Perspectives on core content in initial teacher education: A systematic mapping of stakeholder responses to government reform in Australia

Penny Van Bergen, Mary Ryan, Ken Cliff, Rebecca Andrews, Susan Ledger, Michele Simons, Sue Gregory, Rachael Adlington, Lucie Zundans-Fraser, Cathy Little, Amy Cutter-Mackenzie-Knowles, Edmund Sosu, Olivia Maurice

Research output: Other contribution to conferenceAbstractpeer-review

Abstract

Teaching is a complex endeavour, and the design of initial teacher education (ITE) programs is political (Hardy et al., 2020). Upon graduation, new teachers must be prepared with a repertoire of knowledge and skills relating both to discipline and pedagogy; a multifaceted understanding of child and adolescent learning; a suite of strategies for promoting positive learning environments; and
the capacity to meet diverse student needs. Narratives regarding the adequacy of initial teacher education to prepare students for the classroom perpetuate across countries (Darling-Hammond, 2010; Hardy et al., 2020; Trippestad et al., 2017). In 2023, the Australian Federal Government’s Teacher Education Expert Panel (TEEP) recommended that initial teacher education include mandated core
content related to the Brain and Learning, Effective Practices, Classroom Management, and Enabling Factors (Reform Area 1). Implicit were assumptions that some or all providers do not include such content and that graduates are therefore unprepared for the classroom. Our aim in the current project was to map stakeholder responses to this reform. Using content analysis software
Leximancer, we captured emerging themes in public submissions across nine groups: higher education providers, regulatory authorities, councils of deans, employers, teachers’ associations, educational research groups, advocacy groups, individuals, and others. While the final TEEP report, “Strong Beginnings”,
claimed broad support, we found both agreement and disagreement regarding both the need for reform and the scale of reform needed. Several individual stakeholders were strongly in favour, yet others considered the mandating of core content an overreach. Larger stakeholder groups, including higher
education providers, employers, teachers’ associations, and teacher regulation authorities typically called for nuance: arguing that initial teacher education programs already included the core, that additional interdisciplinary insights were needed to avoid curriculum imbalance, and that the recommendations for
some practices drawn from cognitive science extended beyond current evidence. Differences within and across stakeholder groups are discussed, as are implications for mature policy development.
Original languageEnglish
Publication statusPublished - 2024
EventAustralian Teacher Education Association - University of Newcastle, Newcastle, Australia
Duration: 10 Jul 202412 Jul 2024
https://atea.edu.au/conferences/2024-atea-conference/

Conference

ConferenceAustralian Teacher Education Association
Abbreviated title“Myth-Busting: Confronting Debates and Creative Design in and for Initial Teacher Education”
Country/TerritoryAustralia
CityNewcastle
Period10/07/2412/07/24
Internet address

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Perspectives on core content in initial teacher education: A systematic mapping of stakeholder responses to government reform in Australia'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this