Deconstructing the Carter Review: competing conceptions of quality in England’s ‘school-led’ system of initial teacher education

Abstract

The commitment to establish a ‘school-led’ system of teacher education in England, announced by the Coalition Government in 2011 and relentlessly pursued thereafter, represented a radical departure from previous kinds of initial teacher education partnership. While it is entirely consistent with a neoliberal agenda, with its strong regulatory framework and appeal to market mechanisms, it is also underpinned by a particular conception of teaching as a craft – ‘best learnt as an apprentice observing a master craftsman or woman’. In 2014, the government established a Review of Initial Teacher Training, led by a primary school head teacher, Sir Andrew Carter. This signalled the recognition of teacher education as a ‘policy problem’, adopting Cochran-Smith’s term. The ensuing report, published in early 2015, was more nuanced than might have been anticipated, although a number of profound tensions emerge from a closer analytical reading; four of these tensions are similar to those previously defined by Cochran-Smith and two are newly emergent. This paper identifies and discusses these tensions as they appear in the Carter Review and relates them to wider debates about the links between teaching, teacher education, evidence and research and to policy-making processes in education.

Keywords:

• Critical analysis
• qualitative

Notes

1. School Direct was introduced in 2012 as a government initiative in England to give schools a greater say in the recruitment of trainee teachers and the delivery of ITT programmes (see https://www.gov.uk/government/news/new-school-led-teacher-training-programme-announced for details). Under the schemes, a school would register as a ‘lead school’ and negotiate a training partnership with a university.

2. SCITT programmes are designed and delivered by groups of neighbouring schools and colleges and are accredited ITT providers in their own right. All offer programmes leading to Qualified Teacher Status (QTS) and many also work in conjunction with a university to award the Postgraduate Certificate in Education (PGCE).

3. An Academy in this context is a state-funded but independently managed school.

4. Teaching Schools are designated by the government in recognition of their contribution to professional development and related matters. In late 2015, there were more than 600 Teaching Schools in England, which included Sir Andrew Carter's Academy (primary school).

5. The Review uses the term Initial Teacher Training or ITT throughout and so this is the term used here when discussing its findings. The beginning teachers are referred to in government documents as ‘trainees’, so again this is the language that predominates here.

6. Under changes to the funding arrangements for schools converting to academy status (see end note 1 above), the government announced, in July 2012, that ‘head teachers in mainstream and alternative provision academies will be given greater freedom over the teachers they employ – giving them the same advantages as independent schools, free schools, studio schools and university technical colleges’ (DfE 2012).

7. Pupil Referral Units are local authority establishments providing education for children who are otherwise unable to attend a mainstream school for a range of reasons such as exclusion and long-term illness.

8. This broader research agenda appears to be moving forward in Australia, in the wake of the Report from the Teacher Education Ministerial Advisory Group (TEMAG 2014). See also Mayer et al. (2015) for a sustained attempt to link teacher education and pupil outcomes in Australia.