Competing priorities in professional development: an Australian study of teacher professional development policy and practice

Abstract

This paper argues that neoliberal and managerial pressures external to the teaching profession, as well as more progressive and democratic approaches internal to the profession, have simultaneously influenced professional development policy and practice in Australia. In making this case, the paper reviews the nature of the teacher professional development that is supported in federal Australian policies associated with the recently defeated Liberal/National Coalition government (1996–2007) and research into how professional development has been enacted in practice in Australia, during this government's tenure. While acknowledging the significant impact of more neoliberal and managerial approaches and how such policy emphases contribute to the continuation of traditional, systemic/employer provided workshops, the paper also provides evidence of competing, more teacher‐centred approaches.

Keywords:

• democracy
• neoliberalism
• policy
• practice
• teacher professional development

Acknowledgments

I would like to acknowledge the contribution of Bob Lingard and Jane Mitchell to the development of the ideas presented in this paper and to the broader project from which this paper is drawn. Thank you also to Helen Russell and Peter Grootenboer for their comments on earlier drafts of the manuscript. The development of the paper was assisted by a PhD writing‐up award through the Faculty of Education, Charles Sturt University.

Notes

1. Neo‐liberalism, or “economic rationalism” as it is often referred to in Australia (Pusey, 1991), emphasises a governance model, which promotes self‐government and self‐responsibility but, unlike classic liberalism, it actively frames the promotion of such practices as an important part of the role of government (Rose, 1999). For the purposes of this paper, managerialism is defined principally as a vehicle for the promulgation of these more neoliberal principles within the state. After Stilwell (2000), managerialism is understood as involving being strongly assertive and utilising rank as a supervisor of others to achieve efficient economic outcomes. It is understood as part of the armoury of neoliberal ideology, but is not the same thing.

2. The concept of social democracy is contested but Fraser's (1997) notion of a politics which recognises the need for both redistribution and recognition in a pluralist society is a useful starting point.

3. It should be noted that much of the “teacher professional learning community” literature and its variants, is based upon US studies. This is not to imply that such communities have not been described elsewhere, but to acknowledge the influence of this particular body of research literature, which has been drawn upon extensively by researchers in other countries, including Australia. The complexity of the concept of “community” (Bauman, 2001) is also acknowledged.

4.. It is acknowledged that other initiatives, such as the “Values Project” supported through the federal government funded Curriculum Corporation, have also exerted influence upon teachers' PD in schools. Since 2004, the Values Project, for example, has allocated approximately $29.7 million for schools over a four‐year period (Commonwealth of Australia, 2005b). Emphasis is placed upon the QTP over other initiatives in this paper because of its influence over a more extended period and the more substantial funding associated with this programme.