Individual Presentation or Panel Title

Curricular Control and the Globalization of Fast-Track Teacher Training Programs

Abstract

Fast-track teacher training programs have received increasing and more widespread support over the past twenty years. For example, while Teacher for America (TFA) only assists in preparing a comparatively small number of the teachers certified each year (Donaldson & Johnson, 2010), it has managed to establish itself as perhaps one of the most prominent franchised brands of educational reform in the United States. In cooperation with Teach First, a similarly focused social enterprise based in the United Kingdom, the two organizations established Teach For All, a globally networked consortium of organizations unified under the belief that placing short-term teachers in under-served schools will be a catalyst for longer term educational change.

Specifically focusing on China, this paper considers the impact of the increasingly globalized effort to reform teacher education through “alternative” teacher training programs. This research is designed as analytic study that seeks to address critical issues within the changing field of contemporary curriculum and globalization, with specific focus on challenges to university-based teacher education. As theoretical/conceptual research, the methods of data analysis are based upon a thorough review of peer-reviewed studies on teacher education curriculum and policy in both western countries and China, in addition to the collection and review of primary sources, including documents published by non-governmental organizations, policy briefs from political advocacy groups/think tanks, and materials from the “alternative” certification programs themselves.

Presentation Description

Fast-track teacher training programs have received increasing and more widespread support over the past twenty years. A globally networked consortium of organizations unified under the belief that placing short-term teachers in under-served schools will be a catalyst for longer term educational change. Specifically focusing on China, this paper considers the impact of the increasingly globalized effort to reform teacher education through “alternative” teacher training programs.

Keywords

Teach For All, Teach For/Future China, Curricular Reform in Teacher Education

Location

Magnolia Room A

Publication Type and Release Option

Presentation (Open Access)

This document is currently not available here.

Share

COinS
 
Jun 11th, 2:00 PM Jun 11th, 3:15 PM

Curricular Control and the Globalization of Fast-Track Teacher Training Programs

Magnolia Room A

Fast-track teacher training programs have received increasing and more widespread support over the past twenty years. For example, while Teacher for America (TFA) only assists in preparing a comparatively small number of the teachers certified each year (Donaldson & Johnson, 2010), it has managed to establish itself as perhaps one of the most prominent franchised brands of educational reform in the United States. In cooperation with Teach First, a similarly focused social enterprise based in the United Kingdom, the two organizations established Teach For All, a globally networked consortium of organizations unified under the belief that placing short-term teachers in under-served schools will be a catalyst for longer term educational change.

Specifically focusing on China, this paper considers the impact of the increasingly globalized effort to reform teacher education through “alternative” teacher training programs. This research is designed as analytic study that seeks to address critical issues within the changing field of contemporary curriculum and globalization, with specific focus on challenges to university-based teacher education. As theoretical/conceptual research, the methods of data analysis are based upon a thorough review of peer-reviewed studies on teacher education curriculum and policy in both western countries and China, in addition to the collection and review of primary sources, including documents published by non-governmental organizations, policy briefs from political advocacy groups/think tanks, and materials from the “alternative” certification programs themselves.