher education with some disdain: … the German university can maintain the regard in which it is held at home and abroad only by strictly upholding its academic and universal characteristic as a centre for disciplinary study and research. The demands made upon it by short term training institutions as part of the progressive academicisation of practical professions can only endanger this characteristic. (Bungardt, 1964) In England, as recently as 1997, the attempt to integrate Homerton College within the University of Cambridge provoked very similar sorts of responses. The broad trend in Europe, however, was to accord primary teachers the status associated with a University education and ensure that secondary teachers, if they did not do so already, received some form of University based professional preparation. England was one of the first European countries to systematically integrate the teacher training colleges within the University sector. In the 1970s closures and institutional restructuring created considerable controversy. However, almost as soon as this process was completed government interest in teacher education took a new direction. In the 1980s, a Committee for the Accreditation of Teacher Education (CATE) became established. It aimed to establish agreed criteria for all aspects of course design and implementation. CATE was recreated in a number of guises during a short history, including a period that attempted to introduce a devolved regional structure. Chaired for most of this period by a former teacher educator, Sir William Taylor, CATE sought, despite some criticism, to involve teacher educators in the way the accreditation process was implemented. No comparable body existed in other European countries although in the USA the National Council for the Accreditation of Teacher Education, which is independent of government and working on a voluntary basis, was established as early as 1954. CATE represented the first governmental attempt to
pull back some of the control recently ceded to the Universities. This met with minimal resistance and all Universities participated in the accreditation process, just as all invited HMI is to carry out periodic inspection of courses. In the early 1990s, government control became almost absolute. Following direct ministerial intervention by the Secretary of State for Education, Kenneth Clarke, CATE was abolished. He set out a radical programme of reform that included a significant extension of the time that students had to spend full-time in schools, a specification of competences required of all students at the end of the training course (developed from some models that CATE had introduced in its final phase), and detailed regulations on the form and structure of courses. The idea of diverse routes into teaching became government policy. The option for schools to run schoolbased training courses wholly independent of the Universities was introduced. The responsibility for overseeing these new arrangements was given to a new organisation, the Teacher Training Agency, and, subsequently, inspectorial evidence on the quality of courses was used to determine the allocation of student numbers and funding levels. One of the polemics that, it is claimed, influenced Kenneth Clarke and the Thatcher government was published by the right wing Centre for Policy Studies entitled Teachers Mistaught: training in theories or education in subjects (Lawlar, 1990). The University sector was almost wholly opposed to the reform (Stones, 1994; Edwards, 1994). Again the formal University system, in the guise for example of the Committee of Vice Chancellors and Principals (CVCP), grumbled but this further erosion on University autonomy went ahead without any significant opposition. The enchroachment of central government on the traditional autonomy of the University appeared to jolt England out of the mainstream of European development. In the ensuing controversies it has become difficult to establish balanced and fair minded descriptions, let alone analyses, of the innovations proposed and implemented with such speed. It is of interest, therefore, to place these reforms alongside some of the traditions and developments elsewhere in the world. This international perspective will raise questions about the assumptions on which aspects English policy was based. It may also serve to provide something of a balance sheet, pointing up the strengths of the reforms and identifying areas more open to question. Grounds for comparison Political interest in how other countries organise their education systems goes back at least into the nineteenth century. Mathew
Arnold's sorties to 'the continent' as economic and military progress looked to threaten the Empire, remain a part of the educational heritage. In recent times most Secretaries of State for Education have felt the urge to visit Japan although the USA is the source of most borrowed initiatives (zero tolerance, business action zones, for example). Alongside the interest in others, however, is a parallel propensity to insularity, the 'best to do it our way' approach characteristic of many parts of the world, particularly the larger developed countries. Across the field of education policy few examples, if any, of European inroads into British policy can be identified, even where the systems, for example in Scandinavia, are closely aligned. The aim here, therefore, is to address that imbalance, to look at experience elsewhere and from that to pose some questions of the English system as it evolves. In doing this a number of key themes have been identified: • Course models • System building • Outcomes and standards • Partnerships • Pedagogies and didactics • Values Course models There is endless debate about how teacher education courses should be structured and sequenced. Across Europe alone a multitude of approaches can be found. Buchberger has identified four components that are common to most courses (Box 1): BOX 1 Components of European teacher education course models: • education studies/studies in educational sciences • academic/subject studies • studies in subject matter methodologies/subject didactics • teaching practice (Buchberger, 1994, p 16) Terminology varies from one country to another and different meanings can be attached to terms that become common in translation: the frequent misunderstandings around the term 'formation' in French, which literally translates to training in English but has in fact a broader education/training meaning, is one example. How these different components are put together to form course models and structures does vary significantly. France and Germany provide interesting contrasts with England.
In France, legislation in 1989 led to the establishment of twenty eight IUFMs, one for each académie, the regional administrative framework for the French educational system. The previously separate tracks of primary preparation through an 'école normale' and secondary preparation within the University have been brought together. All intending teachers, after a three year subject based degree, spend a first year within the IUFM following a programme that covers a range of educational courses and with a small degree of involvement in schools. This first year provides the preparation for a 'concours'. The course involves classroom observation, a small amount of teaching and competitive examinations. Success in the 'concours' allows a student to proceed to the second year as a 'professeur stagiaire' with 'quasi fonctionnaire' (civil servant) status and a salary. The second year involves continuous involvement with a school throughout the academic year. Students are supported by a 'conseiller pédagogique-tuteur', who acts as the link between the IUFM and the school. There are also 'les modules d'enseignement' (professional courses) covering general pedagogic and subject based learning, the latter organised by specialists in the discipline. The third element of the programme involves the production of a 'mémoire professionnel', a professional dissertation to which a high degree of importance is attached. Box 2 sets out the description of this national requirement. This 'mémoire profesionnel' is an extremely important part of the preparation process. The 'mémoire', which can be prepared by a group, as well as individually, is aimed at promoting a critical and evaluative approach to practice. Those that meet the requirements are bound and lodged within the library of the IUFM, an acknowledgement of the legitimate research record they represent. BOX 2 What constitutes a 'memoire professionnel'? This is set out in circular 91–202 of the 2nd July 1991 published in B.O.E.N. number 27 on 11 July 1991: it is based on an analysis of a teacher's professional experience particularly during the teaching practice; it must stand as a way of checking the competency of the student teacher in: • identifying a problem or a question based on these practices • analysing this problem and suggesting possibilities of research direction with reference to existing work in this area. It cannot be a simple narration of a personal undertaking, devoid of
analysis or critical reflection; nor can it be a theoretical or historical reflection based on experience unconnected with the student teacher. This 'memoire', accomplished by a team or an individual, should not exceed 30 typed pages (annexes excluded) and can, if necessary, be an extension of the project undertaken in Year 1 or of the work done in the context of a period of industrial or commercial experience. An individual oral examination of the 'memoire' permits an assessment of the involvement of an individual in this work and of his/her analytical ability. The subject of this 'memoire' can be based on a discipline, be interdisciplinary or transdisciplinary. The 'memoire professionnel' illustrates the strongly intellectual orientation of the programme although practice must be central to the analytical and theoretical work. (Extract from course information provided by the IUFM, Strasbourg) In Germany, there are variations between each of the sixteen regional (Länder) administrations and between courses preparing for different phases of teaching, but a school based model has been in place since the development of the Prussian state education system in the latter part of the nineteenth century (Keitel, 1992). In broad outline the German system requires students to study two academic subjects at University for three years. Students then spend one or two years in a second phase which involves teaching in schools under the guidance of a mentor (Fachleiter) combined with educational studies at a 'seminarium' (local centre). As in France, students who have passed the examination to enter the second phase become civil servants and are paid, although on a salary somewhat smaller than that of a qualified teacher. In Germany, however, unlike France where the numbers proceeding to the second year of the IUFM relates to the posts that will be available, there is no guarantee of employment. The status of the 'Referendare' or second phase trainers in Germany is high, according to HMI who visited in 1991, parallel to that of a junior hospital doctor or solicitor doing articles (HMSO, 1993). In this phase a salary is received, as with French students, which in Germany is about 30% of the relevant civil service grade, with an increment for those over 26 and an allowance for married students. Box 3 outlines the phase two structure of primary and secondary
teacher training (Vorbereitungsdienst) in Hessen. Despite variations between Länder most course models are built around an introductory phase (in Hessen 14 periods a week for six months) to a differentiation phase (16 periods a week for 12 months) leading up to the intensive phase where the trainee works independently of direct supervision. Around the time of the practical examination the teaching load is reduced. BOX 3 A two-year teacher education course model in Hessen, Germany (24 months with 1 May or 1 November start, ending 30 April or 31 October)
Start
Phase
May 1 or Nov 1
Introductory Phase
Feb 1 or Aug 1
Differentiation Phase
Feb 1 or Aug 1
Intensive School Practice Phase 4 periods a week observation or teaching under guidance 12 periods a week teaching independently 8 to 12 periods a week in Seminar attendance at staff meetings, parents'
Duration 3 months
10 periods a week classroom observation or teaching under mentor's guidance 8-10 periods a week in the Seminar; general Seminar (education) and subject Seminars in first and second subjects attendance at staff meetings etc. at discretion of head those training for the Berufsschule may replace part of the school/Seminar training by up to three months of skills training where necessary 6 months
14 periods a week classroom observation and teaching under supervision or independently maximum of 10 lessons a week unsupervised 8-10 periods in Seminars, as above attendance at staff meetings, parents' evenings and other school events 12 months
evenings etc. completion of assessed written coursework after 3 months, feedback and counselling session with tutors/mentor/head after 12 months a preliminary school practice grade (Vornote) is given, taking account of lessons seen by tutors/mentor etc. trainee nominates one member of the panel for the exam lessons; all agree on names of any 'guest' observers Feb 1 or Aug 1
Preparation for the Zweites Staatsexamen 10 periods observation/supervised lessons or at request of Referendar, unsupervised teaching 8 to 10 periods a week in the Seminar exam preparation; exam March or April
3 months
(HMSO, 1993) In both countries there are strongly argued debates about the approaches adopted, particularly the relative weightings of academic subject studies to educational courses and the balance between University or seminarium study and practical school experience. In France the establishment of the IUFMs was seen by some as jeopardising the academic integrity of the University with one pressure group (L'Association pour la qualité de l'enseignement) perceiving the move as an American dilution of standards. 'IUFM, MacDonald, Disneyland, all represent the same battle' was one of their refrains (Judge, 1994, p. 90). In Germany Theodor Sander (1996) has identified a number of weaknesses in the pre-service programme (Box 4). BOX 4 Perceived weaknesses of the German teacher education system • the inequality inside a formal system of university education for all teachers that does not give equal treatment to all teachers and is embedded in a highly hierarchical structure of TE faculties in a national perspective • the separateness of the various categories of teachers, reflecting social selectivity at school level • the incoherence of the two (three) phases of TE, with two (three) different and disharmonious conceptions of what teaching at school
level should be like • the disintegration and inconsistency of the TE curriculum, based on the disciplinary structure of higher education and its development, not on basic problems of school teaching • the irrelevance of research for TE and the irrelevance of educational research for the outside world (policy makers, teachers) • the hierarchical relationship and alienation between teacher educators and students promoted by the existing organisation of studies and teaching, finding expression among others in the exclusion of students from research or, even worse, in their not even being made familiar with current research results. (Sander, 1996, p 83) Christine Keitel (1992) has also pointed to the logistical problems of expanding the seminarium system to take increased numbers. The pressure on the system, she suggests, has caused the mentors (Fachleiter) to: take over more tasks in evaluating and assessing than in observing, advising, consulting, and teaching. The function of being more selective has changed the comparative atmosphere in the seminaries into competition, discouragement and anxiety. (p 307) There are common concerns and interests around the parallel, although differently interpreted, roles of conseiller pédagogiquetuteur (France), Fachleiter (Germany), and mentor (England). The nature of the practical component of courses, particularly the relationship with more theoretical elements, does appear to be receiving increasing attention in many countries. A recent European Union funded colloquium on practical experience in teacher education provides evidence for this (Moon, 1996). The more rigorous conceptualisation of the mentor role, for example by Maynard and Furlong (1993), has attracted widespread international interest. What the balance of school experience to general course studies should be, however, varies (see Box 5) from one system to another. BOX 5 Examples of school experience requirements in European teacher education courses: In France the 60 week IUFM 2 year cycle of education and training requires 14 weeks in schools for primary students and 22 weeks for those preparing to teach in secondary schools. In the Netherlands postgraduate secondary teachers must complete 20 weeks out of a
course length of 48 weeks. Dutch primary teachers prepared through a 4 year undergraduate programme must complete 40 weeks (out of a total of 168). In Hessen in the second phase of programmes school based work accounts for 60% of the total. Different approaches to course models exists, therefore, between and within countries. Beyond Europe the situation is similar. The USA has a wide range of models. California, which has a reputation for tough standard setting, leaves individual institutions to make decisions about the organisation of practical experience. In Australia each state has autonomy in deciding teacher education policy. Victoria, for example, now regulates a minimum 80 days of classroom teaching for all courses. The English PGCE requirement (18 weeks primary, and 24 weeks secondary) is significantly higher than any other European country. In many countries additionally, students move much more flexibly in the week, even day, between the University as study centre and the schools. Unlike the English regulatory requirement, these are almost always left to the discretion of teacher education institutions. Scrutiny of the literature on the practical component in teaching shows little empirical evidence to suggest any one form of course model or programme is more effective than any other. The balance of time spent teaching, the extent to which this should be full-time or on the basis of two or three days a week and the number of schools in which practice should take place are all variables that can be interpreted in a variety of ways. The strict regulations that determine this aspect of course design in England implies a certainty that is unsupported by evidence and experience elsewhere. In looking at other models of course design a number of issues arise. First is the articulation between initial education and training and entry into teaching. This is strongest in France where admission to the second year of the IUFM is, if successfully completed, a guarantee of a teaching post. But in Germany, and this is true of a number of other European countries, the salaried civil servant status in the final years of training appears to confer a legitimacy on the process that is not found in England. There are, of course, historical and cultural traditions that underpin these differences (Pepin, 1997), but the issue of linkages remains an important one. Secondly, in England, there is a sharp break between training and employment, between student status and qualified teacher status. There is also a significant break between the place in which a first degree is obtained and subsequent teacher training at the
postgraduate level. Some institutions recruit very few of their own graduates to the PGCE. In terms of designing course models the one year PGCE is 'closed' at both ends. It is a very narrow window of opportunity around which to build a coherent programme. This raises a third issue. The structure of teacher education in England has very few linkages with regional and local systems. In France, for example, through the académie it is not only the schools and the IUFM but also inspectors and administrators who play a role. The 'fifth' year of training, a transition from student to qualified teacher, provides the opportunity for this more systemic involvement whilst also establishing a stronger link between students and the local school system. Regional and local links also exist, in a comparable form, in the USA, Australia, and in Scotland. How these might evolve in the English system might, particularly if recruitment problems intensify, become an important question to consider. System building Control in English education has, since the mid 1980s, shifted sharply to national government. The Education Reform Act of 1988 and subsequent legislation rudely shattered the post-war balance of interest groups or stakeholders. The sharing of responsibility, between government, local authorities and teacher unions, was rejected with the DES, DFE and then DFEE, sometimes in bravura fashion, taking the reins of power. In some sectors agencies, firmly under ministerial control, were set up to implement policy. The relationship of these agencies to government, to each other, and to the stakeholders now outside the decision making process, has been one of the most fascinating, complex and often controversial features of recent educational history. Teacher education, which in the final days of CATE had enjoyed a brief but rather convoluted period of regional organisation, was pulled resolutely to the centre. Certain right wing policy groups and individuals become particularly influential. In some ways they reflect the first phases of what could be termed the 'immature centralisation' that followed the Thatcher break up of the more consensual style of government. Ministers, senior civil servants and officials have enjoyed unparalleled power. The government took few steps to devolve responsibilities or introduce the checks and balances that more mature systems have developed. Consultation, where it took place, usually followed once the main direction of policy has been established (sometimes in considerable detail). The form of consultation was through written submission with the agenda often set by a series of questions to which those consulted were invited to respond. In most other countries, stakeholders such as teacher educators, teacher associations and the employers of teachers in their various
guises are almost always more centrally involved than is the case in England. In France, although central government formally holds power, the work and activity associated with developing national requirements is much more grass roots based. Extensive discussion and debate amongst all those involved with the IUFM leads to the elaboration of a 'plan de formation' which then goes forward for ministerial agreement. In Finland, there are no national regulations. The Ministry of Education carries out periodic reviews resulting in advice and guidelines but in recent years Universities have increased since the 1980s the extent of their autonomy. In Spain, in a move that is directed to encouraging innovation and local development, 40% of the teacher preparation programme is covered by national regulations (arrived at after extensive consultation) and the remainder is left to local universities to determine. In Germany each individual Landër has responsibility for deciding the extent and nature of regulations or guidelines. In the Netherlands, again after extensive consultation, a series of 'suggestions' around the theme of a national curriculum for teacher education will be published but in an advisory rather than mandatory format. In Scotland, guidelines, not regulations, have been agreed after a comprehensive series of discussions in which a range of interests are represented. An English visitor north of the border would now feel a certain nostalgia in observing the search for consensus and agreement that characterises educational change. The English system's transition to a centralised system was rapid. In such systems, as Margaret Archer has comprehensively documented (Archer, 1979): 'political manipulation is the main process through which educational change is pursued and produced…the study of interaction is, therefore, the study of educational politics stricto sensu' (p 271) She sees the structure of political decision making (an aspect of the political structure) and the structure of educational interest groups (an aspect of the social structure) as interrelating within an arena which is distinctly political. She contrasts this with decentralised systems where 'instead of the simple correction current pattern of the centralised system (in which grievances were cumulated, passed upwards to the political centre, negotiated there through political interaction, before being transmitted downwards to educational institutions as policy directed changes) a more complicated pattern of cross
currents characterises interaction and change in the decentralised system' (p 393) Some writers have suggested that a theoretical polarisation of centralised and decentralised systems distorts the actual ways in which the systems are worked (Anderson, 1986; Moon, 1990). The move, however, towards a more political process seems to follow inevitably any increase in centralised power. In this context the role and actions of the central bureaucracy, as well as politicians, becomes critical. Most analyses suggest that DES officials were every bit as enthusiastic for centralisation as Margaret Thatcher and her ministers. Arthur Wise (1979) has critically explored the issue of increased state intervention by looking at the forms bureaucratic activity takes. Using a Weberian framework he suggests that every act of the bureaucratic machine involves either weighing the relationship between means and ends or ensuring that a practice conforms to norms: When the relationship between means and ends is not known and the bureaucratic rationalization persists, we shall say that we are witnessing the phenomenon of hyper-rationalization – that is an effort to rationalize beyond the bounds of knowledge. (p 65) The relevance of this phenomenon to the public control of education is then developed. Such a process inevitably, says Wise, leads to increased centralization with an excess of prescription from outside the local setting. The correlate of this is the adoption by the bureaucracy of goal reduction strategies. For Wise: In the past, policymakers were content to render goals for education abstractly, globally, and with the highest expectations that rhetoric could muster. Goals stated in such terms were not only difficult to put into operation – they were perhaps unattainable altogether. Policymakers now prefer goals with appear attainable and which are measurable. It may be that goals appear attainable because they are measurable, or it may be that they are chosen because they are measurable. At any rate, both the level of rhetoric and the expectations have been reduced. (p 29) Examples of the forms that bureaucratic rationalization may take include scientism – the inappropriate reliance on research to solve difficult ethical and political questions; first order solutions – the creation of a programme with the same name as the problem,
thereby giving the public the impression that the dilemma is being dealt with; and wishful thinking – when policymakers, for example, require by law that schools achieve a goal which in the past they have not achieved. A central issue for Wise is now to explain the discontinuity between the apparently rational policymaking models and the reality of an education system. He draws on the concept of loose coupling to explain this, pointing out that educational policymakers are inclined to embrace rationalistic models of the school while teachers embrace more realistic interpretations. The policymaking system, therefore, may fail to communicate with the operating system. The concept of loose coupling makes a number of issues more explicit. It explains why manipulating some elements of the educational system may have no consequences for other elements. And educational policy makers in a centralised system are inclined to embrace the rationalistic model of decision making which assumes that those being directed share the same values and assumptions. Teacher education in England, like other areas of educational policy, is open to the sort of analyses that Wise makes. A new, immature central system generates a lot of activity at the centre without any of the mechanisms to engage others that more sophisticated centralised systems appear to have developed. And so, whilst France remains in principle a centralised system with ministry circulars decreeing in some detail the form and content of teacher education, the actual process is remarkably similar to that taking place in the religiously (literally) decentralised system of the Netherlands. In some senses England's policy makers appear to be falling into the trap of which Richard Elmore (1989) has called the 'noble lie' of conventional public administration and policy analysis. That is the unquestioned assumption that policy makers control the organisational, political and technological processes that affect implementation. Elmore, in a further analysis of the sort Wise advances, sees conventional wisdom in terms of the notion of 'forward mapping'. This is the strategy that comes most readily to mind when one thinks about how a policy maker might try to affect implementation. 'It begins at the top of the process, with as clear a statement as possible of the policy makers' interest, and proceeds, through a sequence of increasingly more specific steps to define what is expected of implementers at each level. At the bottom of the process one states, again with as much precision as possible, what a satisfactory outcome would be, measured in terms of the original
statement of intent. (p 245) This describes fairly accurately English policy making towards building a teacher education system. Elmore proposes that a more effective strategy is the reverse of what common sense suggests. He argues for a backward mapping approach which: 'begins not at the top of the implementation process but at the last possible stage, the point at which administrative actions intersect private choices. It begins not with a statement of interest but with a statement of the specific behaviour at the lowest level of the implementation process that generates the need for a policy. Having established a relatively precise target at the lowest level in the system the analysis backs up through the structure of the implementing agencies, asking at each level two questions. What is the ability of this unit to affect the behaviour that is the target of the policy? And what resources does this unit require in order to have that effect? In the final stages of analysis the analyst or policymaker describes a policy that directs resources at the organisational units likely to have the greatest effect'. (p 247) This perspective therefore addresses the problem of loosely coupled systems, as defined by Wise, in arguing for a more realistic understanding of the way systems work. It does not assume that policy is the only – or even the major – influence on the behaviour of people engaged in the process. Furthermore, it does not rely on compliance with the policy makers interest as the standard of success or failure. The standard of success is conditional and predicated on an estimate of the abilities, sometimes limited, of those involved at all level to effect change. Mature systems, whether centralised or decentralised, in many senses develop processes of consultation and legitimation which whatever the formal procedure, are inclusive in respect of key players. Immature systems, such as the new English model (and this would also be true of countries such as those in central and eastern Europe that have undergone rapid political transformation), have none of this. Hence the sometimes increasingly frenetic central policy actions when the body politic appears unwilling to respond. The future roles of the Teacher Training Agency, the General Teaching Council, the Office for Standards in Teacher Education, and the Department for Education and Employment, will have to therefore be understood within some sort of framework of bureaucratic activity. The extent to which key players in these
organisations are prepared to critically examine their own roles and interrelationships is unclear. Partnership and outcomes Partnership, shunned for system building nationally in England, has been roundly embraced at the school level. In almost all education systems the concept of a partnership between teacher education and schools is acknowledged. Perceptions of how this can be achieved vary significantly and in only a very few countries has this been developed in a systematic way. A decade ago the All European Conference of Doctors of Educational Research Institutions identified the need to extend practical training in teacher education, and the integration of classroom practice into overall curriculum planning, as the two major challenges facing teacher educators (McAlpine, et al., 1988). In the USA the Holmes group, representing the Graduate Schools of Education, has published a number of self-critical reports on the growing divorce between universities and schools. The status of University and school partnerships is, therefore, an issue of widespread concern. In part this relates to the historical context in which teacher education has developed. Twenty years ago David Hencke (1978) captured some of the problems faced by teacher educators: Teacher training began in 1798 in Southwark, a slum district of London. That Southwark rather than Oxbridge was the home of teacher training explains many of the problems facing teacher educators today: its lack of credibility as a discipline; a dearth of academic ability among its students; and the ambiguities of a curriculum embracing personal education and professional training. All of these have denied it money, resources and until recently, talent, and can be said to have their roots in its humble birth in Southwark. Unlike theology, medicine or law, it has no historic claim to a university tradition of academic excellence or respectability. It has more in common instead with medieval craft guilds, whose apprenticeship system preceded modern technical education. (Hencke, 1978, p 13) Through much of the last twenty years education departments within universities have sought legitimacy within the academy. In doing this it has appeared at times as if theory rather than engagement with schools was the passport to academic acceptance. Anyone close to some departments of education a few years back would have recognised the unequal status attached to PGCE teaching in comparison with other forms of academic activity. Unlike medicine and law, practice was low status. This, however, is
changing. Nowhere, in the 1990s, outside of England, has there been such prodigious energy put into research and development around the themes of partnership. The English experience of mentoring alone has attracted international attention. This work began well before the Clark reforms. Universities such as Sussex and Oxford had established school based schemes and had already begun to research and publish in the area. But the real growth of interest has come more recently. And with that development there has been the rapid development of portfolio assessment and profiling, in ways that equally attract international interest. In the broader international context partnership can have a wider interpretation. Danielle Zay in France, for example, (Zay, 1994a) has made the distinction between partnership and teamwork. She suggests that developing the professional competence to work in a partnership context should form a constituent part of the teacher education process (Box 6): BOX 6 A French conceptualisation of partnership Partnership as a term can be used to describe the ways in which individuals from different institutions work together. The term team we shall reserve for individuals working together from within one institution. This approach, for the first time, ensures that the way the education system is situated within the broader society and local community is given the same attention as the traditional axes that underpin teacher education courses: disciplinary knowledge and classroom apprenticeship. The ability to work with partners in this way is one of the professional competences that must be acquired. The teaching profession does not operate exclusively within the classroom. It also requires collaborative work with a large number of partners; first of all with the parents of pupils with whom it is important that the teacher establishes a regular and genuine dialogue; then with associations and partners with connections with the socio cultural environment. Teachers at all levels, but particularly those in the technical sector, have to be familiar with the world of economics and be prepared to establish and manage relationships with industry or the professional sectors. (Zay, 1994b, pp 214–215) Zay's experimental programmes introducing new teachers to the world of social services, health, local government, policy, and others, is an attempt to recognise the wider teacher role. This
notion of partnership suggests a dimension to practical experience that hitherto, in most systems, has been neglected. In another sense there are also the partnerships that extend practical links through international exchange. The SOCRATES and LEONARDO programmes of the European Union are large scale examples of such initiatives. There is a fairly extensive involvement of English institutions within these programmes. The output, however, in terms of publications and analyses is disappointing with the British Education Index shows little evidence of this growing area of activity. The move to specify the performance expected of a qualifying teacher has been one of the major issues in teacher education in the 1990s. In England competences and standards have been at the core of government reforms. The situation internationally is more mixed. In France, the two ministerial decrees adopt the notion of competence but leave the way it is defined to the Universities. Finland, the Netherlands, and Spain work without any such formulation or regulation. In South Africa, new guidelines on teacher education include specification of outcomes. To be accredited all courses must have adopted an outcomes based approach, referred to simply as OBE (Outcomes Based Education). The wholescale adoption of OBE extends across the school, tertiary and teacher education sectors and official documentation points to Australia and the Netherlands as the source of the concept. Outcomes, however, are understood more broadly than mere skills and performance. The focus is on entitlement. There is an attempt to apply the vision equally across all education sectors. It is an ambitious undertaking and, in spirit, rather different from reforms elsewhere. The motivation to move to outcomes is markedly different in the state of Victoria, Australia. All teacher education is under review by the ministerially appointed Standards Council of the Teaching Profession. Profiles of teacher outcomes on a subject by subject basis have been issued with the advice that it is hoped that schools will use these profiles as a basis for teacher professional development and staff development, and that universities will use them in planning and conducting teacher education programs. In all these countries, however, the institutions of teacher education are centrally, if not wholly, involved in making judgements about the quality and student standards. Universities are left, given due recognition of their statutes and autonomy, to independently monitor this process. No other country combines institutionally based quality assurance systems and peer review through a
structure of external examining with formal, detailed and periodic government inspection. The first two are organisationally related but the Office for Standards in Education (OFSTED) methodology has been developed independently. Here England is the exception. Inspectors make extensive use of scaled measurements and the judgements now provide the basis for the allocation of funds, target numbers and tables of institutional performance. The evidence base for the Teacher Training Agency administration of the initial teacher education and training system is now primarily taken from OFSTED reports and gradings. The methodology used is unique to the English context and far more instrumental in approach than the measures of teaching quality used in other areas of the University curriculum. From an international perspective the present arrangements are exceptional and only applicable in terms of the broader political processes at work. The policy system, reflecting Wise's duties about wishful thinking, finding simple, even blunt, measures are in touch with the prevailing political rhetoric around educational change. Politics and process become inextricably entwined in ways therefore that distort professional and policy action. Political manipulation, to use Margaret Archer's phrase, is the main process through which educational change is being pursued with the Universities given, for the most part, observer status. Pedagogies and didactics Forms and styles of pedagogy are becoming one of the more controversial aspects of teacher education in England. Traditionally decisions about teaching and classroom methods have been the prerogative of the school or individual teacher. There are significant signs, moving into the late 1990s, that this might become the next focus for central regulation. Again the bureaucratic policy process is in danger of going into Wise's state of hyper-rationalisation beyond the bands of current knowledge. Pedagogy has to take cognisance of context and this poses for teachers complex professional tasks. These fit uneasily into a regulatory structure. A number of recent research projects that have looked at the contrasts between pedagogic traditions in different parts of Europe illustrate this vividly. In the primary field, Broadfoot and Osborn (1993) have explored the similarities and differences of French and English teachers' approach to pedagogy through questionnaires, interview and classroom observation. One of their major findings was that French primary teachers place more emphasis on basic skills and academic knowledge than English teachers for whom a major concern is the
development of intelligence and all-round education. English primary teachers also seek to achieve a basic complement of noncognitive objectives including notions such as desire to learn, socialisation and personal development (Box 7). BOX 7 Contrasting perspectives on pedagogy: English and French primary teachers I French teachers typically argue the importance of: Making sure that my pupils acquire the knowledge appropriate to the level of the class and doing this with commitment. Doing my duty to make sure that my pupils acquire a certain body of knowledge. I am obliged to do everything possible to attain this. The English teacher will typically stress more developmental goals relating to the child's intelligence and personality: Creating an atmosphere whereby children will learn through experience, moral and social norms, physical skills and aspects of health and hygiene, developing enquiring minds and creativity, and generally to develop, progress and fulfil their potential. (Broadfoot and Osborn, pp 78–79) This study, however, was followed by a later comparative analysis of English and French Primary Pupils' attitudes and performance in Mathematics and Language (Planel, Osborne, Broadfoot and Ward, 1998). This showed that, although there were differences in pedagogic strategies, pupil attainment on a range of items, taken from English and French national assessments, was comparable. This latter study showed that despite the introduction of the national curriculum and advocacy of more teacher centred approaches English teachers remained individual and child centred in their pedagogic styles. In France, however, despite official attempts to focus more on the individual child, the formal 'leçon' continued to predominate (Box 8). BOX 8 Contrasting perspectives on pedagogy: English and French primary teachers II English pupils' willingness and ability to tackle unfamiliar tasks would seem to reflect the well-established differences in pedagogic
approach between the two countries. In France, the approach may be characterised as one of 'induction' of pupils into the established bodies of knowledge; … Teachers are often 'drillers', their model of the goals of education largely a convergent one. This French emphasis on correct performance was reflected in weaker pupils not always knowing which approach to take in order to solve a particular problem as well as demonstrating a fear of getting a wrong answer by not answering questions to which they did not know the answer. By contrast, the established pedagogic tradition in English primary schools has been one that emphasises discovery and the search on the part of each pupil for a solution to a given problem. Pupils have been encouraged to think for themselves and their efforts have been valued in these terms. The effects of these different emphases, which of course vary in degree from teacher to teacher and school to school, are reflected in maths, for example, by the finding that some English children tried to develop their own strategies to do long multiplication tasks involving decimal points. High achieving children in particular were able to develop their own efficient strategies in number and investigative maths. They also had a better sense of the correctness or otherwise of their answers than French children. However, one less desirable consequence of this stance was the tendency to use non-standard, inefficient methods for procedures in relation to numeracy and, more generally, not being able to distinguish between efficient and inefficient methods. Again these different pedagogic emphases are reflected in the fact that English children showed less understanding of number per se and less expertise than French pupils in the application of the standard algorithms in number, their lack of routine drilling perhaps accounting for their sometimes knowing what to do but being weak in the execution of the required procedure. (Planel et al., pp 55–56) A clear message of the study was that pedagogy needs to be understood in terms of the larger cultural context and that without such understanding, the effects, and hence the potential value, of any particular educational intervention cannot be predicted. As the quote in Box 8 indicates, the authors of the study are prepared to advocate that some of the more prominent pedagogic strategies in one society could be more strongly taken up by the other. But this would have to go with the grain of approaches that appeared overall to be working successfully.
At secondary level a very recent study (Pepin, 1997) has explored how German, French and English teachers, at the secondary level, conceive of and carry out their tasks. Pepin's study was ethnographic and based on interviews and observation of mathematics teachers in each of the three countries as well as interviews with associated professionals, such as school principals, inspectors and others. She found similarities in the phasing of lessons and the sort of behaviours expected of pupils. But, in an analysis that resonates with the Broadfoot and Osborne analysis, there were also interesting differences in their classroom practices reflecting the different cultural conditions in the three countries (Box 9). BOX 9 Contrasting perspectives on pedagogy: English, French and German secondary mathematics teachers In France teachers focused on developing mathematical thinking which included exploring, developing and understanding concepts, and mathematical reasoning. This, in turn, had consequences for their classroom practice. French teachers spent much time preparing their lessons, in order to be able to provide the 'best' introduction and cognitive activities for pupils to discover the notion and to choose a range of exercises which helped pupils to assess their understanding. In class French teachers tried to pose thought-provoking problems and expected students to struggle with the problems for a while, before they drew together ideas from the class and discussed with the whole class the ideas and solutions of individuals. They tried to forge links between ideas, skills and (cognitive) activities on the one hand, and concepts on the other. Relatively little time was spent on routine procedures. Pupil mistakes were used to assess and subsequently deepen pupil understanding of the topic by discussing those mistakes with the whole class. In England teachers focused on training pupils on mathematical concepts or skills and devoted much time to the practice of (sometimes routine) procedures. Most English teachers, unless the lesson was assigned for an 'investigation', introduced and explained a concept or skill to students, gave worked examples on the board and then expected pupils to practice on their own or in small groups, whilst the teacher attended to individual pupils. Students were divided into different achievement sets and teachers provided a different mathematical diet for different sets. Situations where pupils discovered multiple solutions or investigated new solutions
which required reasoning were rare and usually reserved for 'investigation' lessons, and so were practical activities. These practices can be understood in the light of traditions (teacher-led introduction/practice lessons) that underpinned practices in teachers' classrooms. In Germany teachers in the Hauptschule [secondary modern school] worked differently from those in the Gymnasium [grammar school]. What they had in common was that they all worked with the whole class in a kind of conversational style. Often pupils' mistakes in the homework or in class exercises were used to check and deepen pupil understanding. Textbooks were used during the lessons, mainly for exercises. In the Hauptschule teachers often instructed pupils in a concept or skills, solved an example problem with the whole class and then let pupils practice on their own on exercises. But this procedure rarely lasted for a whole lesson. Typically, at a later stage the teacher checked pupil understanding by bringing pupils to the board and discussing their mistakes and understandings with the whole class. This discussion allowed the teacher to gain an impression of the understanding of the whole class. In the Gymnasium, where expectations of achievement were higher, topics were treated in great depth and for a considerable length of time. As logical thinking was regarded as important, formulas were derived and formal reasoning conducted in lessons. The development and understanding of concepts was of paramount importance. The invention of new solutions or procedures was not encouraged. The lessons appeared quite formal and traditional in terms of their mathematical content, but were quite lively concerning their style (conversational). As mentioned before, the emphasis was on whole class interactive teaching which was conducted in a conversational style, with little emphasis on individualised work. (Pepin, 1997, pp 89–90) The distinctions described above represent the strengths of different traditions that influence teacher education in each of the countries. In England, and in the USA, the Deweyian reflective practitioner, pragmatic tradition has come to dominate teacher education programmes. In France and Germany and much of continental Europe, a more knowledge focused interest in didactics and pedagogics has been central to the education and training process.
But the distinction is more than mere emphasis. How for example has the English language come to see the terms didactic or pedagogue in derogatory terms? Has the general concern with the social role of the teacher been overemphasised at the expense of the engagement with knowledge or subject? Neither of the two major English language compendiums on teacher education, The International Encyclopedia of Teaching and Teacher Education and the Handbook of Research on Teacher Education, reference the word didactic at all. Yet in many European countries this is a mainstream part of teacher education. In France, for example, there is a significant level of research into what one leading authority (Chevellard, 1991) has called 'didactic transposition' or the way in which the subject knowledge to be taught inevitably adapts, remoulds and sometimes disfigures elements borrowed from the broader field of subject knowledge (see also Verret, 1975). Tochan and Munby (1993) have pursued the same thing and have suggested that didactics place an emphasis on the uniqueness of school subjects within a historical context. They usefully go on to distinguish between didactics and pedagogy (Box 10): BOX 10 'a progressive selection of relevant knowledge, a sequential transmission involving a past and a future, and a routine memory of evolutionary models of knowledge. Because didactics is a diachronic anticipation of contents to be taught, it is essentially propositional. It names teaching experience in propositional networks and so involves a mediation of time.' 'Didactic goals can be written down, but pedagogical experience cannot be easily theorised, owing to its unique interactive aspects. Though action research and reflection reveals the existence of basic principles underlying practical classroom experience, no matter what rules might be inferred pedagogy still remains an adventure.' (Tochan and Munby, pp 207) In Europe there is a fascinating debate about didactics which has English expression in the activities of one sub-group of the EC funded Thematic Network for Teacher Education in Europe (TNTEE). The group carries out research into the uses, such as subject didactics or the science of the teaching profession, and they have been most recently looking at the relationships between general didactics (allgemeine didaktik) and subject didactics (Fachdidaktik). Comparing the Anglo/American research into teacher knowledge
with the continental (French and German, for example) approach, there have been some interesting comments. Kansanen (Kansanen, 1995, in Pepin, 1998) summarises the developments in America and Germany by suggesting that 'die Didaktik' in Germany has always been a form of philosophical thinking, theorising and the construction of theoretical models whereas the American research into teaching has been more empirically based. Comparing the descriptive Didaktik and AngloAmerican research on teaching, Kansanen argues that the different between the two is 'in their background or in the purpose of their model building'. He claims that Didaktik is of 'genuine German origin' and based on 'philosophical traditions of its own'. Much better known in England is the forging of links between curriculum and teaching represented by Lee Shulman's work on pedagogic content knowledge (Shulman, 1987) Shulman has attempted to analyse the complex relationship between subject knowledge and pedagogy. He asks 'how does the successful college student transform his or her expertise into the subject matter form that high school students can comprehend?' (Shulman, 1986, p 5). The pedagogical content knowledge, for Shulman, defines the subject specialist's task as that of finding 'the most useful forms of analogies, illustrations, examples, explanations, and demonstrations; in a word the ways of representing and formulating the subject in order to make it comprehensible to others' (ibid, p 6). In England, the debate around teaching and learning has been differently construed. Anthea Millett in her annual Teacher Training Agency lecture in 1993 (Millett, 1998) pointed out that there was even no agreement on the way the word pedagogy was pronounced. Brian Simon in a seminal article used the title 'Why no Pedagogy in England' (Simon, 1994) (Box 11). BOX 11 The contrast here with other European countries, both west and east, is striking. In the educational tradition of the Continent, the term 'pedagogy' has an honoured place, stemming perhaps particularly from the work and thinking of Comenius in the seventeenth century, but developed and elaborated in the nineteenth century through the work of Pestalozzi, Herbart and others. The concept of teaching as a science has strong roots in this tradition. Not so in England. It is now one hundred years since Alexander Bain published Education as a Science (1879). Since then, less and
less has been heard of this claim. The most striking aspect of current thinking and discussion about education is its eclectic character, reflecting deep confusion of thought, and of aims and purposes, relating to learning and teaching – to pedagogy. (Simon, 1994, p 10) Simon (1994) has subsequently revisited the thesis in the context of recent education reforms and maintains that his central thesis still holds. He sees social and political influences as highly significant. The atheoretical traditions of nineteenth century public school education still eclipse, in his view, the emergent attempts out of the elementary school tradition to establish an enquiry based science of pedagogy. The analysis may be harsh. Moon (1995) has described the strongly pedagogic development of subject based projects such as Nuffield in the 1960s and 1970s. But these have tended to fade, politically as a 'no nonsense, commonsense, standards' rhetoric has climbed the policy agenda. A more strongly intellectual exploration of comparative traditions in didactics and pedagogy could contribute to a clearer articulation of what constitutes subject knowledge and subject knowledge applications in primary and secondary teaching. These analyses would give a stronger theoretical foundation to a number of processes; including revisions to the national curriculum as well as the formulations of standards at all levels in teacher education. But such a process would be heavily constrained by any notion of an 'official pedagogy'. Values One of the central features of a teacher education system are the values that underpin the process as a whole. This is inevitably a contested area. The railings of some politicians against the IUFM's in France and the pamphlets of English pressure groups are two relatively recent examples of how strong the arguments can be. A national system, however, particularly one that strong, arguably ought to do so against some statement of aims and purpose. In other countries a willingness to link the education of teachers to a values system is more visible. In Scotland in 1993, following widespread consultation, a series of requirements were put in place with one section devoted to professionalism. Crucially the Scottish model, around which there had been extensive consultation, made clear that becoming a teacher was more than acquiring a series of competences. It implies, say the guidelines for teacher training (Scottish Education Office, 1993) courses: 'a set of attitudes which have particular power in that they are communicated to those being taught' (p. 3).
The guidelines identify six forms of commitment against which the development of such attitudes can be judged (Box 12): BOX 12 • a commitment to the job and to those affected by the job • a commitment to self-monitoring and continuing professional development • a commitment to collaborate with others to promote pupil achievement • a commitment to promoting the moral and spiritual well-being of pupils • a commitment to the community within and beyond the school and to promoting a responsible attitude towards the needs of the environment • a commitment to views of fairness and equality of opportunity as expressed in multi-cultural and other non-discriminatory policies (HMSO, 1993, Edinburgh, p 6) In Germany, values are reflected in the subtly pervasive but elusive concept of 'Bildung', the opening of the individuals to the rich cultural inheritance that represents the human condition (Klafki, 1995). 'Bildung' suggests a link between the process of education and the development of personal autonomy and responsibility. It establishes the context in which learners can act independently in their world. The larger this field of action is and the more the pupils are aware of their mobility in it, the more easily they can move within it (Menck, 1987). Teachers therefore have as their mission the opening of minds. Current debates around teacher reform have had, therefore, inevitably to deal with this concept. A recent publication of the Deutsche Gesellschaft für Erziehungswissenchaft, the DGFE (German Society for Pedagogical Sciences, DGFE, 1992) sets out proposals for renewal that linked 'Bildung' explicitly to the importance of teacher education developing 'democratic values' and 'Mündigheit' (maturity). The development of 'Mündigheit' implies a sense of: 'participation and co-operation as a mature person', but it also implies autonomy. Both these values which grow out of the Bildung concept, are seen as models or guides for the education of teachers. In this sense teachers have a core responsibility to create 'self confident, democratic individuals, who are capable of constructive criticism, self-determination and, at the same time, responsible participation in public affairs. In this context the development of knowledge and academic skills is, of course, important…but the higher aim is primarily connected with behaviour
and social qualities'. (Pritchard, 1992, p 222) Complementary traditions exist in France. The moral stature of the local 'instituteur' (primary teacher) within the nineteenth century French state has been extensively documented (most graphically, for example, by Roger Thabault, 1971). It dates back to life at the teacher training colleges in the mid 1800s, quasi monastic with a uniform (thouine) that one former teacher (Grillois, 1923) declared: 'pointed us out, it engaged us, like the tunic of the soldier or the cassock of the seminarist: we felt we belonged to a corps, to an order'. (p 97) This espousal of the laique (lay society) using the trappings of religious expression was, of course, progressively documented throughout the present century. To what extent the moral purpose and authority of the teacher is still reflected in the teacher role is subject to disputation. Raymond Bourdoncle, for example (Bourdoncle, 1996), has suggested that the technical orientation of recent reforms implicitly rejects the moral and cultural purposes that previously characterised the teachers role. Outside of Europe the purposes of teacher education are also attracting considerable debate. The National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education in the USA has set out an ambitious reform agenda premised on the need for a new vision of the professional teacher (Box 13). BOX 13 Our society has changed radically in the past 40 years, with the pace of change escalating even more rapidly since the 1980s. Our system of teacher preparation and licensing may have been adequate for pre-1950s America, but no longer will the old methods suffice. We must enter the new millennium with new structures, new approaches, and a shared base of knowledge about teaching that the new professional teacher can apply in daily practice. A new day is dawning in teacher preparation and teaching. … Today's classrooms find children from many different countries, cultural backgrounds and socio-economic groups learning together – all at different academic levels. A teacher facing a homogenous group of children is rapidly becoming a part of America's past.
Accordingly, P-12 schools are undergoing radical transformations. New methods, new school structures, and new roles for teachers are evolving simultaneously. … Teachers are serving as mentors, coaches, and supervisors as P-12 students take more responsibility for their own learning and work on individual and team projects. The new professional teacher views practice as: • collegial • characterized by sharing • working in teams • observing peers • studying with colleagues This is an entirely new conception of the teacher's role. To prosper in this environment, a new teacher must have adequate preparation. The trial and error method, so common in the past, just won't do in today's environment. (National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education in the USA, 1998, p 9) In South Africa the task of reconstructing the education system involved a wholescale review of teacher education and training. This process involved, as a first stage, widespread consultation over values. In 1996, the results of that consultation were published as 'an agenda for implementing a national policy on teacher supply, utilisation and development' (South African government publication, 1996). In this five core socio-political (Box 14) and five core pedagogical values (Box 15) were set out as the foundation for subsequent measures. BOX 14 Socio-political values Democracy (stakeholder participation, accountability, partnerships) In teacher education, this value points to learner-centred and pluralistic philosophies of education, and stakeholder involvement in governance, as well as the professional accountability of teachers and teacher educators. Liberty (independent and critical thought, democratic freedoms, cultural diversity) In teacher education, this value points to the importance of encouraging the development of strong critical abilities in learners, safeguarding freedoms such as freedom of expression and association, and accepting cultural differences. Equality (right to basic education, open access, non-
discriminatory admissions, non-sexism, uniform norms and standards) In teacher education, this means the removal of gender and racial bias and redress of inequalities. Justice (equity, redress, affirmative action, capacity-building, compensatory expenditure) This would involve student support of various kinds, upgrading of disadvantaged institutions and capacity-building programmes, as well as the advancement of women into management positions. Peace (fundamental rights, due process of law, civic responsibility, co-operation, anti-violence ethos) This would involve clear grievance procedures, conflict-resolution training and human rights education. (South African Government Publication, 1996, pp 3–4) BOX 15 Core pedagogical values Relevance Policies, strategies and programmes affecting teachers must be linked and sensitive to the global educational context and the changing national context, as well as diverse regional and local contexts. Learner-centredness Learners should be active and interactive in their learning rather than passive recipients of knowledge. A learner-oriented philosophy is important to secure student involvement and success which is critical to their learning. Professionalism This incorporates values and ethical commitment, as well as the concepts, knowledge, skills and judgement required for professional practice. Co-operation and collegiality Collaborative interaction, partnerships, and stakeholder participation and co-ordination and critical for successful and sustainable teacher policies, strategies and programmes. Teachers must be encouraged to share their expertise, be supportive of one another and work together to improve the quality of their thought and practice. Interactive professionalism is the goal. Innovation Innovation is the kind of knowledge and practice which persistently opens up new possibilities and is forward- rather than backwardlooking. Innovative solutions to the challenges of teacher education must be encouraged and developed through the allocation of resources.
(South African Government Publication, 1996, pp 3–4) The elaboration of these core values resonates with the South African task of social reconstruction in the post apartheid period. In another democratic context, however, would the main core values in themselves change? Peace, perhaps, would sit uneasily in many European countries or North American states. But a healthy debate could be joined around the need to focus attention on the sorts of civic responsibilities of co-operation that the South African government is seeking to bolster. The build up to the regulation of teacher education in England took place in a particularly charged political atmosphere. The strident calls for reform adopted a stance which eschewed any hint of philosophising or theorising arguing for a focus on basic skills and competence; an argument that appealed to the 'common sense' pragmatism of Kenneth Clarke. The bypassing of values at the policy level, however, whilst not determining practice (most or all teacher education institutions would see the development of attitudes as crucial) does give a particular orientation to national debate. The current British government in its first major announcement on education, the White Paper Excellence in Schools (DFEE, 1997), saw teachers as 'the key to their pupils success'. In line with manifesto commitments raising standards was the identified priority. Values, however, remained implicit. The most recent that regulate teacher education (DFEE, 4/98, Teaching: High Status High Standards) despite the rhetoric of the title is almost wholly instrumental in presentation. The section that deals with Professional Requirements when some expression of role and purpose could have been made, is a curious mix of legal responsibilities and exhortations to 'set an example' (Box 16). BOX 16 For all courses, those to be awarded Qualified Teacher Status should, when assessed, demonstrate that they: a. have a working knowledge and understanding of: i. teachers' professional duties as set out in the current School Teachers' Pay and Conditions document, issued under the School Teachers' Pay and Conditions Act 1991 ii. teachers' legal liabilities and responsibilities relating to: • the Race Relations Act 1976
• the Sex Discrimination Act 1975 • Section 7 and Section 8 of the Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974 • teachers' common law duty to ensure that pupils are healthy and safe on school premises and when leading activities off the school site, such as educational visits, school outings or field trips • what is reasonable for the purposes of safeguarding or promoting children's welfare (Section 3(5) of the Children Act 1989) • the role of the education service in protecting children from abuse (currently set out in DfEE Circular 10/95 and the Home Office, Department of Health, DfEE and Welsh Office Guidance Working Together: A guide to arrangements for inter-agency co-operation for the protection of children from abuse 1991; • appropriate physical contact with pupils (currently set out in DfEE Circular 10/95) • appropriate physical restraint of pupils (Section 4 of the Education Act 1997 and DfEE Circular 9/94) • detention of pupils on disciplinary groups (Section 5 of the Education Act 1997 b. have established, during work in schools, effective working relationships with professional colleagues including, where applicable, associate staff c. set a good example of the pupils they teach, through their presentation and their personal and professional conduct d. are committed to ensuring that every pupil is given the opportunity to achieve their potential and meet the high expectations set for them e. understand the need to take responsibility for their own professional development and to keep up to date with research and developments in pedagogy and in the subjects they teach f. understand their professional responsibilities in relation to school policies and practices, including those concerned with pastoral and personal safety matters, including bullying g. recognise that learning takes place inside and outside the school context, and understand the need to liaise effectively with parents and other carers and with agencies with responsibility for pupils' education and welfare h. are aware of the role and purpose of school governing bodies (DFEE Circular 4/98, May 1998, pp 12–13) Central to the document, as in other areas of policy, is the mission to raise standards. Standards however do not exist in a vacuum. Behind the standard or the example lies a purpose and the rather British tradition to bypass the sometimes difficult debate to establish what these should contribute to the gap between policy and practice discussed earlier.
OVERVIEW This pamphlet began by asserting that teacher education is now a global concern. National systems, however large and powerful, feel the pressures of international scrutiny. The rapid transmission of ideas and information; the impact on education and training of emergent cross national markets, the changing structures of employment, are all creating new contexts for educational development. Reforms in one country are, therefore, inevitably scrutinized by reference to wider trends than any national analysis will reveal. How do the changes in teacher education in England appear in the broader context? Martin McLean (1992), in an interesting study published a few years ago, pointed to the dangers and pitfalls of international comparison. He advocated a stronger conceptualisation of the contexts from which data is gathered and he suggested that comparisons between teachers means little without a deeper understanding of the nature of teaching and of the teachers place within the culture. The research on primary teachers in England and France (Planel, et al., 1998) and mathematics teachers in England, France and Germany (Pepin, 1997) exemplify this stance (Broadfoot and Osborn, 1993). There is a strong case, however, for more analytical work of the sort McLean argues for. James Calderhead (1996) has recently developed the same theme. Europe alone, he has written, 'offers a fascinating laboratory for educational researchers to explore different ideas and programmes, and the effects of different forms of training…such opportunities have not been exploited until very recently, and interestingly the research on teacher education that has been conducted to date, has often had little, if any, impact on policy and development'. Thorough analysis of ideas and reforms in other parts of the world is not a strong feature of policy making in England. The media attention around international comparisons of school performance can excite some interest. And specific ideas, if they fit a prevailing agenda, may receive special attention. International evidence that counters a bureaucratic or political drive is easily ignored. One conclusion of this pamphlet is to point to the need for a more analytical examination and evaluation of the broader trends in the way teachers are formed and developed. Teacher education has increasingly become the responsibility of the University. The higher status of a graduate, university trained teacher has had some influence on recruitment. In England this would be particularly true of primary teachers. There remains,
however, an ambivalence around the role and responsibility of the University that reflects internal and external tensions. Schools of Education in England have had to struggle to achieve legitimacy within the 'academy'. The recent increasingly dirigiste and interventionist activities of central government have done little to bolster that process. The relative weakness of the University sector to mediate, and in some respects resist, new forms of control reflects the external power of the newly centralist administration. But it also signifies the uncertain status of teacher education within the University. A certain scepticism about the effectiveness of the University to provide teacher education is not unique but, in the English context, there seems a certain virulence of political activity and a layering of controls that is not found elsewhere. Certainly in European perspective the combination of regulation and inspection is unique. And the increasingly political engagement to prescribe methods and practices is unusual. Other observations derive from this general point. In looking at course models, for example, it is clear that internationally a range of alternative strategies are in use with scant evidence to suggest that any one is more effective than another; yet the English imperative to centrally regulate and inspect has inevitably led to the imposition of an orthodoxy that brooks no exception. The length of time spent in direct contact with classes, the insistence on full time sustained attendance in school and the requirement to teach in a second school all constrain the potential for diversification and innovation in course design. Initial education and training in England, is significantly based around the nine month (full time) PGCE model. There are no structural links with the preceding three year degree study and very limited articulation between the training year and the first year of teaching. Recent initiatives with career entry profiles and induction attempt to address this problem. Both, however, are premised on an assumption that the training institution has little, if any, subsequent involvement with the newly qualified teacher. These problems exist in other countries but are exacerbated in England by the, tightly packaged, PGCE programme. The two year postgraduate programmes, in France and Germany, permit a less frantic pace with more time to 'intellectualise' the training process. Embarking on a longer course also appears to engender a greater commitment to teaching. This is surely the place for some genuinely radical rethinking. Could the ITT curriculum be spread across a two year course that included induction? Could this be linked to local LEA guarantees of employment at the outset of training? Are there other structures that could give a stronger regional emphasis to linking undergraduate, postgraduate and induction training?
The English approach to system building, as has been already demonstrated, is unique in its centralisation to a government and government agencies. In almost all other European countries, teacher educators, teachers unions, professional associations, and sometimes employers and parents, would expect a far greater structural involvement in establishing models and regulations and overseeing the criteria for judging or inspecting quality. In England teacher training is now effectively controlled by two agencies, the TTA and OFSTED. Both are subject to significant pressures in the uncertain world created by the late 1980s, early 1990s Tory interventionist and centralist reforms. Neither can be seen to be lagging behind in implementing 'tough no nonsense' policies. The racheting up of toughness has become an integral part of the process of bureaucratic manoeuvring and leads inevitably to the exclusion of groups with wider agendas. The entry of a General Teaching Council into this volatile equation looks fraught with problems and bodes ill for the development of responsible professional autonomy. The English system, therefore, continues to appear to embrace Richard Elmore's 'noble lie' of public administration, that is that policy makers control the organisational, political and technological processes that affect implementation. In the short term the strategies associated with this fallacy may give the impression of a proactive, even dynamic, administration. Over time, however, as the energy inevitably seeps away, little foundation will have been laid for generative and sustained improvement. This concern applies to a range of educational issues but it is, arguably, exhibited in an extreme form in the current state of teacher education. This form of policy making may be out of step with most other countries but some policies are attracting international interest. The model of partnership between schools and teacher education institutions is now increasingly structurally established. Putting on one side the issue of resources and financing few in teacher education would argue for reversing the move to a greater involvement of schools. This is an area of success and the research and development literature around this theme is widely read in other parts of the world. More controversially the same could be said of the attempts to focus on performance or standards. In respect of international interest it most certainly is true. Globally the move to make the outcomes of education and training more explicit has gained momentum over the past decade, with some countries making this a central plank of education policy. The problem in England is that the standards, particularly when linked to inspection, become inviolate, even
unquestionable. To do so is interpreted as weakness. Yet we know that specifying practice in this way is fraught with procedural and conceptual difficulties that well developed forms of dialogue can begin to address. It is difficult to judge whether the flirtation, in some areas of English policy making, with regulating teachers; methods will grow into anything more significant. Many countries in central and eastern Europe have advisory expertise to offer, although it might be somewhat rusty! But in terms of pedagogies and didactics a more professionally grounded approach could reap important benefits. There are, as shown above, different cultural traditions that implicitly shape teaching methods and styles. A more strongly intellectually orientated approach to development, building on a teachers intrinsic interest in their subject or subjects could begin to dispel that whiff of anti intellectualism that pervades the English staffroom (reinforced by seemingly timeless 'back to basics' philosophy in the media). The heyday of 'Nuffield science', for example, created an atmosphere and attitudes that could be developed in a more sustainable form across the teaching profession. But it would require some experimentation, even risk taking, wholly inconsistent with the present regulatory and inspectorial regime. This again leads back to values. There is part of government that seeks new approaches and fresh ideas. The challenges facing the education system clearly requires new thinking and teacher education has a potentially crucial role to play. To steer this, however, requires some formulation of values. What should we expect of teachers? What part should teachers play in addressing the big cultural, social and economic issues that press in on us? At present a rather authoritarian commitment to regulated standards serves as a proxy for values. This is inadequate. Standards without values can easily become standardisation, the very process that a vibrant and dynamic culture has to avoid. What stands out about teacher education in England, compared to many other countries (and all European Community countries) is the current lack of real discourse between the key stakeholders in the teacher education process. Discussion is frequently confrontational and polemical and no shared institutional structures exist within which differences can be addressed. Individuals within government, the TTA and the teacher education community broadly interpreted attempt to remedy this but in a highly individualistic way. This is a political issue. With the supply, and therefore the quality, of teachers in many areas reaching crisis point and the standing of the teaching profession under question, oppositional,
even hierarchical, relationships appear counterproductive. New, confident structures need building, embracing the wide interests of this teaching profession and engendering a genuinely shared feeling of responsibility for the future. References Anderson, R. D. (1986) 'Sociology and History: M. S. Archer's Social Origins of Educational Systems', European Journal of Sociology, 27(1), pp. 149–60. Archer, M. (1979) Social Origins of Educational Systems, London, Sage. Bourdoncle, R. (1996) 'From the school teacher to the expert', in Corbett, A. and Moon, B. Education in France. Continuity and Change in the Mitterrand Years, 1981–1995, Routledge, London. Broadfoot, P. and Osborn, M. (1993) Perceptions of Teaching – Primary School Teachers in England and France, London and New York, Cassell. Buchberger, F. (1994) 'Teacher Education in Europe – Diversity versus Uniformity' in Galton, M. and Moon, B. A Handbook of Teacher Education in Europe, London, Council of Europe/Fulton. Bungardt, K. (1964) Der Weg der Lehrerbildung von Seminar zur Universität (Buhl, Gewerkschaft Erziehung und Wissenschaft). Calderhead, J. (1996) Towards a Research Base for the Development of Teacher Education in Europe, Scottish Educational Review. Chevellard, Y. (1991) 'La transposition didactique: du savoir savant au savour enseigné, La Pensee Sauvage, Paris. DfEE (1997) Excellence in Schools, London. DGFE (1992) Empfehlungen zur Weiterentwicklung der Ausbildung von Lehrerinnen und Lehrern, Berlin. Edwards, T. (1994) 'The Universities Council for the Education of Teachers; defending an interest or fighting a cause', Journal of Education for Teaching, 20:2, pp. 143–152.
Elmore, R. (1989) 'Backward mapping: implementation research and policy decisions' in Moon, B. et al. Policies for the Curriculum, London, Hodder and Stoughton. Grillois, J. (1923) Le séminaire laique, Paris, Fallois. Hencke, D. (1978) Colleges in Crisis: the reorganisation of teacher training 1971–77, Harmondsworth, Penguin. HMSO (1989) Initial Teacher Training in France, London. HMSO (1993) The Initial Training of Teachers in Two German Länder, Hessen and Rheineland Pfalz, London. HMSO Edinburgh (1993) Guidelines for Teacher Training Courses, Scottish Office Education Department, PURC CS 4/93 (68454). HMSO (1997) The Professional Status, Recruitment and Training of Teachers, London. Johnson, J. (1968) 'A Brief History of Student Teaching', Creative Educational Materials (De Kalb, Illinois University Press). Judge, H., Lemosse, M., Paine, L. and Sedlak, M. (1994) 'The University and the Teachers', Oxford Studies in Comparative Education, 4(1/2). Kansanen, P. (1995) 'The Deutsche Didaktik', Journal of Curriculum Studies, 22(4), pp. 347–352. Keitel, c. (1992) 'Mathematician or pedagogue? On education of teachers of mathematics in Germany', The Curriculum Journal, 3(3), pp. 291–309. Klafki, W. (1995) 'Didactic analysis as the core of preparation of instruction (Didaktische Analyse als Kern der Unterricht Vorbereitung)', Journal of Curriculum Studies, 27:1, pp. 13–30. Lawlor, S. (1990) Teachers Mistaught: training in theories or education in subjects, London, Centre for Policy Studies. Maynard, T. and Furlong, J. (1993) 'Learning to teach and models of mentoring' in Mcintyre, D., Hagger, H. and Wilkin, M. E. Mentoring Perspectives in School Based Teacher Education, London, Kogan Page. Mclean, M. (1992) The Promise and Perils of Educational Comparison, Tufnell Press, London.
Menck, P. (1995) 'Didactics as construction of content', Journal of Curriculum Studies, 27:4, pp. 353–71. Millett, A. (1998) quoted in the Times Educational Supplement, June 12th. Moon, B. (1990) 'Patterns of control: reforming West-European school', British Journal of Sociology, 41:3, pp. 423–44. Moon, B. (1995) 'Regenerating curriculum and pedagogy: the English experience', Curriculum Journal, 6:2, pp. 185–198.. Moon, B. (1996) 'Practical experience in teacher education: charting a European agenda', European Journal of Teacher Education, 19:3, pp. 217–250. National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education in the USA (1998) A Programme for Reform. Neather, E. J. (1993) 'Teacher education and the role of the University: European perspectives', research paper in Education, 8:1, pp. 33–46. Neave, G. (1987) 'Challenges Met: Trends in Teacher Education 1975–85', in New Challenges for Teachers and Their Education , Noordwijkerhout, Netherlands, Council of Europe. Neave (1992) The Teaching Nation: Prospects for Teaching in the European Community, Oxford, Pergamon. Pepin, B. (1997) Developing an Understanding of Mathematics Teachers in England, France and Germany. An Ethnographic Study, Ph.D., University of Reading. Pepin, B. (1998) 'Existing models of knowledge in teaching: developing an understanding of the Anglo/America, the French and the German scene', paper presented at the TNTEE seminar, Linz, Austria, April 1998. Pritchard, R. M. O. (1992) 'German classrooms observed: a foreigner's perspective', Oxford Review of Education, 18:3, pp. 213–25. Sander, B. (1996) in Sander, T. et al., Germany in Teacher Education in Europe. Evaluation and Perspective. SIGMA conference proceedings, Osnabruck, June 22-23, 1995.
Shulman, L. (1987) 'Knowledge and teaching: foundations of the new reform', Harvard Educational Review, 57, pp. 1–27. Simon, B. (1994) 'Some problems of pedagogy revisited', in Simon, B. The State and Educational Change: Essays in the History of Education and Pedagogy, London, Lawrence and Wishart. Simon, B. (1994) 'Why no pedagogy in England?', in Moon, B. and Shelton-Mayes, A. Teaching and Learning in the Secondary School, London, Routledge. South African Government Publication (1996) An Agenda for Implementing a National Policy on Teacher Supply, Utilization and Development. Stones, E. (1994) 'Mayday! Mayday?' Editorial, Journal of Education for Teaching, 20:2, pp. 139–141. Tochan, F. and Munby, H. (1993) 'Novice and expert teachers' time epistemology: a wave function from didactives to pedagogy', Teacher and Teacher Education, 9(2), pp. 205–218. Vennet, M. (1975) Le temps des études, Librarie Honoré Champion, Paris. Wise, A. F. (1979) Legislated Learning: the Bureaucratisation of the American Classroom, Berkeley C.A. University of California Press. Zay, D. (1994a) Enseignants et partenaires de l'école, Paris, De Boek et INRP. Zay, D. (1994b) La formation des enseignants au partenariat, Paris, Presses Universitaires de France.
