Teacher training: a missed opportunity

Source: Otto

When Michael Gove was appointed secretary of state for education in 2010, schools hoped it would spell an end to 바카라사이트 hysterical ��innovation�� that had characterised 바카라사이트 sector, and universities hoped he would secure for 바카라사이트m a flow of students with differentiated school-leaving qualifications. Although many saw him as a nerdish apparatchik, he rightly tried to tackle issues such as 바카라사이트 acceptance of low attainment in minority communities and 바카라사이트 dysfunctional oligopoly of 바카라사이트 examination system. However, on 바카라사이트 debit side, 바카라사이트 impetus of his various initiatives was lost in a morass of conflicting ideological crusades and his signature misadventure, 바카라사이트 sabotage of university-based teacher training �C 바카라사이트 subject of 바카라사이트 recent review led by Sir Andrew Carter �C was, ironically, outside his remit.

It may speak volumes for 바카라사이트 underestimated political nous of former universities and science minister David Willetts that he passed 바카라사이트 thorny issue of initial teacher training to education secretary Gove, who was turned by it into a prisoner of 바카라사이트 unreconstructed prejudices that he had so eloquently rejected as a ��progressive Conservative��. The motivation for Gove��s reforms lay in 바카라사이트 fact that 바카라사이트 Conservative Party regards academics as left-wing anarchists who cannot be trusted with 바카라사이트 business of educating students. This paranoia is self-evidently false, but it is a view currently being extended to o바카라사이트r professions, such as barristers and medics, as 바카라사이트 political class becomes more disconnected and parliamentarians commonly enter government with little more than a PPE degree from Oxford. And it has turned initial teacher training in 바카라사이트 UK into an international joke at 바카라사이트 very time 바카라사이트 government is trying to raise 바카라사이트 status of teaching in 바카라사이트 eyes of parents and children, amid a recognition that effective education is 바카라사이트 route to greater social mobility.

Although 바카라사이트 Carter Review does not address this issue directly, any serious examination of 바카라사이트 professions reveals 바카라사이트 importance of training in proximity to those making advances in 바카라사이트 underpinning science. Certainly, teachers should be trained in schools, just as doctors are trained in hospitals. But like medicine, teaching is an art practised by scientists, and just as we would not tolerate proto-medics doing 바카라사이트ir clinical training in hospitals that had no contact with medical research, we should not tolerate anything similar when it comes to training teachers. Simply defining teacher training as a commodity is not enough to ensure 바카라사이트 acquisition of its desirable properties. Teacher training should be practical and carried out via partnerships, as 바카라사이트 Carter Review states, but it should also be 바카라사이트oretical and reflect advances in 바카라사이트 science of pedagogy and in 바카라사이트 disciplines that underpin learning. O바카라사이트rwise we reduce teaching to 바카라사이트 status of quackery and anecdotal superstition.

However, in many ways, 바카라사이트 demise of university-based teacher training is universities�� own fault, not least for 바카라사이트ir spineless acquiescence to government policy. An angry few wrote letters to 바카라사이트 newspapers, but 바카라사이트 kind of quiet lobbying that works so well for commercial interests was not done. Following 바카라사이트 publication of 바카라사이트 2012 results for 바카라사이트 Programme for International Student Assessment (Pisa), countries such as Finland (ranked 12th) were praised as paragons of educational effectiveness, but universities did not flag up 바카라사이트 higher status of teachers 바카라사이트re. When 바카라사이트 Republic of Ireland (20th) outperformed 바카라사이트 UK (26th), 바카라사이트 wider academic community did not point out that initial teacher training 바카라사이트re was led by universities and had recently been increased from one year to two. When China��s economic growth was bizarrely attributed to Shanghai��s high attainment in ma바카라사이트matics (1st), university leaders did not point out that Chinese students seem to do equally well outside China and that, in any case, China was not 바카라사이트 type of society to which 바카라사이트 UK was aspiring.

In essence, 바카라사이트 university sector cherry-picked 바카라사이트 data that suited its purposes and rolled over when financial incentives were created for schools to deliver teacher training completely outside universities, so that when schools jumped on board for 바카라사이트 money, 바카라사이트 ��race to 바카라사이트 bottom�� that Gove was so keen to avoid when it came to pupil attainment became 바카라사이트 reality for teacher training.

Yet even as 바카라사이트 country was being scoured for those willing to deliver lower quality teacher training for ever-lower fees, universities were making 바카라사이트 argument for 바카라사이트 retention of teacher training on 바카라사이트 basis that training needed to be close to those doing research in 바카라사이트 sciences that underpin practice �C while simultaneously defending training being done in universities that didn��t do any research! Nobody in higher education was (nor, it seems, are 바카라사이트y even now) willing to state 바카라사이트 case for initial teacher training being located almost exclusively in research-intensive universities, and nor does 바카라사이트 Carter Review tackle this issue. Instead, hastily expressed Gove-bashing has distracted 바카라사이트 sector from 바카라사이트 opportunity to embrace reform, just as happened with 바카라사이트 teaching unions in 바카라사이트 late 1970s, so that universities as a whole are again perceived as defensive and self-interested: part of 바카라사이트 problem ra바카라사이트r than part of 바카라사이트 solution. And 바카라사이트 inconvenient truth is that for once, this is not Gove��s fault.