Intermediary Organizations, Technocratic Discourses, and the Rise of Accountability Regimes in Teacher Education

IF 3.1 1区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH Journal of Teacher Education Pub Date : 2023-05-17 DOI:10.1177/00224871231174835
Elena Aydarova
{"title":"Intermediary Organizations, Technocratic Discourses, and the Rise of Accountability Regimes in Teacher Education","authors":"Elena Aydarova","doi":"10.1177/00224871231174835","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Intermediary organizations’ (IOs) involvement in teacher education policies has grown in recent years. Apart from advocating for the introduction of alternative routes into the teaching profession, IOs have facilitated the spread of outcomes-based teacher preparation accountability. While previous studies examined the neoliberal market-based logic of their proposals, less is known about technocracy as a discourse informing teacher education redesign. To address this gap, I use the tools of critical policy and critical discourse analysis to examine how IOs advocated for and participated in the construction of outcomes-based accountability regimes. This analysis captures key elements of technocracy, such as the depoliticization of social issues, scientism, and the dismissal of opposition on which accountability regimes are built. By attending to the assumptions and inherent contradictions of technocratic discourses, I shed light on the ways in which accountability regimes dismiss opposition and seek to refashion governance structures in teacher education.","PeriodicalId":17162,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Teacher Education","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Teacher Education","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00224871231174835","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Intermediary organizations’ (IOs) involvement in teacher education policies has grown in recent years. Apart from advocating for the introduction of alternative routes into the teaching profession, IOs have facilitated the spread of outcomes-based teacher preparation accountability. While previous studies examined the neoliberal market-based logic of their proposals, less is known about technocracy as a discourse informing teacher education redesign. To address this gap, I use the tools of critical policy and critical discourse analysis to examine how IOs advocated for and participated in the construction of outcomes-based accountability regimes. This analysis captures key elements of technocracy, such as the depoliticization of social issues, scientism, and the dismissal of opposition on which accountability regimes are built. By attending to the assumptions and inherent contradictions of technocratic discourses, I shed light on the ways in which accountability regimes dismiss opposition and seek to refashion governance structures in teacher education.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
中介组织、技术官僚话语与教师教育问责制度的兴起
近年来,中介组织对教师教育政策的参与越来越多。除了倡导在教师职业中引入替代途径外,国际教育组织还促进了以结果为基础的教师准备问责制的传播。虽然以前的研究考察了他们的建议的新自由主义市场逻辑,但对技术统治作为一种话语告知教师教育重新设计的了解较少。为了解决这一差距,我使用关键政策和关键话语分析的工具来研究国际组织如何倡导和参与基于结果的问责制度的建设。这一分析抓住了技术官僚的关键要素,如社会问题的非政治化、科学主义和对反对派的无视,而问责制正是建立在反对派的基础上的。通过关注技术官僚话语的假设和内在矛盾,我揭示了问责制度如何驳回反对意见,并寻求重塑教师教育中的治理结构。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Teacher Education
Journal of Teacher Education EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
8.90
自引率
7.70%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: The mission of the Journal of Teacher Education, the flagship journal of AACTE, is to serve as a research forum for a diverse group of scholars who are invested in the preparation and continued support of teachers and who can have a significant voice in discussions and decision-making around issues of teacher education. One of the fundamental goals of the journal is the use of evidence from rigorous investigation to identify and address the increasingly complex issues confronting teacher education at the national and global levels. These issues include but are not limited to preparing teachers to effectively address the needs of marginalized youth, their families and communities; program design and impact; selection, recruitment and retention of teachers from underrepresented groups; local and national policy; accountability; and routes to certification. JTE does not publish book reviews, program evaluations or articles solely describing programs, program components, courses or personal experiences. In addition, JTE does not accept manuscripts that are solely about the development or validation of an instrument unless the use of that instrument yields data providing new insights into issues of relevance to teacher education (MSU, February 2016).
期刊最新文献
What Matters For Mentors As Knowledge Mobilizers: Are They Easy Riders? Leading Teacher Education: Navigating the Tension Between Past and the Future Reviewer Appreciation Preservice Teachers’ Reflecting on Reflections of Critical Incidents: Effects on Professional Development and Identity Construction “It Was Nice To Be Able To Talk to Them Like They Were Family.”: A Mexican American Preservice Teacher’s Testimonio
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1