A Companion to Research in Teacher Education

good practice is inconsistent and insufficiently shared. Drawing on the evidence,

the inquiry concludes that amongst policymakers and practitioners there is

considerable potential for greater dialogue than currently takes place, as there is

between teachers, teacher-researchers and the wider research community.

• Everybody in a leadership position—in the policy community, in university
  departments of education, at school or college level or in key agencies within the
  educational infrastructure—has a responsibility to support the creation of the
  sort of research-rich organisational cultures in which these outcomes, for both
  learners and teachers, can be achieved.
  While visiting Australia in 2014 I became aware of the moves that were
  developing there to look at the organisation and delivery of teacher education. To
  be frank, there was considerable anxiety at that time that the outcomes of the
  processes of review established by Minister Pyne might bear a considerable simi-
  larity to the developments in England. My reading of the report (TEMAG 2014 ), is
  that this has not in fact been the case.
  The key issues for teacher education (as delineated above) are all in there and the
  awareness of the political significance of teacher education is clearlyflagged, as
  well as the influence of‘the GERM’. The report is not at all uncritical of current
  practice however and suggests that there are some serious weaknesses that must be
  urgently addressed. On the key issue of who should be responsible for high-quality
  teacher education, the report is clear:

Higher education providers and the teaching profession must together embrace the

opportunity to full participate in a reformed, integrated system of initial teacher education.

This participation will be essential in embedding the reforms necessary to deliver

high-quality teaching in every Australian school. (TEMAG 2014 : xi)

The report identifies four‘fundamental principles’on which the group’s delibera-
tions are based: integration, assurance, evidence and transparency. Five proposals
then follow from these principles:

1. a strengthened national quality assurance process;


2. sophisticated and rigorous selection for entry into teaching;


3. integration of theory and practice;


4. robust assurance of classroom readiness;


5. national research and capability.

On the third of these there is talk of structured and mutually beneficial part-
nerships between schools and higher education in order to provide the necessary
‘real opportunities for pre-service teachers to integrate theory and practice’.
And on point 5, the report elaborates:
Better evidence of the effectiveness of initial teacher education in the Australian context is
needed to inform innovative program design and delivery, and the continuing growth of
teaching as a profession. (xii)

Not only that but there is a clear recommendation as to where the leadership for this
research should lie:

674 I. Menter