Teacher Education and Policy Reform in Australia: Using and Connecting Research to Shape Public Education Debates

• In Event: Policy, Governance, and Quality in Teacher Education Systems: Four Cases

Abstract

1. Problem/Objectives
Initial teacher education (ITE) and education reform processes in Australia tend to closely shadow those of the United States and England (see Zeichner, 2014, Mayer, 2014, Gilroy, 2014). While there is some evidence of one-off policy initiatives borrowed from other countries, the last decade has seen an ever-increasingly rapid policy ‘catch-up’ as Australia follows the same reform waves as our English and American ‘cousins’ (Gilroy, 2014, p.624). As Grossman (2008) notes, ‘within crisis lies opportunity’ (p.22) and this context has in turn led to a study of Australian education policy reform and policy makers. The paper will examine the current policy landscape through a critical discourse analysis of the ITE policy reforms and their origins with a comparison of the views, assumptions and evidence base currently used by policy makers (n= 20) to inform their thinking across a range of jurisdictions in Australia.

2. Perspective and Modes of inquiry/Questions/data sources
This paper responds broadly to Sleeter’s (2014) call for an investigation into “what kind of research in teacher education would better inform policy and to what extent are teacher educators engaged in this research?” Data sources included a number of recent Australian policy documents and initial teacher education reviews, in particular the Government’s response to the Teacher Education Ministerial Advisory Group (TEMAG) who proposed a number of recommendations to improve student learning by focusing on initial teacher education (ITE). These documents are compared using critical discourse analysis with other international policy reform literature to reveal key sources and shifts from context to context (Sahlberg, 2011).

The reform documents are compared with the views of current policy makers (n=20) and the evidence they identify that informs them. Building from the work of Nelson, Leffler & Hansen (2009), semi-structured interviews were conducted seeking responses to a range of questions including but not limited to: What sources/evidence do you currently use to inform your work? What current links do you think exist between education policy makers and teacher education researchers? What do you think facilitates using teacher education research evidence in educational policy decision making? And what factors do you believe most influence change in teacher education policy and practice?

3. Analysis/Results and contributions/significance
Analysis revealed when, how, and under what conditions teacher education research evidence is used by education policymakers; what other sources of information they relied on; and what factors served as barriers or enablers to using research evidence in making education policy and practice decisions. Results indicated that policy makers in Australia do want to work closely with teacher education researchers and research and value the contribution of national and international teacher education scholarly work. They did not believe current university systems worked well together to maximise research-policy participation or impact.

By understanding what shapes education policymakers’ decision making and the influence of neo-liberal reforms, the role of teacher education research evidence can be increased to better contribute to and inform policy and practice rather than be out of step.

Author

• Simone Jane White, Monash University