Standards Talk: Considering Discourse in Teacher Education Standards

Chapter
Part of the Explorations of Educational Purpose book series (EXEP, volume 6)

Abstract

My interest in understanding the discursive meanings of national standards in teacher education comes from my early experiences as a high school English teacher and member of our school district’s K–12 English/Language Arts standards committee in the early 1990s. Standards-based teaching, at the time, involved collaboration with other teachers on the committee, as we negotiated agreement about what our students should know, and what we would consequently teach. Teachers’ voices were integral to the process, and we used our knowledge of our students and the local community’s resources to consider appropriate grade-level standards for our students. The process was not perfect: as Bourdieu (1974) suggests, teachers often act as if the language of standards is natural, “full of allusions and shared understandings,” and assume that “academic judgments which in fact perpetuate cultural privilege” are “fair” (pp. 39–40). To us, standards-setting seemed a professional, rational exercise concluding in consensus, and we never asked whose standards we were promoting. It seemed we were promoting our own.

References

  1. Bourdieu, P. (1974). The school as a conservative force: Scholastic and cultural inequalities. In J.Eggleston (Ed.), Contemporary research in the sociology of education (pp. 32–46). Cambridge: Methuen.Google Scholar
  2. Cornbleth, C. & Waugh, D. (1995). The great speckled bird: Multicultural policies and education policymaking. New York: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  3. Darling-Hammond, L., & Sclan, E. M. (1996). Who teaches and why: Dilemmas of building a profession for twenty-first century schools. In J. Sikula, T. J. Buttery, & E. Guyton (Eds.), Handbook of research on teacher education (2nd ed.) (pp. 67–101). New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  4. Foucault, M. (1972). The archaeology of knowledge & the discourse on language. New York: Pantheon.Google Scholar
  5. Grant, C. A. (1994). Best practices in teacher preparation for urban schools: Lessons from the multicultural teacher education literature. Action in Teacher Education, 16(3), 1–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Groden, M., Kreiswirth, M. & Szeman, I. (Eds.) (1994). Discourse. The Johns Hopkins guide to literary theory & criticism. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
  7. Hobbel, N. (2001). Access, equity, and performance-based assessment: Reviewing the NBPTS. Paper presented at the American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education Annual Meeting, Dallas, TX.Google Scholar
  8. Ladson-Billings, G. (1998). Teaching in dangerous times: Culturally relevant approaches to teacher assessment. The Journal of Negro Education, 67(3), 255–267.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Ladson-Billings, G. (2000). Racialized discourses and ethnic epistemologies. In N. Denzin & Y. Lincoln (Eds.), The handbook of qualitative research (2nd ed.) (pp. 257–277). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  10. McSorley, K. (2000). Moving from oppression to democracy: Reframing the preparation of special education teachers. Educators for Urban Minorities, 1(2), 27–38.Google Scholar
  11. Metz, M. H. (1990). How social class differences shape teachers’ work. In M. McLaughlin, J. Talbert, & N. Bascia (Eds.), The contexts of teaching in secondary schools: Teachers’ realities (pp. 40–107). New York: Teachers College Press.Google Scholar
  12. National Board for Professional Teaching Standards (NBPTS). (2008). The Standards. http://www.nbpts.org/the_standards. Accessed 17 October 2008.
  13. National Commission on Excellence in Education. (1983). A nation at risk: The imperative for educational reform. Washington, DC: National Commission on Excellence in Education.Google Scholar
  14. National Council for the Accreditation of Teacher Education (NCATE). (2001–2008). NCATE 2008 Unit Standards. http://www.ncate.org.Accessed 22 September 2008.
  15. Nóvoa, A. (2000). The teaching profession in Europe: Historical and sociological analysis. In E. S. Swing, J. Schriewer, & F. Orivel (Eds.), Problems and prospects in European education. Westport, CT: Praeger.Google Scholar
  16. Popkewitz, T. S. (2000). Globalization/regionalization, knowledge, and the educational practices: Some notes on comparative strategies for educational research. In T. S. Popkewitz (Ed.), Educational knowledge: Changing relationships between the state, civil society, and the educational community (pp. 3–27). Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
  17. Popkewitz, T. S., & Lindblad, S. (2000). Educational governance and social inclusion and exclusion: Some conceptual difficulties and problematics in policy and research. Discourse, 21(1), 5–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Portelli, J., & Vibert, A. (1997). Dare we criticize common educational standards? McGill Journal of Education, 32, 69–79.Google Scholar
  19. Shannon, P. (1995). Can reading standards really help? The Clearing House, 68(4), 229–232.Google Scholar
  20. Teacher Education Accreditation Council. (2003-2008). Brief overview of the Teacher Education Accreditation Council. http://www.teac.org. Accessed 6 August 2008.
  21. Weiner, L. (2000). Research in the 90s: Implications for urban teacher preparation. Review of Educational Research, 70(3), 369–406.Google Scholar
  22. Whitty, G., Power, S., & Halpin, D. (1998). Devolution & choice in education: The school, the state, and the market. Buckingham, UK: Open University Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science + Business Media B.V 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Humboldt State UniversityCaliforniaUSA

Personalised recommendations