seven contemporary ideological perspectives on teacher education

8/2/2019 Seven Contemporary Ideological Perspectives on Teacher Education

1/14

Australian Journal of Teacher Education

| Issue 2Volume 16 Article 2

1991

Seven contemporary ideological perspectives onteacher education in Britain todayDave HillWest Sussex Institute of Higher Education
http://ro.ecu.edu.au/ajtehttp://ro.ecu.edu.au/ajte/vol16/iss2http://ro.ecu.edu.au/ajte/vol16http://ro.ecu.edu.au/ajte/vol16/iss2/2http://ro.ecu.edu.au/ajte/vol16/iss2/2http://ro.ecu.edu.au/ajte/vol16http://ro.ecu.edu.au/ajte/vol16/iss2http://ro.ecu.edu.au/ajte


2/14

Australian Journal of TeaclJer Education

BIBLIOGRAPHYAoki, T. (1989). Curriculum Implementation asInstrumental Action an d SituationalPraxis. Curriculum Praxis MonographSeries. No. 9. Edmonton: University ofAlberta.Bollnow, O. (1987). Crisis and New Beginning.

Pittsburgh: Dusquesne UniversityPress.

Dewey, J. (1966). Democracy and Education: AnIntroduction to the Philosophy ofEducation.New York: Free Press.Hyman, R.T. (1974). Ways of Teaching.Philadelphia: Lippincott Company.Lingard, B., Bartlett, B. & Knight, J. (August,1990). Teacher education:

developments an d context. TheAustralian Teacher, 26.Onions, CT. (Ed.). (1966). The Oxford DictionaryofEnglish EtymologJj. Oxford: Clarendon

Press.Seddon, T. (1990). Who says teachers don't work?Education Links, 38.Skeat, W. (1965). A Concise Etymological Dictionaryof the English Language. Oxford:

Clarendon Press.Van Manen, M. (1982). Phenomenological

Pedagogy. Curriculum Inquiry, 12(3),283-299.Van Manen, M. (1991). The Tact of Teaching: Themeaning of pedagogical thoughtfulness.New York: SUNY Press.

4 Vol. 16 No. 2,

Australinn JOllrnnl of Tenc1ler Education

SEVEN CONTEMPORARY IDEOLOGICAL PERSPECTIVESON TEACHER EDUCATION IN BRITAIN TODAY

Dave HillWest Sussex Institute of Higher Education

This paper examil1es and critiques sevencontemporary ideological perspectives 011 teachereducation in Britain, it examines the RadicalRight, the 'Soft Centre', the 'Hard Centre', andtile 'Left il1 the Centre'.111 doing so it refers to three interrelated levels ofdiscourse: the popular Press, the academic Pressalld the work of ideologues, and the Partypolitical.The paper critiques not only the Radical Rightbut also Centrist positions such as the erstwhileLeft, the 'Left in the Centre', criticising theirvirtual evacuatiol1 of he cultural and ideologicalfield of eacher education.Three types of Radical Left discourse, all ofwhich express strong commitment to socialjustice and to teacher education and schoolingdeveloping a moral-ethical level of reflection, arethen isolated:1. the critical utopian transfonnativeintellectual possibilitarian project of HemyGiroux and associates such as PeterMcLaren and Stanley Aronowitz;2. the pluralistic autonomistic critical projectof the 'Madison School' such as KennethZeicimer and Tom Popkewitz;3. the deterministic reproductionist modelrepresented, in the some respects, by John

Smyth.The Giroux model calls for political actionwithin as well as outside the classroom, theZeicimer model eschews political action withinthe classroom but calls for it outside, thereproductionist model is deterministicallypessimistic about the possibility of school basedor intellectual based political change.The paper ends by arguing for an assertion andreassertion of a distinctively Radical Leftdiscourse and programme, and action 011 teachereducation in Britain and calls for thedevelopment of teachers as 'transformativeintellectuals .

16, No. 2,1991

INTRODUCTIONTeacher education in England and Wales is in thespotlight. It is under ferocious, sustained andnakedly ideological assault at three inter-relatedlevels of discourse - the radical right middlebrowand quality media (in particular the Daily Mailand Mail on Sunday); radical right ideologists,think-tanks an d academics; and the current(1991/92) Conservative education Ministerialteam.Throughout this paper, references are made to,and quotes taken from the above three types ofsource each of which features in a discourse ofderision (Maguire, 1991).These levels of discourse, aimed at differentaudiences, might be expected to use very differentvocabularies, sentence structures and sentencelengths. While there are differences, in generalthey don't. All these three levels punch home andderide 'trendies' in education. All use populist,punchy, and social panic terminology metaphorsand 'enemy within', 'scapegoatism' typical of theReagan-Bush an d Thatcher-Major project forreconstituting schooling, higher education,teacher education, adult and further education -the ideological states apparatus of the educationsystem - into the service of late capitalisteconomy. The misinformation systems of theConservative government, illuminated in suchvaried sources as 'Spycatcher', the Ken Loach film'Secret Agenda' and the 1991 Alan Bleasdaletelevision series 'GBH', show, through fact an dthrough fiction, the handservant role of the rightwing press and the interactive relationshipbetween that press an d the Conservativeleadership, over, for example teacher education asa whole, or to take one cause celebre of 1991, theevents surrounding Culloden Primary School.The 1991 attacks on Culloden Primary School, atfirst hailed widely after its BBC TV series as amodel of non-sloppy progressive, child-centred,anti-racist, anti-sexist education (even welcomedinitially by the right-wing Daily Telegraph and TheTimes), have been like an ideological blitzkrieg.

5


3/14


Kenneth Clarke, the Secretary of State forEducation and Science, encouraging andencouraged by the Daily Mail and Mail on Sunday,has fulminated against 'cranky' approaches to theteaching of reading, damning not only the realbooks method bu t also the 'look and say' method,in favour of the 'phonics method'I, acondemnation extended to the institutions ofteacher education propagating such approaches.The reading methods controversy is part of thecurrent attack on teacher education, with TimEggar, one of the Junior Ministers for Educationbaldly announcing "That in future most teacherswould be trained in schools instead of eacher trainingschemes" (Massey, 1991c) and with a Daily Mailfull page article announcing that

our education system is in turmoil. Nowhere isthat more apparent than in the teacher trainingcolleges - A shake-up of teacher training is nowcertainly at the top of the Government'smanifesto pledges for the next election.Education Secretary Kenneth Clarke, who hascondemned child-centred learning as 'silly', hasnot been idle.After the 'Sharon Shrill' affair in whichCambridge classicist Annis Garfield was denieda teacher training place at Nene College,Northamptonshire, yet was offered an interviewwhen she posed as a ficti tious Afro-Caribbeanfeminist, he sacked some of the 'trendies' fromthe quango which validates teacher-trainingcourses.Further, he has ordered two inquires: the firstinto the quality of courses approved, and thesecond into the way in which teachers aretrained to teach reading.It is an open secret that he is olltraged by some ofthe courses which have been approved.Ministers are itching to break the monopoly -and power - of the teacher training colleges andwill use the next election to do it. The mainweapon favoured by them will be 'on the job'training.(Massey,1991c)

Like their National Curriculum for schools,current radical right proposals for detheorisingteacher education, for replacing much of it by inschool apprenticeships or by passing it altogether,are a gigantic ideological experiment, playingwith children's schooling an d futures.

6

Supposedly in the name of 'standards' this is,reality, in the cause of 'conforming the future',establishing ideological supremacy, ofto assert their ideological hegemonyideological state apparatuses.It s not my purpose here to give a description andcritique of the two ne w school-based routes intoteaching (The Licensed Teacher and theTeacher) schemes nor of current (midproposals to change college based B.Ed andcourses into primarily school based courses.this cr itique s ee Hill (1989, 1990, 1991a, 1992a)Bocock (1991). In May 1991 there wereLicensed Teachers employed in 44 local educationauthorities, 290 of them were graduates.There are currently a number of national andlocalised formative evaluationHowever, some problems with school basingor most, teacher ed ucation are as follows: (i)loading of schools; (ii) the cost of Articledbursaries and of one to one ratio between m E ~ n h ) r s and articles teachers and licensed teachers;the rapidly apparent desire amongteachers for less time in school an dsustained time in school; and (iv) concernthe context specificity of most schoolschemes. A number of recent evaluations haveborne out these criticisms (see Barrett et al. (1992);DENI (1991); NFER (1991); DES (1991a);(1992a and 1992b).From sections of the Left, inherent problems areapparent - problems of de heorising, decritiquing, de-intellectualising, de-reflecting andde-skilling. On the Right, however Ministers andsome of the Press, such as the Daily Mail haveapparently already pre-judged in favour of suchschemes. Proposals to base teacher educationcourses in schools made in the winter of 1991/92were met with such right-wing media headlinesas 'Training shake-up to beat college trendies'(Daily Mail, 4 Ja.n). 'Is this the Right way toteacher the teacher? Clarke's aims for return totraditional methods as standards plummet'(Sunday Express, 29 Dec) and 'Do we really needthese colleges?' (Sunday Express, 5 Jan). Longtime radical right ideologues rushed to welcomesuch moves, for example Sheila Lalor with herTimes article 'Touch of class for teachers: Plans totrain teachers on the job should be welcomed,2 .My particular perspectives from a Radical Leftposition are based on a belief that teachers mustno t only be skilled, competent, classroomtechnicians, - they must be much more than that.They must also be critical, reflective,

transformative and intellectual. They shouldenable and encourage their pupils/students, notonly to gain basic and advanced knowledge andskills, bu t question, critique, judge and evaluate'what is', 'what effects it has' and 'why', and to beconcerned an d informed about equality andsocial justice. Not just in school, bu t in life:::;beyond the classroom door. This concept of acritical active citizenship goes beyond the PrimeMinister's' current mid-1991 quietist status quo,though participative, citizenship. Hisconservative notion of citizenship must be madecritical and radically democratic.This particular formulation of critical active,'radical citizenship can be criticised as 'modernist'. in economy, culture, aesthetic and philosophywhich is, in some respects, becoming post

It is modernist. It is based on ametanarrative of justice an d equality andmorality, and unashamedly so. While recognisingthe political an d analytic force of some?formulations of plurality of 'voices', of diversity,of anti-ethnocentrism within a 'post-modernismsof resistance' drawing inter alia from Laclau an d, the perspective of this paper joins withand Aronowitz (1991) for example, an dBoyne and Rattansi (1990), in seeking adialogue between post-modernism an d neoMarxism.This particular formulation of critical, active,radical citizenship is also no t placed in the serviceof anyone particular variation or formulation ofanti-capitalist ideology.Events in Eastern Europe, an d discussion withBulgarian teacher educator Iva Nestorova bringthe appropriacy of applying versions of a...


4/14

Australiml Journal of Teacher Educatio1l

Articled Teacher Scheme. The Articled TeacherScheme attracted about 403 students in 1990-91and the Licensed Teacher Scheme 439, a quart er ofthem, non-graduates (Barrett, E. et al., 1992). So,in 1990-91 around 96% of teacher education wascarried out in college-based courses, and around4% in school-based schemes.LICENSED TEACHING AND ARTICLEDTEACHINGCollege-based teacher education is avoided in theLicensed Teacher schem e whereby untrained over24 year olds are enabled to teach in state schoolswithout having previously undergone anyteacher education whatsoever. The only formalqualifications are the age qualification, a grade Cor above GCSE in Maths an d English, andcompletion of the equivalent of two years fulltime post - A level higher education. A degree isnot necessary.Indeed it is possible that someone wh o failed atthe end of 2 years of a 4 year B.Ed degree couldbecome a Licensed Teacher on acceptance by aschool governing body and/or in (practice) by aLocal Education Authority.Licensees are appointed to a school staff, they arenot, unlike Articled Teachers, supernumerary,they have their ow n classes. At the moment anumber are already teaching, as untrainedteachers, for example of foreign languages (inwhat, until the Licensed Teacher Scheme was, inintention, an all-graduate profession).It is worth noting the genealogy of the LicensedTeacher Scheme, being based (in the same waythat the ne w City Technology Colleges are -loosely - based on Magnet Schools) on an UnitedStates model.Licensing is based on New Jersey's PTP(Provisional Teacher Programme) in the USA, bywhich Ne w Jersey graduates who have notfollowed education courses at college, arecertified as teacher after satisfactorily completinga year's supervised teaching and the required 200hours instruction at a regional centre. TheEducation theory in this Ne w Jersey 200 hoursinstruction was general theory, not linked directlyto the age range of children being taught. This isunlike British teacher education in whichstudents are divided into Secondary and Primaryage range courses (and frequently sub-dividedinto First/Infant an d Middle/Junior age rangecourses). He r Majesty's Inspectorate also noted in

8

their report on the Ne w Jersey scheme1989), the lack of links between teacher eddepartments and the schools in assessingtrainees. The lecturers taught the theory,teachers supervised the practice. Britishcoverage of the HMI Report omitted tothat 1000 PTP teachers were attracted bymassive pay rise for teachers! In the words ofHM Inspectors of Education "the raising ofwas a subsequent, though important "'''''''lnm'Hn.".,Ne w Jersey raised the minimum starting1985 by 23% from $15,000 to $18,500prospect of a further increase in the near20% plus a pa ckage of loans of $7,500 forstudents, convertible into an outright grantthose teaching in (state) schools for 4-6 years.Not only that, the average size of the 22seen by the HMI wa s 10! It must also bethat the American school curriculum is far'teacher-proof' that the British, Unitedteachers delivering courses which are far'off the shelf', far more pre-designed anddetermined (Hill, D., 1990).The second way in which college-basededucation in Britain will also be suavoided is by the substantial immersiontraining on the job. Teacher s in 1991 recei vepounds for the first year and 6,500 pounds forsecond year (more in London). The T"',,,_,,,,'"Articled Teacher scheme for graduates aand over, is basically an apprenticeshipIt was subsequently upgraded in nomenclaturethe 'Articled Teacher Scheme'. This scheme1990-91 involves 16 pilot schemes with aroundArticled Teachers in each.Of the four routes into teaching, the B.Ed,PGCE, the Articled Teacher Scheme andLicensed Teacher Scheme, the first three leadrecognised academic awards and are subjectthe require ments of CATE (the Committee forAccreditation of Teacher Education),Government appointed supervisory bodyteacher education, bu t the last employsentirely different approach to the awardQualified Teacher Status (QTS). UnlikeArticled Teacher Scheme, which is basednotion of partnership between LEAs andeducation, the Lic ensed Teacher Schemerequire (though it does permit andencourages) the involvement of co nteacher training institutions in the LEAsprogramme (Whitty, G., 1991a).It should be noted that in private schools,present attended by around 7% of children

and Wales, a t eaching qualification is notrequired. Hence many private schoolare untrained.it is possible that within two or three yearsbased teacher education will have been

very substantially, by school basedteacher education.MODELS OF INITIAL TEACHER

(ITE)current models of initial teacher educationcommonly presented as alternatives to each

the classroom competency skills model;the reflective practitioner mode l.ajority of current B.Ed. an d PGCE coursesthis reflective practitioner stance, based onof Schon (1983, 1989). See Barrett et al.

these are no t the only models. There is aa 'radical left', model of the teacher which ism ~ i t l I l l c t l v e variant of the reflective practitioner- distinctive in its pedagogy and in itsTeacher Education curriculum content andits intention . This mode l, promulgated here is:

critical reflective 'transformative'practitioner model.model is particularly associated with theof Henry Giroux such as, for example,and McLaren (1989); Aronowitz an d(1986). See also Hill, D. (1989, 1990,

are made for a number of PGCE coursesas those at Oxford Polytechnic and WestInstitute of Higher Education that theirare 'critical'. A number of recent books

discuss developments and theirin British initial teacher education,. Barton, and Pollard (1987), Booth,an d Wilkin (1990), an d Graves (Ed)The Licensed and Articled Teacher

> " " n a ~ r ' n are set out and/or described in DES198ge, 1989f, and 1989g).

Australia1l Journal of Teacizer Educatioll

time PGCE (Post-Graduate Certificate inEducation) decide to concentrate mainly on thecompetency skill model.SEVEN PERSPECTIVES ON TEACHEREDUCATIONWithin ideological debate on teacher educationthere are a number of, by now quite Well known,broad positions,: The 'Radical Right' and 'HardCentre' tend to argue for the classroomcompetency skills model, the 'Radical Left' forthe 'critical practitioner' model. Within theRadical Left model there are three identifiablecategories: the social reproductive critical model,which is essentially deterministic in Marxistterms and pessimistic; the cultural political ethicaland moral model; for exa mple of Zeichner, Liston,and Popkewitz, and the ethical and moral'transformative intellectual' model of GirouxMcLaren and Aronowitz. The ideological d e b a t ~ and culture wa r is discussed in Hill (1989, 199)d r ~ w i n g on Giroux, McLaren, Apple, Liston,Zelchner and Portuguese studies by Stoer (1986)and Fernandes (1990). In the USA it has beencritiqued in Apple (1989a, 1989b) and Giroux.1. THE RADICAL RIGHTT ~ e current c u l t u r ~ clash is between what mightstill be called, despite Mrs Thatcher's resignationas British Prime Minister, the Thatcherite cultureof privatised service and private interest culture onthe one hand, against a socialist culture of publicservice and public interest.In the first year since he r demise, there has beenno apparent let-up by the ConservativeG o v e r n ~ e n t in t ~ e ~ p p l i c a t i o n of Radical Rightc ? m p e t l . t l v ~ , . m ? ~ v l d ~ a l i s t i c , privatising,hJerarchlcaiJsmg, eiJtlst, differentiating, Hayekianpolicies regarding schools or teacher education.'Radical Right' writers on education and onteacher education in Britain include the HillgateGroup, (Roger Scruton and Caroline Cox amongothers), Stuart Sexton, Anthony O'Hear, DennisO'I


5/14

Australian Journal ofTeacher Education

comment in a number of right-wing dailynewspapers and weeklies such as the TimesEducational Supplement, some controlled byRupert Murdoch. This particular report and acontemporary Adam Smith Institute report byDennis O'Keefe, was massively and acidlyrejected by the Universities Council for theEducation of Teachers in a press release.The Radical Right in Britain have been influencedin particular by the philosophy of Friedrich vonHayek with its emphasis on individual choice,competition, inequality, an d neo-liberal economicpolicies, and by the monetarism of MiltonFriedman. They have heavily influenced a wholerange of policy of the Thatcher Government inBritain (1979-90) through the use of 'think tanks'such as the Centre for Policy Studies, the AdamSmith Institute, the Social Affairs Unit, and theHillgate Group. This last group restricts itself toeducational matters.There have been many books and articlesdescribing, analysing, an d critiquing the effect ofThatcherism and the Radical Right on schooling,the wider education system, wider and teachereducation. See for example my own booklets andarticles and Chapter Two in Hessari, R. and Hill,D. (1989); Chitty, C. (1989) and Jones, K. (1989).The influence of Hayek on Radical Right thinkingin Britain, and its transmogrificat ion into the 1988Education Reform Act are set out in Ball, S. (1990).Incidentally, these four writers (Hill, Chitty, Jonesand Ball) are all members of the Hillcole Group ofRadical Left Educato rs. See also Wragg, T. (1988).Whole series of articles have been written onThatcherism and the ne w Right, or Radical Right,in the Left Press in Britain, in Marxism Today, NewSocialist, Socialist Worker Review, MilitantInternational Review, throughout the 1990s. Theresignation of Mrs Thatcher as Prime Minister inlate 1990 triggered a spate of similar articles in thequality British daily and Sunday press.For a radical right perspective an d analysis of theRadical Right and Education in Britain, seeKnights, C. (1990).A very clear summary of the influence of theRadical Right an d the conflict within thatperspective between the authoritarian Right andthe neo-Liberal right was contained in the TimesEducational Supplement (1989). Mentor (1992) setsout and summarises radical right perspectives onteacher education. He not only brieflysummarises the two components within Radical

10

Right thinking, the libertarian-economic 'andauthoritarian, he also summarises three ofKey Radical Writings - the Hillgate Group (O'Keefe, D. (1990), and Lawlor, S. (1990). Henot include what I think is the equallyO'Hear, A. (1988). While his article issuccinct and hard-hitting I questionterminology of describing the twocomponents of 'New Right'economic' and 'ideological'. Both are >U 'OU>V) ' . l l : aThey are (in some ways) conways complementary - as theirpopulist fusion. But both the freeHayekian neo-Liberalism and theConservative authoritarianism are ~ ~ ' - ~ ~ ~ " , . ' ' - a l representing strains or variant of thatself-expressing the interests of the UUHU . H druling class andcolonising/deceiving the consciousnesssections of subordinate raced, sexed,gendered social classes.A critique of Thatcherism andcombined with socialist policy devuu...,,, :l Iacross a range of education issues and phrasescontained in the Hillcole Group (1991).Common interrelated themes of the Radicalin respect of teacher education are that: the present college-based system of

education should be scrapped (eithersubstantially) (The Hillgate Group (1Sexton (1987); Lawlor (1990a); Trend (1Boyson (1990); O'Hear (1991));

school-based on-the-job skill developsuch as the Licensed Teacher Scheme,become the major type of teacher training;

college-based teacher education is tooconcerned with changing societydeveloping egalitarian or liberal p e ~ r S 1 J e ( : t i ' T e on schooling and society (Shaw (1(1988, 1990); the Hillgate GroupO'Keefe (1990a, 1990b));

in particular, college-based teacher educapromulgates a model of the multi-culturalanti-racist teacher (O'Hear (1988); theGroup (1986, 1987)). It is noticeable thatthe right-wing press in Britain pilloriesclass egalitarian ('anti-classism'), .anti-sexism, and n ' C ' ~ A C D ' V I consistently, there is less emphas is onsexism in the writings of (for examp'academic' Radical Right. In the Radicalbooks, articles, or pamphlets listed here

attack anti-sexism as overtly or as strongly astheir visceral attacks on 'Marxistegalitarianism, anti-racism, or anti-heterosexism'. One chapter in O'Keefe'searlier book (1986), does so. The contras t withradical right wing newspapers such as the Sun,the Daily Mail, the Mail on Sunday is verystrong. In those, explicit anti-sexism isprominent;

college-based teacher education concentratestoo little on classroom diScipline skills (Shaw(1987); Sexton (1987); O'Hear (1988));

college-based teacher education is tooprogressive and child-centred (The HillgateGroup (1986, 1987); O'Keefe (1990a));other than practical skills, teachers also need"knowledge and love of the subject to betaught" (O'Hear (1988); Trend (1988));there is no or little need for educational theory(Sexton (1987); Lawlor (1990a, 1990b); O'Hear(1991)).

THREE CENTRE PERSPECTIVESA view has emerged which could be described asthe social democratic/liberal democratic/soft/'wet' Conservative consensus. This has beeny in tune with professional teacher unionand 'official' body opinion. This (in my view) isthe perspective of much of the current'educational establishment', with a broad set ofviews defending much of the educationalof the 1960s and 1970s. It is moderate,child-centred and generally supportsCflllpp"ph""pn teacher education developments, asupdated by the 1984 an d 1989 requirements of theCommittee for the Accreditation of TeacherEducation (CATE), and by the 1991 NationalCurriculum Council (NCC) document 'TheNational Curriculum and the Initial Training ofArticled, an d Licensed Teachers'. (TheDES consultation document was substantiallyunaltered as Circular 24/29 (DES, 1989b)).Two major aspects of CATE of 1984 are therequirements that teacher education lecturersshould have 'recent, relevant an d substantial'teaching e xperience in schools; and secondly, thatthe 'Main Subject Study' in the B.Ed degree beupgraded to 50% of time on the B.Ed. The majorCurrent 1989 requirement of CATE is that teachertraine.rs shoul? undertake school teachingexpenence eqmvalent to one term in every five

Australian JOllmal Of Teac11er Edllcatioll

years. The 1989 document requires thatinstitutions reach this standard by the academicyear 1992-93.The NCC document, together with the CATEcriteria are, in effect, a ne w National Curriculumfor I n ~ t i a l . Teacher Education, relating andsubordInatIng ITE to the National curriculum forSchools.The first three paragraphs of the NCC (1991, p. 3)document are:1.1 The National Curriculum is now an important

element in all initial teaching training (ITT)and most in-service education and training(INSET). Its introduction has provided aframework within which students, teachers,Higher education (HE) tutors and LocalEducation Authority (LEA) staff can worktogether and ha s helped to promote acommon language form professionaldiscussion about teaching an d learning.

1.2 The need to prepare ne w teachers for theNational Curriculum has also helped to clarifythinking about what is reasonable to expect ofan ITT course. Initial train ing is the first stagein a process of continuing professionaldevelopment through induction andsubsequent INSET. No initial trainingprogramme can equip new teachers with allthe knowledge, understanding and skillswhich they will need in their career.

1.3 During their initial training, student, articledand licensed teachers should, as an essentialpart of their wider professional training,develop the following knowledge,understanding and skills:awareness of the statutory framework inwhich the National Curriculum functions'knowledge of subject content an d teachingmethods;s k i l ~ s in assessment, recording and reportingachievement;a view of the whole curriculum;understanding of curriculum continuity;IT capability;skills in curriculum planning and review.

The former consensual liberal democratic cultureof the 60s and 70s is left looking bewildered,seeking to de-ideologise education, to retreat fromthe culture wars and to camp out on the lowlandsof pragmatism and competency training. It hasretreated from egalitarianism on grounds ofexpediency and/ or faint-heartedness.

11


6/14

Australian Journal of Teacller Education

However, a number of teacher educators have pu ttheir heads above the parapet in publications orthe media. These include Ted Wragg (1990b, c),Tim Brighouse, Maurice Craft (1990), DianeMontgomery (1989), Peter Newsam (1989), JeanRudduck (1989), Anthony Adams an d WitoldTulasiewicz (1989), and Bill Taylor (1990), theChair of CATE. In Craft's words 'training efficienttechnicians is a very worthwhile activity, but this isneither the role of teacher education, nor therequirement of the nation' (Craft, 1990, p. 77). Seealso Baker, R. (1990) an d TES (1990b). Anothercounterblast was the round robin letter signed bymany University teacher educators in a scathingand effective attack on two 1990 Radical Rightpublications, by Sheila Lawlor and DennisO'Keefe, and various papers at the 1990 UCETConference which attacked the Radical Rightonslaught as Initial Teacher Education. In April1991 UCET Press Conference an d Release furtherattacked misrepresentation of initial teachereducation work and suggested that thetheory practice po larisation was not anappropriate way of categorising the content ofITT courses today as the theory and the practicewere fully integrated. At the Press ConferenceTony Becher (UCET, 1991) of Sussex Universitysaid "The Tory party has become dominated by theraving right. Some of the things they are saying arecomplete falsehoods". Edgar Jenkins of LeedsUniversity said: "We are facing a complete disasterwhich would make the poll tax look like a fairy tale. Ifschools are given complete responsibilityfor trainingteachers without adequate resources or the desire totrain them, the cumulative effect would be on thatscale". A number of chapters in Booth, Furlong,an d Wilkin (1990) critique current developmentsin teacher education ideologically, for examplechapters by Margaret Wilkin, by Crozier, Mentorand Pollard, and by Wragg. So too does RobertCowens' chapter in Norman Graves (1990).Ted Wragg often writes hilariously, for examplesee his 'Join the Right and ring the changes' in theTES 6th July 1990, on the national curriculum,teacher training and right-wing pressure groups.He attacks

12

ill-informed and vitriolic attack on teachertraining by those right-wing critics ofeducationwho show the greatest reluctance to go and lookat the actual schools they criticise so readily.One fantasy put out is that the need for trainingactually prevents good people from beingrecruited. Yet when maths and sciencegraduates were allowed straight into schools

without training in the 1970s and 1980s morethan 2,000 a year, many with higher degrees andgood first degrees chose to take a peCE courseand only a hundred or so entered untrained.Another is that training does nothingforthat little knowledge is needed toprimary school and that graduates with aknowledge of their subject can simply go into aclassroom and start teaching. I have never beenable to understand this contempt for train'always fancy putting some haplessprizewinner in with 4D on a wetafternoon to test this 'you only need toyour subject' view. Some right wingers seekcounter by arguing that a Nobel prizewinnereducation would not be able to cope witheither. This is based on another false ncclI l1 , , , f , 'nthat'education' is abstruse theory.intelligent action informed by analysisreflection. Nobel prizewinners therefore, oughtto be well informed and t/lOuglztjul practitionersstill experimenting and well able to teachvariety ofclasses.

Within this broadly Centrist group thedistinguishable sub-groups are the 'Soft Centre',the 'Hard Centre' an d the 'Left in the Centre'.2. THE J50FT CENTRE'This group argues that 'everything in theis rosy', Nirvana would exist if thereresourcing and people would 'let us get on withthe job'. This is a not untypical 'producer' view,and is the view of a number of teacher educationinstitutions and college/university department ofeducation lectures. Sometimes it is borne ou t ofgenuine ideological support for those liberalprogressive child-centred integrated studies'Plowdenite' policies most commonly associatedwith British Primary Schooling arguably from themid-sixties, sometimes it is borne ou t of socialdemocratic or human capital or egalitariansocialist, 'comprehensivist', and 'equalopportunities' policies in schooling andeducation. Frequently this 'Soft Centre' view isheld simply ou t of the innate comfort orconservatism of not wanting to change from aknown and comforting system of schooling andof the production of teachers.

Vol. 16 No. 2, 1991

THE JHARD CENTRE'collection of individuals seek to accept

of the critique of the Radical Right. Such, teacher educators, for examplevid Hargreaves and Mary Warnock do no tto be organised into formal groupings.

Hargreaves' views have been set ou t in aseries of articles in the Times Educationalsupplement. See Hargreaves (1989a, 1989b, 1989c,198ge, 1990a, 1990b, 1991, 1992). See alsoBeardon, T., Booth, M., Hargreaves, D. an d Reiss,(1992). Mary Warnock's views are set ou t inWarnock (1985,1988). Among them there seemsto be a consensus emerging about some of the.below points. They see something wrong withthe state of teacher education, and welcome theblowing away of the cobwebs, the opening up ofthese debates. They accept a combination of:easier academic entry qualifications ontoInitial Training (LT.) courses if it is tied tomaturity and previous experience;shortened course on the lines of the shortagesubject shortened B.Ed 2-year courses;other models of shortage courses (of whichthere are few examples in England);a reduction in (effectively an attack on)reflective theory on macro-issues, radicaltheory and practice relating to critical theoryand egalitarianism, together with an increasein time on classroom competencies and skills;

5. virtual totally school-based siting of InitialTeacher Education (I.T.E.) (as in the LicensedTeacher Scheme);6. substantially school-based siting of LT.E. (as

in the Articled Teacher Scheme). This lastview is particularly associated with DavidHargreaves in a series of attacks on the B.Eddegree in The Times Educational Supplement;

7. school-based siting (of the 'substantial' ratherthan 'total' model) either in specially selectedteaching schools, (which might include CityTechnology Colleges), or involving a muchwider use of schools, even rotating theexperience to involve most or all schools.

They have recently been joined in one respect byMichael Bassey (1991) arguing for theabandonment of the four year B.Ed and itsreplacement by a two year PGCE. His argumentis that the four year B.Ed is 'too complicated' andVol. 16, No. 2,1991

Australian JOllrnal Of Tencller Edllcation

'too demanding on staff, and students cannotachieve high standards in professional practice'.Yet he assumes that the two years professionaldevelopment in terms of two year (post-graduate)professional training will do the job better thanthat half (two years equivalent) of the B.Ed degreedevote.d to professional training. In comparinghis preferred model of 3 years plus 2 years PGCEto a 4 year B.Ed he might be right (though thisignores the recruitment attrac tant of the REd bothfor 18 year olds and for mature students - nosmall consideration in an era of teacher shortage.However to compare like with like in terms ofhigher an d professional education would be moreuseful. For example by comparing his 3+2 yearoption with a 4 year B.Ed plus an induction yearbased on the best (ILEA?) models of release,discussion, and reflection time forinducting/probationer teachers. In otherwritings Bassey is highly critical of conservativechanges in teacher education.The 'Hard Centre' may well be supported not justbe atavistic Radical Righters bu t also by somelevels of college managements flexing their newlystrengthened autonomous managerial muscles,delighting in shaking up existing practice andstaffs.This should not be underestimated, thedramatically increased levels of pa y and powerawarded (and self-awarded) within a deliberatelypermissive ideologically based restructuring ofPolytechnic and College Managements in 1991has had noticeably negative effects on thecollegiality and pro o-democracy of manyinstitutions. Managers now more overtlymanage, the managed are now more overtlymanaged. Managerial muscle flexing is nowmore legitimated - by law - and rather less locatedwithin liberal democratic/social democraticcultures of staff-student and management staffrelationships.In the new increasingly competitive biddingprocess for student numbers in the Polytechnicsand Colleges Sector since 1990, (prior to which thebidding process was more discrete and controlover ITE and other courses more permissive)various college managements and other collegeteacher educators appear to act from expediency.They either act habitually, bending to everyauthoritative wind that blows, or selectively,partly on the grounds of avoiding retribution,cuts in funding or cuts in student numbers.This 'Hard Centre' sub-group of the Centre is not,as far as I am aware, an identifiable organised

13


7/14

Australian Toumal of Teacher Education

grouping nor do they all accept all seven of theproposals. In any case some of these proposalsare alternatives to each other. But they seem toaccept, emphasise or demand: more schoolbasing, more skills/competency training, lesscritical theor y and egalitarianism, shorter courses,and easier access into teacher education andteaching.4. THE 'LEFT IN THE CENTRE'This group comprises individuals and networkswhose ideological orientations are left of centre,sometimes a little, sometimes a lot.Groups and initiatives have been set up by BERA(the British Education Research Association),UCET (the Universities Council for the Educationof Teachers), by 'The Future of Teacher Training'(sic) Writing Group, co-ordinated by JeanRudduck an d David Bridges, and by the'Imaginative Projects: Arguments for a Ne wTeacher Education' group those publication ofthat name was published in January 1991.The British Educational Research Association(BERA) research group on teacher educationincludes Jack Whitehead, David Hustler, JohnElliot, Jean Rudduck, and Dave Hill. The UCETgroup (Universities Council for the Education ofTeachers) embraces a wide number of Universityteacher educators. The 'Futu re of TeacherTraining Group' is open to teacher educatorsacross the binary (University/Polytechnic andCollege) divide, an d the 'Imaginative ProjectsGroup' publication is just published (Hextall et al.1991). As well the writers (Ian Hextall, MartinLawn, Ian Menter, Susan Sidgwick an d StevenWalker), this involv ed initially, though not finally,Colin Lacey, Dave Hill an d Geoff Whitty.Organised resistance to current attacks on theorybased and on college-based education has becomeevid ent since 1990. See for example UCET (1990)press release on teacher education. The Ministerof Education's speech on teacher education(Clarke, K. 1992b an d DES 1992a), an dConsultation Paper proposing basing 80% of theone year postgraduate PGCE course in school(DES 1992b) drew a spate of critical responses.See, for example Adams, A. (1992), Elliott, J.(1992), Hodgkinson, K. (1992), UCET (1992),PCET (1992), Menter, I. (1992) an d Gilroy, D.(1992). Both Menter and Gilroy are particularlyhard-hitting.As organisations BERA and UCET do not have aspecific political orientation, and are moreheterogeneous than the other two specific issue

14

groups mentioned here. In general, however, theteacher education papers at the 1989 and 1990BERA Conferences w ere h ighly critical of RadicalRight developments in ITE, and very supportiveof the reflective practitioner model. The 1990UCET press statement is similarly caustic about(two of) the Radical Right attacks on 'teachertraining'.The apparent intentions and the group writings ofthese various groups, however Left their personalpolitics might be, differ little from those of the'Soft Centre'. In some cases this derives from thepolitics of the lowest common denominator inopposing Radical Right attacks on teachereducation. In other cases it may derive from otheraspects of 'reformism' - such as moderating ofviews in the hope of gathering wider support,wider alliances.While such initiatives are welcome for thosereasons implicit in political 'reformism' or'revisionism', they do fail to go much beyond adefence of and rationale for the status quo -neglect overt an d explicit issues of socialand equality as do some recent internal LaLJUUIParty discussion documents in 1991 andDecember 1991 Labour Party policyteacher education an d training, wh ateverother merits. While individ ually andmany adherents and activists in suchare highly committed to such issuesinitial teacher education, such concerns aremade explicit, in their group activities or ifare, instead of being neon-lit, they are, inilluminated by a flickering candle.An example of 'Left in the Centre' writing isbooklet written by Ian Hextall, Martin Lawn,Menter, Susan Sidgwick, an d Stephen(1991). A number of the writers individassociated with the Radical Left. In it theincisively and admirably critique the n , , ~ ~ ' c m . Right's attack on teacher education, anddevelopments in ITE, defining andthese respects. Bu t it offers a limited critiqueprogramme. In 35 pages it avoidsdevelopment of the 'critical arena' of lelleLUUllsocio-political reflection. In the wthere is only one sentence on 'criticalpractice' and one of their five 'p(assumptions about the nature and n",.n,-,c"education forming the basis of teacher edis 'critical-theoretical'.

s e ~ education as a pr?cess ofempowering people:Vlth the 11l1ders.tandmgand cOl11petences whichlIlcreases effectIVe particip.ation in our society,and enables people to defme and realise theiri d e n t i t y ~ think critically about the world, and tochange If(Hex all, I. et al. 1991, p. 23)

a wholly admirable and concisely presentedprinciple.~ h i l e .this ma y .well, ~ a , : e . been a principlemformmg the wnters mdlvldual practice andperspectives it is difficult to see how it hasinformed t h e ~ r collective booklet in any explicitw ~ y .. That IS to ~ a y , t ~ ~ s highly importantprIDClple, one of a c t I v ~ , cntIcal, reflective agency( t h o u g ~ no t necessa.nly. one stemming from anemancIpatory egalItanan metanarrative), isactually undeveloped, left without salience orprofile in their booklet.While the booklet has consider able value it couldhave been written by the Soft Centre. 'ltis too early to pass similar comments about 'TheFuture of Teacher Training Writing Group'convened by Jean Rudduck and David Bridges.The highly commendable aims of that group areas follows:

:0 d ~ f i n e / advance a view of: teachers asmtellIgent, thinking practitioners; teaching as a~ o r m of practice which has constantly to bemforn:ed by sensitivity, intelligence andreflectIveness in practice.To defend/advance the distinctivec o n t r i ~ u t i o n which institutions of highere d u c ~ t l O n have to make to the development ofprac!lce thus conceived (at the same time asvalumg the distinctive contribution that in~ c h o o l p r a c t ~ t i o n ~ r s c ~ n make to that trainingID partnershIp WIth hIgher education).To challenge and correct some of themythology about current teacher trainingpropagated by the 'raving right';- t ~ a t c ~ . l . r r e n t training is entirelydIsassoCIated from practical experience inschools (they seem to have no idea of the

amount of time that students spend inschool-based work with or without tutors);

Australian JOllrnal of Teacher Edllcation

- that practising teachers play no significantpart m the selection, training or assessmentof s t u d ~ n t t e a c ~ e r s (they of course play avery actIve part ID most institUtions); -

- that the curriculum of teacher training islar!?ely determined by the ideologicalwhIms of teacher educators (they don'tseem to have heard of CATE or of theSecretary of State's requirements).

4. To d ~ s e n t ~ n g l e some of the muddle about therelatIonshIp (or otherwise) between:i. the c h a r a ~ t e r and quality of initial training;ii. the recrUItment and retention of teachers'iii. the mismatch between initial t r a i n i n ~ qualifications and the posts held by largenumbers of teachers.

5. To demonstrate our own capacity to think andwork creatively:i. to improve the quality of initial training

an d dev.elop constructive approaches tothe contmumg professional developmentof teachers;ii. to extend access to initial trainingprogrammes and contribute througheffective programmes of professionaldevelopment to the retention and careermobility of teachers;iii. to provide appropriate career change and. retraining support for teachers;

IV. to w?:k in effective partnership withpractIsmg teachers.n u m b ~ r of the ten Polytechnic and UniversitysIgna ones to that manifesto can be regarded asLeft of Centre in varying degrees.H o ~ e v ; r , like the .Hextall/Lawn 'ImaginativeProjects group, theIr collaborative intentions ar ea c t u ~ l l ~ minima ist. No doubt their intention is tom a x ~ m l s e the breadth and depth of their embraceand Impact - honourable intentions - bu t they aren ~ t , . as a group, overtly about the development of~ n t J c a l reflective let alone 'transformative'm t e l ! e ~ t ~ a l s . Their aims are ultimately defensiveand ,mltIal!y d ~ f e n s i v e . They are reactive, unlikethe I ~ a g m a t I v e Projects' booklet which has aproachve element. In making this criticism I amwell aware that many of those involved such asto take ?ne example, Donald M c I n t y r ~ (1990b)have wntten forcefully about the need for studentt e a c h e r ~ to develop 'a critical understanding ofthe c u r n c u l u ~ a ~ d pedagogy oftheir subject(s)'and an appreClatlOn of the potentialities and the

15


8/14

Australian Joumal a/Teacher Education

problems of achieving social justice in their ownteaching. Many members of both theRudduck/Bridges the Future of Teacher TrainingWriting Group' an d the Lawn/Hextall'Imaginative Projects' such as Jean Rudduck andIan Menter have substantial publications andpedigrees in critiquing the Radical Right oneducationand teacher education. See for exampleRudduck (1989, 1990) an d Menter (1988) andCrozier, Menter an d Pollard (1990).I am also aware that the group/network hashardly yet begun to function. But, as it stands, itsfive intentions, while laudable, are no t Radicaland are not identifiably Left. The only differencebetween this particular 'Left in the Centre' agendaand that of the 'Soft Centre', is in the politicalhistory and individual politics of much of 'TheFuture of Teacher Training Writing Group'.The final example I wish to give here, of a 'Left inthe Centre' (British) programme for teachereducation in the Labour Party document ofDecember 1991, 'Investing in Quality: Labour'splans to reform teacher education and training'.The document is light years away from current(mid 1992) Conserva tive proposals to detheorise,de-critique, teacher education by placing itprimarily in schools. The Labour Party planssupport the role of theory, the role of colleges inITE, an d make a commitment to equalopportunities as part of a national corecurriculum for teacher education. Howeverwelcome the plans are in contrast to Conservativeplans, they are not identifiably Radical or Criticalor Transformative.

THREE TYPES OF RADICAL LEFTDISCOURSE ON TEACHER EDUCATION:INTRODUCTIONThere are three distinctive variants of RadicalLeft/Socialist/Marxist/neo-Marxistdiscourse onteacher education in late capitalist societies suchas Britain. It has to be said that, other than theHillcole Group's espousal of teachers and teachereducators as 'transformative intellectuals' thefollowing are analytical categories rather thanorganised groupings. These three categories are:1. Social reproductivist/deterministic teacherswho see little space for contesting the deadhand of capitalism (in some respects, JohnSmyth);2. transformative teachers outside the classroom.

committed to the autonomy of intellectuals

16

an d of students within a pluralistic discoursewithin the classroom committed to theautonomy of intellectuals an d of studentswithin a pluralistic discourse within theclassroom (e.g. Zeichner, an d associates);

3. transformative intellectuals or pUblicintellectuals whose belief in social justice andegalitarianism inform teaching within as wellas outside the classroom (e.g. Giroux andassociates such as Aronowitz, McLaren).Firstly, I intended to set ou t some of thedistinctive views of Henry Giroux and associatesin the Critical Theory of Henry Giroux. Thisincludes their concepts of 'the transformative'and 'public' intellectual; their attack on thelimited problematising emancipatory goal ofmuch radical theorising; their attack on thepolitically limiting an d weakening liberalpluralism of some post-modernists andmodernists; their associated critique of uncriticalacceptance of difference; student experience andvoice; their call for critical utopianism; and theirdefence of the transformative role of the teacher.Secondly, in 'Criticism of Giroux by the MadisonSchool - Kenneth Zeichner, Tom Popkewitz, andDa n Liston', I highlight their attack on Giroux'snotion of organic intellectual, and on his allegeddenial of intellectual and student autonomy byhis relatively predesigned political project.Thirdly, I criticise what is, in many ways, anadmirably trenchant, lucid and informed paperby John Smyth. While the words are combative Ifind the critique in the paper less so, fitting tosome extent (though he might deny it) into whatis in some respects a pessimistic socialreproductionis t Radical Left model. This is to saythat here I am posing Smyth within what I amsuggesting in a third Radical Left model,admirable on analysis an d critique, combative intone, showing little sympathy with the pluralisticautonomistic stance of Zeichner and associates,bu t also being far more cautious about thepossibility of, and possibility of effectiveness of,critical utopian transformative action by teachersas organic intellectuals.

Vol. 16 No. 2, 1991

5. ASPECTS OF THE CRITICAL THEORY OFHENRY GIROUX AND HIS ASSOCIATES(STANLEY ARONOWITZ, PETERMCLAREN) AND THEIR RADICAL LEFTMODEL OF THE CRITICAL UTOPIANTRANSFORMATIVE INTELLECTUAL

Giroux's (1991) most recent book of a decade longannual book production is written, as was anearlier work (Giroux (1985), with StanleyAronowitz.Giroux's work calls for teachers to act as'transformative intellectuals'3.A 'Transformative Intellectual' is:

one who exercises forms of intellectual al1dpedagogical practice which attempt to insertteaching and leamil!g directly into the politicalsphere by arguing that schoolil1g represents botha struggle for meaning and a struggle overpower relations. Teachers who assume the role oftransfor111ative il1tellectuals treat students ascritical agents, question how knowledge isproduced and distributed, utilise dialogue, andmake knowledge meaningful, critical, al1dultimately emancipatory.(Giroux, H. an d McLaren, P. 1987)Giroux's expansion of the category oftransformative intellectual emphasises theinterrelationship between the political and thepedagogical:

Central to the category of transformativeintellectual is the necessity of making thepedagogienlmore politienl and the politienlmorepedagogical. Making the pedagogical morepolitical means inserting schooling into thepolitical sphere by arguing that schoolingrepresents botl! a struggle to define meanillg anda struggle over power relations. Within thisperspective, critical reflection and action becomepart of a fundamental social project to helpstudents develop a deep and abiding faith in thest1'llggle to overcome economic, political andsocial injustices, and to further humanisethemselves as part of this struggle.Giroux, H. 1988, pp. 127-8)Along with other Radical Left and neo-Marxistanalysts, Giroux asserts that teacher educationprograms are designed to create intellectualsWhose social function is primarily to sustain an dlegitimate the status quo. However he attacks:

Vol. 16, No. 2,1991

Austmliall JOllmal a/Teacher Educatioll

the failure of eft educators to move beyond ... thelanguage o f critique ...(which) fails to defineteacher education as part of an extendedcOllllterpublic sphere; .. and tends to remaintrapped within the logic of social reproduction: ..their lal1guage fails to grasp alld acknowledgethe concept ofcounter-hegemony.(Giroux, H. 1988, pp. 161-3)Giroux and McLaren (1991, p. 156) criticise"orthodox radical educational theorists whose workhovers over, rather than directly engaging thecontradictions of the social order that their efforts seekto transform". They attack what they see as theoverly deterministic reproduction theorists. ForGiroux and McLaren (1991, p. 157):

the programmatic impetus of much radicaleducational reform remains fettered by thelimited emancipatory guard of makil1g 'theeveryday problel11atic' .. the langllage of critiquethat informs lIluch radical theorising is overlyindividualistic, Eurocentric, al1d reproductive,radical educators fail to acknowledge that thestruggle for democracy, iil the larger sense oftransforming schools into democratic publicsphere, takes political and ethical precedenceover making teachers more adept atdeconstl'llctive 'double readings'.They critique those who have jailed to develop aradical notion of hope and possibility', indeed thosesuch as Dan Liston who they see as anti-utopian.They criticise Liston (1988) as presenting 'a visionofedllcation .driven by a college illtO a dystopian formof Scientism'.Having attacked Radical Left socialreproductionists, Giroux also criticises thepluralistic autonomistic school of Radical LeftCritical theorists associated with Zeichner.Giroux (1991, p. 117) attacks such of his critics (in'Post-modern Education') as "critienl pedagogy atits worst ...c/ose to .... the libera l democratic tradition inwhich teaching is reduced to getting students merely toexpress or access their own experience ..a banal,unproblematic notion of acilitation, self-affirmationand se/f-cOllsciousness". "It is not enollgh for teachersmerely to affirm IIncritically their student's histories,experiences and stories .... (this) is to run the risk ofidealising and romanticising them" (Giroux, H. andAronowitz, S. 1991, p. 130)While rejecting 'the postmodernism of reaction'associated with Baudrillard an d Lyotard asnihilistic, he also attacks (liberal) postmodernism(and, I would say the same applies to liberal

17


9/14

Australiall lournal of Teadler Educatia11

modernism) 'for democratising the notion ofdifference in a way that echoes a type of vapidliberal pluralism ..difference often slips into atheoretically harmless an d politicallyderacinerated notion of pastiche'.Within the British educational context similarcomments can be made about multi-culturalismas opposed to anti-racism, an argument I tried todevelop in Chapter Two of Hessari and Hill (1989)(though regrettably not in the chaptersdeveloping classroom activities), an d one made,for example, by the Inner London EducationAuthority (1985b).Multi-culturalism can be recognised as anadvance over assimilationism bu t it is no tenough. Giroux's (1991, p. 51) position on'difference' is similar. While it is an advance on amono-cultural denial of 'difference', anundiscriminating plural approach is preciselythat, undiscriminating and uncritical:

to acknowledge different forms of literacy is notto suggest that they should all be given equalweight. On the contrary .. their differences are tobe weighted against the capacity they have forenabling people to locate themselves in their ownhistories while simultaneously establishing theconditions for them to function as a part of awider democratic culture. The represents a ormof literacy that is not merely epistemological butalso deeply political and eminently pedagogical.

Giroux (1991, p. 108) an d his associates areinsistent on the necessity of the political andtransformative role of the teacher. WithAronowitz he writes:

Education workers must take seriously thearticulation of a morality that posits a languageof public life, of emancipatory community, andindividual and social commitment ..A discourseon morality is important ... it POilltS to the needto educate students to fight and struggle in orderto advance the discourse and principles of acritical democracy.

In this enterprise:

18

educators need to take up the task of redefiningeducational leadership through forms of socialcriticism, civic courage, and public engagementthat allow them to expand oppositional space -both within alld outside of school - whichincreasingly challenge the ideologicalrepresentation and relations of power thatundermine democratic public life.(Giroux, H. and Aronowitz, S. 1991, p. 89)

Giroux (1983c, pp. 202-3) set s out in more concreteterms what students need to actually learn.Students should learn not only how to weigh theexisting society against its own claims, theyshould also be taught to think and act in waysthat speak to different societal possibilities andways of living. But if the development of civiccourage is the bed-rock ofall emancipatory modeof citizenship education, it will have to rest 011 anumber of pedagogical assumptions andpractices that need to be somewhat clarified.1. First, the active nature of students'participation in the learning process must bestressed. This means that transmissionmodes of pedagogy must be replaced byclassroom social relationships in whichstudents are able to challenge, engage, andquestion the form and substance of thelearning process.2. Second, student /Ilust be taught to thinkcritically. Depending of course uponlevels, students can learn to juxtaposedifferent world views against the truthclaims that each of them makes.3. Third, the development of a aiticalmodereasoning must be used to enable studentsappropriate their own histories, i.e. tointo their own biographies and systemsmeaning. That is, a critical pedagogyprovide the conditions that give studentsopportunity to speak with their own voices,to authenticate their own experiences.4. They must learn how values are embedded illthe very texture ofhuman life, how tlzeyaretransmitted, and what interests they supportregarding the quality ofhuman existence.5. Fifth, students must learn about thestmctural and ideological forces thatinfluence and restrict their lives. DennisGleeson and GeoffWhitty speak to this issuewhen analysing the role social studies callplay in addressing it:A radical conception ofsocial studies starts withthe recognition that social processes, both withinschool and outside it, influence alld restrict thelife chances of many students. What socialstudies can do is to help them become moreaware of their assumptions and more politicallyarticulate in the expression of what it is theywant out of ife. This can direct them towards allactive exploration of why the social world resistsand frustrates their wishes and how social actionmay focus upon such constraints.

6. ASPECTS OF THE CRITICAL THEORY OFTHE MADISON SCHOOL - KENNETHTOM POPKEWITZ, AN D THERADICAL LEFT MODEL OF PLURALISTICAUTONOMISTIC CRITICAL ANALYSISWITHIN CLASSROOMS AND POLITICALACTIVISM OUTSIDETom Popkewitz (1991, p. 231) criticised Giroux'sconcept of 'transformative intellectual'.popkewitz attacks what he calls "popularistscholarship (which) accepts global dlWlis1l1s betweenoppressor and the oppressed ..asserting theresearcher'S direct attachment to ...oppositional socialmovements. The category ofprogressive is assigned totlle practices associated with oppressed groups"..A very brief summaryof Popkewitz's, and indeedKenZeichner's, depiction of critical theorists suchas Giroux, that they regard as essentiallyantipathetic the relationship in Giroux's thesisbetween:

political commitment and the pedagogy of apolitical project with prefigured aims on theone hand; withthe democratic development of individualautonomy of the intellectual. "The engagementof the intellectual is continually juxtaposed withthe struggle for autonomy" (Popkewitz, T., 1991,p.241).the democratic development of individualautonomy of the learner, the student, facedwith a political project and commitment, withthe desire of the teacher as intellectual to'transform' his or her students.

Ken Zeichner (1987, p. 25) writing with DanListon also criticises the overt political project andagenda of Giroux.In the major article they co-wrote setting out theirthree levels of reflection, Liston an d McLarensuggest that "in Giroux and McLaren's attempt to'politicise' schooling we feel they blur an essentialdistinction between the teacher as educator and theteacher as political activist".Zeichner and Liston emphasise, against Giroux, it

is important to note that 'reflexive teaching' isnot viewed as synonymous with any particularchanges in teacher behaviours. The programseeks to help student teachers become moreaware of hemselves and their environments in away that changes their perceptions of what is

Australiall lalmznl of Teacher Educatioll

possible. The hope is that these expandedperceptions and an enhanced' cultural literacy'(Bowers 1990) will affect the degree of'reflectiveness' expressed in student teacheractions, and that more reflective actions will leadto greater benefits for the teacher and for all ofhis or her pupils.I now want to amplify on differences among lefteducators, which I have categorised above. Inparticular I wish to examine the Zeichner-Girouxargument, which essentially is about the role ofteachers as 'transformative' intellectuals. Listonand Zeichner (1987, p. 117-8) do associatethemselves with 'the important role for teachereducation' in efforts to bring about moreemancipatory educational practices in our publicschools believing that a more critically orientedapproach to teacher education, in conjunctionwith other educational, political and economicreforms, could help to create a 'more democraticand just society'. But they 'caution against theportrayal of teachers as political activists withinthe classroom. While they themselves 'haveproposed reflective, critical, or emancipatoryprograms ..motivated by a specific desire torectify social and educational inequality andinjustice' ..they believe that, by definition, areflective and critical approach to the moraleducation of teachers would:

recognise this plurally and enable futureteachers to identify alld choose betweensufficiently articulated alld reasollably distinctmoral positions .. the goal of a reflective alldcritically oriented teacher educatioll program iscertainly IlOt moral inculcation, but rather areflective examination of educational goals andalternative course ofaction.(Liston, D. and Zeichner, K. 1987, pp. 121-2)While they are 'highly cautious' about (Girouxand McLaren's) 'civic minded action within theclassroom' Liston and Zeichner (1987, pp. 124-5)encourage it outside the classroom' believing that'teacher education programs should begin toexamine how the conditions of schooling andteachers' work inhibit prospective teachers'chosen goals' and Liston and Zeichner (1987, pp.133-4) argue for' a much more aggressive politicalstance by teacher educators not within theclassrooms, but 'in relation' to the organisationsand agencies that allocate resources and rewardsaffecting teacher education programs' and inefforts to democratise schools that would giveteachers and parents greater control over theschool curriculum and school management. Theydo however agree, with Giroux (and McLaren

19


10/14

Australian Journal of Teacher Education- - - - - - ~ - - - - ~ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

and Aronowitz) that 'the social relations andpedagogical practices within programs need toreflect the emancipatory practices that teachereducators seek to establish in ...schools'.Liston and Zeichner (1987, pp . 126-7) locatethemselves within 'the Radical Tradition inTeacher Education'. They 'share a set ofcommitments and common purposes whichchallenge dominant ideologies and practices inteacher education ... and 'have attempted todevelop teacher education programs which areboth critical and emancipatory'.They note the 'variety of conceptual lenses andtheoretical principles' within this radical view ofteacher education.To summarise their debate with Giroux andMcLaren, they agree with the above definition,aims, roles of prospective teachers, actu al teachersand teacher educators' - except within theclassroom.7. RADICAL LEFT REPRODUCTIONISM -

AND A CRITIQUE OFREPRODUCTIONIST ASPECTS OF JOHNSMYTH'S ANALYSIS

In this section I wish briefly to rehearse the majorcriticisms of the economic reproductive modelassociated, for example, with the correspondencetheory of Bowles an d Gintis, an d the materialaspects of Althusser's notion of ideology, and thecultural reproductive model of Bourdieu.Such criticisms are very clearly and explicitly setou t in Mike Cole (1990), in Henry Giroux (1983b)work by Mike Apple (1982) an d Geoff Whitty(1981).I wish then to locate some aspects of John Smyth'sforcible and incisive analysis of late capitalisteducational developments within thereproductionist model and to critique thoseaspects.Firstly, then a very brief critique of reproductiontheory taken from Giroux.Reproduction theorists have over-emphasised theidea of domination in their analyses an d havefailed to provide any major insights into ho wteachers, students, and other human agents cometogether within specific historical an d socialcontexts in order to both make and reproduce theconditions of their existence. More specifically,reproduction accounts of schooling have

20

continually patterned themselves after structural_functionalist versions of Marxism which stressthat history is made 'behind the backs' of themembers of society. The idea that people domake history, including its constraints, has beenneglected. Indeed, human subjects generally'disappear' amidst a theory that leaves no roomfor moments of self-creation, mediation, andresistance. These accounts often leave us with aview of schooling and domination that appears tohave been pressed out of an Orwellian fantasYischools are often viewed as factories or prisons,teachers and students alike act merely as pawnsan d role bearers constrained by the logic andsocial practices of the capitalist system.

By downplaying the importance of humanagency and the notion of resistance,reproduction theories offer little hope forchallenging and changing the repressive featuresofschooling. By ignoring the contradictions andstmggles that exist in schools, these theories notonly dissolve human agency, they unknowinglyprovide a rationale for not examining teachersand students in concrete school settings. Thus,they miss the opportunity to determine whetherthere is a substantial difference between theexistence of various stl"llctural and ideologicalmodes of d011lilwtion and their actual unfoldingand effects.Whereas reproduction theorists focus almostexclusively on power and how the dominantculture ensllres the consent and defeat ofsubordinate classes and groups, theories ofresistance restore a degree of agency andinnovation to the cultures of these groups.Culture, in this case, is constituted as much bythe group itself as by the dominant society.Subordinate cultures, whether working-class orotherwise partake of moments of self-productionas well as reproduction; they are contradictory illnature and bear the marks ofboth resistance andreproduction. Such cultures are forged withincOllstraints shaped by capital and itsillstitutions, such as schools, but the conditionswithin which such constraints shaped by capitaland its institutions, such as schools, bllt theconditions within which such constraintsfunction vary from school to school and fromneighbourhood to neighbourhood. Moreover,there are never any guarantees that capitalistvallles and ideologies will automatically succeed,regardless of how strongly they set the agenda.As Stanley Aronowitz reminds us, 'In the finalanalysis, human praxis is not determined by itspreconditions; only the boundaries ofpossibilityare given in advance'.(Giroux, H. 1983b)

Vol. 16 No. 2, 1991

paper to the 1991 Bath University'Reconceptualising Teacher, John Smyth gave a trenchant and

critique both of Radical Right wingin conforming schooling in Australia,in other late capitalist systems. He also takesin the intra-Radical Left debate concerning

resistance, the role of the teacher andeducator, the role of the intellectual, andRadical Left discourse.As part of this debate I wish to criticise aspects ofhis argument. For Smyth (1991, p. 12) the realityof participative, locally based, an d reflectiveapproaches

is that such local initiatives do not amount to aredistribution of power, but rather theyconstitute limited discreti011ary control over theimplementation of decisions and directionsdetermined centrally. Reflection then, becomes ameans of ocussing upon ends determined byothers, not an active process of contesting,debating and determining the nature of thoseends.Certainly in Britain, with the imposition of the(new) National Curriculum for Schools inEngland and Wales following the 1988 EducationReform Act, and the effective introduction of atighter National Curriculum for Initial TeacherEducation in England and Wales following the1989 CATE criteria and the 1991 NationalCurriculum Council document on Initial TeacherEducation, the scope for resistance, for thedevelopment and dissemination of oppositionaldiscourses is restricted. Smyth is correct inasserting the restrictive nature of such changes.However many writers have shown, theoretically,how spaces for counter-hegemonic activityremain. For example the work of Gramsci andGiroux; how some British departments of teachereducation can and do subvert government wishesconcerning the curriculum and seize theopportunities afforded by restructuring a system(Whitty, 1991b) and how restructuring of schoolbudgetary and management powers as part of theBritish Government's Local Management ofSchools (a classic example of Smith'sdecentralising from above) can be used for adifferent agenda, one of autogestion or of localworkers' d emocratic control (Hill, D. 1991b).Smyth (1991, p. 25) calls for teachers to

link consciousness about the processes thatinform the day-ta-day aspects of their teachingwith the wider political and social realities 'for'Vol. 16, No. 2,1991

Australian Journal of Teacher Educatioll

then they are able to transcend s e l f ~ b l a m e forthings that don't work out and to see thatperhaps their causation may more properlylie in the social injustices and palpableinjustices of society. .

Smyth (1991, p. 29) does, in his paper, contributeclearly to developing' a socially culturally, andpolitically reflective' discourse, bu t he is verywary and too dismissive of 'radical! discoursethat emphasises notions like emancipation andother core concepts of contemporary radicaldiscourse and Smyth (1991) quotes, approvinglywhat seems to me to be an unduly negative andjaundiced view by Nash that:

these concepts are never articulated in aconcretely referenced discussion o f politicaltransformation tied to a realisable, local politicalprogramme, bllt just float airily serving perhapsas a rhetoric of inspiration for those soconstituted to need it but devoid of any practicalfunction.I wish to make a four-fold criticism of this stance,relating to:

i. a rhetoric of inspiration,ii. a rhetor ic of popularisation,iii. the linking of transformatory rhetoric topolitical programmes, andiv. the validity of intellectualism.1. Firstly, a rhetoric of inspiration has a valuablefunction per se for any political/ideological/educational project, in engaging emotion an ddesire, in thrilling, in motivating. To say that

ideology is related to the domain of theaffective is to assert that ideology must beunderstood as operating within a politics offeeling - "structures ofdesire that both enable andconstrain emancipatory stYllggle " (Giroux, H.and McLaren, P., 1991, p. 190). Cert ainly someof my ow n writing is intentionally written inthe rhetorical register.At a non-critical theory level Benjamin Bloomlinks the affective an d cognitive domains ofintellectual development, and it is acommonplace of political science analysis ofthe politics of charisma that links excitement,feeling high, a pleasurable body state, theproduction of extra adrenalin - that is, thepsychology and physiology of pleasure, withcognitive messages.

2. Secondly, a rhetoric of inspiration it has avaluable function in popularising, in

21

Australian Journal of Teacher Education Australian Journal of Teacher Educatioll


11/14

attracting and moving those particularaudiences 'so constituted to need if , or soconstituted as likely to develop a desire toneed it.The initial section of this paper refers to thesuccess of the Radical Right in using threedifferent levels of discourse for three differentaudiences - the academic, the three levels ofthe press, (highbrow / quality, middle brow,and popular press), the Party political, eachreacting to and feeding on th e other, topopularise and disseminate the vocabularyand concepts of a discourse of derision, (aboutthe Loony Left, schools, 'teacher training'),together with the vocabulary and concepts ofits own rhetoric of inspiration.

3. Thirdly, while it may be true that suchemancipatory concepts are frequently no t tiedto a realisable local political programme', toclaim that they are 'never' so articulated iseither sloppy writing or sloppily and underinformed. The 'Keep Strong' movement anddocument of the Chicago Common GrandNetwork in Chicago (1987) influenced byHenry Giroux, is one example of Girouxlinking theory with concrete and popularisinglocal action and programme (ILEA 1984, ILEA1985b).

22

The Inner London Education Authority's twomajor reports aimed at combating underachievement by working class children,'Improving Secondary Schools' (TheHargreaves Report,) and 'Improving PrimarySchools', (The Thomas Report), and various ofthe anti-elitist, anti-hierarchical educationreforms of the 1974-1976 PortugueseRevolutionary Governments informed andinfluenced no t least by educators such asPaolo Freire, as too has been the educationpolicy of SWAPO in Namibia, are just someexamples of emancipatory an d mobilisingconcepts of radical discou rse being articulatedin a concretely referenced discussion ofpolitical transformation tied to a realisablelocal political programme. An d these aresome of the best known (to which might beadded the initial education reform followingthe 1917 Russian Revolution) .To these must be added the efforts ofthousands, or hundreds of thousands ofgroups of intellectuals, school teachers,teacher educators, radical school governors,political militants an d activists, municipalsocialists who have not only been inspired by

emancipatory rhetoric, but who havecollaborated in or developed and actually, insome cases, realised and effected a localpolitical programme. (So effectively, that insome cases the structures through which theyworked were abolished, conformedpunished, or castrated by a vengeful andworried Conservative central government_for example with the abolition of the InnerLondon Education Authority in 1990, and theconstricting and reduction in powers of localeducation authorities).As another example, the Hillcole Group (1991)book is a collaboratively developed andcritiqued series of proposals, including aproposed new Education Act, which seeks tointerrelate Radical Left theoretical analysiswith national and local politicalwith classroom practice; and Hillattempts to relate a series of policy proposalsto critical Radical Left theory, as does Hill, D.(Ed.) (1992).

4. My fourth criticism of Nash and ofwh o approves he r /him, is the implicitintellectualism of such statementsmight for all I am aware, stem from ei'workerism' which not onlyover-privileges proletarianism inand expression, or simply fromunfortunate experiences ofvanguardists or intellectuals whoairily, wishing to critique and or t h""" ' i c6 :without seeking an influence or partpolitical project, i.e. without beingintellectuals. While such criticism as


12/14

Allstralian Jail mal of Teacher Education

CONCLUSIONThere is a very brief conclusion to this paper. It isthat under Radical Right governments, mediaoffensives and attempts at strengthening controland hegemony over, and conforming, theschooling and teacher education ideological stateapparatuses, the Left has, with few exceptions,vacated the ideological battlefield and got 'Left inthe Centre'. This is true of the caution of erstwhileLeft writers, educationalists an d ideologues inBritain in their alliances with vapid liberalprogressivism and uncritical pluralism - a retreatfrom the cultural and educational advances of the1970s and 1980s. And it is true too, I suggest, ofthe current anti-transformativist direction of someelements of Radical Left theorising an d teachereducation course development in the USA. It isalso reflected in a return to the negativistpessimism of reproductionists on the one handand negativistic nihilism of some post-modernisttheorists on the other.This paper calls for the development of pro-activedebate both by and within the Radical Left in latecapitalist economies. But more than that. It callsfor direct engagement with liberal pluralist(whether Right, Centre or Left in the Centre) andwith Radical Right ideologies and programmes.And it calls for the defence, extension anddevelopment of Radical Left programmes ofteacher education and of schooling founded on acritical theory of social justice and egalitarianism.ENDNOTES1. For the events surrounding and developingfrom Culloden Primary School in 1991 see articlesin the Mail 011 Sunday and Daily Mail by Lightfoot(1991a,b), Gordon (1991) and Massey (1991b,c).For the Culloden version see Culloden School(1991). A scathing attack on the HMI Report onCulloden School (HMI 1991), is made by RobinRichard son (1991). Kenneth Clarke's commentsare from Lodge, (1991a).2. Gordon, A. (1991) Teacher is the pupil in aclass of he r own Mail on Sunday, 5 May allglowing report included the following "XXX isone of the first 400 graduates to start training underthe Government's controversial articled teacherscheme. The aim is to improve standards in Britain'sschools with staff who are not brainwashed by trendytheories expounded in teacher training colleges. Thebrave new breed of teachers are paid 5,000 a year togain experience on the job for four days and go to

24

college for formal institution only one day a week. ADepartment of Education spokesman said: We aremore interested in teachers being able to teach thanteachers with too much theory". The Winter 1991/92responses are Daily Mail (1992), Sunday Express(1991,1992), Lawlor, S. (1992).3. The concepts, of cultural contestation, of thetransformatorypower of education are developedin Giroux (1983a, 1989a, 1989b); Aronowitz andGiroux (1986); Giroux and Aronowitz (1991),Giroux and Simon (1988); Liston and Zeichner(1987); Girou x and McLaren (1987, 1989b); Sarup(1986, 1982); Cole (1988); Fernandes (1990). Afascinating example and analysis of an attempt totransform an education system in accordancewith some of these perspectives is contained inStoer (1986). Stoer discusses the leftRevolutionaryperiod in Portugal from 1974the first Constitutional Government of 1976 andits socialist reforms such as democraticmanagement of schools (the election ofhead eachers by school staffs - with candidatesfrequently running on party political platforms),the Cultural Dynamisation Campaign of the(the left-wing'Armed Forces Movement'carried ou t the Revolution of April 1974).

BIBLIOGRAPHYAdams, A. (1992, 20 March). Training plancomforts the real enemy. Letter. Times EducationalSupplement. LondonAdams, A. and Tulasiewicz, W. (1989,13 October).Which way the PGCE? Times EducationalSupplement. London.Alexander, R, Rose, J. and Woodhead, C. (1992),ClIrriculllm organisation and classroom practice inprimary schools: A discussion paper. London:Department of Education and Science.Apple, M. (1982). Education and Power. London:Routledge, Kegan Paul.Apple, M. (1989a). Critic al introduction:Ideology and the state in educational policy. InDale, R The State and Education Policy. MiltonKeynes: Open University Press.Apple, M. (1989b). How Equality has beenredefined in the conservative restoration. InSecada, W. Equity in Education. London: FalmerPress.

G. and Giroux, H. (1986). EducationSiege: The Conservative, Liberal and RadicalOver Schooling. London: RKP.Baker, R (1989). PGCE cours es show up faults ofarticled scheme. Times Edllcational Sllpplement.London.Ball, S. (1990). Markets, Morality and Equality inEducation. Hillcole Paper No. 4. London: TheTufnell Pres s.Barrett, E. et al. (1992). In itial Teache r Educ ati onin England and Wales: A Topography. Londo n:

. Goldsmith's College (Interim Report of theModes of Teacher Educa tion Project).Bassey, M. (1991,2 9 March). All right in theory,but short on time. Times Educatio n Supple ment.London.Beardon, T., Booth, M., Hargreaves, D. Reiss, M.(1992). (1992). School-led initial training: The way. forward. Cambridge Edllcation Paper No. 2.Cambridge: Cambridge University Departmentof Education.Bocock, J. (1991). Quality Teacher Education:Reflection on a Decade. Assessment and Evaluationin Teacher Education, 16(1).Boyne, Rand Rattansi, A. (1990). Post Modernismand Society. London: Macmillan.Booth, M., Furlong, J., and Wilkin, M. (1990).Partnership in Initial Teacher Training. London:Cassell.Boyson, R (1990,25 February). Teachers shouldbe trained on the job and not in ivory towers.Observer.Chicago Common Ground Network, (1987,November-December). Keep strong. ChicagoCommon Ground Network.Chitty, C. (1989). Towards a New Education System:The Victory of the New Right. London: FalmerPress.Clarke, K. (1992a, 26 January) . Education's insaneBandwagon finally goes into the ditch. TheSunday Times. London.Cole, M. (1988). Bowles and Gintis Revisited:Correspondence and Contradiction in EducationalTheory. London: Falmer Press.

Vol. 16, No. 2,1991

Allstralian JOllmal of Teacher Edllcation

Cole, M. (1990). Education for Equality: SomeGuidelines for Good Practice. London: Routledge.Cole, M. (1992, 18 February). Winding up thestudies business. The Guardian. London.Cole, M., Clay, L and Hill, D. (1991). The Citizenas 'individual' and nationalist or as 'social' andinternationalist? What is the Role of education?Critical Social Policy,)0(3).Clay, J., Cole, M., and Hill, D. (1990, Summer).Black Achievement in Initial Teacher Education -How do we proceed into the 1990's. MuiticuituralTeaching, 8(3).Cowens, R (1990). Teacher Education: AComparative View. In Graves, N. Initial TeacherEducation: Policies and Progress. London: Instituteof Education University of London.Craft, M. (1990). Charting the Changes in TeacherEducation. Cambridge JOll/'l1al of Education, 20(1).Crozier, G., Menter, I. an d Pollard, A. (1990).Changing Partnership. In Booth, M., Furlong, J.,and Wilkin, M. Partnership in Initial TeacherTraining. London: Cassell.Daily Mail. (1992,6 January). At the Chalk Face.(Editorial) Daily Mail. London.DENI (Department of Education, NorthernIreland. (1991). Teachers for the 21st Century: AReview of Initial Teacher Training, COIlsllitative Paper.Bangor, N. Ireland: DEN!.DES. (Department of Education and Science)(1989a). The Education (Teachers) Regulations 1989.Circular 18/89 (on Licensed Teachers). London:HMSO.DES. (Department of Education and Science)(1989a). Future Arrangements for the Accreditationof course of Initial Teacher Training, A ConsultationDocUIlle/1t. London: HMSO.DES. (Department of Education and Science)(1989b). Initia l Teache r Training : Approval ofCourses. Circula r 24/89. London: HMSO.DES. (Department of Education and Science)(198ge, 27 June) Articled Teacher Pilot Scheme:Invitation to Bid for Funding. London: DES.

25

Australiall Journal of Educatioll


13/14


DES. (Department of Education an d Science)(1989f, 27 June). Ne w 'On the Job' TeacherTraining Scheme for Graduates. DES PressRelease. London: DES.DES. (Department of Education and Science)(1989g, November ). TASC (Teaching as a Seco ndCareer) pamphlet on the Articled TeacherScheme, 1st edition. London: DES.DES. (Department of Education an d Science)(1991a, 4 December). Primary Education. Astatement by the Secretary of State for Educationand Science, Kenneth Clark. London: DES.DES. (Department of Education and Science)(1992b). Reform o f Initial Teacher Training. AConsultation Document. London: DES.Elliott, J. (1992, 7 January). Defeat the Defeatists:Surrender is the Wrong Response to KennethClarke's Training Proposals. Times EducationalSupplement. London.Fernandes, J. (1990). Rejlexoes(as) Sobre 0 El1sino daSociologia da Educacao 110 Formacao de Professores.Paper presented at the 1st International Sociologyof Education Conference, Faro, Portugal.Gilroy, D. (1992). The Political Rape of InitialTeacher Education in England and Wales: a JETrebuttal. journal of Education for Teaching, 18(1).Giroux, H. and Aronowitz, S. (1991). Post-ModemEducation: Politics, Culture and Social Criticism.Minneapolis: University of Minnesot a Press.Giroux, H. (1983a). Theory and Resistance inEducation: A Pedagogy for the Opposition. London:Heinemann.Giroux,H. (1983b). Theories of Reproduction andResistance in the New Sociology of Education: ACritical Analysis. Harvard Educational Review,53(3).Giroux, H. (1989a). Teachers as Intellectuals:Towards a Critical Pedagogy of Learning.Massachusetts: Bergin and Garvey.Giroux, H. and McLaren, P. (1987). TeacherEducation as a Counter-Public Sphere: NotesTowards a Redefinition. In Popkewitz, T., CriticalStudies in Teacher Education. London: FalmerPress.

26

Giroux, H. an d McLaren, P. (1989a, August)Teacher Education and the Politics ofEngagement: The Case for Democratic Schooling.Harvard Education Review, 56(3).Giroux, H. and McLaren, P. (Eds.). (1989b).Critical Pedagogy, State and Cultural Struggle. NewYork: State University of New York Press.Giroux, H. and McLaren, P. (1991). RadicalPedagogtj as Cultural Politics: Beyond the Discourse.of Critique and Anti-Utopianism.Giroux, H. and Simon, R. (1988). Schooling,Popular Culture and a Pedagogy of Possibility.Boston University joumal ofEducation, 170(1).Gordon, A. (1991, 5 May). Brave Ne w BreedLearn Their Schoolroom Skills on the Job. TheMail on SUl1day. London.Grave s, N.J. (Ed.). (1990). Initial Teacher Education:Policies al1d Progress. London: Institute ofEducation, University of London.Hargreaves, D. (1989a, 6th October). Judgeradicals by results. Times Educational Supplement.London.Hargreaves, D. (1989b, 8th September). Ou t ofB.Ed. and into Practice. Times EducationalSupplement. London.Hargreaves, D. (1989c, 3rd November).assessment fails the test. Times EducationalSupplement. London.Hargreaves, D. (1989d, 1st December). Looking ata model of health. Times Educational Supplement.London.Hargreaves, D. (198ge, 14th April). Merit andMarket. Times Educational Supplement. London.Hargreaves, D. (1990a, 21st Septemb er).Remission on a Life Sentence: Flexibility is thekey to Teacher Training. Times Higher EducationSupplement. London.Hargreaves, D. (1991, Autu mn) . Deba te Section:The Education an d Training of a Profession.(NUT) Education Review, 2(2). London: NationalUnion of Teachers.Hargreaves, D. (1992, 17 Janua ry). On the righttracks: The Educatio n Secretary's teacher trainingreform should be welcome. Times HigherEducational Supplement. London.

Vol. 16 No. 2,1991

Bessari, R. and Hill, D. (1989). PracticalApproaches to Multi-Cultural Learning and Teachingin the Primary Classroom. London: Routledge.Bexta

seven contemporary ideological perspectives on teacher education

Documents