The Australian Educational Researcher

, Volume 41, Issue 4, pp 411–423 | Cite as

International ‘benchmarking’ studies and the identification of ‘education best practice’: a focus on classroom teachers and their practices

  • Andrew SkourdoumbisEmail author


The disproportionate focus on classroom teachers and their instruction—teacher effectiveness—in order to confront and address under-achievement and disadvantage appears as a contemporary education policy theme in Australia. Phrases such as ‘high performing schooling systems’, ‘the best teachers’, ‘high performing countries’, ‘quality teaching’, ‘under-performing schools’, ‘the right change’, ‘operationally feasible’, ‘targeting of reforms’, ‘degrees of under-performance’, ‘educational drivers’, ‘teacher quality and improved teaching’ and ‘external standards and governance’ are constantly mentioned and given continual attention and prominence by policy-makers. The paper questions and critiques a policy-making direction that uses teacher effectiveness research to force and steer reform in education. The distinctive and narrow concern with teacher effectiveness works to the specific exclusion of breadth and scope concerning debate about broader education related issues and questions, for example, matters of student achievement, exclusion and disadvantage. This article uses a qualitative research approach informed by critical theory to examine three influential private sector reports on education and schooling: The McKinsey Report ( 2007 )How the world’s best-performing school systems come out on top, The Nous Group ( 2011 )Schooling Challenges and Opportunities and The Grattan Institute ( 2012 )Catching up: Learning from the best school systems in East Asia. The article subjects the reports to close critical scrutiny and examination and finds that classroom teachers are positioned so that their specific and explicit instruction becomes the differentiating ‘variable’ in matters of student achievement and success.


Corporate report Teacher performance Student achievement Classroom teachers Education policy Teacher education 


  1. Althusser, L., & Balibar, E. (2009). Reading capital. London: Verso.Google Scholar
  2. Ball, S. (2001). Labour, learning and the economy. In Michael Fielding (Ed.), “education education education” Taking Education Really Seriously. Four Years’ Hard Labour. London: Routledge Falmer. 45–56.Google Scholar
  3. Ball, S. (2006). Education policy and social class. The selected works of Stephen J. Ball. London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  4. Ballou, D., Sanders, W., & Wright, P. (2004). Controlling for Student Background in Value-Added Assessment of Teachers. Journal of Educational and Behavioural Statistics, 29(1), 37–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Baltodano, M. (2012). Neoliberalism and the demise of public education: The corporatization of schools of education. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 25(4), 487–507. doi:  10.1080/09518398.2012.673025.
  6. Barber, M. and Mourshed, M. (2007). How the world’s best-performing school systems come out on top. (McKinsey and Company).Google Scholar
  7. Bayart, Jean-Francois. (2007). Global subjects. A Political Critique of Globalization. U.K: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  8. Biddle, Bruce J. (2012). Splendid Contributions and Flawed Conclusions. Educational Researcher, 41(5), 179–181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Blum, D., & Ullman, C. (2012). The globalization and corporatization of education: the limits and liminality of the market mantra. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 25(4), 367–373.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bourdieu, P. (1984). Distinction. A social critique of the judgement of taste. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  11. Bourdieu, P. (1990). The logic of practice. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  12. Bourdieu, P. (2003). Firing Back. Against The Tyranny Of The Market 2. London: Verso.Google Scholar
  13. Bourdieu, P. (2004). The forms of capital. In S. Ball (Ed.), The Routledge falmer reader in sociology of education. Routledge Falmer: London and New York.Google Scholar
  14. Bourdieu, P. (2005). The Social structures of the economy. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  15. Bourdieu, Pierre, & Passeron, Jean-Claude. (2000). Reproduction in education, society and culture. London: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  16. Briggs, D. C. (2008). Synthesizing causal inferences. Educational Researcher, 37(1), 15–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Coffield, F. (2012). Why the McKinsey reports will not improve school systems. Journal of Education Policy, 27(1), 131–149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Dean, M. (1994). Critical and effective histories. Foucault’s methods and historical sociology. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  19. Foucault, M. (2008). The Birth of bio-politics. Great Britain: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Foucault, M. (2011). The government of self and others. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  21. Gale, T. (2006). How did we ever arrive at the conclusion that teachers are the problem? A critical reading in the discourses of Australian schooling. In B. Doecke, M. Howie, & W. Sawyer (Eds.), ‘Only connect …’ English teaching, schooling and democracy (pp. 99–119). Kent Town: AATE and Wakefield Press.Google Scholar
  22. Gale, T., & Densmore, K. (2003). Engaging teachers. Towards a radical democratic agendafor schooling. Philadelphia: Open University Press.Google Scholar
  23. Gale, T., & Cross, R. (2007). Nebulous gobbledegook: The politics of influence on how and what to teach in Australian schools. In A. Berry, A. Clemans & A. Kostogriz (Eds.), Dimensions of Professional Learning. Professionalism, Practice and Identity (pp. 5–22). Rotterdam, The Netherlands: Sense Publishers.Google Scholar
  24. Giroux, H. (2011). On critical pedagogy. London: Continuum.Google Scholar
  25. Gorard, S., & Smith, E. (2010). Equity in education. An international comparison of pupil perspectives. U.K.: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  26. Hattie, J., and Bowles, T. (2013) A winning formula: how to pick the best teachers,
  27. Jensen, B. (2012). Catching up: Learning from the best school systems in East Asia. Melbourne, Australia: Grattan Institute.Google Scholar
  28. Kelly, A. (2012). Sen and the art of educational maintenance: evidencing a capability, as opposed to an effectiveness, approach to schooling. Cambridge Journal of Education, 42(3), 283–296.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Larsen, Marianne A. (2010). Troubling the discourse of teacher centrality: a comparative perspective. Journal of Education Policy, 25(2), 207–231.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Lingard, B., & Ozga, J. (2007). The Routledge falmer reader in education policy and politics. London and New York: Routedge.Google Scholar
  31. Lingard, B., & Rawolle, S. (2011). New scalar politics: implications for education policy. Comparative Education, 47(4), 489–502.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Nous Group. (2011). Schooling Challenges and Opportunities. A Report for the Review of Funding for Schooling Panel. Melbourne: Nous Group.Google Scholar
  33. Perry, L., & McConney, A. (2010). School socio-economic composition and student outcomes in Australia: Implications for educational policy. Australian Journal of Education, 54(1), 72–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Ranson, S. (2007). Public Accountability In The Age Of Neo-Liberal Governance. In B. Lingard & J. Ozga (Eds.), The Routledge falmer reader in education policy and politics (pp. 198–219). Routedge: London and New York.Google Scholar
  35. Rizvi, F., & Lingard, B. (2010). Globalizing education policy. Oxon: Routledge.Google Scholar
  36. Sellar, S., & Lingard, B. (2013). Looking East: Shanghai, PISA 2009 and the reconstitution of reference societies in the global education policy field. Comparative Education, 49(4), 464–485. doi: 10.1080/03050068.2013.770943.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Skourdoumbis, A. (2012a). Teach for Australia (TFA): can it overcome educational disadvantage? Asia Pacific Journal of Education, 32(3), 305–315.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Skourdoumbis, A. (2012b). Classroom teacher effectiveness research and inquiry, and its relevance to the development of public education policy: an Australian context. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 26(8), 967–985.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Skourdoumbis, A., & Gale, T. (2012). Classroom Teacher Effectiveness Research: A Conceptual Critique. British Educational Research Journal, 39(5), 892–906.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Tan, C. (2012). The culture of education policy making: curriculum reform in Shanghai. Critical Studies in Education, 53(2), 153–167.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Teese, R., & Polesel, J. (2003). Undemocratic schooling. Equity and quality in mass secondary education in Australia. Melbourne: Melbourne University Press.Google Scholar
  42. Thrupp, M. (1999). Schools making a difference. Let’s be realistic. Buckingham-Philadelphia: Open University Press.Google Scholar
  43. Victorian Department of Education and Early Childhood Development. (2012). New directions for school leadership and the teaching profession. Discussion Paper. Accessed from:
  44. Windle, J. (2010). Anyone can make it, but there can only be one winner: modeling neoliberal learning and work on reality television. Critical Studies in Education, 51(3), 251–263.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Young, M., & Muller, J. (2010). Three Educational Scenarios for the Future: lessons from the sociology of knowledge. European Journal of Education, 45(1), 11–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Australian Association for Research in Education, Inc. 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Deakin UniversityMelbourneAustralia

Personalised recommendations