Who should guard the gates? Evidentiary and professional warrants for claiming jurisdiction

29Citations
Citations of this article
28Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

This article explores empirical and theoretical literature relevant to accreditation of teacher education programs. The lack of substantial research on accreditation makes it impossible to make empirically based claims about the value-added of such processes, including how accreditation processes enhance the professionalization of teacher education. Contemporary scholarship, especially in sociology, also raises questions, especially about the uncritical acceptance of the professionalization movement in teacher education. After briefly reviewing three lines of criticism concerning professionalization, the authors use that literature to "read" both Wise's (2005) description of the benefits of NCATE's work and Murray's (2005) description of TEAC's role in enhancing professionalism in teacher education. Both authors presume that professionalization is a good; both fail to confront some of the central concerns about the exclusionary practices of professions in their descriptions of NCATE and TEAC. The authors conclude by suggesting that the professionalism movement within teacher education - while important - requires that we encourage and embrace both internal and external forms of criticism. © 2005 by the American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Tamir, E., & Wilson, S. M. (2005). Who should guard the gates? Evidentiary and professional warrants for claiming jurisdiction. Journal of Teacher Education. SAGE Publications Inc. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487105279840

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free