The Professional Standards Conundrum

Surveying the Nature and Implementation of Professional Teaching Standards among Education International’s Affiliates

Jelmer Evers

2

1.Introduction ............................................................................................................ 3 1.1 Guidelines for the implementation of professional teaching standards.............. 3 1.2 The teaching profession and professional standards ............................................. 3 1.3 What are professional standards? .............................................................................. 7 1.4 The need for professional standards .......................................................................10 1.5 Implementation and governance of professional standards ...............................12

2. Survey Findings ................................................................................................... 15 2.1 Introduction Survey ....................................................................................................15 2.2 Methodology ................................................................................................................15 2.3 Professional standards...............................................................................................16 2.4 Professional standards: balance between accountability and support ..............19 2.5 Code of ethics or conduct ..........................................................................................22 2.6 Professional Development ........................................................................................25 2.7 Governance and collective teacher autonomy .......................................................29 2.8 Accountability ..............................................................................................................32 2.9 Consultation and Development ................................................................................35 2.10 Support for professional standards .......................................................................39

3. Conclusions ......................................................................................................... 43 3.1 Create a common understanding of what we mean by professional standards ..............................................................................................................................................44 3.2 Take into account the many different successful arrangements that have been implemented worldwide ..................................................................................................44 3.3 Ensure that the standards are fit for purpose, not too general and not too detailed ...............................................................................................................................45 3.4 Ensure a real teacher voice in developing and implementing professional standards ............................................................................................................................45 3.5 Involve unions in developing and implementing professional standards .........46 3.6 Ensure proper funding and support to implement and maintain professional standards ............................................................................................................................46

References ............................................................................................................... 47

3

1.1 Guidelines for the implementation of professional teaching standards It has become increasingly necessary to develop a set of global guidelines for professional standards for the teaching profession, as concurrently multiple new jurisdictions are developing and are impeding the ability for teachers’ unions and professional organisations to prepare and implement their own set of professionalised teaching standards. Therefore our mission is clear—it is crucial that we develop a set of standards from the teachers’ perspective, so that the global guidelines may be determined by the profession, so as not to be developed by external actors and imposed on the profession. With the celebration of the 50th Anniversary of the 1966 ILO/UNESCO ‘Recommendation concerning the Status of Teachers’, there has been a renewed interest in developing a set of standards for the professionalisation and development of the teaching profession. International organisations like the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) and the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) have also expressed an interest in developing these standards; and EI has already been involved, with the ongoing Quality Educators Project initiative, as well as several reports commissioned and published over the last few years.

1.2 The teaching profession and professional standards The most thought-provoking questions concerning the role of professional standards for the teaching profession are what constitutes a profession, and therein, can teaching (still) be identified as a profession? If the answer is yes for both questions, then one must further investigate the issue of exactly what standards are currently in place for the teaching profession around the world, and how are these professional standards determined, implemented and governed?

The identification of teaching as a profession has been a long-contested issue. In 1969, Edzai Antioni (in)famously categorised teaching as merely a ‘semi-profession’ (Etzioni 1969). Yet, teaching is not something that one can do with just a four-week training period. Teaching requires a varied, comprehensive, and extensive training in subject-area expertise, developmental psychology, pedagogy, sociology, and history; and while teaching is informed by the sciences, it is also grounded in hands-on classroom training and practice. Every pupil deserves a teacher with training in these areas, and national governments should encourage the development of a quality teaching profession.

Quality has always been at the centre of education reforms, but ability to define quality for the teaching profession, from both the global and national perspective, still presents many

4 issues for teachers, policy makers and local officials; and standards play an important role in determining, defining and achieving quality. Standards, in simple terms, are a level of quality or attainment (Pearsal, n.d.). and teachers must meet certain standards to be able to teach, i.e. they must be certified. The basic idea that one must have the proper training to meet certain predefined standards—and that they must meet these standards to be considered a qualified professional—should be an inherent for any profession. Outwardly, standards of quality can also lend more recognition and credibility to a profession. Professionalism, as defined by the OECD, is, ‘the level of autonomy and internal regulation exercised by members of an occupation in providing services to society’ (Schleicher, 2016a).

Figure 1. Internal regulation exercised by members of an occupation in providing services to society (Schleicher, 2016a).

The words ‘profession’, and similarly, ‘professional’, have their etymological roots in Latin: they come from the word profiteri, which means ‘to declare publicly,’ or, ‘to profess’; in fact, the word ‘professor’ is also derivative of the same root (Anon, n.d.). Profiteri, in its most basic interpretation, it is about being in service to the public. Over time this term has adapted a more evolved interpretation and definition, but the core message—rooted in the etymology— remains extremely relevant. Moreover, modern concepts of organised professions owe their origins to the medieval guilds that date back to the Middle Ages; specifically, to the groups of skilled practitioners, with specific knowledge sets for their trades. The guilds were early professional organisations that regulated recruitment and participation of citizens for specific crafts and trades. In 18th and 19th century Europe, the differences between an occupation and a profession were due to several different aspects related to professional standards, such as: the level of institutionalisation of the members of a given trade, the level of specialised knowledge required to carry out a certain trade, a formalised code of conduct, or a State mandate to carry out particular services, which served as ‘the guarantor of legal order [and] the promoter of culture’ (OECD, 2016, p. 28).

In Political Order and Political Decay, Francis Fukuyama explains that the rise of modern nation-states saw the growth of modern institutions, and as a result, professions have become more institutionalised. Institutions are ‘stable, valued, recurring patterns of behaviour whose most important function is to facilitate human collective action’ (Fukuyama, 2014). Additionally, institutions are constantly changing in both purpose and design, and ‘socio-economic modernisation [has] led to the mobilisation of new social groups over time, whose participation could not be accommodated by existing political institutions’, Institutions

5 are a way of engendering and regulating trust in the state and in society, as well as a way of channelling the rise of new socio-economic groups in society: ‘Through deliberate institutionalisation, the state fostered the intellectual development of members of the professions, and cultivated the growth of professions that were of fundamental importance to the development of the state. Over time, the classic definition of the professions was expanded, and university professors and upper secondary teachers were recognised as the experts for education, aesthetics and morality’ (OECD, 2016, p. 28). The debate on standards for teachers can be seen in this light. As noted in EI’s Status of Teachers and the Teaching Profession study in 2015: ‘Teacher education of high quality and standards is necessary for entry into the profession and must be fully funded. Participating in professional development programmes should ensure career progression opportunities for all teachers’ (Symeonidis, 2015, p.13).

The definitions of, and requirements to perform in various professions are constantly up for debate, especially the teaching profession. In his landmark study, ‘The Future of the Teaching Profession’ (2012), John MacBeath defined the following characteristics of professions: 1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

10.

Theoretical knowledge and concomitant skills: Professionals are assumed to have extensive theoretical knowledge and, deriving from that, skills that are exercised in practice.

High quality pre-service academic and professional preparation: Professions usually require at least three years’ academic accreditation plus professional induction, together with a requirement to demonstrate professional competence in the workplace.

Legal recognition and professional closure: Professions tend to exclude those who have not met their requirements nor joined the appropriate professional body.

Induction: A period of induction and a trainee role is a prerequisite to being recognised as a full member of a professional body together with continuous upgrading of skills through continuing professional development.

Professional association: Professions usually have professional bodies organised by their members, intended to enhance their status together with carefully controlled entrance requirements and membership.

Work autonomy: Professionals retain control over their work and have control over their own theoretical knowledge.

Code of professional conduct or ethics: Professional bodies usually have codes of conduct or ethics for their members and disciplinary procedures for those who infringe the rules.

Self-regulation: Professional bodies are self-regulating and independent from government.

Public service and altruism: Services provided are for the public good and altruistic in nature.

Authority and legitimacy: Professions have clear legal authority over some activities but also add legitimacy to a wide range of related

6

11.

12.

activities.

Inaccessible and indeterminant bodies of knowledge: The body of professional skills are relatively inaccessible to the uninitiated.

Mobility: Skills, knowledge and authority belong to professionals as individuals, not the organisations for which they work and, as they move, they take their talents with them. Standardisation of professional training and procedures enhances such mobility.

With the introduction of standards came professional accountability measures: ‘In the 20th century, the professionalisation of teaching was faced with a counterforce: ‘the growing standardisation of curricula and standards and, with them, the emergence of externally imposed accountability’ (OECD, 2016, p.28). The problem is that there are several, and often conflicting goals with professionalism, and with using standards to raise the professionalism of teachers. In fact, ‘Professionalism as a reform approach is that it is viewed as a way of both improving teacher quality while also enhancing teachers’ perceptions of their status, job satisfaction and efficacy’ (OECD, 2016, p.26). However, the externally imposed reform efforts haven’t paid off; and the ultimate goal of implementing standards is in their contribution towards improving both teachers’ abilities, and students’ educations. It’s not that standards themselves are problematic, but rather that problems may arise with how standards can be determined and implemented. ‘External accountability for professionalism has created a ‘prescribed’ professionalism dictated by national policies and standards, which differs from the ‘enacted’ professionalism that exists in teachers’ practices’ (OECD, 2016, p.29).

This is in contrast to increasing evidence attributing improved performance to teachers’ levels of practice and autonomy. According to the study on the ‘The Status of Teachers and the Teaching Profession,’ Symeonidis concludes that, ‘Professional development should reflect the daily practice and needs of teachers’ (2015, p. 68). In Carol Campbell’s report, ‘The State of Educators’ Professional Learning in Canada’, she emphasises three important findings from her comprehensive overview: 1.

2.

3.

There is no ‘one-size-fits-all’ approach to professional learning; teachers are engaging in multiple opportunities for professional learning and inquiry with differentiation for their professional needs.

Collaborative learning experiences are highly valued and prevalent within and across schools and wider professional networks.

Teachers value professional learning that is relevant and practical for their work; ‘’job-embedded’ should not mean school-based exclusively as opportunities to engage with external colleagues and learning opportunities matter also. (Campbell et al. 2016)

Research into teacher professional development has shown that classroom autonomy, practice and networking are essential for teachers in developing their skills; therefore, the implementation of professional standards should play a complementary role, corresponding to the appropriate levels and types of teacher professional development training. Developing this would require an education system that encourages collaboration among, and adequate development and training of autonomous teachers.

7 While teaching may not be an evidence-based profession, it is certainly evidence-informed.

What works in education does not always yield a simple explanation. The idea of education as a treatment, or as a controlled intervention—intended as a process to bring about specific means to an end—is not an appropriate approach, as Gert Biesta has clearly laid out in his article, ‘Why “what works” won't work: Evidence-based practice and the democratic deficit in educational research’: ‘Some have questioned the homology between education and medicine and have pointed to the different meanings of evidence in these fields. Others have questioned the positivistic assumptions underlying the idea of evidence-based education and have criticized the narrow conception of research entailed in evidence-based education. Still others have criticized the managerial agenda of evidence-based education and its linear, topdown approach to educational improvement. Finally, many have objected to the lack of an acknowledgment of the crucial role of values in educational research and practice’ (Biesta, 2007, p.4).

The role of the educational professional in this process is not to translate general rules into modes of action; rather, it is to use research findings as problem-solving guidelines or best practice approaches. This involves a comprehension and consideration of both the rationale and effectuation of education techniques and goals; and education has many, sometimes, conflicting aims. In The Tacit Dimension, Michael Polanyi captured this essence about the art of teaching quite well when he remarked, ‘I shall reconsider human knowledge by starting from the fact that we can know more than we can tell’ (Polanyi, 2009, p.4).

1.3 What are professional standards?

MacBeath defines professional standards as ‘theoretical knowledge and concomitant skills, a code of professional conduct or ethics’ (MacBeath, 2012, p.15). In EI’s study ‘Quality Educators: An International Study of Teacher Competences and Standards’ (2011), authors Paloma Bourgonje and Roseanne Tromp posited the following definition of competence about the content of professional standards: ‘Definitions of competences should be linked to a common understanding of what constitutes quality teaching, and firmly linked to teachers’ daily classroom practice’. They took this concept one step further with their development of ‘Competency Profiles’ as helpful measures based on ‘a framework for discussion about the quality of teaching’, which were meant to ‘serve as [guidelines] for teachers’ evaluation, empowerment and professional growth, but only when the competence is defined broadly.

The Competency Profile includes domain-specific knowledge and broader life skills, as well as cultural and socio-emotional competence’ (Bourgonje & Tromp, 2011, p.10).

Linda Darling-Hammond made an important distinction between teacher licensing and certification in her book Reshaping Teaching Policy, Preparation, and Practice. Influences of the National Board for Professional Teaching Standards. She introduced the controversial concept of ‘Licensing’ as an admission to practice. [As in what’s awarded after] Finishing your Initial Teacher Education (ITE) and [after you’re] ready to begin teaching as an independent professional. And ‘certification’ [as in] certifying professional accomplished practice. [This is used for] Recognising the continuous learning and development of teachers during their career’ (Darling-Hammond, 1999). Despite the difference in public opinion, DarlingHammond’s differentiating standards remain relevant to professional development

8 discussions; in fact, professional standards are often interpreted as analogous to teacher certification. Standards should also span various different aspects of teaching, and this variation should be required; but unfortunately, according to the Centre of Study for Policies and Practices in Education (CEPPE) study on, ‘Learning Standards, Teaching Standards and Standards for School Principals: A Comparative Study’, teaching standards that accommodate at least three different dimensions— such as subject area, grade level and career stage―are rare. Usually national standards are described more generally (2013).

In conclusion, the following were determined as the three main issues for the teaching profession: 1. The minimum requirements needed to finish your teacher education; 2. Professional development standards as an essential resource for any teacher; 3. [and] A code of conduct and ethics to guide teachers’ values in the classroom.

Furthermore, CEPPE has concluded in the aforementioned study that professional standards are often defined in several different ways and can be categorised among four domains: disciplinary knowledge, pedagogic practice, values, and professional practice (2013, p. 35).

Standards also range in specificity within these domains. Standards on pedagogic practice range from theories of learning and development, assessment, didactics, social values, intercultural sensitivity, use of ICT and civics. The values domain covers reflection on practice, awareness of educational policy and contributing to the development of the profession. A range of domains covering the work inside and outside of the classroom.

9 Table 1 Overview of content of teaching standards in different jurisdictions identified by CEPPE study p.35

10 1.4 The need for professional standards In her article on ‘Teacher Professional Standards: Controlling or developing teaching?’ Judyth Sachs has identified several, and often conflicting reasons for implementing professional standards. Firstly, she claims that standards should be common sense: standards should provide a benchmark of minimum levels of achievement. Unfortunately, she expresses that this the view of professional standards is often used as a means to control teachers. Secondly, she questions standards and quality assurance: is the service provided consistent, reliable, safe, and does it provide value for money? This argument is often used to promote the status of the teaching profession; the issue remains, however, that it is often ambiguous who is responsible for determining standards. Thirdly, she discusses standards and quality improvement: this promotes the view of 'standards in the context of teachers’ professional development, learning and career advancement.’ Standards outline the main dimensions and routes by which teachers can improve their practice (Sachs, 2010, p.178). Ultimately, it is about better teaching in the classroom, and therefore the third viewpoint should have precedence. Sachs concludes urging that to ensure that standards contribute to quality improvement, they need to be formulated and implemented by the profession itself, and that they shouldn’t promote a particular view of teaching. Additionally, developing standards takes time, and the uniqueness of the teaching profession—as Gert Biesta stated—should be acknowledged.

Frameworks for professional standards for teachers have been a global concern for quite some time. In 1966 UNESCO adopted the ‘Recommendation concerning the Status of Teachers’, which included articles on: (70) Recognising that the status of their profession depends to a considerable extent upon teachers themselves, all teachers should seek to achieve the highest possible standards in all their professional work. [And on] (73) Codes of ethics or conduct should be established by the teachers’ organisations, since such codes greatly contribute to ensuring the prestige of the profession and the exercise of professional duties in accordance with agreed principles.

(ILO, 2008, p. 33) EI has been very involved in this discussion, and in 2001 it adopted the ‘EI Declaration on Professional Ethics’ (Education International, 2007). In the preamble in point 5, the declaration states that: The teaching profession may benefit greatly from a discussion about the core values of the profession. Such raising of consciousness about the norms and ethics of the profession may contribute to increasing job satisfaction among teachers and education personnel, to enhancing their status and self-esteem, and to increasing respect for the profession in society... (Education International, 2007, p.1) Their statement echoes many academic arguments surrounding the development of professions.

In the same ‘EI Declaration…’, Article 1 on the ‘Commitment to the Profession,’ clearly references quality teaching, qualification and continuing professional development:

11 1. Justify public trust and confidence and enhance the esteem in which the profession is held by providing quality education for all students; 2. Ensure that professional knowledge is regularly updated and improved; 3. Determine the nature, format and timing of their lifelong learning programs as an essential expression of their professionalism; 4. Declare all relevant information related to competency and qualifications; 5. Strive, through active participation in their union, to achieve conditions of work that attract highly qualified persons to the profession; 6. [and] Support all efforts to promote democracy and human rights in and through education. (Education International, 2007, p.1) The ‘Global Education Monitoring Report 2017-2018’ focused on accountability systems, specifically that these systems should be formative, supportive of teachers and schools, and avoid punitive mechanisms. Governments should trust teachers and help build their professionalism. In turn teachers’ unions aiming to strengthen professionalism through codes of ethics should raise members’ awareness and follow up with internal accountability systems (UNESCO, 2017, p.78).

Finally, it is important to note that there is a renewed pressure on the professions by a combination of privatisation and educational technology. Corporations are increasingly looking to create a platform economy, where the digital platform becomes the organising factor in a sector, like the recent rideshare pop-up company, Uber, for example. Platforms like these are reliant on automated digital support structures and cheap, untrained labour, and minimum regulations. Some perceive these developments positively; in ‘The Future of the Professions,’ Richard and Daniel Susskind portray professions as antiquated and inhibiting the progress of society. They predict that professions will be unwound into various sets of tasks that can be separately automated, ultimately contributing to the same, more efficient whole of a profession. In education, Massively Open Online Courses (MOOCs) and platforms like the Khan Academy will offer new ways to offer education to consumers (students and parents). Through this prediction, education and the teaching profession will be unbundled, and the teacher as we know it will become obsolete and may alternatively perform a narrow task in service of clients (R. Susskind & D. Susskind, 2015, p.93-96).

EI and its affiliates, the Alberta Teachers Association (ATA) and the Canadian Teachers Federation (CTF), have acknowledged this in their report ‘We the Educators’ where they’ve pointed out the dangers these trends present for the teaching profession: Educational technology and the datafication of learning have resulted in increased pressures to standardise learning, narrow curricula, depersonalise student learning and, ultimately, undermine and deprofessionalise teaching in many parts of the world. The deprofessionalisation of teaching already occurs on an extreme level in countries in the Global South, where Bridge International Academies employs ‘teacher-computers’ and an ‘Academy-in-abox’ model, privileging company profits over students’ interests. Educational technology, though full of promise, enables this. (Education International 2017)

12 A focus on professionalism, including professional standards, qualifications, and licensing, could make it more difficult for companies to succeed in undermining the teaching profession.

1.5 Implementation and governance of professional standards In the CEPE review it was found that England, Chile, Mexico, Australia and New Zealand developed their standards centrally, while in other countries such as the United States, standards developed by different institutions and associations of teachers nationally coexist with standards at the state level (CEPPE, 2013, p.36). In the latter, widespread consultation is common to ensure buy-in from the teaching profession. As stated earlier, the OECD recommends developing education policy with the teaching profession. In the recommendations developed earlier by Education International and Oxfam in a study in African countries it was stated that a Competency Profile (CPs) should be developed in cooperation with all involved stakeholders. Teacher competence should be approached as a collective, system-wide effort. The competency profile is applied along the entire spectrum of teacher education (Bourgonje & Tromp, 2011, p.8).

Country

England

Institution responsible for standards development

Description

Since 2012, The Department for Education (This was formerly a responsibility of an It is equivalent to the Ministry of independent body known as the Training and Education.

Development Agency for Schools)

National Board for Professional Teaching Standards (NBPTS)

It is an independent non-profit institution with neither a political party, nor any ties to the federal Government.

It is an independent institution composed of 34 different organisations, including teachers’ United States groups, curriculum discipline National Council for Accreditation of Teacher specialists, and state and local Education (NCATE) institutions. It is recognised by the Department of Education as an organisation that can certify suppliers for teacher training.

Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC)

It is a consortium of State agencies and national organisations that provide teacher training.

13

Mexico

Australia

Chile

Centre for Educational Studies (Centro de Estudios Educativos CEE)

It is an independent centre that developed standards on behalf of the central Government.

Australian Institute for Teaching and School Leadership (AITSL)

it is a public and independent body funded by the Australian Government and the Minister for School Education, Early Childhood and Youth.

General standards were developed by the Ministry with input from the Ministry of Education (for generic standards) teachers’ professional organisation, University of Chile and the Pontifical Catholic and the Chilean Association of University of Chile (specific standards for Municipalities. There are specific recently graduate teachers in different standards for graduate teachers subjects) developed by these universities on behalf of the Ministry of Education.

Source: CEPPE, 2013. Learning Standards, Teaching Standards and Standards for School Principals: A Comparative Study, Chile. P.8

As the above table shows, governance and implementation of professional standards can involve multiple institutions. There are also multiple methods and organisations through which professional standards can be implemented, such as: an education ministry; a teacher council mandated by the ministry with no independent or democratically-elected teacher representation; or an independent professional association with democratic representation of teachers on the governing board.

If we consider John Macbeath's definition of professions, self-regulation plays an important part, but so, too, does legal recognition and professional closure (MacBeath, 2012). Selfregulation implies that the profession as a collective has a voice and the right to express a collective opinion; it implies some form of democratic representation in determining and implementing a set of professional standards. Moreover, this can lead to tension with legal recognition and closure. This tension is discussed in Walter Dresscher’s report for Education International on ‘Professional Ethics in Teaching and Professional Teachers Organisations’ in 2007: ‘a Teaching Council will be solely concerned with the qualitative and professional matters within its remit, whereas negotiating on the conditions of service, salaries and pensions will continue to be a major concern of the teacher unions’ (2007, p.25).

Scotland was the first country in the world to instate a teaching council; the General Teaching Council was set up by the Scotland Teaching Council Act of 1965, and the council met for the first time in 1966. The Government wanted to improve its relations with teachers around the country, and the council was therefore created; tensions remain, however, with the democratically governed teachers’ unions, who also see themselves as representatives on professional issues. The question that often comes up in examining the governance of teaching standards is, can teacher councils be seen as representatives of the profession? The

14 answer to this is no, not really, as they are not solely composed of teachers, and are almost always linked to the government in some way. Councils usually have members who are either appointed or elected, and who represent different kind of stakeholders, like employers, teacher education institutions, parent groups, and other officials who are nominated by relevant government ministers. They could possibly be seen as representing education, but not as representing the education profession as a whole (Dresscher, 2007, p.24).

Dresscher furthermore called this ‘a new pseudo-democratic governance structure charged with decision making on some aspects of education policy’ (2007, p.25). It could make the teaching profession less democratic, and even lessen the influence of unions, since their role(s) would be relegated to just collective bargaining (Dresscher, 2007, p.25). This would be to the detriment of union engagement and the democratic representation of the profession.

In a recent study on ‘Organising teaching: Developing the power of the profession’, Bascia and Stevenson argued that the future of unions will be impacted at both the industrial and the professional level (2017). Individual teachers can engage with professional issues, but they need a strong bargaining position as well as the confidence in organisations to advocate on their behalf when it comes to issues such as workload, class-size, and teachers’ pay. But as Walter Drescher has argued, A Council framework creates the impression that the profession is empowered, when its main institution, the union, is locked into this new statutory body with shared responsibility with government. This makes bargaining more difficult. It also means that while teachers might get more of a say in the profession, unions could be left with only bargaining roles.

(Dresscher, 2007 p. 23) As Dresscher explains, weakened unions can undermine and weaken the profession. This conflict can be seen in some jurisdictions like Ontario, Canada, for example, where the Ontario Teachers Federation (OTF) and the Ontario Teaching Council (OTC) have been at odds on what the mandate of the council is. The OTF believes that the council is encroaching on their rights, and regularly seen as using the professional standards as a punitive means of establishing control in certain situations. The ‘Ontario College of Teachers is considering that the OCT become responsible for tracking the ongoing learning of Ontario’s licensed teachers.

OTF and its Affiliates are opposed to this unnecessary, expensive and counterproductive concept…voluntary self-directed and meaningful professional learning continues to be the cornerstone of the Professional Learning Framework’ (OTF-FEO, 2015, p. 4). When we talk of empowering the profession these structures matter. If unions are weakened and replaced by a semi-democratic structure the teaching profession is worse off.

15

2.1 Introduction Survey Education International (EI) conducted a survey among all affiliates which sought to analyse various unions’ and/or professional organisations’ perspectives on the continuous development and implementation of teachers’ professional standards within each respective country. The aim was to acquire various national-level perspectives, so that they might be analysed according to trends and similarities from the global perspective. This report presents the analytics that stemmed from the results of the survey with the objective to facilitate the development of a set of global guidelines for professional standards for the teaching profession that would be adaptable, accessible, and sustainable for every country.

In the light of the ongoing policy reforms, EI adopted two resolutions at its 7th World Congress in 2015: the first, 1.2 on ‘Quality Environments for Teaching and Learning’, and the second, 4.1 on ‘The Promotion and Protection of Standards and Values in the World’. The Congress also mandated the EI Executive Board to develop guidelines on the development and implementation of professional teaching standards.

The findings of this survey will therefore be used to inform both the development of these guidelines, as well as a union toolkit to promote what the best practices would be in implementing professional standards for the teaching profession.

2.2 Methodology The initial structure of the survey was based on a review of previous studies conducted by EI1, as well as relevant documentation from the OECD and UNESCO. The survey targeted all EI affiliates, and it was provided in English, French, and Spanish, and EI received a total of 64 responses. 50 of those responses were received in English, 12 were received in French, and 2 were received in Spanish. Additionally, EI received the most responses from the unions and professional organisations from the European region. Several affiliates operate in a federal national system where education is devolved to a subjurisdiction (state or province), as is the case, for example, in the United States, the United Kingdom, Canada, and Australia. These countries have proved the most difficult to analyse due to the difficult nature of the differentiation of the federal, state-operated education systems, as there is no centralised perspective. It was also therefore difficult to formalise a survey to incorporate both the national and federal education system types. In order to

1

See Bourgonje, P. & Tromp, R. (2011). Quality Educators: An International Study of Teacher Competences and Standards.

Education International.

Drescher, E. (2007). Professional Ethics in Teaching and Professional Teachers Organisations. Education International.

MacBeath, J. (2012). Future of Teaching Profession. Education International.

Symeonidis, V. (2015). The Status of Teachers and the Teaching Profession. Education International.

16 garner a higher rate of response, we included the option to skip questions, so that those respondents for whom the question would not apply did not feel burdened to supply an impossible answer. Several affiliates asked for clarification of survey questions, and many others supplied EI with additional written-response type clarifications of either their survey responses, or their stance on professional standards. The terms ‘unions’ and ‘professional organisations’ are employed throughout the study to refer to all forms of organisations affiliated to EI that represent teachers and education workers.

Surveys aiming to garner responses from varied sources can be quite complex, as questions concerning professional standards at times may not be specific or broad enough to accommodate some federal or national type education systems. Teacher qualifications and certifications are organised in a variety of different ways among the countries surveyed; and furthermore, the conditions in which those standards must be met for teachers to obtain training and certifications are often vastly different. Additionally, the survey targeted a varied array of unions and professional organisations, all of whom represent different education sectors, from Early Childhood Education (ECE), to higher education, to Education Support Personnel (hereafter referred to as ESP); therefore, for those questions aimed at a particular education sector, EI received a range of different responses. Due to the varied nature of the responses from the various unions and professional organisations representing different education sectors, EI was unable to obtain a comprehensive (inclusive of all education sectors) data set for some countries where a particular sector may be under-represented or affiliated to EI. Where quotations are used without a reference to literature they refer to the responses in the survey.

2.3 Professional standards The majority of survey respondents indicated that their education systems have implemented professional standards. On the question of whether a jurisdiction has professional standards 39 answered positive and 13 negative. How extended the professional standards are seems to differ. This also depends on the definition of what one would consider a professional standard to be. Most educational systems have an initial teacher education (ITE) qualification in place and that could be the starting point of a teacher standard. With that stipulation in mind the unions answering yes to this question could have been higher. Most respondents seem to have interpreted standards as ‘licensing’, meaning for professional development, following after the initial teacher qualification.

17

Figure 1

To gain more insight in the granularity of the teaching standards we asked follow-up questions about how detailed professional standards are across different sectors and if they were divided by proficiency level. Not all systems have different standards for different sectors, by which we mean separate descriptors for early childhood, primary, secondary, vocational and higher education.

Figure 2

In a follow-up question we asked respondents to split-up the standards according to different sectors. Some jurisdictions seem to make a distinction between a newly qualified teacher and an expert teacher. An intermediary level of beginning teacher, like in Scotland doesn’t seem to be as common. Respondents seem to have interpreted standards here as ‘licensing’ as there were less positive answers in table 1 (15) than in figure 1 (39). Finishing an Initial Teacher Education (ITE) is a ‘qualification’.

18 Two things stand out. The first is that a lower number of unions responded that there is a separate standard for special education. Special education requires very specific knowledge so one would expect that the standards in different sectors would be among the highest. The second finding is that the formulation for teaching standards in higher education seems to be the lowest. This is in line with the current debates about standards in that sector. There is heavy resistance to further standardisation in the sector. The OECD wants to implement a ‘PISA for higher education’ for example, and many institutions and academics are highly resistant to this idea. An interesting follow-up to this finding would be to compare if research standards are more widespread than teaching standards.

Sector General Early Childhood Primary Secondary Vocational Special Higher

Professional Standards per sector and level of expertise ITE Beginner 15 11 13 11 15 14 14 12 16 11 11 9 8 7

Expert 17 13 16 17 14 12 9

Table 1

The next question asked if there are professional standards for middle-management, schoolleaders and district-level administrator roles (Table 2). Standards for school leaders (15) seem as common as standards for teachers (15/17). Leadership standards for primary, secondary and vocational school leaders seem to be more common than for early childhood and higher education. The positive replies are significantly lower for middle management roles and for district level administrators. This begs the question why it would be considered useful to have standards at the school level, but not for the wider system level. Whether it’s necessary to have standards in all sectors at all is up for debate of course, but standards for district level administrators seems to be less common. If an education system does have standards for teachers, it might be good practice to push for standards for school leaders and administrators as well so that interests between different stakeholders towards professional standards will align and that accountability runs both ways.

General Early Childhood Primary Secondary Vocational Higher

Professional Standards per sector for managers in education Middle Management School Leaders Administrator/Board level 5 15 4 4 9 6 7 14 8 8 16 9 7 14 10 2 7 5 Table 2

In some countries subject organisations also play a role in setting separate standards. The National Education Association (NEA) in the United States noted that ‘Professional content organisations from the major subject areas (e.g. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics,

19 The Association for Teacher Educators, National Association for the Education of Young Children) have defined for their members’ professional standards. All of these standards are voluntary.’ And in addition to the Australian Professional Standards for Teachers & for School Leaders, the AEU noted that there are also standards for the Accreditation of Initial Teacher Education Programs.

Looking at the breadth and depth of standards that are used worldwide it can be concluded that there are a wide range of options available to unions to advocate according to their own context. In Nepal for example the ‘teachers standards are grouped in 8 levels. All school teachers have their own standards level wise.’ Whereas in The Republic of Congo the teacher standards are the same for all teachers according to EI affiliate FETRASSEIC. Unions and their members will need to have a discussion in what form professional standards are necessary, maybe an initial teacher qualification is enough. But in other cases, like in Australia and Scotland a more elaborate structure that encompasses a teacher’s career is preferable. In other professions like medicine and law it is more common to have licensing standards according to specialisation, these survey findings seem to indicate that this is not yet the case in education.

2.4 Professional standards: balance between accountability and support How professional standards are formulated and used can be indicative of the level of performativity in an educational system. As Andy Hargeaves says, ‘we need high standards not standardisation’. Ideally a system of appraisal or evaluation is set up that supports teachers’ professionalism. We asked the following questions. Are teachers and school leaders appraised against professional standards in different educational sectors? Are the professional standards formulated in a general or detailed way? Are there financial incentives for individual teachers to adhere to the teaching standards? What are the professional standards used for on a system level?

Are teachers and school leaders appraised against professional standards in different educational sectors (See Figure 3)? Out of all 64 responses, 17 unions responded that the standards were used to appraise teachers. Again, the use of the standards is higher in primary, secondary education than in other sectors. Appraisal of school leaders and administrators to professional standards is lower than is the case of teachers.

20

Figure 3

The more detailed the standards are the more they can to be used for external accountability and reduce teachers’ professionalism (OECD 2016, p. 28). The level of detail seems to differ (Figure 4) The response to the level of detail, detailed (28%) or very detailed (15%), was high.

Almost the same as ‘very general’ (13%) and ‘general’ (33%). These are subjective answers of course, but an indication about how teacher unions perceive their professional standards.

With a high level of detail, the danger of prescribing teachers’ work increases. The National Union of Teachers (NUT) responded that standards could narrow a teachers’ professional autonomy with ‘too great a level of detail’, e.g. the requirement that teachers should employ a specified method of teaching children to read; or the use of inappropriate standards ‘requiring the teaching of an arbitrarily selected set of fundamental British values’. In followup research a more detailed look at the level of detail of professional standards and how supportive they are perceived amongst teachers is something that could be explored.

Figure 4

As can be seen in figure 5, financial incentives are not as prevalent as we expected. The were 28 negative responses, far more than the 13 positive responses. In some American States, a

21 financial bonus is linked to the voluntary National Board of Professional Teaching Standards (NBPTS). Financial incentives are not seen as detrimental by all unions, because it depends on how they are implemented; for example, the Trade Union of Education and Science Workers of Ukraine (TUESWU) indicated that they would welcome financial incentives. In Nepal, the Nepal National Teachers' Association (NTA) attests that ‘Financial or non-financial motivations are not mentioned’ as a weakness. Thus, care must be given on how to implement financial incentives, because in the worst-case scenario, standards could be linked to performance pay.

Figure 5

Systems-level professional standards can be used for evaluative purposes from teacher evaluation in schools, to benchmarking initial teacher education in different institutions, to improve professional development amongst teachers. Using professional standards in this way seems to be quite common. The question remains of course how this data is gathered and how individual teacher data is used. The Education Institute of Scotland (EIS) says that the strength of the professional standards is ‘alignment with the curriculum and other key policies.’ The Ulster Teachers Union (UTU) stated that the strengths of their standards are ‘robust standards for initial teacher training and early professional development,’ and that ‘standards laying out the expectations for continuing professional development’. In Portugal, the Federação Nacional da Educação (FNE) stated that the standards support a ‘high level of initial training’. The Japan Teachers’ Union (JTU) stated that, ‘The standards are solid and ensure teachers' quality; but it is often said that the quality is not enough to cope with various educational challenges. The Japanese Government uses this in particular to attack us’. This emphasises the dangers of using standards in an overly political setting.

The Czech and Moravian Trade Union of Workers in Education (ČMOS-PS) clearly sees a need to use standards to promote growth and career opportunities for teachers: The law stating and regulating further career development of teachers is being discussed and prepared on the governmental level. This law is supposed to outline and state further steps in the career ladder of teachers.

This law is supposed to design a scheme of exams and certifications which will set three different degrees of teachers (experienced teacher, senior

22 teacher and teacher tutor). All degrees will be linked with certain further responsibilities and with a further pay rise. Such a system would be motivating for teachers to continue/develop their careers. So far there is a system which does not distinguish between a one-year experienced teacher and a twenty-year experienced teacher, which is quite demotivating.

Figure 6

2.5 Code of ethics or conduct Besides defining teacher knowledge and skills, professional standards sometimes also encompasses a teacher code of ethics or code of conduct. For some unions these codes are a better reflection of the work of teachers than a detailed description of teacher competencies. The response from EI’s Norwegian and Swedish affiliates was that the combination of high quality initial teacher qualifications combined with a code of ethics was enough to protect the status of teachers. In this case enacted professionalism is perceived to be more important. Some prefer a code of ethics- as it focuses on the teacher as a virtuous professional- to a code of conduct which focuses more narrowly on behaviour.

In the Netherlands the Algemene Onderwijsbond (AOB) responded that the Dutch name for the national code of ethics was the ‘Teacher Standard’. There is confusion in what standards exactly mean. Similar confusions were expressed by EI’s Scandinavian and South American affiliates at the Unite for Quality Education and Leadership Conference, held in Rotterdam, Netherlands in May of 2017. Standards are often linked to standardisation policies and standardised testing. All seen as deprofessionalising teachers. This underlines the confusion that can arise because of the use of the word standard(s) and the need for clear definitions when unions engage in conversations with their members, governments and international organisations on this issue.

23

Figure 7

Figure 8

There are still quite a few systems which don’t have a code of ethics. Among those surveyed, 26 unions responded positively to the question if there was a code of ethics or conduct.

Amongst unions themselves there are still a lot of affiliates that don’t have a code of ethics.

In Norway, the UDF, has written a code of ethics, but noted: ‘The code of ethics is made for all teachers and school leaders, but not all teacher unions have adopted it’. It might be good policy to lead by example and adopt a code of ethics which then might be adopted nationally.

Interestingly Finland shows how the profession can be strengthened this way. Under the leadership of EI affiliate OAJ, Finland has recently adopted the Comenius oath (below Figure 9), a code of ethics. They see it as a means to strengthen the profession. The OAJ has called upon all teachers worldwide to adopt this teacher oath. Unions and education systems might use this oath and the process of implementation as a blueprint for their own organisations

24 and systems. Or use Education International’s declaration of professional ethics as an example (2007).

Figure 9

Comenius Oath The teachers’ union in Finland OAJ has introduced a new oath for teachers to take.

The oath outlines the principles of the profession and underscores the value of their work. The Oath aims to underpin the status of teachers and the value of their work. The Comenius’ Oath was designed by an independent ethical panel working with OAJ which comprised top Finnish experts of education and philosophers. The Oath derives its name from the 17th Century Czech philosopher and educational activist, John Amos Comenius, whose tireless devotion to achieving sustainable, equitable educational practices and quality educational materials in his time earned him a high degree of international esteem.

As a teacher I am engaged in educating the next generation, which is one of the most important human tasks. My aim in this will be to renew and pass on the existing reserve of human knowledge, culture and skills.

I undertake to act with justice and fairness in all that I do and to promote the development of my pupils and students, so that each individual may grow up as a complete human being in accordance with his or her aptitudes and talents.

I will also strive to assist parents, guardians and others responsible for working with children and young people in their educational functions.

I will not reveal information that is communicated to me confidentially, and I will respect the privacy of children and young people. I will also protect their physical and psychological inviolability.

25 I will endeavour to shield the children and young people in my care from political and economic exploitation and defend the rights of every individual to develop his or her own religious and political convictions.

I will make continuous efforts to maintain and develop my professional skills, committing myself to the common goals of my profession and to the support of my colleagues in their work. I will act in the best interests of the community at large and strive to strengthen the esteem in which the teaching profession is held.

2.6 Professional Development One of the aims of having professional standards is to promote professional learning and development among teachers. Standards can provide a continuum of professional development opportunities and pathways into leadership and research. In education systems, like those found in Scotland and Singapore, professional standards are being used to map out and accredit professional learning. This is a practice that has not been adopted universally. Survey feedback was divided on the question of ‘if professional development is accredited against professional standards by a regulatory body’; 21 unions responded negatively, and 20 unions responded positively.

Figure 10

That doesn’t exactly match with the next question on how they are being accredited. 34 unions answered that question positively and 16 answered ‘Don’t know’. There are roughly two models that can be discerned. An input and an evaluation (output) model. With the input model teachers keep track of a list of continuous professional development (CPD) courses followed in hours or points, which is then validated by a regulatory body. This is essentially a quantitative model which- because it is less linked to teachers daily practice- could lead to a

26 ‘tick-box’ mentality and standardisation of professional development. In the evaluation model teachers collect their work in a portfolio of the work done- and the continuous professional development (CPD) followed by the teacher. The portfolio, and not the number of hours, is validated by the regulatory body. This is more an evaluative model of accreditation. The input model is more widely used (19) than the output model (15) with 16 unions answering that they don’t know.

Figure 11

With the advent of social media and professional learning communities in and outside of the school, informal learning has proliferated exponentially in the last couple of years. This is clearly new territory for some unions and education systems in general and has influenced how teachers learn and network outside of the school. (Bascia & Stevenson, 2017) Selforganised events like ‘teach meets’ and ‘Edcamps’ have sprung up in the education system worldwide. These informal structures are powerful learning levers, it strengthens enacted professionalism, they are powerful advocacy tools, and they can have a positive impact on students’ learning. The latest GEM Report stated that ‘Although rarely considered an accountability tool, collaborative or peer-to-peer learning can improve instruction and monitoring of teacher practices’ (UNESCO, 2017, p.79). In the Netherlands, the inspectorate is now piloting, with a peer-learning network of schools, where teachers and headteachers will provide feedback and support to each other and see how this can be incorporated as a formal accountability system.

The Japan Teachers’ Union points out that ‘peer development should be recognised as one of professional development’. It would make sense for teacher unions to advocate for these online and informal learning opportunities to be incorporated in professional development frameworks. To the question of Is informal learning approved as continuous professional development, 21 affiliates answered positively, 15 answered negatively and 9 answered that they don’t know. There is clearly room in many jurisdictions to incorporate these new insights in their professional learning frameworks.

27

Figure 12

Workload is a big issue in most countries. A high workload can have a negative impact on professional development. Leading towards a downward spiral in teacher learning and teacher retention. To the question of if there are mandated hours that teachers must spend on Continuous Professional Development, 26 respondents answered yes and 18 answered no, with 14 affiliates answering I don’t know. And the number of mandatory CPD-hours per year can certainly be high. According to the majority of respondents the amount of mandatory CPD hours were below 50 hours per year. The question arises if there are enough resources provided. The response of EIS was that standards allowed the union to ‘advocate for proper resourcing’. It highlighted the discrepancy between what was considered to be the condition of quality teaching and the resources provided by government to make that possible.

The Australian Education Union also noted time as one of the biggest issues: The progression from the first to the second stage of the standards (Graduate to Proficient) usually occurs over the first two years of employment. This creates a burden and anxiety on the part of Early Career Teachers who are at the same time coping with all the requirements of their new employment. Middle and Later Career teachers also find little ‘release time’ to undertake the reflective, research activities and induction and mentoring roles essential in a more complete integration of the standards into teaching practice.

28

Figure 13

Figure 14

Professional Development is usually provided through a mix of providers. Only in a small minority of jurisdictions is professional development delivered by public authorities. But an increasing emphasis on private provisions shifts funds away from public institutions and the classrooms. There is an increasing worry amongst unions about the growing commercialisation of education: ‘Increasingly spaces and opportunities for edu-businesses to expand their role in schools and schooling systems, largely on a for-profit basis’ (Hogan et al., 2017, p.8). Professional learning opportunities are cited as an area of concern for Australian teachers.

29

Figure 15

2.7 Governance and collective teacher autonomy How teaching standards are being governed can be an indicator of the level of teacher autonomy within the system. As stated earlier in Dresscher’s report there can be a tension between the role of unions and the governance of standards by a separate institution. In an E-Forum by UNESCO’s IIEP, ‘participants regarded teacher unions as the institutions through which to involve the teaching profession in the process of creating and implementing a code of conduct, and to make teachers’ voice heard at all levels’ (IIEP, 2011, p.14). A democratically organised profession should have some input in how its own standards are being set and maintained. However, that does not seem to be the case in a lot of jurisdictions.

Who is responsible for the governance of the professional standards? In a majority of jurisdictions, 28 unions replied that the department of education is responsible, 11 unions replied that there is a separate regulatory body, a teaching council for example. In federal states there is usually no national standards setting body, those that are there are on a voluntary basis, like the NBPTS in the United States. One of EI’s American affiliates, the National Education Association (NEA), replied that: The organisation Learning Forward, which is the only US-based professional association devoted exclusively to those who work in educator professional development has taken the lead in developing and supporting the Standards for Professional Learning. However, they cannot mandate the adoption of these standards by any state or legislative body.

30

Figure 16

Another indicator of self-governance and input by teachers in the governance of professional standards is how many teachers the governing body that governs has on its board. The survey asked affiliates to indicate what percentage of teachers in their country were either members of, or act in coordination with teachers’ governance boards. Responses received indicated that the majority of affiliates, specifically 14, replied negatively, with only 0-25% teachers on the governing board. Only 6 affiliates could confidently confirm that there is a majority of teachers on the board of the body. The remainder of the respondents, 19 affiliates in total, indicated that there were either no teachers, or only a minority of teachers on governing boards. Again, an important aspect of professionalism is self-regulation. The troubling conclusion from these responses is the indication that, globally, the teaching profession does not benefit from high levels of professional autonomy; and because autonomous selfgovernance is an important aspect in establishing professionalism.

Figure 17

31 Another lens through which we can look at professional autonomy is if there are democratic structures in place in the governing institutions of the profession. So, it is interesting to see if teachers can vote for members of a governing board, of a teaching council for example.

Although this is not a panacea, in Ontario teachers can vote for members, but turnout has been very low, it dropped from 32% in 1997 to 3,75% in 2012. Not every seat could be filled because there were not enough members standing for a seat on the council (OTF-FEO, 2014, p.4). In only a minority of systems (9) do teachers have a direct, democratic say about who will represent them. The majority (22) indicated that teachers couldn’t vote for board members, with seven answering that they didn’t know. For teaching councils, who often portray themselves as having the interests of teachers at heart, this is problematic. There is less legitimacy in that claim if individual teachers don’t have a voice in the governance of their own profession. Democratic professionalism doesn’t seem to be as widespread amongst teachers as it is in other professions.

Figure 18

But the quality of education, and by default its teachers, is something that involves society as a whole of course. Therefore, it is common to have different stakeholders represented in a standards body. According to the survey, parents and students—key stakeholders—are not often well represented on the governing body. Union seats are more common, as only 14 unions answered positively that they are represented. The same number of teacher educators are represented, which seems low because they are the one inducting new members into the profession. Looking at earlier questions it is logical that the ministries of education are well represented. Interestingly, school leaders and administrators are often not as well represented as teachers are from different sectors. Additionally, 16 unions answered positively that both primary and secondary teachers are represented. Early childhood teachers less so, only fourteen answered positively.

32

Figure 19

2.8 Accountability Accountability is one of the most contested issues in educational policy. Top-down accountability which leads to deprofessionalisation is one of the main worries of teachers’ unions in the implementation of teaching standards. Of course, standards also ensure a minimum standard of quality, they regulate the quality of the profession. Teacher unions who advocate for the profession also see the benefit of this. One of the questions this comes down to is who can and cannot teach. On the question ‘if a teacher does not comply with the teaching standards can the right to teach be revoked?’ Unions answered positively by a big margin (32) on this question. The rest was divided between ‘no’ (8) and ‘don’t know’ (10). In many jurisdictions, there are consequences for not adhering to the standards or a code of ethics and conduct. This is the case in Northern Ireland for example, but the Ulster Teachers Union also responded that there is a missing procedural layer for dealing with complaints against a teacher. According to the GEM Report, in Australia, ‘counselling, written admonishment, financial penalty, transfer to other duties (including below current salary), reduction in incremental points, temporary/permanent reduction in classification/salary, employment termination’; and in South Africa, ‘caution/reprimand, fine (not exceeding one month’s salary), removal of name from the register (temporarily, permanently or subject to conditions)’ (UNESCO, 2017, p.81).

In this instance, the strictest consequence for those who may fail to adhere to professional standards is that their rights to teach in their country can be (sometimes permanently) revoked.

33

Figure 20

The survey listed several questions to assess the quality and impact of workplace procedures and protocols, one which asked respondents to indicate whether or not complaints about teachers were reviewed by a separate committee in their country. Of those polled, 28 affiliates answered in the affirmative, 13 answered negatively, and 9 affiliates opted for the ‘don’t know’ option. Negative responses to this question pose a discrepancy compared to the answers provided for the previous question; this suggests that there could be an arbitrary aspect of implantation of the standards.

Figure 21

In a self-governing profession, teachers would have a significant autonomous impact in overseeing the disciplinary measures of their colleagues. This would mean that teachers would be involved in hearing and implementing disciplinary and procedural measures (such as UTU in Northern Ireland). Not only is this common in other professions, but it also circles back to what Judyth Sachs meant by ‘the uniqueness of the teaching profession’ (Sachs, 2010, p.185). Of course, hearings on complaints against teachers are in the public’s interest, and it

34 is common to have multiple stakeholders on board. Teachers also must be accused by a majority of those at the hearing to conclude that they have failed to adhere to the professional standards in their country. If such a disciplinary structure is in place, and if some teachers have places in these hearing committees, then it can be an indication of collective professional autonomy. To the question on the number of teachers included in these types of committees, 13 affiliates responded with 0-25%, 5 affiliates replied between 26-50%, and 1 affiliate answered that it was between 51-75%. Additionally, 14 affiliates opted for the ‘don’t know’ response. Thus, the majority of EI affiliates indicated that teachers are not well-represented on complaints and disciplinary hearing committees.

Figure 22

Regional access to a hearing indicates a fair and equitable system for teachers, especially in larger countries. If a hearing is held in a more northern city of the country, it can thereby make accessing those hearings more difficult for citizens living in distant, southern cities, especially in developing countries. For the question on whether complaints hearing committees convene regionally or nationally, by country, 14 affiliates answered ‘nationally’, 8 responded ‘regionally’, and the remaining 9 affiliates marked the ‘don’t know’ response.

35

Figure 23

2.9 Consultation and Development Concerning the timeline of when professional standards were developed the question allowed for more answers. An earlier overview seemed to indicate that there were several attempts in some jurisdictions. In the timeline it shows that there was an increase in the development of standards from 2000 onwards. The introduction of the PISA reports in 2000 sparked a global conversation on educational reform and standards, with a peak in the period 2006-2010. This fits with the standardisation discourse that Andy Hargreaves and Dennis Shirley have identified in the Global Fourth Way (Hargreaves & Shirley, 2012). This period in the 2000s is what they indicated as the Third Way, a focus on standardisation, accountability and compliance. Or what Pasi Sahlberg identified as the Global Education Reform Movement (GERM) (2011, p. xx). This could explain weariness amongst some teacher unions surrounding the word standard.

36

Figure 24

The survey asked affiliates to answer whether or not professional standards had been developed, and if so, when. Among the responses received, 44 affiliates answered positively, and 8 affiliates answered negatively. At the past two International Summits on the Teaching Profession (ISTP), the OECD has emphasised a need for the teaching profession, specifically teachers and teachers’ unions, to engage in global social dialogue with one another, and the survey findings seem to strengthen that recommendation. As Andreas Schleicher noted in the accompanying report on the 2016 ISTP: In most school districts, collaboration between different stakeholders (e.g. unions, teachers, school leaders and community representatives) played a key role in the design and implementation stages. The setting of shared priorities, negotiation, consensus building, and transparency often resulted in greater ownership and acceptance among stakeholders. (2016b) The results from this survey support this advice from the OECD, most unions have been consulted, and this can be used by those unions that haven’t been consulted.

37

Figure 25

The survey sought to analyse which stakeholders were involved in the process of determining and implementing professional standards, and the results indicate that policymakers invest in teachers’ and education professionals’ input. Among those polled, 17 respondents marked ‘teacher education associations’, 14 marked ‘principal associations’, 20 marked ‘professional or subject associations’, and 31 marked ‘teacher unions’. The other stakeholders received minimal attention, such as the 8 respondents who selected ‘students’, the 10 respondents who selected ‘parents’, and the one respondent who chose ‘business’; the data therefore prove that stakeholders from the professional education sector make a greater impact on processes involving professional standards. UNESCO has asserted that a successful implementation of professional standards requires public interest, consideration and investment. This is precisely why involving external stakeholders in professional standards processes may serve to boost public awareness and trust in teachers’ professionalism. This theory is supported by the mere existence of an organisation like Education International. A segment of EI’s collective mandate specifically speaks to the importance of professional ethics, as it serves to ‘justify public trust and confidence and enhance the esteem in which the profession is held by providing quality education for all students’ (Education International, 2007, p.1).

38

Figure 26

The survey also laid out questions to determine how consultation processes on professional standards were implemented, and results indicated that some methods were more common than others. Among the total number of respondents, 4 marked ‘road shows’, 7 marked ‘surveys’, 9 marked ‘regional focus groups’, 18 marked ‘national focus groups’, and finally, 19 marked ‘steering committees’. Perhaps the most interesting finding for this question was that national focus groups and steering committees are more often used than surveys or regional focus groups. On average, our respondents, composed of teachers and education professionals themselves, must therefore value national focus groups and steering committees far more than other policy consultation processes. While this survey did not provide additional, more detailed questions about these processes, it is a positive initial indication that, on average among our respondents, policymakers provide inclusive input processes for teachers.

Figure 27

39

While the responses to the survey question on teacher unions’ involvement in consultation processes has been predominantly positive, this does not mean that it is the case for all countries. In New Zealand, for example, EI’s affiliate, the PPTA, noted that ‘the absence of union representation on the Education Council Board raises suspicion as to their motives (from teachers)’. Furthermore, the positive responses to this question do not confirm that these inclusive consultation processes are in line with what the profession as a whole considers to be significant, or impactful. In the DR Congo, EI’s affiliate the Fédération des Travailleurs de la Science, des Sports, de l'Enseignement, de l'Information et de la Culture (FETRASSEIC) felt that ‘representation of all the stakeholders (in the country) is a weak point’.

Figure 28

2.10 Support for professional standards The level of individual teacher engagement was another question that received an interesting array of responses. Many affiliates, between 26 to 30 respondents, indicated that they had either no, or only a ‘low to moderate’ awareness of, or support for teaching standards. This suggests that the majority of the respondents are not currently engaged in discussions on, or processes to determine professional standards. In the DR Congo, FETRASSEIC stated that the ‘absence of popularisation of the texts’ is a concern. In Haiti, EI’s affiliate, the Union Nationale des Normaliens/Normaliennes et Educateurs/Educatrices d’Haïti (UNNOEH), noted that ‘the state does not have enough legitimacy to implement them [professional standards]’. EI’s affiliate, the SNTE, indicated that, in Mexico, there is ‘little diffusion of the normative changes’.

40

Figure 29

Despite the positive impacts that professional standards can have on the workplace and the profession globally, in some countries individual teachers remain sceptical. Some teachers feel that the process of developing professional standards should be undertaken with caution, even when teachers’ unions are involved and consulted. In Northern Ireland, EI’s affiliate the Ulster Teachers’ Union believes in ‘raising more teacher awareness of the work and purpose of the General Teaching Council for Northern Ireland (GTCNI)’. In Fiji, the Fiji Teachers’ Union indicated that more awareness was essential for the process of developing standards. The Federação Nacional da Educação (FNE) from Portugal felt that many of their members had not yet developed an understanding of standards, attributing this to a ‘low diffusion of [information about] standards’. EI’s American affiliate, the NEA added that ‘measuring the level of satisfaction amongst teachers is difficult. In order to do this, we would need a coordinated plan of awareness for educators. We estimate that as little as 15% of teachers across the United States may have some knowledge of the standards’.

Ideally professional standards are a living and breathing document used by all teachers for their professional growth. We need to know more about how unions have taken their members along and created support for teaching standards. The fact that many unions don’t know the extent of support for standards is a knowledge gap that should be filled. It is also invaluable information in advocating for members.

41

Figure 30

Many teachers’ unions and education organisations’ involvement in professional standards development processes, in any given country, can be interpreted as support for those processes; and when many unions and organisations come together in this capacity, they can serve as an influential, implied majority of, and for the profession. This is the case with the passing of the Every Student Succeeds Act in the United States, as the NEA has pointed out: …because the professional standards are voluntary, there is no way to ensure that they are supported with fidelity or implemented in any way. The current organisation that supports the standards [NBPTS] has limited capacity to engage stakeholders and no authority to mandate their use. The strength of these standards is that the 40 organisations that supported and engaged as partners in their development represent a significant number of teachers.

Those organisations serve as validators of the importance and strength of the standards.

With the passing of the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA), more states will become aware of the Standards’ definition for professional development, as the definition is in the law. This should lead to more education stakeholders utilizing the standards as them implement ESSA in the 2017-2018 school year.

Conversely, simply because unions comply with professional standards in their countries, it doesn’t substantiate the quality of those policies and standards. CTERA in Argentina points out that ‘faced with the possibility of removing teacher rights, the union supports the continuity of professional standards even though we are not totally in agreement with them’.

42

Figure 31

Among the survey respondents, 14 affiliates reported that a majority of teachers’ unions in their countries supported standards, while 15 affiliates responded that all unions in their country supported the standards; the remaining 12 affiliates opted for the ‘don’t know’ answer. And while there is a significant amount of union support for standards, many affiliates left case-specific caveats in the question comments section (See earlier comments for other examples). EI’s Slovak affiliates, OZPŠaV, noted that ‘Professional standards are being amended and are dynamic, and evolve constantly’; the union furthermore asserted that they nevertheless ‘serve to provide a minimum degree of information for all teachers about what should they comply with’. The Scottish affiliate, EIS, added that: The strengths of the standards are the alignment with the curriculum and other key policies and they have the potential to strongly support teacher professionalism. The weakness lies in excessive teacher workload which compromises opportunity for meaningful engagement with the standards. The standards are also sometimes used to serve a managerialist agenda by employers and senior leaders in schools.

Figure 32

43

Overall there is genuine support for defining and implementing professional standards, if they can be embedded within a local context. All unions, however, unanimously agree upon the successful implementation of needs and practices. Firstly, high workloads are perceived as problematic for the successful implementation of standards. Secondly, funding remains a major problem for many affiliates. Other affiliates expressed discontent over the lack of incentives and career opportunities embedded in some standards frameworks. Moreover, a lack of teacher involvement in the definition and implementation process is interpreted as a lack of quality control.

EIS’ statement is exemplary; a system thought by some to be the gold standard for implementing professional standards: ‘By reducing the class contact time of teachers to create more time for professional dialogue and collaboration around the standards.

Increased funding for professional learning is needed to enable teachers to confidently engage with the standards’.

EI’s affiliate in the United Kingdom, the NUT, stated that improvements are needed, as well as ‘a much higher level of teacher involvement in the formulation and maintenance of professional standards and… by stipulating a guaranteed entitlement to CPD [continuous professional development]’. In Australia, the AEU advocated for ‘greater release from face-toface teaching duties, and a significant increase in professional mentoring to enable better engagement with the standards and what they mean for teaching practice’. In Armenia, EI’s affiliate, the Branch Republican Union of Trade Union Organisations Workers of Education and Science of Armenia (CRSTESA), expressed the concern that ‘the teachers need more hours per year to spend on their professional standards’.

Meanwhile, in Nigeria, the National Union of Teachers (NUT) called for ‘1. Introduction of reward for accomplishment 2. Enhanced remuneration of Teachers 3. Programmes to be mounted regularly 4. Teachers coverage to be enlarged’. In Hong Kong, EI’s affiliate (The Hong Kong Professional Teachers’ Union) the union called for the establishment of a Teaching Council, because their current standards policy is ‘unsystematic and only governed by the Education Bureau’. The Bulgarian Teachers’ Union pointed out that making the standards work will mean that teachers need ‘better information, increased funding and a rise in the status of teachers’. In the Philippines, EI’s affiliate, the Teachers' Organisation of the Philippine Public Sector (TOPPS), believes that the arbitrary aspect is seen as an impediment: ‘teacher satisfaction with professional standards can be improved when there is a strict implementation of the standards by all without any prejudices or biases’.

In further exploring the implementation of professional standards Education International and those organisations who are involved in professional teacher standards should: 1. Create a common understanding of what we meant by ‘professional standards’;

44 2. Consider the many different successful arrangements that have been implemented worldwide; 3. Ensure that the standards are not too detailed; 4. Ensure the application of real teacher voice in developing and implementing professional standards; 5. Involve education unions in developing and implementing professional standards; 6. Ensure proper funding and support to implement and maintain professional standards.

3.1 Create a common understanding of what we mean by professional standards What has become clear from a preliminary literature review, from designing the survey, and also from the questions and the responses was that standards can mean very different things in different countries and regions. The fact that some unions responded with ‘we don’t have professional standards’ is indicative. These systems usually do have qualifications for Initial Teacher Education (ITE) and these are considered standards as well. There is a clear need to create a common language and definitions to define what we mean by professional standards.

To come to a recommendation which unions can use we need to come to an accepted definition that will mean the same thing in different languages in different jurisdictions. A professional teaching standard generally seems to be consisting of several domains: teacher knowledge, competencies and skills, for example. ● ● ●

Qualification is meant for describing standards for initial teacher education.

Licensing can be used for standards of ongoing teacher professional development and learning, whether or not they are mandatory.

Code of Conduct or Code of Ethics describe a set of values which guide teacher's daily practice inside and outside of the classroom. It is recommended that policy makers and teacher unions take this into account.

3.2 Take into account the many different successful arrangements that have been implemented worldwide When we create a common understanding of the scope of professional standards, unions and policy makers need to take into account that there are many different arrangements in creating a standards framework. From high functioning systems with just initial teacher education combined with a more informal professional framework that doesn’t include licensing but does have a code of ethics to systems that have a comprehensive framework of qualification and licensing and a teacher council to create coherence in the system.

45 3.3 Ensure that the standards are fit for purpose, not too general and not too detailed The main worry around professional teaching standards are: that they become a punitive monitoring system that deprofessionalises teachers and teaching. Teaching standards in this case are used to standardise teaching and links them to external accountability measures. In some countries professional standards are linked to financial incentives for example.

Professional development can also be reduced to ‘counting hours’ leading to a compliance mentality to satisfy management.

This is linked to how specific standards are described. The more specific the standards the more we can speak of a prescribed professionalism, especially if this is strongly linked to external accountability. This differs from the enacted professionalism that exists in teachers’ practices. Unions should focus on the latter.

Professional Standards can support enacted professionalism by ensuring lifelong learning and a career infrastructure for teachers covering the whole range of a teacher's professional career: formal standards of practice for full entry into the teaching profession; processes for supporting teachers, and mentoring teachers in their initial years of practice; quality standards for providers of continuing professional learning for teachers. This way the profession ensures that its individual members are supported, and teachers hold each other to the highest standards and support one another with the help of these standards, and therefore the profession protects itself from external forces that threaten to deregulate and de-professionalise teachers.

3.4 Ensure a real teacher voice in developing and implementing professional standards Teacher autonomy means, among other things, that teachers have discretionary powers within schools. This also works on a system level. A profession that doesn’t have a say in setting its own standards is not a profession and doesn’t have professional autonomy. Recall John Macbeath’s definition which included, among others, the following characteristics: Professional association, work autonomy, code of professional conduct or ethics, selfregulation, public service and altruism, authority and legitimacy (2012). This survey shows that the extent to which teachers and their representative organisations really have professional autonomy is mixed.

The regulatory body on professional teaching standards can be in the hand of the department of education or it can be a separate regulatory body. In both cases it is not a given that teachers are represented in its governance. And if they are it is not a given that these teachers are selected through a democratic process, either through representation by the union or direct elections. In the case where teachers have an influence in governing their own professional standards these standards tend to be more deeply ingrained in an educational system. Having a real teacher voice in implementing and maintaining professional standards is crucial to their success.

46 3.5 Involve unions in developing and implementing professional standards In many jurisdictions unions are the only democratically organised teacher organisations. The survey shows that many teacher unions are proactive in the development of standards for their profession and many unions have been consulted in the development of teaching standards. However, too often that has been the extent of their involvement. Too many unions feel that they don’t have a real say in the development and implementation of the standards. It sometimes seems that there is a voice of teachers, but it should be embedded in a democratic structure where teachers can express their individual and collective voice.

This poses several challenges and unions will need to formulate a strategy to ensure that this forms the basis for guidelines in implementing professional standards. There are several affiliates who have taken a proactive approach and found ways to have a constructive relationship with democratic teaching councils.

3.6 Ensure proper funding and support to implement and maintain professional standards To promote enacted professionalism teachers, need time to engage with professional standards in their daily practice. Workload amongst teachers is seen as an impediment for successful implementation so non-classroom time devoted to teachers for professional development is key. Proper funding is crucial to ensure that this happens. This funding should also be allocated to create better support structures and professional development opportunities to engage with the standards.

When we talk about professional standards for the teaching profession, ultimately what matters is that students receive a quality education and that teachers become better at what they do. This is not a simple matter of developing standards and then enforcing them through top-down and punitive measures. Education and teaching are too complex and multidimensional for that. We know what doesn’t work and we increasingly discern what is good practice. We need to foster what is inherent in good education and what we would like to see in the classroom and expect from our students: high standards, trust, collaboration and aspiration for a better world. To reach these goals it is imperative that teaching itself is based on those premises.

47

Anon, Profession. Online Etymology Dictionary. Available at: https://www.etymonline.com/word/profession [Accessed June 3, 2017].

Bascia, N. & Stevenson, H., 2017. Organising teaching: Developing the power of the profession, Brussels: Education International.

Biesta, G., 2007. Why “what works” won't work: Evidence-based practice and the democratic deficit in educational research. Educational Theory, 57(1), pp.1–22.

Bourgonje, P. & Tromp, R., 2011. Quality Educators: An International Study of Teacher Competences and Standards, Brussels: Education International.

Campbell, C. et al., 2016. The State of Educators’ Professional Learning in Canada C. Campbell, ed., Oxford, OH: Learning Forward.

CEPPE, 2013. Learning Standards, Teaching Standards and Standards for School Principals: A Comparative Study, Chile: OECD Publishing Darling-Hammond, L., 1999. Reshaping Teaching Policy, Preparation, and Practice. Influences of the National Board for Professional Teaching Standards. American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education, AACTE Publications.

Dresscher, E., 2007. Professional Ethics in Teaching and Professional Teachers Organisations, Brussels: Education International Education International, 2007. EI declaration on Professional Ethics, Brussels: Education International.

Education International (EI), Alberta Teachers’ Association (ATA), & Canadian Teachers’ Federation (CTF). (2017). We the Educators: Educational Technology and the Personalisation, Standardisation, Privatisation and Datafication of Education. Education International. Retrieved from https://issuu.com/educationinternational/docs/coor124_wetheeducators-eng

Etzioni, A., 1969. The Semi-Professions and Their Organization, London: Free Press Fukuyama, F., 2014. Political Order and Political Decay, New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.

Hargreaves, A. & Shirley, D., 2012. The Global Fourth Way: The quest for excellence, Boston:

48 Corwin Press.

Hogan, A. et al., 2017. Commercialisation in Public Schooling, Sydney: NSW Teachers Federation.

IIEP, 2011. IIEP-UNESCO e-Forum on teacher codes of conduct Synthesis Report, Paris: UNESCO. ILO, 2008. The ILO/UNESCO Recommendation concerning the Status of Teachers (1966) and The UNESCO Recommendation concerning the Status of Higher-education Teaching Personnel (1997) s, Paris: ILO/UNESCO. MacBeath, J., 2012. Future of Teaching Profession. Brussels: Education International.

OECD, 2016. Supporting Teacher Professionalism, Paris: OECD Publishing.

OTF-FEO, 2014. Course Correction: A Renewed Focus for the Ontario College of Teachers, Ontario: OTF-FEO. OTF-FEO, 2015. “Recent Ontario College of Teachers’ membership survey – What are they really asking?” OTF Communiqué, 19(1) Pearsal, J., 2002, Concise Oxford English Dictionary, Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Polanyi, M., 2009. The Tacit Dimension, Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

Sachs, J., 2010. Teacher Professional Standards: Controlling or developing teaching? Teachers and Teaching, 9(2), pp.175–186.

Sahlberg, P., 2011. Finnish lessons: What can the world learn from educational change in Finland? New York: Teachers College Press.

Schleicher, A., 2016a. International Summit on the Teaching Profession: framing the issues. In International Summit on the Teaching Profession. Berlin, OECD Publishing Schleicher, A., 2016b. International Summit on the Teaching Profession: Teaching Excellence through Professional Learning and Policy Reform Lessons from around the world, Paris: OECD. Susskind, R. & Susskind, D., 2015. The Future of the Professions, OUP Oxford.

Symeonidis, V., 2015. The Status of Teachers and the Teaching Profession. Brussels: Education International UNESCO, 2017. Global education monitoring report, 2017/8 Accountability in education: meeting our commitments, Paris: UNESCO Publishing.