"If You Can't Kill Them, Co-Opt Them": How Educational Reformers Appropriate Teachers' Voice and Agency

• In Event: Teachers as Policy Experts, Agents, Activists, and Advocates

Abstract

Purpose: Since the early 2000s, intermediary organizations (IOs) with the support of venture philanthropies have played an increasingly important role in reshaping educational policies (deMarrais et al., 2019; Tompkins-Stange, 2016). As conservative think tanks, research institutes, nonprofit and for-profit organizations, as well as advocacy groups sought to gain dominance in policy debates, they turned their attention to teachers. New teacher voice organizations were established; a number of policy programs started recruiting annual cohorts. The purpose of this paper is to examine how IOs have used these initiatives to co-opt teachers' voices in policy debates to gain greater legitimacy for their agendas.
Methodological Approach: This study is rooted in anthropology of policy that elucidates interactions between various participants in policy processes. This study complements the analysis of videos, documents, and interviews with social network analysis of IO policy activities. Data included in the analysis comprises reports produced by non-state actors on the use of teacher voice to promote reform agendas; publicly available video recordings of legislative sessions where teachers testified on behalf of various organizations; teachers’ blog posts and advocacy letters in support of IOs’ agendas; as well as interviews with teachers who went through policy advocacy training programs.
Theoretical Framework: Drawing on theoretical traditions in sociology (Goffman, 1959, 1974), anthropology (Shore et al., 2011; Wedel, 2009), political science (Edelman, 1988), and educational policy (Smith et al., 2004), this paper approaches policy as a form of performance. Smith (2004) described policymaking as resembling “theater, complete with directors, stages, casts of actors, [and] narrative plots” (Smith et al., 2004, p. 11). In the context of neoliberal transformations and expansion of private interests into the public sector, what comes to matter most in policy-making circles is not evidence, facts, or data, but convincing performance (Wedel, 2009). Applied to the roles IOs afford teachers in advocacy work, this framework elucidates ways in which teachers’ voices are scripted to offer credence to IO actors’ performance in policymaking contexts.
Results: Philanthropies and intermediary organizations incorporate K-12 teachers’ and administrators’ advocacy activities in the orchestration of policy ideas that advance privatization and technocratization of education (Lubienski & Brewer, 2016). On the one hand, educational reformers, philanthropists, and advocacy groups have subjected teacher unions - organizations representing teachers’ professional interests - to continuous attacks. On the other hand, these policy actors have lauded the activities of teacher voice organizations, such as the Hope Street Group, TeachPlus, and Educators4Excellence, which render support for neoliberal policies. Whether it is science of reading reforms, the use of edTPA, or stringent accountability requirements for teacher education programs, IOs use teacher voice organizations to engage teachers in public deliberations that gives credence to IO policy proposals. Talking points and scripts for blogs and op-eds are provided to help teachers frame their position in alignment with IO agendas.
Significance: The study complicates our understanding of teacher agency in policy contexts and demonstrates how in “the war of ideas” waged by philanthropies, intermediary organizations, and advocacy groups, teachers’ voices can be co-opted to advance disruptors’ agendas.

Authors

• Elena Aydarova, University of Wisconsin - Madison
  Presenting Author

• Garett Dallas Reed, Auburn University
  Presenting Author