Juliana from England noted that the OFSTED visit divided the faculty: some
wanted to comply, while others felt it should be boycotted. While Stella (England) a
Director of a teacher education program described the high stakes of an OFSTED
visit and the dire consequences of a poor OFSTED report as follows:
I suppose I’ve become more critically aware of pressures on me...to make sure that what I
do is going to be compliant or not found wanting of any of kind of OFSTED regulation.
Because I am very clear that...they could say our course [program] didn’tfit the bill and
that would be curtains [for the program]. And that’s terrifying.The stress of these high stakes external reviews cannot be underestimated. Nor can
the logistical, conceptual, and moral challenges be dismissed as the LTEs faced as a
result of government agendas. One participant described the situation as“soul
destroying”while others were choosing to leave teacher education and/or their
faculty position because they simply could no longer endure what some described
as the“destruction of teacher education”.
9.9 Discussion
The LTEs showed themselves to be hard-working, thoughtful, and knowledgeable.
Their commitment to their student teachers and sheer ingenuity were impressive.
Although there were some common practices and beliefs (e.g. importance of getting
to know their student teachers) they clearly were individuals. As Dominique
(US) noted,“I really, really believe you teach who you are so I really just try to stay
true to that”.
There was substantial evidence the 28 LTEs had extensive knowledge spanning
many key areas. They demonstrated knowledge of the four spheres identified by
Kosnik et al. ( 2015 ): knowledge of research, pedagogy of higher education, literacy
and literacy teaching, and current school and government initiatives. Evidence of
including the four spheres was found in the design and delivery of their courses and
in their course syllabi. Using the four spheres to assist with the data analysis it is
evident that teacher educators drew on their knowledge and further, they require a
vast knowledge in order to capably fulfil their work.
The LTEs’pedagogy of teacher education was based on their research, their
work as classroom teachers, and their own early childhood experiences. As a result,
each course was unique which has both merit and drawbacks. By working from
their individual strengths and interests even in the confines of government oversight
there was not a great deal of consistency in literacy courses. However, there is some
concern in the variability of courses. With governments monitoring many teacher
education programs, this range could inadvertently lead to further control by
governments.
Determining what student teachers need to know about literacy can be inter-
preted differently. To help assuage the differences LTEs need to come together to
discuss goals and pedagogies so they can start to come to some agreement on a
148 C. Kosnik et al.