gtcni paper.doc

8/17/2019 gtcni paper.doc

1/17

Teacher professionalism in a new era

Geoff Whitty

Institute of Education, University of London

Paper presented at the first General Teaching Council for Northern Ireland Annual

Lecture, Belfast, March 2006

IntroductionContemporary educational reform – including both marketisation and centralisation, but

also a ne emphasis on the involvement of a ider range of stakeholders – has resulted

in a period of significant change for teachers! It has also raised ne "uestions# for

e$ample, ho should e understand the role of the teacher% Who has a right to beinvolved in decisions about education% Conse"uently, and perhaps more than ever in

recent times, e need to reflect on the appropriateness of e$isting notions of teacher

professionalism to the conte$t in hich teachers ork and to the goal of social &ustice!

'evolution and competition, alongside increasing central prescription and performativity

demands, have become global trends in education policy over the past tenty years, eventhough the particular balance of policies has varied from place to place and, indeed, from

government to government ithin particular countries (Whitty, )oer * +alpin, --./!

0et, particularly in those countries that embarked early on these reforms, both market1

based policies and so1called 23hird Way4 alternatives are already demonstrating theirlimitations, especially in relation to social &ustice!

In England, the 5e Labour government has recently admitted that its on researchdemonstrates this failure# it shos that, although educational standards have risen overall

during its term of office, the relative performance of children from poorer socio1economic backgrounds has not improved (6elly, 7889/! 3his is despite the fact that someof 5e Labour4s policies had been e$pected to counter the social ine"uities that had

arisen from the policies of their Conservative predecessors!

3his nes did not come as a complete surprise to me: as early as --; )eter


2/17

ninfor!ed professionalis! – the period prior to the -.8s, often regarded as the

golden age of teacher autonomy but hen, according to =arber, teachers lackedappropriate knoledge, skills and attitudes for a modern society

ninfor!ed prescription – the period folloing the election of


3/17

3hese lists reflected the nature of established professions such as medicine and la, hile

occupations that did not entirely meet such criteria ere given the title 2"uasi14 or 2semi1

professions4 (EtDioni, ->-/!


4/17

state4 of post1ar social democracy, not only for cost reasons but also because the elfare

state had failed to deliver its original promise! 3his became coupled ith an intellectual

criti"ue of public sector management on the part of neo1liberals and public choicetheorists! 3he outcome as a call for public sector providers to be sub&ected to greater

accountability – both through market1based competition and increased surveillance by the

state! )articularly under 3hatcherism and similar regimes elsehere, there eresingeing attacks on public sector professions, including teachers, ho ere accused of

abusing their autonomy to the detriment of pupils and society!

@ key strand of policy, as in other countries, has been to re1position public sector schools

as competitors in the marketplace, encouraging them to behave more like those in the

private sector! )arents have been offered greater choice over the school that their

children attend, hich is often coupled ith a shift to per capita funding and, in somecases, e$perimental voucher systems! =udgets and managerial poer are handed don to

schools in the e$pectation that they can then respond more effectively to the preferences

of parents as consumers! While these developments are probably less advanced in

5orthern Ireland than elsehere in the United 6ingdom, local management of schoolsand similar arrangements are already in place! When the 3ransfer 3est is abolished the

'epartment of Education has pledged to put in place a ne system based on informed parental and pupil choice in the conte$t of a more differentiated system!

+oever, hile contemporary governments have been enthusiastic about making schoolsmore receptive to parents4 ishes, they are generally unilling to relin"uish control over

the outcomes that schools should achieve! 3hus, e have the apparent parado$ of the

2free market and the strong state4 (Gamble, -../! While devolution appears to offer

organisations greater autonomy, the state retains overall strategic control by setting theoutputs that providers need to achieve (5eave, -..# /! 3his is operationalised through

the range of targets and performance indicators, and associated league tables that have

gron up around 2marketised4 systems! @lthough &ustified in terms of providinginformation for the 2consumer4 and greater public accountability, these indicators also enable

government to scrutinise and direct providers! @rguably, they indirectly influence the

priorities of parents – ho in turn reinforce the pressure on schools to achieve government1determined outcomes (@dnett * 'avies, 788H/!

3hese developments have obvious implications for teachers and teacher professionalism!

?tandardised criteria no feed into the frameork of targets and indicators that schools andindividual teachers must ork to, and the ne assessment regimes provide a ealth of

performance data for their managers at all levels of the system! @lthough performance

indicators severely delimit and direct hat and ho schools manage their resources, thestakes that are involved have still necessitated the groth of managerialism and the

development of a distinct managerial tier ithin schools! Fne conse"uence of this is likely

to be increased fragmentation of the profession!


5/17

From New Right restructuring to New Labour revisionismIn England, the Conservative government4s -.. Education eform @ct has often beenseen as the epitome of a policy combining market forces and state control! ?imilar levels

of prescription in relation to the curriculum ere introduced in 5orthern Ireland a year

later! Importantly, hoever, policy under the Conservatives by no means represented the

height of these trends in England! 'espite the proclaimed 23hird Way4 approach of 5eLabour after --;, in practice its education reforms have built on the 2ne right

settlement4 and even gone beyond it – combining devolution, diversity, choice and even

privatisation, on the one hand, and centralised regulation, monitoring and even pedagogical prescription, on the other!

@s part of this, under 5e Labour, e have begun to see developments that reinforce and2concretise4 changes in the conceptualisation of teacher professionalism! 3here seems to

have been a progressive move aay from a concern ith up1skilling teachers as

individuals or even seeing responsibility for educational improvement as lying largely inthe hands of the teaching profession, hoever it is regulated! Instead, there has been a

groing focus on education as a collective endeavour, encompassing a much ider rangeof stakeholders than merely the state and teachers themselves!

3his approach as effectively summarised in the --. Green )aper, Teachers& !eeting

the challenge of change ('fEE, --./, hich noted that 23he time has long gone hen

isolated, unaccountable professionals made curriculum and pedagogical decisions alone,ithout reference to the outside orld4!

It ent on to list hat, in the government4s vie, a modern teaching profession needed#

to have high e$pectations of themselves and of all pupils:

to accept accounta'ilit%( to take personal and collective responsibility for improving their skills and sub&ect

knoledge:

to see" to 'ase decisions on e)idence of *hat *or"s in schools in the + and

internationall%(

to *or" in partnership *ith other staff in schools(

to *elco!e the contri'ution that parents, 'usiness and others outside a school

can !a"e to its success( and

to anticipate change and promote innovation!

In this respect, 5e Labour4s agenda for education may provide a useful 2case study4, or2ideal type4 of here professionalism in education is heading – and I ant to look briefly

at a fe e$amples of the policies that have emerged from it!

Certainly, there has been a reinforcement by 5e Labour of the need for the state to take amuch more assertive role in specifying hat teachers are e$pected to achieve, rather than

9


6/17

leaving it to professional &udgement alone! 3here is a real enthusiasm for intervening in

the detail of educational processes, ith advice on all aspects of the day1to1day running

of schools and teaching itself! urlong (7889/ highlights the 7,888 model lesson plansthat teachers can no donload from the 'epartment for Education and ?kills ('fE?/

ebsite – something that ould have been unthinkable in England not many years ago

and is reminiscent of traditional English criticisms of highly centralised systems such asthose of rance!

National Literacy and Numeracy Strategies

3his approach of intervening in the detailed processes of teaching, specifying ho to

teach in addition to hat to teach, supposedly based on evidence of 2hat orks4, is

particularly evident in 5e Labour4s 5ational ?trategies for Literacy and 5umeracy!

@lthough the levels of prescription e have seen in England have not been introduced in 5orthern Ireland, the 'epartment of Education has produced the #trateg% for the

Pro!otion of Literac% and Nu!erac% in Pri!ar% and #econdar% #chools ('E5I, --./!

3his has brought a drive for greater coherence and consistency across schools and some

degree of additional target setting!

In one sense, the ?trategies are &ust one element of a long process of curriculum reformstretching back to the introduction of the 5ational Curriculum! =ut they are also

"ualitatively different, both in their immediate impact on teachers4 ork, and through the

pace of change they have ushered in! 'elivery has been standardised through prescribedcontent and a ell1defined se"uence and structure to lessons, coupled ith the promotion

of particular teaching approaches – for e$ample, the Literacy and 5umeracy +ours (see

Webb et al, 788/! Increased funding for research on 2hat orks4, professional

development courses for teachers, books and the production of classroom materialssupported this effort to standardise provision!

In turn, the ?trategies have included ambitious targets and a significant programme of pupil assessments to monitor achievement and the e$tent to hich all pupils ere

reaching a given level in their literacy and numeracy! In this, the levers of monitoring

and target setting have been such that they have enabled the centre to steer schools andteachers much more closely than before (


7/17

3he highly diverse array of teacher training courses provided by universities and colleges

in England as first brought under centrally mandated re"uirements in -.!

@ccreditation as no dependent on meeting officially defined criteria, including thenumber of eeks to be spent in school and the number of hours to be spent on English

and mathematics in primary training ('E?, -./! Control as tightened from the late

-.8s ith a series of government circulars setting out competences that had to be met bystudents before "ualifying to teach ('E?, -.-: 'fE, --7, --H/!

3he ork some of us did for the 'epartment of Education in 5orthern Ireland in the--8s as critical of this approach and e e$pressed the vie that 2the atomisation of

professional knoledge, &udgement and skill into discrete competences inevitably fails to

capture the essence of professional competence4 ('E5I, --H# /! @nd, indeed, in some

cases, such an approach led to an unduly bureaucratic model of student teacherdevelopment that, at its orst, as focused much more upon ticking bo$es of statements

of competence than upon the real issues related to teaching and learning!

@nother development, hich as taken up by the incoming 5e Labour government in--;, effectively turned the competences into hat as an ultimately unorkable eighty1

five page 2national curriculum4 for teacher training! 3his specified in very great detail thecontent that had to be covered by trainee teachers in English, mathematics, science and

IC3! @s urlong et al (7888/ point out, although the curriculum as designed to

constrain teacher educators rather than the trainees themselves, it could be argued that the2hidden curriculum4 of this approach provided 2appropriate socialisation into a

profession in hich official prescription of teaching approaches (encroaches/ on

autonomous professional &udgements4 (9/!

5e Labour has no abandoned this national curriculum to focus on the stipulation of

standards to be achieved by all trainees ('fE?J33@, 7887/! 3he resulting standards do

respond to criticisms of earlier versions by recognising the importance of refle$ive practice and, overall, represent a somehat more manageable and holistic set! =ut it took

almost a decade for the English authorities to recognise hat e alays argued in

5orthern Ireland – that individual competences that ere not thoroughly and consistentlyunderpinned by clear professional values ould fail to deliver the sorts of professionals

needed in the tenty1first century!

3he English standards are currently undergoing a further process of revision as the3raining and 'evelopment @gency for ?chools (3'@/ develops a frameork to cover

teachers4 hole career rather than &ust the initial training! =ut there are still different sets

of standards for different groups of teachers, some hich the 3'@ finds it difficult todefine clearly, e!g! @dvanced ?kills 3eachers and E$cellent 3eachers! @s my colleague,

?ara =ubb, ho is orking closely ith the G3C5I on the development of its on

scheme, has put it#

It4s such a shame the 3'@ hasn4t taken this golden opportunity to draft &ust

one ell thought through set of standards for the hole of the teaching

profession, like the ne 7; 5orthern Ireland competences3hese recognise

;


8/17

that each standard is a continuum to be met to different degrees depending on

a teacher4s role, e$perience and conte$t! 'oesn4t that make more sense%

(=ubb, 788>/!

3he 3'@ revie has also specifically addressed the issue of teachers4 research skills!

3his represents a move toards recognising teaching as a research1based profession! @stheir draft standards currently stand, hoever, the only teachers for hom the use of

research to inform teaching is stipulated are those ith @dvanced ?kills and E$cellent

3eacher status! Like many ho commented on the original draft, my vie is that thehole profession should be research1informed, so I hope that the eventual standards ill

come to reflect this! Fn this basis, I elcome the General 3eaching Councils4 inclusion

of research pages on their ebsites! 3he G3C in 5orthern Ireland seems to pay particular

attention to this – ith the aim of collating a database of all educational researchconducted in 5orthern Ireland and of facilitating practising teachers4 attendance at the

5orth of England Conference this year!

Looking more generally at Continuing )rofessional 'evelopment, in England there areno much broader opportunities opening1up for e$tended professional development

through, for e$ample, the 3'@4s )ostgraduate 'evelopment )rogramme! =ut, as ith thedraft teacher standards, these opportunities are currently available only to a small

proportion of the orkforce! @t the same time, other courses for teachers have become

increasingly centrally1defined and focused on short1term practical training closely tied togovernment ?trategies – for e$ample, additional phonics training to support the Literacy

?trategy! In this sense, C)' opportunities are no largely focused on the needs of the

school and its pupils rather than the individual teacher! 3he G3C5I is currently orking

to establish a 2mi$ed economy4 model that addresses individual as ell as school1basedand systemic needs! 5evertheless, and particularly so in England, this shift reflects hat

is a broader significant development for the future of teacher professionalism – the

emphasis on education as a collective endeavour and the role of other stakeholders inraising standards in school!

Teacher professionalism in a changing contet

Workforce remodelling

@n important aspect of 5e Labour policy in England has been its school orkforce

remodelling agenda and the 788H 5ational @greement on aising ?tandards and 3acklingWorkload! @ key element of this concerns the use of teaching assistants! While most

sections of the support staff orkforce in English schools have gron in recent years, the

number of teaching assistants has risen dramatically! =eteen --; and 7889 the number almost trebled – from H9,988 to &ust under 88,888! =y comparison, the number of full

time e"uivalent (3E/ 2regular4 teachers in the maintained sector rose by &ust ,888 to

reach around H8,888 last year ('fE?, 7889a/!

3he groth in teaching assistant numbers in England has been accompanied by marked

changes in the nature of their responsibilities! 3his has involved a shift in focus from

2egular4 teachers are those ho hold either a permanent contract or a temporary contract of one month or more!

.


9/17

purely 2care and housekeeping4 toards greater involvement in the actual process of

learning – including, for e$ample, assisting ith the assessment of pupils4 learning! 3his

e$pansion of the number and role of teaching assistants is not an entirely ne idea inEngland! 3he ->; )loden eport and -;9 =ullock eport urged that more profitable

use be made of elfare assistants and ancillary help (


10/17

of this development, an 2e$tended schools4 programme seeks to establish ider services

in all primary and secondary schools – including study support and family learning

opportunities and sift referral to a ider range of specialised support services, if not on1site services in childcare, youth &ustice, health and social care! 3his is something that has

been tried successfully in ?cotland and is often seen as vital if the effects of social

disadvantage on educational achievement are to be minimised!

In 5orthern Ireland the government ill shortly publish its strategy for children and

young people! Its consultation document incorporates many of these themes,emphasising the need for organisations at all levels and in all sectors to ork together to

support a 2hole child4 needs1centred model! 'raft actions for the 'epartment of

Education include e$ploration of the e$tent to hich schools could be resourced to

become multi1agency centres ith out1of1hours usage (F


11/17

an unacceptable attack on teacher autonomy and teacher creativity, transforming teachers

from professionals to technicians (eg, @dams * 3ulasieicD, --9: 3omlinson, 788:

+all * ?chulD, 788H/!

or ?achs (788H/, riting in the @ustralian conte$t but referring to cross1national trends

in policy, the modern professional in the eyes of governments is increasingly one hoorks efficiently and effectively in meeting the standardised criteria set for the

accomplishment of students and teachers as ell as contributing to the school4s formal

accountability processes! @s urlong (7889/ similarly argues, this is a form of professionalism hich accepts that decisions about hat to teach, ho to teach and ho

to assess children are made at school and national level rather than by individual teachers

themselves! @s he continues, this brings ith it a move aay from seeing the individual

teacher as an essential actor!

I do not necessarily disagree ith these commentators4 observations on the ays in hich

reforms have impacted on teachers# I noted earlier my on concerns about, for e$ample,

performativity, managerialism and the nature of some sets of teacher competences andstandards! +oever, here I differ ith these commentators is in their tendency to imply

that all current reforms ill lead to the de1skilling and de1professionalisation of teachers!Indeed, it seems to me that some of the reforms I have mentioned may have the potential

to e$tend, rather than restrict, the professionalism of teachers!

@s a sociologist influenced by the contemporary approaches to the study of

professionalism that I outlined earlier, I ould argue anyay that hat e are seeing in

interventions such as 5e Labour4s in England is not necessarily an e$ample of de1

professionalisation in some absolute sense, but an attempt at reprofessionalisation – thatis, the construction of a different type of professionalism, considered by those like

/conception of a more engaged professionalism properly entails fuller engagement of

teachers ith their professional associations, it ultimately looks rather too much like a

traditional understanding of professionalism – ith an emphasis on teachers e$erting


12/17

greater influence over policy and e$tending their autonomy as an end in itself! 3his is

perhaps not the best ay to in friends and influence people!

@s Laton argued many years ago, there are different levels of decision making in

education and the further one gets from the individual encounter in the classroom, the

more other stakeholders need to be involved (Laton, -.8/! =ut even in the classroom,the active role of other adults and, indeed, students themselves is increasingly recognised

as important in the development of appropriate learning environments (ielding and

udduck, nd: ielding, ---/! 3he capacity to collaborate ith others, rather than merelyinstructing them, must surely be an important competence on the part of contemporary

professional teachers! In England, the e$panding role of teaching assistants is a case in

point! ?imilarly, both the English and 5orthern Ireland education departments are

looking more closely at school councils and other mechanisms for pupil involvement indecision making in schools (F


13/17

fide profession in terms of the traditional characteristics of a profession that I referred to

earlier! 3his as especially so hen they ent on to develop codes of professional

conduct! 3his aspect of the Councils is also reflected in the current membership of theirgoverning councils – ith the e$clusion from membership of other sections of the school

orkforce and, certainly in England, the limited influence of other stakeholders!

+aving achieved, at least in some respects, the century1long occupational pro&ect of

making teaching a profession in the traditional sense, it hardly seems fair to suggest that

further change may be necessary! =ut e do need to consider hether, if the respectiveCouncils are to ma$imise the positive influence of teachers in the changing conte$t I

have described, this is the model that serves them best!

3he dilemma about hich ay to go in response to recent developments is alreadyevident in debates ithin England, and I ould be surprised if similar issues did not arise

in 5orthern Ireland! 3ake, for e$ample, some reflections on the part of the Chief

E$ecutive of the G3C for England, Carol @dams, regarding the children4s agenda! @s

Carol notes, this agenda – and similar developments in 5orthern Ireland – raises anumber of considerations for the teaching profession and its representative bodies! Fn

the one hand, could pupils, parents and the ider community become confused about theuni"ue role and contribution of the teacher% Could a child4s right to learn be threatened

by the ne multi1disciplinary agenda% While Carol herself elcomes many aspects of

the ne agenda, she argues that e need 2to hold fast to the simple premise that a schoolis a centre of learning4 and thereby be clear about the role of the teacher (@dams, 7889/!

Fn the other hand, this does not necessarily re"uire a defensive, e$clusionary and inard

looking stance on the part of teachers! Indeed, if the key "uestion is ho can teachersma$imise children4s opportunities to learn, that can only be achieved by orking ever

more closely ith the other stakeholders! =ringing about the conditions in hich all

young people can realistically, in the G3CE4s on ords, 2access the best possiblestandards of learning and achievement4 ill necessitate much closer orking ith other

professional groups and ith progressive social movements, as ell as changing

teachers4 conventional ays of orking here necessary to support the positive aspectsof the ne agenda! What e must achieve is surely a balance beteen defining the

teacher4s proper role and staking out the territory too rigidly! In this respect, it is good to

see that the G3CE has recently "uestioned hy the 3'@ and the Children4s Workforce

'evelopment Council (CW'C/ are consulting simultaneously on distinct sets ofinduction standards rather than orking in tandem!

Towards a ‘democratic professionalism’+oever, it is notable that the G3CE4s concern here is to facilitate inter1professional

orking beteen distinct groups ithin the children4s orkforce! =ut the sociological

criti"ue of professionalism as elitism could also apply to inter1professional agreements!In a democratic society, the professions also need to be open to the concerns of other

stakeholders! or myself, I have no problems about the government4s demand that other

stakeholders should have a role in education decision making, though I do have a

H


14/17

problem about its limited conception of ho those other stakeholders might be and about

ho it goes about seeking involvement from them!

In my vie, genuine stakeholder involvement should be elcomed by the professions and

the democratisation of professionalism should be adopted as an alternative to both the

traditional professional pro&ect and the managerialist professional pro&ect currently promulgated by governments! @ democratic professionalism ould seek to demystify

professional ork and build alliances beteen teachers and other members of the school

orkforce, such as teaching assistants, and e$ternal stakeholders, including students, parents and members of the ider community! or many of these groups, and

particularly marginalised sub1sets of them, decisions ill have traditionally been made on

their behalf either by professions or the state (@pple, -->/!

If teachers are to make a real contribution to the e"uity agenda as ell as the standards

agenda, they must ork actively ith others committed to teaching for a &ust society

(Gale * 'ensmore, 7888: 788H/! @ democratic professionalism thus encourages the

development of collaborative cultures in the broadest sense, rather than e$clusive ones! Itcertainly suggests that the teacher has a responsibility that e$tends beyond the single

classroom – including contributing to the school, other students and the ider educationalsystem, as ell as to the collective responsibilities of teachers themselves to a broader

social agenda! Indeed, under democratic professionalism, this broader agenda becomes

part and parcel of the professional agenda rather than being counterposed to it!

?achs4 (788H/ notion of an 2activist identity4 for teachers goes some ay toards

recognising this! +er activist professional orks collectively toards strategic ends,

operates on the basis of developing netorks and alliances beteen bureaucracies,unions, professional associations and community organisations! 3hese alliances are not

static, but form and are reformed around different issues and concerns! @ctivist

professionals take responsibility for their on on1going professional learning, and orkithin multiple communities of practice! 3hese develop in larger conte$ts – historical,

social, cultural, institutional (., see also ?achs, 788/!

In conclusion, democratic professionalism and this associated 2activist4 identity re"uire

not merely stronger professional bodies and associations but ones that are themselves

prepared to ork in an open and meaningful ay ith a much more varied range of

stakeholders! In England this is not proving easy, not least because recent policies haveundermined both the morale of, and public trust in the teaching orkforce! 3his, in turn,

has limited the e$tent to hich teachers can engage authoritatively ith other

stakeholders! In 5orthern Ireland, hoever it may seem to you, the relative standing ofteachers is such that you are starting from a position of greater strength and confidence as

you confront the need to ork ith others to help shape the progressive opportunities that

are provided by policies like those relating to the childrenKs agenda! I hope the General3eaching Council for 5orthern Ireland ill grasp this opportunity!

Ac$nowledgements


15/17

3his paper develops the analysis offered in my book Ma"ing #ense of $ducation Polic%

()aul ChapmanJ?age 7887/! I am most grateful to 'r Emma Wisby for her help in the

preparation of this paper!

References@dams, @! * 3ulasieicD, W! (--9/ The Crisis in Teacher $ducation& a $uropean

concern- London# almer )ress

@dams, C! (7889/ comments made at the G3CE 2=attle of Ideas4 Conference 7-1H8

Fctober

@dnett, 5! * 'avies, )! (788H/ ?chooling reforms in England# from "uasi1markets to co1opetition% .ournal of $ducation Polic% . (/ H-H18>

@donis, @! (7889/ Council business Guardian th 'ecember

@pple, / Cultural Politics and $ducation =uckingham# Fpen University )ress

=arber,

=ubb, ?! (788>/ 5e teachers on the ropes Ti!es $ducational #upple!ent H ebruary

'ainton, ?! (7889/ eclaiming 3eachers4 Moices, /oru! ; (7/, 9-1>;

'avies, C! (--9/ Gender and the Professional Predica!ent in Nursing =uckingham#

Fpen University )ress

'avies, C! (-->/ 3he sociology of professions and the profession of gender #ociolog% H8

>>1;.

'E5I N'epartment of Education in 5orthern IrelandO (--H/ e)ie* of Initial TeacherTraining in Northern Ireland& eports of Three 1or"ing Groups =angor# 'E5I

'E5I (--./ #trateg% for the Pro!otion of Literac% and Nu!erac% in Pri!ar% and

#econdar% #chools 'E5I

'E5I N'epartment of Education in 5orthern IrelandO (788/ Teachers Pa% 3 Conditions

of #er)ice In4uir%& /inal eport, Part 2 I!pro)ing Conditions, aising #tandards and

Negotiating Arrange!ents ebruary 'E5I

'E? N'epartment of Education and ?cienceO (-./ Initial Teacher Training& Appro)al

of Courses Circular 578 London# 'E?

'E? N'epartment of Education and ?cienceO (-.-/ Initial Teacher Training& Appro)alof Courses Circular 2879 London# 'E?

'fE N'epartment for EducationO (--7/ Initial Teacher Training :#econdar% Phase;

Circular 992 London# 'fE

'fE N'epartment for EducationO (--H/ The Initial Training of Pri!ar% Teachers

Circular


16/17

'fEE N'epartment for Education and EmploymentO (--./ Teachers& !eeting the

challenge of change Green )aper London# 'fEE

'fE? N'epartment for Education and ?killsO (788H/ Every Child Matters& Change forChildren London# 'fE?

'fE? N'epartment for Education and ?killsO (7889a/ ?chool Workforce in England(including pupil teacher ratios and pupil adult ratios/, anuary 7889 ()rovisional/

http%&&www'dfes'gov'u$&rsgateway&()&*FR&s+++,-,&inde'shtml

'fE? (7889b/ ?chools White )aper# =igher standards, 'etter schools for all > !ore

choice for parents and pupils London# 3?F

'fE?J33@ (7887/ ?ualif%ing to Teach London# +


17/17

Laton, '! (-.8/ The Politics of the #chool Curriculu! London# outledge * 6eegan

)aul

Le Grand, ! (--;/ 6nights, knaves or pans% +uman behaviour and social policy .ournalof #ocial Polic% 7> -1>

Leaton1Gray, ?! (788>/ Teachers nder #iege ?toke on 3rent# 3renthan =ooks

/ The ?ualif%ing Association London# outledge * 6egan )aul

Documents

gtcni paper.doc