Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Performance Measurement and Accountability: Some Reflections on the Developments in Teacher Education in England

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Governance in der Lehrerausbildung: Analysen aus England und Deutschland

Part of the book series: Educational Governance ((EDUGOV,volume 27))

Abstract

This chapter examines the processes of change that have been under way in teacher education in England. The trends that are revealed are consistent with a centrally controlled development of a marketised approach. There has been a diversification of provision with new entry routes which have little or no higher education input, as well as a growing emphasis on performance and ‘accountability’. The overall effect has been to create a fractured system with considerable instability especially for traditional providers of teacher education. This has been accompanied by a growing sense of constraint on the nature of teaching, based on a simplistic view of the profession which assumes that teaching can be encapsulated in a list of measurable standards or competences.

Zusammenfassung

Dieser Beitrag betrachtet die Veränderungsprozesse, die in der Lehrerbildung in England in den letzten Jahren angestoßen wurden. Die aufgezeigten Trends zeigen sich konsistent mit dem zentral gesteuerten Ausbau eines markt-orientierten Ansatzes auch in diesem Bereich. So findet sich eine erhöhte Diversifikation des Ausbildungsangebotes durch neue Qualifikations- und Berufseintrittswege, die wenige oder keine akademischen Ausbildungsanteile aufweisen, ebenso wie eine zunehmende Betonung von Leistungsergebnissen und Accountability. Insgesamt wurde durch die Veränderungen ein zersplittertes System der Lehrerbildung geschaffen, welches sich durch eine erhebliche Instabilität insbesondere für die traditionellen Anbieter von Lehrerbildungsprogrammen auszeichnet. Basierend auf einer grob vereinfachenden Sicht auf die Profession, wonach das Unterrichten und das hier zu vollziehende professionelle Handeln auf eine Liste messbarer Standards und Kompetenzen verkürzt werden könne, wurden diese Entwicklungen begleitet durch wachsende Vorbehalte gegenüber der Lehrtätigkeit als solcher.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 49.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 69.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    From 2005 the Training and Development Agency for schools (TDA); and from April 2012 TDA roles will transfer to the Teaching Agency, a new executive agency reporting to the Department for Education.

  2. 2.

    Later Barber became Head of the Prime Minister’s Delivery Unit, then he worked for the McKinsey Partnership’s Global Education Practice, and at the time of writing he is Chief Education Advisor at Pearson, the multinational publishing corporation.

  3. 3.

    This characteristic was even more clearly demonstrated when the approach in England was compared with that in Scotland, see Menter et al. (2004).

  4. 4.

    However, when the standards in England were compared with those in other parts of the United Kingdom, they still appeared to be more constraining and “technicist” than elsewhere (Hulme and Menter 2008).

  5. 5.

    For example, in March 1997 The TTA withdrew ITT accreditation from La Sainte Union College of Higher Education, Southampton.

  6. 6.

    The unistats website is owned by the Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE) and managed by the Universities and Colleges Admissions Service (UCAS). From September 2012 the unistats website will be replaced by a new public portal publishing Key Information Sets (KIS) on higher education courses.

References

  • Ball, S. (2003). The teacher’s soul and the terrors of performativity. Journal of Education Policy, 18, 2, 215–228.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barber, M. (1996). The learning game. Arguments for an education revolution. London: Indigo.

    Google Scholar 

  • Conroy, J., & Menter, I. (2011). Developing a “clinical” model for teacher education. Paper presented at the BERA annual conference, Institute of Education, University of London, 6–8th Sept. 2011.

    Google Scholar 

  • Department for Education (DfE). (2010). The importance of teaching. The schools white paper 2010. Cm 7980. London: The Stationery Office.

    Google Scholar 

  • Department for Education (DfE). (2011). Training our next generation of outstanding teachers. Implementation plan. London: The Stationery Office. DfE-00038–2011.

    Google Scholar 

  • Department for Education and Employment (DfEE). (1998a). Teachers: Meeting the challenge of change. London: DfEE.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dillon, E., & Silva, E. (2011). Grading the teachers’ teachers: Higher education comes under scrutiny. Phi Delta Kappan, 93, 1, 54–58.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Furlong, J. (2005). New labour and teacher education: The end of an era. Oxford Review of Education, 31, 1, 119–134.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Furlong, J. (2008). Making teaching a 21st century profession: Tony Blair’s big prize. Oxford Review of Education, 34, 6, 727–739.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gewirtz, S. (2002). The managerial school: Post-welfarism and social justice in education. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gilroy, P. (1999). Inspecting the inspecting of teacher education in England and Wales. Journal of Education for Teaching, 25, 3, 215–219.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gleeson, D., & Husbands, C. (Eds.). (2001). The performing school. London: Routledge Falmer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Graham, J. (1997). Initial teacher education: TTA/OFSTED quality framework. Universities’ Council for the Education of Teachers (UCET). Occasional Paper No. 9. http://www.ucet.ac.uk/377.

  • Hulme, M., & Menter, I. (2008). Learning to teach in post-devolution UK: A technical or an ethical process? Southern Africa Review of Education, 14, 1–2, 43–64.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hulme, M., & Menter, I. (2011). South and North – Teacher education policy in England and Scotland: A comparative textual analysis. Scottish Educational Review, 43, 2, 70–90.

    Google Scholar 

  • Independent Review of Teachers Standards. (2011a). First report of the independent review of teachers’ standards. QTS and core standards. http://media.education.gov.uk/assets/files/pdf/r/first%20report%20of%20the%20review%20of%20teachers%20standards.pdf.

  • Independent Review of Teachers Standards. (2011b). Second report of the independent review of teachers’ standards. http://media.education.gov.uk/assets/files/pdf/s/independent%20review%20of%20teachers%20standards%20 %20 %20second%20report.pdf.

  • Jeffrey, R. and Troman, G. (Eds.) (2012). Performativity across UK education: ethnographic cases of its effects, agency and reconstructions. Painswick: E&E Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Judge, H. (1990). The Reform of Teacher Education. In P. Benton (Ed.), The Oxford internship scheme: Integration and partnership in initial teacher education (pp. 1–15). London: Calouste Gulbenkian Foundation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kirk, G. (2006). TDA consultation: Draft standards for classroom teachers. UCET response. 23 Feb. 2006. www.ucet.ac.uk/downloads/908.doc.

  • Klecka, C. L. (Ed.). (2009). Visions for teacher educators: Perspectives on the association of teacher educators’ standards. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Koster, B., & Dengerink, J. J. (2008). Professional standards for teacher educators: How to deal with complexity, ownership and function. Experiences from the Netherlands. European Journal of Teacher Education, 31, 2, 135–149.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lawlor, S. (1990). Teachers mistaught: Training in theories or education in subjects. London: Centre for Policy Studies.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mahony, P., & Hextall, I. (2000). Reconstructing teaching: Standards, performance and accountability. London: Routledge Falmer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mahony, P. (2009). Should “ought” be taught? Teaching and Teacher Education, 25, 983–989.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mahony, P., Menter, I., & Hextall, I. (2004). The emotional impact of performance-related pay on teachers in England. British Educational Research Journal 30, 3, 435–452.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McNamara, O., Boyd, P., Jones, M., Murray, J., Qasim, S., & Stanley, G. (2010). Initial teacher education annual self-evaluation: Review of the SED. London: UCET.

    Google Scholar 

  • Menter, I., Mahony, P., & Hextall, I. (2004). “Ne”er the twain shall meet? The modernization of the teaching workforce in Scotland and England. Journal of Education Policy, 19, 2, 195–214.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Menter, I. (2009). Teachers for the future: What have we got and what do we need? In S. Gewirtz, P. Mahony, I. Hextall, & A. Cribb (Eds.), Changing teacher professionalism: International trends, challenges and ways forward (pp. 217–228). London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Hear, A. (1988). Who teaches the teachers? London: Social Affairs Unit.

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Keeffe, D. (1990). The Wayward Elite. London: The Adam Smith Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  • Office for Standards in Education (Ofsted). (2003). Advanced skills teachers. HMI survey 1767. London: Ofsted.

    Google Scholar 

  • Office for Standards in Education (Ofsted). (2004). A new relationship with schools: Improving performance through school self evaluation. London: DfES.

    Google Scholar 

  • Office for Standards in Education Children’s Services and Skills (Ofsted). (2009). Evaluation schedule for schools. Manchester: Ofsted. Published 23 July 2009, Reference number: 090098.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ozga, J. (2009). Governing education through data in England: from regulation to self-evaluation. Journal of Education Policy, 24, 2, 149–162.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Perryman, J. (2006). Panoptic performativity and school inspection regimes: Disciplinary mechanisms and life under special measures. Journal of Education Policy, 21, 2, 147–161.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Power, M. (1997). The audit society. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smithers, A., & Robinson, P. (2011). The good teacher training guide. Centre for Education and Employment Research. University of Buckingham. http://www.buckingham.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/GTTG2011.pdf.

  • Strathern, M. (2000). The tyranny of transparency. British Educational Research Journal, 26, 3, 309–321.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sutherland, Sir S. (1997). Teacher education & training: A study. Report 10 of the National Committee of Inquiry into Higher Education (The Dearing Report).

    Google Scholar 

  • Taylor, W. (1987). Accrediting teacher education: the work of CATE. European Journal of Teacher Education, 10, 1, 23–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Training and Development Agency for schools (TDA). (2011). Results of the newly qualified teacher survey 2011. Manchester: TDA. http://www.tda.gov.uk/training-provider/itt/data-surveys/nqt-survey-archived-results.aspx.

  • UCET. (1999). Evidence to the British House of Commons Select Committee on the inspection of teacher education in England, Wales and Northern Ireland. Journal of Education for Teaching, 25, 3, 221–231.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weiner, G. (2002). Auditing failure: Moral competence and school effectiveness. British Educational Research Journal, 28, 6, 789–804.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wilkins, C., & Wood, P. (2009). Initial teacher education in the panopticon. Journal of Education for Teaching: International research and pedagogy, 35, 3, 283–297.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Education – St. Andrew’s Building, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK

    Dr. Moira Hulme

  2. Dept. of Education, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK

    Prof. Ian Menter

Authors
  1. Dr. Moira Hulme
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Prof. Ian Menter
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Moira Hulme .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Institut für Erziehungswissenschaft, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Berlin, Germany

    Dina Kuhlee

  2. Institut für Erziehungswissenschaft, Humbodt-Universität zu Berlin, Berlin, Germany

    Jürgen van Buer

  3. Department of Education, King's College London, London, United Kingdom

    Christopher Winch

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2015 Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Hulme, M., Menter, I. (2015). Performance Measurement and Accountability: Some Reflections on the Developments in Teacher Education in England. In: Kuhlee, D., van Buer, J., Winch, C. (eds) Governance in der Lehrerausbildung: Analysen aus England und Deutschland. Educational Governance, vol 27. Springer VS, Wiesbaden. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-05894-4_13

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-05894-4_13

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer VS, Wiesbaden

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-658-05893-7

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-658-05894-4

  • eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Science (German Language)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation