Marilyn Cochran-Smith

This article explores how teacher education operates within market-organized environments. We argue that the forces of the market have acted against institutional isomorphism in teacher education, as evidenced by the emergence of new graduate schools of education (nGSEs), which are a new population of teacher preparation providers. We suggest that nGSEs are animated by logics based on highly-specialized missions, alternative funding models, and membership in powerful networks that set this population apart from others within the organizational field of teacher education. We also argue that there is remarkable variation and diversification among nGSEs, which has resulted in highly specialized teacher preparation niches that distinguish each nGSE from other members within the same population through mission-specific branding, publicity, and funding, which in turn prompts increased demand for specialized programs. Finally, we suggest that although nGSEs have been shaped in many ways by the forces of the market, most of them are not completely dominated by market logics. Rather, most combine elements of the logic of markets with elements of other powerful logics, forming hybrids that create tensions, some of which are highly productive, prompting rapid organizational evolution, including name changes, reorganizations, and new partnerships.

Over the last decade, there have been multiple recommendations for evaluating, assessing, or holding teacher preparation accountable. This article analyzes recent policy proposals regarding “best practices for evaluating teacher preparation programs” by critiquing 19 major reports explicitly focused on evaluation. The analysis revealed that the reports’ primary goal was identifying preferred evaluation metrics using rigorous criteria for accuracy and utility. The majority of reports did not position equity as a central goal of evaluation and actually said little about equity explicitly, although some assumed equity was a by-product of rigorous evaluation systems. Building on previous efforts to focus on equity in teacher education, the article advocates an equity-centered approach to teacher preparation evaluation that acknowledges long-standing inequities in educational opportunity and attainment in the United States. Rejecting the idea of “best practices,” which are by definition decontextualized and inattentive to local contexts, the article offers 11 guiding principles for researchers, policymakers, and practitioners, to make strong equity the center of evaluation. These recommendations include: making equity an explicit goal during the entire process of evaluation and working at a systems/structural level; utilizing assessment models and tools that focus on equity; including all stakeholders, especially those from the minoritized communities served by programs, in decisions about evaluation criteria; and, supporting internal professional accountability. Durante la última década, ha habido múltiples recomendaciones para evaluar, evaluar o responsabilizar la formación docente. Este artículo analizó las propuestas de políticas recientes con respecto a las “mejores prácticas para evaluar los programas de preparación docente” al criticar 19 informes importantes centrados explícitamente en la evaluación. El análisis reveló que el objetivo principal de los informes era identificar las métricas de evaluación preferidas utilizando criterios rigurosos de precisión y utilidad. La mayoría de los informes no posicionaron la equidad como un objetivo central de la evaluación y en realidad dijeron poco acerca de la equidad explícitamente, aunque algunos asumieron que la equidad era un subproducto de los sistemas de evaluación rigurosos. El artículo aboga por un nuevo enfoque centrado en la equidad para la evaluación de la preparación docente que reconozca las desigualdades de larga data en las oportunidades educativas y el entretenimiento en los Estados Unidos. Rechazando la idea de las “mejores prácticas”, que por definición están descontextualizadas y no prestan atención a los contextos locales, el artículo ofrece 11 principios rectores para investigadores, formuladores de políticas y profesionales, para hacer de la equidad sólida el centro de la evaluación. Estas recomendaciones incluyen: hacer de la equidad un objetivo explícito durante todo el proceso de evaluación y trabajo a nivel de sistemas/estructuras; utilizar modelos y herramientas de evaluación que se centren en la equidad; incluir a todas las partes interesadas, especialmente las de las comunidades minoritarias atendidas por los programas, en las decisiones sobre los criterios de evaluación; y, apoyando la rendición de cuentas profesional interna. Ao longo da última década, houve várias recomendações para avaliar, avaliar ou responsabilizar a preparação de professores. Este artigo analisa propostas recentes de políticas sobre “melhores práticas para avaliar programas de preparação de professores” criticando 19 grandes relatórios explicitamente focados na avaliação. A análise revelou que o objetivo principal dos relatórios era identificar as métricas de avaliação preferidas usando critérios rigorosos de precisão e utilidade. A maioria dos relatórios não posicionou a equidade como um objetivo central da avaliação e, na verdade, disse pouco sobre equidade explicitamente, embora alguns assumissem que equidade era um subproduto de sistemas de avaliação rigorosos. O artigo defende uma nova abordagem centrada na equidade para a avaliação da preparação de professores que reconheça as desigualdades de longa data em oportunidades e realizações educacionais nos Estados Unidos. Rejeitando a ideia de “melhores práticas”, que são por definição descontextualizadas e desatentas aos contextos locais, o artigo oferece 11 princípios orientadores para pesquisadores, formuladores de políticas e profissionais, para fazer da equidade forte o centro da avaliação. Essas recomendações incluem: tornar a equidade um objetivo explícito durante todo o processo de avaliação e trabalhar em nível sistêmico/estrutural; utilizando modelos e ferramentas de avaliação com foco na equidade; incluir todas as partes interessadas, especialmente aquelas das comunidades minoritárias atendidas pelos programas, nas decisões sobre critérios de avaliação; e, apoiando a responsabilidade profissional interna.

This article is a commentary on the seven articles in this special issue of EJTE on teacher quality from international perspectives. In the article, Marilyn Cochran-Smith points to differences as well as common themes and details across the articles in the issue. The article discusses the emergence of teacher quality as a global concern, including analysis of some of the assumptions underlying the issue and shifts in its meaning and valence over time. This commentary analyzes the articles in the issue according to scholarly genre and in terms of the questions addressed about teacher quality and larger professional, policy, and political goals. Cochran–Smith suggests that despite the global nature of teacher quality, what this concept actually means and how reforms are designed and implemented in particular countries vary considerably.

In many developed countries over the past two decades, there have been new standards, new monitoring systems, new course and fieldwork requirements for teacher candidates, new accreditation criteria, and/or new auditing procedures for colleges and universities that offer initial teacher preparation programmes. However there has also been enormous variation among accountability policies, initiatives, and approaches as well as an array of competing claims about their efficacy and impact in teacher education. This article suggests that accountability, on its own, is neither good nor bad, but rather depends on the larger policy and political agendas to which it is attached, how it is used, the goals, values, and purposes it serves, and the assumptions it makes about who should be accountable for what, to whom, and for what purposes. The article introduces the concept of intelligent professional responsibility as part of an alternative to dominant, audit-based accountability models in teacher education. Then the article explores the meaning and instantiation of this concept with examples of recent accountability developments in two interesting, but different policy, professional, and geopolitical contexts – the United States and Norway.

We appreciate being invited by the guest editors to contribute to this Special Issue of Teaching Education, which takes up the provocative topic, ‘The Village and the World’: Research with, for, an...

This article takes a multi-case perspective on teacher preparation at new graduate schools of education (nGSEs) across four sites. The article argues that teacher preparation at nGSEs is a study in contrasts. On one hand, nGSE leaders frame teacher preparation at their institutions in terms of the marked contrasts they perceive between their programs and teacher preparation programs at universities, which is one of their principal justifications for the relocation of teacher preparation to new non-university organizations. On the other hand, there are stark contrasts within and across nGSE sites in how teacher preparation is conceptualized and enacted, depending primarily upon the interplay of underlying assumptions and values and the larger professional and political purposes to which particular nGSEs are attached.

The relocation of teacher preparation to new graduate schools of education (nGSEs) is a highly controversial “innovation” within the rapidly expanding field of teacher education. This introductory article to a guest-edited issue of The New Educator focused on nGSEs defines teacher preparation at nGSEs and analyzes their characteristics. The article identifies the intersecting political, professional, and policy contexts and conditions out of which teacher preparation at nGSEs emerged, pointing out that popular and professional reactions and responses to this innovation have been extremely mixed. The article also provides information about the design of the larger study from which all the articles in the issue draw.

Consistent with the anniversary theme of this special issue of ATE, this article offers an overview of 40 years of advocacy for social justice- and equity-centered teacher preparation through three extended examples from the author’s own work. Arranged chronologically and shaped by differing policy and political landscapes, the examples represent contrasting genres of scholarship emerging from the author’s involvement in different aspects of the work of teacher education. Each example provides a snapshot of equity-related advocacy work in teacher preparation at a particular point in time and a particular social and political context. Taken together, the three examples also suggest that a number of key questions recur in advocacy (and controversy) related to justice- and equity-oriented teacher preparation, including: What is the meaning of equity in teacher preparation? What is the meaning of practice? What kinds of knowledge are needed to teach well? What does it mean to learn to teach? The article comments on the shifting policy contexts that have shaped efforts to advocate for justice- and equity-oriented teacher education. It concludes by connecting 40 years of advocacy to a major current controversy related to equity and teacher education.

The people who prepare teachers – teacher educators – are often explicitly or implicitly held accountable for teacher quality and are frequently blamed when school students do not meet national or international expectations. Despite high expectations, historically there has been little attention to the education of teacher educators or to local and larger policies that would support the development of teacher educators who are prepared to meet the complex demands of teaching teachers for the twenty-first century. This includes addressing the persistent discrepancies and “gaps” between historically privileged and disadvantaged groups in terms of educational opportunities and outcomes. In this article, Cochran-Smith and colleagues analyze how teacher educators are educated in four different countries – the U.S., New Zealand, Israel, and Norway – which vary considerably in terms of their historical, geopolitical, and policy contexts. The article suggests that international perspectives on the policies and practices related to the education of teachers and teacher educators are important politically, sociologically and educationally. They reveal commonalities and differences in how those in power desire to shape the education of those who will shape the lives of society’s future participants and reveal a great deal about nations’ priorities, assumptions, and values related to equity and inequity.

Most of today’s reforms of initial teacher education programs, policies, and practices have positioned teachers and teacher educators as the objects, rather than the agents of reform. In contrast, this article focuses on teacher educators as reformers by analyzing three approaches to reform that are initiated, developed, and promoted by teacher educators themselves: entrepreneurial reform, managerial reform, and democratic reform. The article concentrates primarily on teacher educators as reformers in the US, but also includes examples from other countries. For each approach, the article considers: who the teacher educator reformers are and how they are positioned; how they construct the 'problem' of teacher education; what reforms they advocate as the 'solution'; and, how these are related to larger policy and political agendas. The article argues that this kind of analysis is critical to understanding the current discourse of reform and the competing agendas that dominate the politics of teacher education.