Search

Teacher effectiveness research now informs the rationale of much Australian education policy aimed at redressing student under-achievement. The approach draws a "straight line" between teacher practice and student outcomes, "controlling" for and ultimately dismissive of other possible influences. The paper calls into question this conception of teaching-learning relations, particularly the extent to which teaching practice can be reasonably quantified and improvements in students' academic achievement can be solely attributed to and/or sole responsibility placed on the pedagogic strategies employed by teachers. Drawing on the theoretical resources of Foucault and Bourdieu, the paper argues further that teacher effectiveness research is flawed in both means and ends. It concludes that in its ranking of student and teacher performance, such research actually works against the purposes of education; specifically, authentic teaching and learning.

One popular view of student achievement is that the quality of teaching students receive plays an important part in whether or not they do well at school. In this article we draw attention to "context" as a complementary explanation, particularly regarding achievement differences between students from different socio-economic backgrounds. In making these observations, we utilise data from one Australian secondary school located in an economically depressed rural community. Drawing on the insights of Bourdieu, our focus is on the broader social and economic influences that can adversely position students and schools, as well as work to inform the institutional stance that schools take in relation to their students. (Contains 1 note.)

Teacher effectiveness research now informs the rationale of much Australian education policy aimed at redressing student under-achievement. The approach draws a 'straight line' between teacher practice and student outcomes, 'controlling' for and ultimately dismissive of other possible influences. The paper calls into question this conception of teaching-learning relations, particularly the extent to which teaching practice can be reasonably quantified and improvements in students' academic achievement can be solely attributed to and/or sole responsibility placed on the pedagogic strategies employed by teachers. Drawing on the theoretical resources of Foucault and Bourdieu, the paper argues further that teacher effectiveness research is flawed in both means and ends. It concludes that in its ranking of student and teacher performance, such research actually works against the purposes of education; specifically, authentic teaching and learning. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper introduces and analyses three broad discourses of academic achievement and failure, specifically those that speak of students' deficits, disadvantages and differences. It draws on interview data collected from teachers working in Australian primary (elementary) and secondary (high) schools and on academic literature that speaks to the field. The paper argues that 'deficit', 'disadvantage' and 'difference' represent discourses of considerable influence in determining how teachers, students and parents define what constitutes success or failure in schools, which respective approaches educators employ, and the beliefs we hold about students who fail and those who succeed. In this respect, the paper is concerned with matters of inclusion and exclusion in schooling. In particular, we seek to tease out the stories that these discourses tell about student diversity, as a way of unmasking how students are differently represented and how these representations serve to include some and exclude others from the benefits of schooling and society more broadly. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]