Microsoft Word - v23n84IntroEPNP fnl.docx Journal website: http://epaa.asu.edu/ojs/ Manuscript received: 8/23/2015 Facebook: /EPAAA Revisions received: 8/23/2015 Twitter: @epaa_aape Accepted: 8/23/2015 SPECIAL ISSUE New Public Management and the New Professionalism in Education: Compliance, Appropriation and Resistance education policy analysis archives A peer-reviewed, independent, open access, multilingual journal Arizona State University Volume 23 Number 84 September 14th, 2015 ISSN 1068-2341 New Public Management and the New Professionalism in Education: Framing the Issue Gary Anderson New York University & Kathryn Herr Montclair State University United States Citation: Anderson, G. & Herr, K. (2015). New public management and the new professional educator: Framing the issue. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 23(84). http://dx.doi.org/10.14507/epaa.v23.2222. This article is part of the Special Issue on New Public Management and the New Professionalism in Education: Compliance, Appropriation and Resistance Guest Edited by Gary Anderson & Kathryn Herr. Abstract: This article provides an introductory frame for this special issue dedicated to New Public Management and the New Professional Educator. We will intoduce the five articles and how they analyze the characteristics of NPM and this emerging new professional as well as forms of educator resistance and advocacy. Keywords: New Public Management; New Professional Educator; resistance; advocacy Nueva Gestión Pública y el Nuevo Educador Profesional: Enmarcando el Problema Resumen: Este artículo ofrece un marco introductorio para este número especial dedicado a la Nueva Gestión Pública y el Nuevo Educador Profesional. Presentaremos los cinco artículos y cómo analizan las características de la NGP y este nuevo modelo de educador profesional, así como las epaa aape E ducation P olicy A nalysis A rchives V ol. 23 N o. 84 Special Issue 2 formas de resistencia y activismo. Palabras clave: Nueva Gestión Pública; Nuevo Educador Profesional; resistencia; defensa. Nova Gestão Pública e New Professional Educator: Enquadrando o Problema Resumo: Este documento fornece um quadro introdutório para esta ediçã especial sobre a Nova Gestão Pública e o Novo Educador Professional. Apresentamos os cinco artigos e como analisam as características do NPM e este novo modelo de educador profissional, e as formas de resistência e ativismo. Palavras-chave: Gestão Pública; Nova New Educador Profissional; resistência; defesa New Public Management and the New Professional Educator The study of education is a parochial field. It tends to be siloed and narrow in its disciplinary focus and country specific in its research focus, even though school reform is now a global phenomonon. Researchers across fields are so specialized they can’t possible understand the proverbial elephant, but only the trunk, a leg, or the tail. And yet, what is happening to teachers today is also happening to principals, counselors, nurses, social workers, doctors and police officers. A “new professionalism” (Evetts, 2009; 2011) is being constructed in all professions and in all countries. While it is enacted differently depending on local contexts, the struggles and dilemmas of the English, Chilean and U.S. teachers, principals, and professors portrayed in these articles are strikingly similar, as are the neoliberal policies these countries have implemented since the 1980s. We are also becoming increasingly aware that the new policy networks of venture philanthropists, think tanks, foundations, international agencies and edubusinesses, who are successfully promoting current reforms, are themselves global (Ball, 2012). As public schools are increasingly absorbed into a market, profit, and efficiency logic, the professional identities of teachers and leaders are being redesigned around the vision of these policy entrepreneurs, few of whom are educators (Ball, 2001; Gillies, 2011). Urban school districts in the U.S. and around the globe have become sites of experimentation with an array of neoliberal and New Public Management (NPM) reforms that are largely non–evidence-based (Ward, 2011). NPM essentially transfers managerial logics from the private to the public sector (See Anderson & Cohen, this issue, for an overview of NPM). Moreover, these new policy networks are largely bipartisan, implemented in England by the Tories and New Labour, in the U.S. by both Republicans and New Democrats, and in Chile by the Christian Democrats and the Concertación (an alliance of left parties). Apple (2001) provides a useful overview of what he calls a “hegemonic alliance of the New Right” including neoliberals, social conservatives, religious conservatives and a new professional middle class. Apple’s notion of alliances is useful in that even though these groups may differ in some areas ideologically and politically, they form a sort of informal coalition pushing for markets, standardization, a reversal of separation of church and state, and a perpetuation of inequality based on notions of individualism and meritocracy. Thanks largely to the influence of these bipartisan policy networks, a long list of reforms has been implemented globally in the last three decades. They include high-stakes testing, school choice, vouchers, charter schools (or their equivalent), principal “autonomy,” alternative and fast track pathways to teaching and leading, privatization and contracting out of public services, mayoral control, data-driven management, public-private partnerships, increased school policing and surveillance, schools and districts as profit-centers for “vendors”, and digitalization of learning through virtual schools. New Public Management and the New Professional Educator: Framing the Issue 3 In fact, many of these reforms are not being adopted in middle class and affluent communities, but are exclusively targeting low-income communities of color (Scott, 2011). While school choice polices and the privatization of urban public schools is viewed by many reformers as the civil rights issue of our time, some research is finding that public schools actually out-perform private and charter schools when socio-economic level is controlled for (Lubienski & Lubienski, 2014; Mizala & Romaguera, 1998). Globally, these reforms are creating a “new professionalism” across all public sectors that is the result of a transfer of private sector logics into the public sector and the replacement of an ethos of public service with the discipline of the market (Denhardt & Denhardt, 2011; Exworthy & Halford, 1999). Evetts (2009) and other sociologists of the professions (Gleeson & Knights 2006; Stronach, Corbin, McNamara, Stark & Warne, 2002), are finding similar trends among other public sector professionals. In education, these changes have had a dramatic impact on what it means to be a teacher and leader, particularly in districts that serve low-income students. New advocacy networks funded by venture philanthropists seek the demise of university-based teacher education and the production of “new professionals” who are trained to work in the highly scripted, franchised charter and virtual schools of the future (Zeichner & Pena-Sandoval, 2015). This collection of articles provides international perspectives on the new professionalism at the school and university levels. Research from Chile, England, and the U.S. provide evidence from three countries that were early adopters of neoliberalism and NPM. The special issue will describe the characteristics of NPM and this emerging new professional and will also review forms of educator resistance and advocacy. The articles provide both conceptual analysis and studies of how new professionalism is manifested within schools as well as in university-based certification programs both through “fast track,” online programs and hybrid programs in which alternative certification (Teach for America, Teaching Fellows) programs partner with university-based programs. The articles use multiple methodologies including interviews, observations, experience sampling methodology (ESM) logs, Q-sort methods, self-ethnography, and discourse and content analysis. In the first article, A Framework for Studying Educator Resistance and Advocacy in the Context of New Professionalism, Gary Anderson & Michael Cohen provide an overview of the literature on new professionalism, New Public Management and forms of resistance, both individual and collective. This article offers a conceptual analysis of the major themes of the resistance literature and proposes a new framework for studying educator resistance and advocacy. Rather than a return to “old” professionalism, they provide characteristics of a new community-based, advocacy professional. Kathryn Herr, in her article, Cultivating Disruptive Subjectivities: Interrupting the New Professionalism provides a self-ethnography of her lived experience of “everyday neoliberalism” and the ways it creates new subjectivies in the workplace. This article explores the tensions and contradictions between graduate students’ experiences in an action research class and the larger goals of an educational leadership certification program designed to prepare teachers who can seamlessly enter schools reflective of the audit culture of New Public Management. In Targets, Threats and (dis)Trust: The Managerial Troika for Public School Principals in Chile, Carmen Montecinos, Luis Ahumada, Sergio Galdames, Fabian Campos, and Veronica Leiva study how principals experience everyday neoliberalism as their professional role changes from instructional leader to school marketer. They explore how a structural problem (public schools’ declining enrollment in Chile) created by neoliberal policies is transformed into an individual problem to be managed by the public school principal. They document the ways that school principals have been E ducation P olicy A nalysis A rchives V ol. 23 N o. 84 Special Issue 4 charged with meeting targets for increasing enrollment and how much of their daily time is spent devising marketing schemes. In Conceptualizing teacher professional identity in neoliberal times: Resistance, compliance and reform, David Hall and Ruth McGinity report findings from extensive ethnographic school data on everyday neoliberalism and how teachers comply or resist current reforms in English schools. They argue that theorizing and researching resistance at a time of widespread compliance has become an urgent issue for educational researchers, which includes a localized understanding of how compliance has been secured. Finally, in Hybridized teacher education programs: A missed opportunity from the forced partnership between university-based and alternative teacher preparation?, Angus Shiva Mungal reports the findings of an interview study of six university-based teacher preparation programs that integrated alternative pathways to teaching (Teach for America, Teaching Fellows, etc.). The objective of the study was to explore how education schools adapted as alternative teacher preparation programs entered their institutional environment. This forced merger of more traditional notions of professionalism and new professionalism highlighted distinctions between conflicting notions of professionalism and revealed the potential for a hybrid teacher. We hope that this special issue will stimulate more research on how NPM and market-based policies filter into the everyday lives of professionals. It is important to “study up” to look at the new policy networks that are promoting these policies, but it is equally important to better understand how they are refashioning a new professional and how this is lived (and resisted) on the ground. References Apple, M. (2001). Educating the “right” way: Markets, standards, God and inequality. New York, NY: Routledge/Falmer. Ball, S. (2001). Performativities and fabrications in the education economy: Towards the performative society. In D. Gleason & C. Husbands (Eds.), The performing school: Managing, teaching and learning in a performance culture (pp. 210–226). London, UK: Routledge/Falmer. Ball, S. (2012). Global education Inc.: New policy networks and the neo-liberal imaginary. London, UK: Routledge. Denhardt J. & Denhardt, R. (2011). The new public service: Serving, nor steering. Armonk, NY: M. E. Sharpe. Evetts, J. (2009). New professionalism and New Public Management: Changes, continuities, and consequences. Comparative Sociology, 8, 247-266. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/156913309X421655 Evetts, J. (2011). A new professionalism? Challenges and opportunities. Current Sociology, 59(4), 406- 422. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0011392111402585 Exworthy, M., & Halford, S. (1999). Professionals and the new managerialism in the public sector. Philadelphia, PA: Open University Press. Gillies, D. (2011). Agile bodies: A new imperative in neoliberal governance. Journal of Education Policy. 26(2), 207-223. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02680939.2010.508177 Gleeson, D. & Knights, D. (2006). Challenging dualism: Public professionalism in ‘troubled’ times. Sociology, 40(2), 277-295. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0038038506062033 Lubienski, C. & Lubienski, S. (2014). The public school advantage: Why public schools outperform private schools. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press. New Public Management and the New Professional Educator: Framing the Issue 5 Mizala, A., & Romaguera, P. (1998). ¿Cómo se comparan los resultados de la prueba SIMCE entre colegios privados y públicos? [How do private and public schools SIMCE test results compare?]. Revista Perspectivas en Poli ́tica, Economi ́a y Gestión, 2(1), 107-130. Scott, J. (2011). Market-driven education reform and the racial politics of advocacy. Peabody Journal of Education, 86, 580-599. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0161956X.2011.616445 Stronach, I., Corbin, B., McNamara, O., Stark, S. and Warne, T. (2002). Towards an Uncertain Politics of Professionalism: Teacher and Nurse Identities in Flux, Journal of Educational Policy 7(1), 110–38. Ward, S. (2011). The machinations of managerialism: New public management and the diminishing power of professionals. Journal of Cultural Economy, 4(2), 205-215. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17530350.2011.563072 Zeichner, K. & Pena-Sandoval, C. (2015). Venture philanthropy and teacher education policy in the U.S.: The role of the New Schools Venture Fund. Teachers College Record, Online First. E ducation P olicy A nalysis A rchives V ol. 23 N o. 84 Special Issue 6 About the Guest Editors Gary L. Anderson New York University Email: gary.anderson@nyu.edu Gary L. Anderson is a professor of Educational Leadership in the Steinhardt School of Culture, Education, and Human Development at New York University. A former high school teacher and principal, he has published on topics such as educational policy and leadership, critical ethnography, action research, and school micro-politics. His most recent books include: The Action Research Dissertation: A Guide for Students and Faculty (2015, Sage), with Kathryn Herr, and Advocacy Leadership: Toward a Post-Reform Agenda (2009, Routledge). Kathryn Herr Montclair State University Email: herrk@mail.montclair.edu Kathryn Herr is a professor in the Department of Educational Foundations in the College of Education and Human Services at Montclair State University, Montclair, NJ. She currently primarily teaches qualitative and action research. Recent publications include The Action Research Dissertation: A Guide for Students and Faculty, (2015, Sage) with co-author, Gary Anderson. SPECIAL ISSUE New Public Management and the New Professionalism in Education: Compliance, Appropriation and Resistance education policy analysis archives Volume 23 Number 84 September 14th, 2015 ISSN 1068-2341 Readers are free to copy, display, and distribute this article, as long as the work is attributed to the author(s) and Education Policy Analysis Archives, it is distributed for non- commercial purposes only, and no alteration or transformation is made in the work. More details of this Creative Commons license are available at http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/. All other uses must be approved by the author(s) or EPAA. EPAA is published by the Mary Lou Fulton Institute and Graduate School of Education at Arizona State University Articles are indexed in CIRC (Clasificación Integrada de Revistas Científicas, Spain), DIALNET (Spain), Directory of Open Access Journals, EBSCO Education Research Complete, ERIC, Education Full Text (H.W. Wilson), QUALIS A2 (Brazil), SCImago Journal Rank; SCOPUS, SOCOLAR (China). Please contribute commentaries at http://epaa.info/wordpress/ and send errata notes to Gustavo E. Fischman fischman@asu.edu Join EPAA’s Facebook community at https://www.facebook.com/EPAAAAPE and Twitter feed @epaa_aape. New Public Management and the New Professional Educator: Framing the Issue 7 education policy analysis archives editorial board Editor Gustavo E. Fischman (Arizona State University) Associate Editors: Audrey Amrein-Beardsley (Arizona State University) & Jeanne M. Powers (Arizona State University) Jessica Allen University of Colorado, Boulder Christopher Lubienski University of Illinois, Urbana- Champaign Gary Anderson New York University Sarah Lubienski University of Illinois, Urbana- Champaign Michael W. Apple University of Wisconsin, Madison Samuel R. Lucas University of California, Berkeley Angela Arzubiaga Arizona State University Maria Martinez-Coslo University of Texas, Arlington David C. Berliner Arizona State University William Mathis University of Colorado, Boulder Robert Bickel Marshall University Tristan McCowan Institute of Education, London Henry Braun Boston College Heinrich Mintrop University of California, Berkeley Eric Camburn University of Wisconsin, Madison Michele S. Moses University of Colorado, Boulder Wendy C. Chi* University of Colorado, Boulder Julianne Moss University of Melbourne Casey Cobb University of Connecticut Sharon Nichols University of Texas, San Antonio Arnold Danzig Arizona State University Noga O'Connor University of Iowa Antonia Darder University of Illinois, Urbana- Champaign João Paraskveva University of Massachusetts, Dartmouth Linda Darling-Hammond Stanford University Laurence Parker University of Illinois, Urbana- Champaign Chad d'Entremont Strategies for Children Susan L. Robertson Bristol University John Diamond Harvard University John Rogers University of California, Los Angeles Tara Donahue Learning Point Associates A. G. Rud Purdue University Sherman Dorn University of South Florida Felicia C. Sanders The Pennsylvania State University Christopher Joseph Frey Bowling Green State University Janelle Scott University of California, Berkeley Melissa Lynn Freeman* Adams State College Kimberly Scott Arizona State University Amy Garrett Dikkers University of Minnesota Dorothy Shipps Baruch College/CUNY Gene V Glass Arizona State University Maria Teresa Tatto Michigan State University Ronald Glass University of California, Santa Cruz Larisa Warhol University of Connecticut Harvey Goldstein Bristol University Cally Waite Social Science Research Council Jacob P. K. Gross Indiana University John Weathers University of Colorado, Colorado Springs Eric M. Haas WestEd Kevin Welner University of Colorado, Boulder Kimberly Joy Howard* University of Southern California Ed Wiley University of Colorado, Boulder Aimee Howley Ohio University Terrence G. Wiley Arizona State University Craig Howley Ohio University John Willinsky Stanford University Steve Klees University of Maryland Kyo Yamashiro University of California, Los Angeles Jaekyung Lee SUNY Buffalo * Members of the New Scholars Board E ducation P olicy A nalysis A rchives V ol. 23 N o. 84 Special Issue 8 archivos analíticos de políticas educativas consejo editorial Editor: Gustavo E. Fischman (Arizona State University) Editores. Asociados Jason Beech (Universidad de San Andrés) y Jesús Romero Morante (Universidad de Cantabria) Armando Alcántara Santuario Instituto de Investigaciones sobre la Universidad y la Educación, UNAM México Fanni Muñoz Pontificia Universidad Católica de Perú Claudio Almonacid Universidad Metropolitana de Ciencias de la Educación, Chile Imanol Ordorika Instituto de Investigaciones Economicas – UNAM, México Pilar Arnaiz Sánchez Universidad de Murcia, España Maria Cristina Parra Sandoval Universidad de Zulia, Venezuela Xavier Besalú Costa Universitat de Girona, España Miguel A. Pereyra Universidad de Granada, España Jose Joaquin Brunner Universidad Diego Portales, Chile Monica Pini Universidad Nacional de San Martín, Argentina Damián Canales Sánchez Instituto Nacional para la Evaluación de la Educación, México Paula Razquin UNESCO, Francia María Caridad García Universidad Católica del Norte, Chile Ignacio Rivas Flores Universidad de Málaga, España Raimundo Cuesta Fernández IES Fray Luis de León, España Daniel Schugurensky Universidad de Toronto-Ontario Institute of Studies in Education, Canadá Marco Antonio Delgado Fuentes Universidad Iberoamericana, México Orlando Pulido Chaves Universidad Pedagógica Nacional, Colombia Inés Dussel FLACSO, Argentina José Gregorio Rodríguez Universidad Nacional de Colombia Rafael Feito Alonso Universidad Complutense de Madrid, España Miriam Rodríguez Vargas Universidad Autónoma de Tamaulipas, México Pedro Flores Crespo Universidad Iberoamericana, México Mario Rueda Beltrán Instituto de Investigaciones sobre la Universidad y la Educación, UNAM México Verónica García Martínez Universidad Juárez Autónoma de Tabasco, México José Luis San Fabián Maroto Universidad de Oviedo, España Francisco F. García Pérez Universidad de Sevilla, España Yengny Marisol Silva Laya Universidad Iberoamericana, México Edna Luna Serrano Universidad Autónoma de Baja California, México Aida Terrón Bañuelos Universidad de Oviedo, España Alma Maldonado Departamento de Investigaciones Educativas, Centro de Investigación y de Estudios Avanzados, México Jurjo Torres Santomé Universidad de la Coruña, España Alejandro Márquez Jiménez Instituto de Investigaciones sobre la Universidad y la Educación, UNAM México Antoni Verger Planells University of Amsterdam, Holanda José Felipe Martínez Fernández University of California Los Angeles, USA Mario Yapu Universidad Para la Investigación Estratégica, Bolivia New Public Management and the New Professional Educator: Framing the Issue 9 arquivos analíticos de políticas educativas conselho editorial Editor: Gustavo E. Fischman (Arizona State University) Editores Associados: Rosa Maria Bueno Fisher e Luis A. Gandin (Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul) Dalila Andrade de Oliveira Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Brasil Jefferson Mainardes Universidade Estadual de Ponta Grossa, Brasil Paulo Carrano Universidade Federal Fluminense, Brasil Luciano Mendes de Faria Filho Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Brasil Alicia Maria Catalano de Bonamino Pontificia Universidade Católica-Rio, Brasil Lia Raquel Moreira Oliveira Universidade do Minho, Portugal Fabiana de Amorim Marcello Universidade Luterana do Brasil, Canoas, Brasil Belmira Oliveira Bueno Universidade de São Paulo, Brasil Alexandre Fernandez Vaz Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina, Brasil António Teodoro Universidade Lusófona, Portugal Gaudêncio Frigotto Universidade do Estado do Rio de Janeiro, Brasil Pia L. Wong California State University Sacramento, U.S.A Alfredo M Gomes Universidade Federal de Pernambuco, Brasil Sandra Regina Sales Universidade Federal Rural do Rio de Janeiro, Brasil Petronilha Beatriz Gonçalves e Silva Universidade Federal de São Carlos, Brasil Elba Siqueira Sá Barreto Fundação Carlos Chagas, Brasil Nadja Herman Pontificia Universidade Católica –Rio Grande do Sul, Brasil Manuela Terrasêca Universidade do Porto, Portugal José Machado Pais Instituto de Ciências Sociais da Universidade de Lisboa, Portugal Robert Verhine Universidade Federal da Bahia, Brasil Wenceslao Machado de Oliveira Jr. Universidade Estadual de Campinas, Brasil Antônio A. S. Zuin Universidade Federal de São Carlos, Brasil