Origins of primary specialisation in Australian education policy: what’s the problem represented to be?

Abstract

Recent reforms in Initial Teacher Education (ITE) in Australia have called for primary pre-service teachers to graduate with a specialisation in a priority learning area. This represents a significant change to the way that primary teachers are prepared. In this paper, we use Carol Bacchi's What's the Problem Represented to be? approach (WPR) to analyse the discourses present in four policy documents that have led to the introduction of primary specialisations in Australian education. The policy analysis reveals that the introduction of primary specialisations does not have a strong evidence base. Moreover, slippage in definitions causes confusion about what the role entails, with certain people marginalised by this policy direction. Recommendations are given for how teachers and teacher educators can work effectively within this new policy context.

“Are we there yet?” 25 years of reform (and reform, and reform, and reform) of teacher education in Australia

“…Over the same period successive Commonwealth governments have stepped up their control of ITE programs, at least partly in response to growing panic about declining national performance on international large-scale assessments such as PISA (Savage and Lingard, 2018). Researchers have employed different forms of policy and discourse analysis to explore aspects of Australian ITE reform over the years, for example, the introduction of a compulsory specialisation for primary ITE students (Bourke et al, 2020), and of nationally regulated teaching performance assessments for all ITE students (Brownlee et al, 2023). Others have explored the forms and consequences of increased regulation (e.g.…”

Primary specialisations in Australia: graduates’ perceptions of outcome and impact

“…This has led to a growing interest in investigating the efficacy and impact of these offerings. In their analysis of the policy documents leading to the introduction of primary specialisations in Australian ITE, Bourke et al (2020) assert that there was no evidence that "…introducing primary specialisations will improve confidence, engagement, student enrolments or student outcomes" (p. 734). In addition, they identify the need to clearly define what is meant by a primary specialisation.…”

“…The Cambridge dictionary defines 'specialisation' as "the process of concentrating on and becoming expert in a particular subject or skill" (Cambridge Dictionary, 2020). In the education literature, 'specialisation' has been referred to as: (1) generalist teachers with a specialisation; (2) instructional coaches and (3) specialist teachers (Bourke et al, 2020). A specialist teacher in the primary setting is usually a generalist teacher who has additional expertise in a specific area e.g., science (Herbert et al, 2017;Markworth et al, 2016).…”

“…The audit of how Australian ITE providers are implementing primary specialisations indicates a varied approach to meeting the needs of their individual programme contexts, which is consistent with the flexibility afforded by the accreditation requirement. Further research stemming from the implementation of specialisation policy is needed to provide greater clarity on the effectiveness of the initiative in addressing teacher quality concerns and supporting the need for specialisation in the primary context (Bourke et al, 2020).…”

Primary teacher educators’ practices in and perspectives on inquiry-based science education: insights into the Australian landscape

“…This practice raises questions for inquirybased approaches to science education and whether the richness provided by these opportunities are lost when science teaching is reduced to a 'set' time and place (Pezaro 2017). Likewise, this increasingly favoured policy position is cause to query the role of primary science teacher education if science teaching is positioned outside the domain of a generalist teacher (Pezaro 2017;Bourke, Mills, and Siostrom 2019).…”