The Struggle for Critical Teacher Education: How Accreditation Practices Privilege Efficiency Over Criticality and Compliance over Negotiation
In this article, the author uses a case study approach to explore and analyze a conflict within the Professional Education Unit (PEU) at her university. While the controversy seemed to focus on differing epistemologies concerning critical and traditional pedagogy for teacher preparation, the intensity of the clash suggested there were additional forces at work. The author argues that in this particular case, the undertow of a technical rational perspective, generated by an educational accrediting agency, privileged efficiency over criticality and compliance over negotiation. In addition, she suggests that the power structures embedded in the processes of accreditation interfered with unity supported by a common conceptual framework. The article concludes with recommendations on how an institution might use the educational ideals within their conceptual framework, required for accreditation, to liberate its authors from constrained communication that is bounded by a technical discourse.
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).