Teaching & Teacher Education, Vol. 10, No. I, pp. 1 14, 1994 07424351X/94 $6.00+ 0.

00
Printed in Grcat Britain Pergamon Press Ltd

PROFESSIONALIZATION IN TEACHING AND TEACHER EDUCATION:

S O M E N O T E S O N ITS H I S T O R Y , I D E O L O G Y , A N D P O T E N T I A L ~

T H O M A S S. P O P K E W I T Z
University of Wisconsin-Madison, U.S.A,

A b s t r a c t - - T h e more recent calls for school reform have focused on a re-visioning of the work of
teachings and teacher education. A central rhetoric in the current climate is related to the
professionalization of teaching. We can view the public discourses as not simply a formal
mechanism for describing events but as part of their context serving to align loyalty and social
solidarity with particular values and social interests. My intent in this discussion is to raise
questions about how the word, professionalization, is used within the social and political contexts
in which teaching occurs. At the same time, I propose that there are certain issues in teaching that
professionalization can address. In particular, I examine tensions of modernity and a post-
modernity for considering the power relations in which the professional production of knowledge
and the development of expert-mediated systems of ideas occurs.

A number of recent U.S. federal, state, and are to reform schools.

foundational reports have focused on the quality
of public education. Earlier reports, such as
Nation-At-Risk, identified a crisis in teaching:
Children are not learning their basics, and better
instruction is needed to maintain the spiritual,
cultural, and economic climate of the nation.
The more recent calls for school reform have
focused on a re-visioning of the work of
teachers and teacher education through chang-
ing conceptions of pedagogy. The reform propo-
sals make substantial claims about the problems
of schools and the direction in which reform
should move. A central rhetoric in the current
climate is related to the professionalization of
teaching. There is a concern for providing
teachers with more autonomy, privilege, and
status. Words like reflection, empowerment, and
teacher control are juxtaposed with constructiv-
ist psychologies and cooperative learning to
speak about the new roles and conditions which
But to view the reform proposals as objec-
tive, disinterested plans for action is to obscure
their social significance and political implica-
tions. The current public discourse is not
simply a formal mechanism for describing
events but is part of their context serving to
align loyalty and social solidarity with particu-
lar values and social interests. The documents
define what knowledge is relevant for consider-
ing problems and a structure for finding
solutions to problems of schooling. In this short
discussion, I will provide a social and historical
look at the meaning of professionalization in
teaching in the U.S.A. My intent is to raise
questions about how the word, professionaliza-
tion, is used within the social and political
context in which teaching occurs. At the same
time, I will propose that there are certain issues
in teaching that professionalization can
address.

1An earlier version of this article appeared in Cuadernos de Pedaoooia (1990). For a more extensive discussion of these issues,
see Popkewitz (1987, 1991). I would also like to thank the a n o n y m o u s journal reviewer for comments which I believe (and
hope, if I followed directions) tightened my argument.
2 THOMAS S. POPKEWITZ
Reform-Oriented Words and Their Social
Ecology
We cannot take the meanings of key words in
education reform for granted but need to develop
an ecology of how the categories of reform are
identified. If we take, as an example, the emphasis
given to professions as a goal of policy in the
current educational reform discourse, we find that
this word has different meanings in Australia,
Iceland, Spain, Sweden, the U.S.A., among other
nations. 2 Further, the word has no fixed
definition or some universal idea irrespective of
time or place. Historical and sociological schol-
arship continually reminds us that there are "no
minimal conditions" for professions to exist. One
can compare, the difference between the law
profession in Britain and the U.S.A. to under-
stand, for example, how thee meaning of profes-
sion is itself constructed through different rela-
tions between the state and the civil society (see,
e.g., Tortsendahl, 1990).
The concept of profession is a socially con-
structed word which changes in relationship to
the social conditions in which people used it. To
put it differently, there is no essential definitions
that we can apply to the words that describe
schooling; our terms do not portray a reality
against which we can then measure the capacity
to live up to a specific standard. Our words are
a part of the socially constructed and sustained
worlds in which we live.
Let me explore this by focusing upon the
words "professions" and "professionalism." I
recently participated in a 3-year international
symposium on professions at the Swedish
Collegium for Advanced Study in the Social
Sciences. It became apparent that there could be
no understanding of profession in any universal
manner. There are important differences between
the Anglo-American and European, continental
traditions of the professions. In Germany,
professions has traditionally referred to an
educated class rather than to experts and
scientific planning (Kocka, 1990). In part, these
differences reflect the diversity in state develop-
2For a discussionof how professionaldiscoursesare introducedinto the social pattern of teachereducationin eight countries,
see, for example, Popkewitz (1993).
3The importance of expert-mediated knowledge is evident in current teacher education reforms which "look'" at teacher's
personal knowledgeand teacher thinking. That looking is the application and re-interpretationof situated thought through
cognitivepsychologyor symbolicinteractionistsperspectives.It is not a naive catalogingof thought that "naturally" exists. I
discuss this in Popkewitz(1991).
ment when certain educated middled class
occupations formed. In many strongly centra-
lized European state systems, there was no word
equivalent to the Anglo-Saxon word profession
until recently. Sweden and Iceland, for example,
had no word to speak of professions until
the Anglo-American concept was imported as a
way to speak about the particular rationaliz-
ations occurring with its educational systems.
The Anglo-Saxon word "profession" is brought
into the language of many countries to describe
the social formations of work within the middle
class, the increased importance of expertise in
the process of production/reproduction, and
specifically, in teaching, the effort toward upward
mobility.
The Anglo-American conception of profession
is not a neutral term that can be incorporated
easily into other national vocabularies. It im-
poses an interpretive "lens" about how occupa-
tions work. The American discussion about the
teaching profession, for example, identifies an
ideal type of altruistic occupation that is separate
from the functions of state. The autonomy of
professionals, technical knowledge, occupational
control of the rewards, and a noble work ethic are
identified as characteristic of a profession. The
ideal, however, has little basis in fact; it ignores
the political struggles, the debates, and the
compromises involved in the formation of the
professions.
Whatever important social service we might
want to identify with professions, we must also
realize that the characteristics commonly asso-
ciated with these occupations are myths which
legitimate existing power and authority. The
power of the legal system, for example, was tied to
the emerging state and its systems of elite
privilege (Larson, 1977; Collins, 1979). The
actual knowledge in individual professions is
often context-dependent; although expert-
mediated systems are increasing in importance. 3
Furthermore, technological knowledge--medi-
cine is a good example--is developed outside the
work place so that practitioners have little
understanding of how technologies work; thus,
 Professionalizationin Teaching
we see current hospital and pharmaceutic
technologies of which doctors have little direct
knowledge used for diagnosis in medicine
(Svensson, 1990). The centralized authority of
American physicians is in fact a relatively recent
development that relates to technological and
institutional changes that have little to do with
the stated goals of the medical professions
(Krause, 1977; Starr, 1982).
Professional groups developed in the U.S.A.
and Britain as a by-product of a weak centralized
state. Anglo-American professionals functioned
as mechanisms to mediate the problems of social
regulation that were dealt with through a
centralized state in most European settings.
What is interesting is that a country like Sweden,
which during the 20th century has been one of the
most centralized and bureaucratic states in
western Europe, did not have a professional
culture of expert knowledge outside the state
organization. This is changing. The Swedish
government's decentralization reforms now
place greater emphasis on local decision making
in finances and the curriculum of schools a
development that is introducing new regulation
problems for the state. The new situation entails
the formation of stronger professional groups in
schools, such as in various associations of mathe-
matics teachers, teacher educators, science edu-
cators, and so on. These groups seek to assume
some of the regulatory authority previously
located in formal structures of the state, such as
proposing curriculum standards and controlling
entry to teaching.
To summarize at this point, the current U.S.A.
reforms assume that professionalization will
bring status, improved working conditions, and
greater financial rewards by adopting the occu-
pational conditions associated with law and
medicine. The label "profession" is used by
occupational groups to signify a highly trained,
competent, specialized, and dedicated group that
is effectively and efficiently serving the public
trust. But the label "professional" is more than a
declaration of public trust: It is a social category
that also imputes status and privilege to an
occupational group. Even while making this
analogy, the educational reform movement in the
U.S.A, has not sufficiently addressed the complex
political, economic, and structural issues under-
lying the growth of professional power among
physicians and lawyers in the past century
3
(Larson, 1977). The history of these professions is
not one of selflessness but a record of the
development of increasing social and cultural
authority. Professions made their services a
medium of exchange for the desirable resources
of status, power, and compensation. Doctors, for
example, used their position as independent
providers of services separate from hospital
charges to protect their fee structures. Profes-
sional services were never as altruistic as
portrayed, nor were professional interests as
neutral as practictioners would have their clients
and themselves believe (Hughes, 1958). This
point is made clear in the various rhetorical
strategies taken by the Americal Medical Asso-
ciation and pharmaceutical companies as the
U.S. government seeks to curtail medical costs in
order to provide universal health care.
Professionalization in Teaching: Occupational
Mobility for Men and Social Regulation for
Women
I want to look further at the issue of school
improvement in which U.S. arguments about
professionalization have become important. As
an ideological stance, one has to agree with the
public rhetoric: that teachers should participate
in their work with autonomy, integrity, and
responsibility. At this level, the slogan can be
important to a reconstruction of schooling.
There is a need for teachers to increase their
skills in developing and implementing curricu-
lum. The requirements of modern societies entail
teaching practices that give values to critical
thinking, flexibility, and a tentativeness and
skepticism towards social patterns--cultural
requirements that have implications for teacher
autonomy and responsibility. Professionalism
also contains some notions of collegiality and
community ethics; important in contemporary
societies. But to talk about professionalism,
integrity, and responsibility, and collegiality
without focusing upon the structural relations
that shape teaching is to lose sight of the way
school practices are historically shaped.
"Professionalism" has been an aspect of reform
in U.S. education since the early 19th century; it
referred to two different layers in the formation of
the occupation. Professionalism served as a
slogan for those "at the top," including adminis-
4 T H O M A S S. P O P K E W I T Z
trators and university professors, denoting spe-
cialization in university training and the
development of new disciplines in educational
sciences (as part of the planning and evaluation
of schooling at the turn of the 20th century).
Much of the research and many of the evaluation
schemes for schooling relegated teachers to an
ancillary status (Mattingly, 1987). For adminis-
trative purposes, research focused upon assess-
ment of large groups of students and the
evaluation of school systems. This stratum of the
occupation tended to be male-dominated and
better paid than teachers were who were
typically women; administrators and professors
enjoyed significant autonomy in the conceptuali-
zation and organization of their work conditions.
The creation of strong school superintendents
and, later, department heads provided an occu-
pational hierarchy and, not incidently, advance-
ment paths for males.
At the bottom were teachers. Many of the
reforms of the late 19th century made teaching
increasingly bureaucratic in the name of profes-
sionalization. Standardized hiring practices,
uniform curriculum policies, and teacher evalua-
tion practices eroded Spheres of teacher autono-
my and responsibility as there was an increased
rationalization of school organization and didac-
tics. At no time in the history of modern mass
schooling have the working conditions of
teachers in the U.S.A. provided the opportunity
for genuine intellectual training or systematic
reflection. Teacher education has been concerned
with a fragmented and practically oriented
acquisition of information and skills--devaluing
an intellectual focus. It is historically significant
that the outcome of teacher reforms has reduced
the boundaries of teacher responsibility. Moral,
ethical, and intellectual considerations have been
replaced with an emphasis on administrative
skills, what we now call "classroom manage-
ment." Ever since the 1840s, attempts to reform
teaching have served to introduce more hier-
archical forms of control (Mattingly, 1987;
Powell, 1980).
The diminution of teacher responsibility
through bureaucratization is evident in curricu-
lum development as well. Consider, for example,
the development of reading textbooks from the
1920s to the present. In the 1920s, U.S. teachers'
manuals emphasized the teaching of reading. The
manuals were small, containing professional
discussions and student bibliographies for the
use of teachers (Woodward, 1987). By the 1970s,
teachers' lessons were completely scripted, with
about four pages of detail per day to specify what
to say, where to stand in classrooms, how to
organize the lesson, and how to evaluate
students. These later manuals seemed to subor-
dinate reading itself to the teaching of specific
skills. These findings are underscored in current
research on curriculum reforms. While these
reforms emphasize teaching for problem-solving,
self-motivation of students, and learning as the
elaboration of meaning, the implied role of the
teacher is undermined through classroom struc-
tures that emphasize teaching as managing for
procedural learning and compliance (McCaslin
& Good, 1992).
These trends continue in current reform efforts
that link professionalism to school improvement.
A study of three school districts involved in an
effort to increase teachers professionalism indi-
cates this very clearly (Popkewitz & Lind, 1989).
The reform strategies increased the teachers'
work load and the level of monitoring of teacher
practices. Evaluation was to provide "evidence"
of teacher accountability and more rational
approaches to school improvement. It was
assumed that there is a direct relation-
ship between teacher evaluation and the
improvement of learning. Yet the teacher
evaluations valued instrumental and pro-
cedural concerns, such as whether teachers
stated their objectives clearly or followed the
correct outline given for the lesson; the evalua-
tion process devalued the craft and dynamics
of teaching, as well as those elements that have
gender implications.
If this brief review of the different meanings of
professionalization is correct, then reforms that
offer teachers greater autonomy and responsi-
bility require a systematic examination of how
teaching practices, the conceptions of evaluation,
and school social patterns can limit or restrain
the work of teaching and teacher education. It is
not enough to say that teachers should be
reflective or that they should enjoy greater
autonomy. There is a need to establish traditions
of thought and reflection in the patterns of
scholing that will sustain such efforts more of
which is discussed at the end of this essay.
 Professionalizationin Teaching
Schooling and the Expertise of Education
Sciences
While much of the rhetoric of educational
reform uses law and medicine as exemplars of
professionalism, the histories of those fields are
not especially relevant to the occupational
development of schooling. Rather, discussions of
professionalism need to focus on the interrelation
of the social sciences with the formation of the
"helping" professions to explore the power
relations that shape teaching in the U.S.A. The
conception of professionals as experts in organiz-
ing social institutions through scientific know-
ledge appeared as early as the middle 1800s
(Bledstein, 1976). The appeal of the new occupa-
tions was that out of the many only a few,
specialized by training and indoctrination, would
enter the profession that all in societ2¢ were to
respect.
The social authority of the profession derives
in part from its scientific claims and in part from
the assumption that only a few self-governing
persons could exercise trained judgement in their
field of expertise. The ideology of these sciences is
that they are socially and culturally neutral; the
histories of the social and educational sciences
reveals their participation in social movements
and as a dynamic in the regulatory strategies as
the modern state assumed its social welfare roles
(Lement, 1991; Popkewitz, 1984). Since the turn
of the 20th century, science has provided much of
the legitimation for organizing the work of
curriculum, and learning. The discussion about
professionalism has moved to rationalize (and
control) teachers' knowledge of pedagogical prac-
tice, through strategies of educational research.
The Emergence Sciences of Education and the
Problems of Governing
In the emergent pedagogical sciences of the
late 19th and early 20th century in the U.S.A., we
can locate certain status distinctions and power
relations in education that limit autonomy
(O'Donnell, 1985; Napoli, 1981). Scientific peda-
gogies were a part of the rapidly growing
American universities to aid in the new role of
social and cultural management (Powell, 1980).
Edward Thorndike, a leading psychologist of
mental testing, argued that the human mind is
given to exact measurement similar to that of the
5
natural sciences, that such measurement is
beyond the capacity of teachers, and that the
formation of curriculum should be left in the
hands of experimental psychologist (Bloch,
1987). With the concern for administration of the
newly formed mass schooling, it seems in
retropsect that it was no accident that the
experimental and behavioral sciences rather than
the psychology of Dewey became firmly im-
planted in instructional design (Kliebard, 1986).
The sciences of the helping professions devel-
oped particular theories and methodologies that
were to function as part of the regulatory
strategies of schooling. A faith existed that
science brought progress to social and economic
institutions. Many of the new social experts
claimed that the social sciences could assure the
same material and social progress that had been
gained through the natural sciences. The new
professionals emphasized empirical analysis and
useful knowledge (Foucalt, 1970; Napoli, 1981;
Silva & Slaughter, 1984). Central to the sciences
of human affairs was the problem of control:
There was a "vision of a science which would
make society as amenable to analysis and certain
kinds of mastery and reform as was the world
investigated by the natural sciences" (Silver,
1983).
A professional language developed that as-
serted a neutrality towards industrial, commer-
cial, or civil interests. Professional knowledge, it
was argued, was descriptive of how things
worked and could be used by any group in
society to further its interests. The early leaders of
the American Economic Association, American
Sociological Society, American Psychological
Association, and later, the American Political
Science Association maintained that the social
sciences offered positive guidance to government
in bringing about human progress (Silva &
Slaughter, 1984).
While the new professionals argued that they
were non-partisan groups, the assumptions
underlying the social sciences had to do with
maintaining social harmony. The methods and
questions of the new sciences, it was thought, was
to result in social amelioration as worker strife,
rural dislocation, and challenges to dominant
social groups from European immigration per-
meated the constuctions of mass schooling. In the
early decades of the 20th century, the dominating
mandate of the social sciences was to help reduce
6 T H O M A S S. P O P K E W I T Z
social conflict and provide strategies to Ameri-
canize the diverse groups who had be-
come citizens (Popkewitz, 1991).
The sciences of pedgagogy gave concrete
attention to the concerns of social harmony
(O'Donnell, 1985; Napoli, 1981). The pedagogi-
cal sciences responded directly to concerns about
moral upbringing and labor socialization but
refocused them as problems of attitude, learning,
and the skills of individuals as they interacted
with their environment. The focus upon individu-
al differences and the seemingly objective meth-
ods of social science offered an appealing
approach to schoolmen who had to deal with
large population increases, issues of urban
dislocation, and problems of diverse populations
(Franklin, 1986). The psychologies of instruction
down-played social conflict by emphasizing
classless institutions based upon merit. 4
Constructivism and Re-Constituting Patterns of
Regulation
The current reform reports argue, as did the
educational psychologists of the 1890s, the
importance of an empirical functional knowledge
for providing direction to educational progess
(Holmes Group, 1985),. The Holmes Report, for
example, asserts that the reform of teacher
education "depends upon engaging the complex
work of identifying the knowledge base for
competent teaching and developing the content
and strategies whereby it is imparted" (p. 49).
Further, "studies of life in classrooms now make
possible some convincing and counter-intuitive
conclusions about schooling and pupil achieve-
ment" (p. 52). This knowledge, it is argued, can
enable "training to increase the higher order
questions a teacher asks; to decrease the
preponderance of teacher talk; to provide
advanced organizers, plans and clear directions;
to give teachers the cognitive resources to make
pedagogical decisions and to manage producti-
vely the hundreds of distinct interactions they
will have with pupils each day" (p. 52),
The new wave in educational cognitive psy-
chology is given focus in these reform reports to
replace earlier behaviorism. The cognitive
researcher considers how teachers think and
reason about classroom practices. The argument
4See Mattingly (1975). These views can be contrasted with current social-psychologies which seek to understand a socially
mediated subjectivity; such a Resnick, Levine, and Teasley (1991).
is that such research can help to identify
particular teacher competencies and skills that
will establish their professional credential.
In an analysis of that literature, however, the
cognitive research agendas tend to provide a
more intrusive strategy for the social regulation
of teachers' lives (Popkewitz, 1991). The organ-
ization of knowledge about teachers' thought
brings new forms of supervision and observation
of teachers into the specific and practical level
of school work.
The constructivist psychologies can be seen as
producing a crystallization of knowledge and
value. The irony of this strategy is that the
rhetoric of the constructivist psychologisits is to
treat knowledge as socially constructed. Yet its
methodological commitments are in the opposite
direction. The psychology suggests a world
which separates mind from its social and
historical world.
This brand of psychology is somewhat like the
Jesuit teaching of the Counter-Reformation. The
Jesuits taught classical Greek literature as a de-
contextualized literature. The literature was read
as devoid of the Greek social values that framed
the Ancients' writing. The Jesuits re-contextua-
lized the Ancient literature by making it a
technical exercise of textual reading where
Catholic interpretations of principles and values
could be superimposed on the stories. As the
Jesuit teaching in medieval times, the pedagogi-
cal researchers take-for-granted the structured
patterns that underlie the various disciplines that
comprise school subjects. The constructive psy-
chologies make the school subjects exist as
devoid of the multiple interpretations, social/
cultural conflict, or social interests in which
disciplinary knowledge is produced. The prob-
lem and problematic of school pedagogy is to
find multiple strategies by which to learn what is
given as the content of learning. Concepts and
generalizations are treated as persisting monu-
ments to the progressive and harmonious
developments of science or humanity. Pedagogi-
cal strategies are to identify flexible strategies by
which children can acquire the monuments
called concepts.
Behind the research strategies and its
modernist rhetoric about children's develop-
 Professionalizationin Teaching
ment, problem-solving, and the social construc-
tion of knowledge are 19th century conceptions
of a determined knowledge. It is a world without
history and social interests. Ignored are the
constantly changing and multiple interpretative
schemas of science, mathematics, and social
science. In its irony, much of the reform
movement about teaching subject matter con-
structs an imaginary disciplinary field as it
constructs its imaginary school subject.
The regulation in the cognitive psychologies
are inscribed through different but related
strategies of research. Even though the research
paradigm emphasizes the social construction of
knowledge, there is a reification of school
subjects. The content of school subjects has a
taxonomic propensity and made to seem univer-
sal rather than historically contiguent. Further,
the rationalizations of teachers' knowledge are
techniques of social administration. When edu-
cators speak of research as identifying the
knowledge base of teaching or that research is to
describe fully the mental lives of teachers, as is the
case in this research, that research breaks social
interactions into more detailed, discrete tasks.
But these research strategies are not just
academic ideas about schooling. The research is
sanctioned as part of the reform agenda through
state practices. The categories and distinctions
of the constructivist psychology are tO be
brought back into the school to guide teachers'
conceptions and practice. The purpose of the
regulatory systems is to guide the individual in
determining needs, satisfaction, and knowledge.
The categories of the external evaluations and
the distinctions applied to determine the
teacher's own competence are to inscribe more
refined ways for individual teachers to monitor
themselves. When the teacher thinking research
agenda is tied to a clinical perspective, the object
of the discourse is the individual whose inten-
tions are to be revealed and ordered through the
empiricism.
It is ironic that the desire to produce new
degrees of freedom and autonomy for teachers
through the educational sciences has had histori-
cally different effects upon their responsibilities.
New technologies tend to regulate further
teachers' lives through an individualization
process that makes every teacher subject to
ceaseless supervision by themselves and by
others.
7
Normalizing, Disciplining, and Professionalized
Knowledges
My concern with regulations is to focus on
how the scientific knowledges of professions
regulate through the categories and definitions of
the teacher that they construct. Professional
knowledges are not only knowledges that
describe the world but are systems of ideas and
practices that authorize how people find out
who they are and what they are in society. (The
theoretical issues of how certain knowledges are
sanctioned as authoritative are discussed in
Bourdieu, 1991.)
This "deep" structure of knowledge is a
consequence of modernity: The scientific dis-
courses of professions are the sacred knowledge
of modernity. It is the knowledge that is to help us
to come to grips with the abstract systems that
place our individuality in worlds that transcend
the local and communal. For example, we
participate in a universal schooling, in economic
systems that are often global, in social welfare
arrangements to secure our health, in state
governing systems in which we are citizens; each
system imposes sets of obligations and responsi-
bilities on what we do and how we are to think of
ourselves as members of these distance systems of
relations. At the same time, professional know-
ledge provides strategies by which our sense of
"self" is re-embedded' in a commmunity to
understand the face-to-face interactions in which
daily life is acted out (Giddens, 1990).
Both direct and indirect mediations of experts
are important to the modern "self". We visit a
psychologist to resolve personal and family
problems, work with a financial advisor to make
judgements about pension planning, or work
with a school psychologist to understand chil-
dren's behaviors and teaching strategies for
classrooms. At the same time, and indirectly, our
daily talk about family, work, leisure, and
education are inscribed with scientific rationali-
ties that create bounded systems by which to
effect daily practices. We speak of ourselves and
children through expert-mediated knowledge,
such as having a childhood, as being pre-
adolescence, of attaining the learner's motiva-
tion, as organizing the school through site-based
management, or as examining the labels of foods
to determine their cholesterol levels.
8 THOMAS S. POPKEWITZ
The significance of these mediating profes-
sional knowledges is that they sanction and
normalize; although I do not mean these as either
evil or good, but to recognize that discursive
practices of professions produce contraints and
restraints on our individuality. This regulation is
not only on the clients, the children in schools,
but on the mediating agents themselves--the
teachers. The regulation is in the way in which
objects of the world are constructed through the
sophisticated methodologies and linguistic stra-
tegies that define and categorize what a person is
in school and how that person is to relate to the
world. When we talk in schooling about the
individual, the student, the teacher, the adminis-
trator, achievement, childhood, and so on, these
are not "merely" words but are embedded in
systems of ideas that cognitively organize the
world; and with that cognition are sensitivities,
dispositions, and awarenesses that have the
potential to shape and fashion identity itself.
The inscriptions enable us to "see" what
objects of the world are to be put together or
differentiated, while, at the same time, making
certain "things" difficult to talk about, or at
points, not possible as thought. In this sense, the
work of Michel Foucault and feminist scholar-
ship over the past decade are helpful in locating
how language practices are not only representa-
tive of things in the world but are important
elements in the construction of those worlds.
I have sought in the previous discussion to
focus on professionalization as a dynamic in the
development of institutions by which new forms
of social regulation were invented. The sciences
of schooling need to be considered as part of the
process of social regulation. These forms of
regulation and multiple qualities: (1) they pro-
vided for some social mobility, and (2) they
provided systems of regulation through the in-
scription of ways of acting, feeling, talking and
"seeing" the world (for histories of the profes-
sionalization and ideas in U.S. education, see
Franklin, 1986; Kliebard, 1986). Professionaliz-
ation has direct consequences not only for elites
and their clients, but for workers at the lower
51n contemporary reforms, see Popkewitz, Tabachnick, and Wehlage (1982), especially in the chapter concerned with technical
schooling; also Ginsburg (1987).
6The work of Marie Brennan, Stephen Kemmis, Jenifer Gore, James Ladwig, and John Smyth in Australia; Ken Zeichner,
Susan Nofke, and Joe Kincheloe in the U.S.A. provide such examples.
VThere is a sense of ambiguity in this proposal of"reconstruction" because of the historical baggage carried with the words,
professional and professionalism.
levels in the organization of teaching hierarchies
which are highly populated by women. Turn of
the century reforms to increase teachers' profes-
sionalization through efficiency did protect jobs
but also reduced teacher responsibility for cur-
riculum and increased the monitoring and con-
trol of their work by others. 5 Current reform
efforts to professionalize teaching may poten-
tially decrease the range of responsibility and the
conceptualization of teaching. We find, for
example, that the efforts to improve the working
relations may, in fact, bestow differential status
on teachers that are in conflict with the norms
of professional quality (Smylie, 1992). At the same
time, the reform movement has produced new
initiatives for teachers to control their work
space. 6
Professionalization and Post-Modern Views of
Knowledge
Throughout this essay, I have continually
viewed professional practices as social practices. I
have specifically focused on issues of knowledge
that underlie the production of expert-mediated
systems of knowledge in modernity of which
schooling is a central institution. I touched upon
these concerns to understand pedagogy as
producing and reproducing social worlds and
identity. I pose the problem of teaching in this
manner to point to issues of power that are
intertwined with institutional practices.
A Re-Visioning of the Enlightenment Project
At this point, I would like to consider briefly a
way to reconstruct the notion of professionaliza-
tion to move it into the social/intellectual
tradition from which it derives, that of the
European Enlightenment. v I maintain the use of
the word professionalism rhetorically to make
explicit the tensions inscribed in expert-mediated
knowledges of schooling. At the same time, I
want to make traditions of skepticism and
criticism towards the established truths as
privileged in professional discourses of teaching
and teacher education.
 Professionalization in Teaching 9

By the phrase "Enlightenment," I evoke a
tradition which places faith in reason and
•rationality for improving the conditions of the
world. The Enlightenment also represents a
political philosophy that accorded people public
responsibility for the organization of their own
lives. Schools, in this context, become an import-
ant educative institution in the realization of that
social goal. The objective was to produce an
enlightened citizen, but as I argued earlier, the
production of the citizen involved power rela-
tions whose effects produced new forms of
regulations and patterns of governing.
Major strands of 20th century philosophy,
sociology of knowledge, cultural studies, socio-
logy, literary studies, anthropology, and history
have refocused the problem of the Enlighten-
ment through a concern with how power as
inscribed in knowledge. 8 This refocusing has
been variously defined as post-modernism, post-
structuralism, and feminism. There is a recogni-
tion that there are multiple claims to truth and
progress; progress is never absolute but a prag-
matic movement that entails both critical and
constructive moments. This latter awareness
involves considering claims about truth and
producing social betterment as historically
bound, contingent, and emerging from the social
struggles and tensions of a world in which we live.
Further, the search to expand human possibili-
ties always is fraught with potential dangers as
the things that we seek in the world rarely turn
out as we have conceived of them.
We can think of the current questioning of the
relation of knowledge, social practices, and
power as a strategic re-ordering of the intellectual
and political projects of the Enlightenment
Project. 9 Central to this questioning is a
reconceptualization of the concept of power.
Previous "modernist" traditions of inquiry
sought to identify strategies that can overcome
the repressive elements of society and sought a
global and redemptive progress. With some
hesitations and some dissent, intellectual tradi-
tion of modernism presupposed an evolutionary
progress as researchers provided the normative
boundaries to guide and direct change. Post-
sPolitical and non-politicalelementsof post-modernismand its relation to social scienceare drawn in Roseneu (1992). For
discussion of its politicalelementsin education,see,Cherryholmes(1988),Giroux (1992),Lather (1991),and Popkewitz(1991).
9While critics see post-modernisms, a term I use here to talk about diverse intellectual movements, as rejecting the
commitments of the Enlightenment, my own position is that "post" literatures re-vision the intellectual and political
projects associated with the Enlightenment. See my preface in McLaren, Giarelli, and Kincheloe(in press).
modern studies shift their key concepts from a
repressive notion of power to the deployments of
power; that is, the ways in which power works its
way through the social body to produce social
practices and identity--a Nietzschean concep-
tion of the will to know. These studies reject the
notion of evolutionary progress and global stra-
tegies of change; focusing attention more with
those pragmatic practices that can interrupt the
ways in which power circulates in and through
our subjectives.
How might we reinterpret teaching and its
professionalization as a part of a post-modern
tradition? As part of the Enlightenment, teaching
and teacher education maintain general and
seemingly transcendent values that relate to
notions of democracy, justice, and equality.
These values, however, are always contingently
formed and reformed. We need to be aware that
while the rhetoric of education always points
towards transcendent values, the language and
social practices are precarious, limited, and often
with contrary effects. Further, teacher education
and teaching maintain diverse and differen-
tial practices that continually inscribe power
relations. Curriculum practices, for example,
contain diverse conflicting philosophical
assumptions about human "nature," political
assumptions about the relation of people to their
institutions, and cultural assumptions about the
central values and patterns that give direction
to social dynamics (Kliebard, 986). No matter
how noble our hopes, curriculum practices are
socially constructed with multiple political
boundaries whose effects are bound to power
relations through which we construct
identity.
A challenge of professionalization is to develop
traditions of teacher practice that considers
pedagogy as having dual qualities. It is to
develop capacity; and it is a form of social
regulation that produces capacity through the
effects of power relations (Bernstein, 1990;
Lundgren, 1983). As we engage in the tasks of
constructing and implementing a curriculum,
what are defined as possibilities may also become
prisons.
10 T H O M A S S. P O P K E W I T Z
School Subjects, Alchemy, and Imaginary
Constructions
Pedagogy is concerned with the selection,
organization, and evaluation of knowledge. By
knowledge, I refer not only to the "facts" and
content that become part of the curriculum. The
language of our conversations about teaching,
childhood, individuality, and society are more
than cognitive lenses; they are ways of thinking,
"seeing," feeling, and acting in the world. In this
sense, we understand the acts of teaching as forms
of social regulation; selecting from the total array
of phenomena to impose boundaries of interpre-
tation, to classify, and to distinguish what is
significant, and related; and at the same time, the
boundaries define what should be omitted.
Let me provide an example, We can think of
school subjects as what the French sociologist,
Pierre Bourdieu has called an "alchemy," the
reorganization of phenomena from one system of
practices into another form (Bourdieu, 1991).
The alchemy is a passage from one social space.
(e.g., physics) into another (e.g., school physics)
that presupposes a change in mental ordering but
does not acknowledge that change in social space.
When we think of the construction of a
school subject as an alchemy, we can begin to
understand school subjects as imaginary--it has
no basis in the world outside of the school. What
is brought into school is not what scientists,
mathematicians, writers, or artists do. Here, I
think we can draw Bourdieu into a conversation
with Basil Bernstein, the British sociologist
(Bernstein, 1990). Bernstein talks about the
reformulation of school subject as "imaginary
subjects" and "imaginary practices." The practice
of selecting school knowledge involves a process
of reconceptualizing and reformulating know-
ledge. Science and mathematics, for example, are
formed as school knowledge through a process of
selective appropriation, relocation, and refocus
that reorders the school subjects. The net result is
something different from what is borrowed.
The principle of reformulation seems obvious,
but it is lost in the discussions about school
subjects. Schooling rhetorically establishes the
sacredness of science, mathematics, social sci-
ence, and so on through its labels and assignment
of categories of knowledge. One reads school texts
that say they have the concepts and information
of science, mathematics, and so on. But these
categories about science or mathematics are
remade in its new pedagogical contexts to
conform to the rules of schooling that have little
to do with the original disciplinary fields. The
syntax, lexicon, and references of pedagogy
divorce the research practices of science from the
social determinisms that are embodied in discip-
linatry practices. Teachers talk about how "to
help others learn," to plan a lesson to teach a
concept, to evaluate students' assignments, or to
understand student's progress. Science is teach-
ing "cooperative small groups", or "whole-group
instruction." The pedagogical reformulations are
hidden in the school discursive practices, cere-
monies, and ritual performances (such as sitting
in a science laboratory with all its paraphernalia,
writing mathematical formulas on a chalkboard,
or reading textbooks labeled as physics).
It is here that we can more forcefully explore
the regulative qualities of pedagogical discourses
at two layers of social life. One, the imaginary
subjects posit a moral order through the rules of
order, relations, and identify which establish
priority and value in the world. That moral order
is both prior to and a condition for the
transmission of competence in the practices of
teaching. Certain truths that secure and enhance
the well-being of social life are promoted through
the inscriptions of what are accepted as prob-
lems, questions, and responses in classroom
practices.
The significance of pedagogy, however, is also
in a second layer. The ordering principles of
curriculum are to teach individuals who they are
and what they are in their worlds--we might call
this learning as part of identity formation.
The cognitive organization of curriculum is
to be tied with the development of wants,
desires, bodily feelings. As a child learns a school
subject matter, a child also learns what it "feels"
like to be smart and how to articulate that
smartness through body movements and speech,
and how to be sociable and to feel competence in
carrying on a conversation that often goes
beyond schooling.
If I take a particular U.S. example, the televised
Congressional hearing on the nominations of
Clarence Thomas to the Supreme Court, we can
understand how school learning involves learn-
ing dispositions, sensitivities, and awareness
about the world and one's "self". Thomas was
accused of sexual harassment by a former
 Professionalization in Teaching
employee. The televised hearing became one of
the most watched television shows this past year.
Both Thomas and his former employee, Anita
Hill, were African-Americans and grew up in
rural poverty. Both had scholarships to Yale
University Law School; the alma mater of
President Bush and many of the Senators in the
hearing. Both called witnesses to testify on their
behalf that also attended this elite Law School. In
following the hearing, it became clear that we
were not only watching a drama about sexual
harassment in the workplace. These participants
carried themselves (their styles of expression,
body manners) in a manner that was similar and
spoke with a certain entitlement as they contin-
ually referenced their ties with Yale. This simi-
larity crossed gender and racial lines. What was
learned in their legal education was not only
legal arguments. The pedagogy also inscribed
certain attitudes, feelings, expressions, and bodily
manners that "told" of their placement in a
world.
It is of this regulation of curriculum that
Foucault speaks--when he suggests that we
reverse the traditional belief that knowledge is
power, and define power as embodied in the
manner by which people gain knowledge and use
the knowledge to intervene in their social affairs.
His particular concern is how the individual is
governed through the invention of certain forms
of scientific discourses about the individual.
Foucault called this relation as governmental-
ity--the linking of changing socio-political
administrative patterns to individual behaviors
and dispositions. In certain ways Foucault's
interest in the effects of knowledge is important
to theories of schooling.
The professionalization of teachers needs to
give attention to the multiple conditions of
knowledge; but not only as those of philosophical
questions, but also as social questions. Ideas are
part of the material context they express and
produce.
Power/Knowledoe and Teachino
The system of rules, distinctions, and categor-
ies of curriculum privilege certain types of
interpretations about the world from the vast
array of possibilities. The rules about curriculum
also provide a technology of self-regulation and
self-monitoring, a form of power which has
11
implications for how individuals manage them-
selves through the rules, standards, and styles of
reasoning that construct boundaries and possibi-
lities for everyday life.
Since at least the Protestant Reformation,
schools are institutional patterns that relate the
state, civil (and religious) authority, and moral
discipline. The idea of curriculum is a particular
organization of knowledge by which individuals
were to regulate and discipline themselves as
members of a community/society (see, e.g.,
Englund, 1986; Hamilton, 1989; Lundgren,
1983). The reforms introduced by Martin Luther
were to make education as a "disciplining"
mechanism important to the Reformation (Luke,
1989). The German reforms of the 16th century
were not only to educate the masses along
humanistic principles. Curriculum was (and is)
an imposition of knowledge of the "self" and the
world that would give order and individual
discipline. The imposition was not of brute force
but in the symbolic system by which one is to
interpret, organize, and act in the world.
The peculiar quality of school knowledge
developed historically in relation to a number of
social issues and pressures. These have included:
the creation of viable democracy, the selection
and maintenance of a labor force, and assistance
with the welfare and economic programs that
have been a hallmark of the modern state. These
social purposes of schools are maintained within
societies that are characterized by different social
classes, religious differentiations, racial diversity,
and gender divisions, among others.
This has led to school patterns of differentia-
tion that do not necessarily mirror the larger
social patterns but which are related to them.
For example, there is sufficient research in the
U.S.A. to suggest that the patterns of classroom
conversation and the practices of teaching do
not represent a universal or common experience;
they contain multiple layers of meaning and
interpretation. While the rituals of schooling are
part of a common institution, there exist social
distinctions about who learns what and how that
learning is to take place.
We can view current school reforms as
impositions that inscribe regulatory patterns
through the forms given to curriculum and
teaching. What these impositions are, however,
have multiple interpretations. One can read, for
example, discussion of state and professional
12 T H O M A S S. P O P K E W I T Z
standards for multi-cultural curriculum as recog-
nizing the multiple boundaries of knowledge and
acknowledging the position of multiple groups
formerly excluded from school curriculum (see,
e.g., Report of the New York State Committee,
1991; National Council for Social Studies, in
press). From one perspective, such curriculum is
to develop knowledge and dispositions that can
create national cohesion and notions of common
good through inclusionary processes. At the
same time, these efforts to privilege the position
of various grouping of people are also to make
standards of truth as relational and historically
contingent without fixed boundaries. Implicit in
the school subjects and subjectivity (see, e.g.,
Giroux, 1992; Gore 1990).
In focusing upon issues of Enlightenment as
frames for professionalization, we return to the
ironies, contradictions, and dilemmas involved in
teaching and teacher education. The complex
and profound problem of curriculum can be
expressed as a conflict between the hope we place
in schooling and the happenings as people
create, sustain, and renew the conditions of their
world. The history of the curriculum is one in
which theories are never realized in the manner
they are intended. Further, as reform practices
are realized in the social conditions of schooling,
there are power relations that have unintended,
unanticipated, and unwilled consequencess.
Conclusions
This essay began with an examination of the
words of reform and professionalization. While
professionalism is a slogan that has great appeal
to many of our cherished beliefs and noblest
hopes about schooling, the words have no
intrinsic meaning. They exist in relation to other
words in social patterns and institutional set-
tings.
My argument sought to privilege the intellec-
tual and political importance of critical tradi-
tions in teaching and teacher education. The
practices of teaching and teacher education occur
within broader bands of structural relations in
which schooling is located. At the same time, the
practices of teaching are themselves located
simultaneously in dual worlds. One of these
worlds is the institutional patterns by which
schooling is produced. The other context is the
larger struggles and power relations of the world
which include the intellectual production of
knowledge and the development of expert-
mediated systems of ideas. When I use "intellec-
tual systems" and intellectuals I am concerned
not only with the politics of systems of ideas but
also with the social practices in which expert
ideas are mediated. Teaching is the par excellence
of this mediation in modernity.
I focused on the relation of teaching and
teacher education to what has been called the
Enlightenment Project and the recent rethinking
of the role of reason, rationality, and the
intellectual in the development of democractic
and just social systems. Curriculum revision and
altering the construction of teaching require
intellectual traditions that can confront the ways
in which power relations are inscribed in the
which power relations are inscribed in the
categories, distinctions, and differentiations of
professional practices. While we cannot lose site
of the social commitments within teaching, we
also need to develop a skepticism towards
practices that seem to establish unambiguous
foundations--be it notions of teacher autonomy,
children's learning, or emancipation.
If one examines the history of teaching and
teacher education, its traditions tend to be anti-
intellectual. It accepts the roles of expert-
mediated knowledges and the experts in organiz-
ing change. Often posed as a populism that
makes teachers' practices as sacred ("the wisdom
of practice"), it ignores how practice and
experience are themselves theoretically con-
structed categories whose effects are to produce
power relations (Scott, 1991). Even traditions of
teaching and teacher education that are to
impose critical strategies into teaching tend to
privilege the present and the immediately useful.
When we examine the labels of "action research",
collaboration, professional development schools,
and reflective teaching--reform slogans that
have currency within education--these practices
tend to privilege the immediate and the present
through defining direct relations between theory
and practice (Ladwig, 1991). Obscured are the
historical conditions in which systems of ideas
are developed and the complex sets of debates,
tensions and struggles that underlie the produc-
tion of knowledge and power.
 Professionalization in Teaching
Learning how to study requires learning how
to read "deeply" (see, e.g., Cherryholmes, 1988).
One needs to learn not only what questions are to
be asked, concepts to use, or methods to apply. In
learning about ways of asking questions, we need
also to learn how the questions that we ask are
themselves constructed within historically
formed systems of ideas and social practices.
Questions and methods of research are formed
within schools of thought (be it different brands
of empiricism, hermeneutics, Marxism, or post-
modernism) that are historical constructions of
disciplines. Dewey, for example, needs to be read
not only for the ideas that we "see" in his writings,
but as an epistemic person who was part of a
discursive community that was responding to
multiple changes in the cultural, social, econ-
omic, and political world (see, e.g., Ross, 1991).
If we are to engage in something called action
research or "reflective teaching", we need to ask
what systems of ideas organize how we construct
the objects that we are calling schooling,
children, teaching, learning, and so on. This
entails giving attention to "systems of intellectual
habits"; that is, the tools for critical thinking and
the active disposition that can prevent know-
ledge from appearing as a catalogue of tech-
niques and which renounces an "academic
indulgence towards the history of doctrines or
concepts in order to grant diplomatic recognition
to the values consecrated by tradition or fashion"
(Bourdieu, Chamboredon, & Paseron, 1991, p.
4). The ordering of reason through the common-
sense and ordinary languges of schooling needs
to be brought into focus.
Current reforms that focus, on the quality of
schools and schools of education pose an
opportunity to consider the intellectual, social,
cultural, and economic relations that underlie
our teaching. The study of schooling should
involve a critical awareness that will enable us to
understand how existing traditions and customs
limit our search for possibilities. S. Wright Mills
called this quality in which the interplay of
history, social structure and biography as "a
sociological imagination" (1959). Our struggle is
to make our traditions and community better;
but that struggle involves integrating moral
visions of tradition and community with a
skepticism toward those traditions and its
verities.
13
References
Bernstein, B. (1990). The structuring of pedagogal discourse.
Class, codes and control (Vol. iv). New York: Routledge.
Bledstein, B. (1976). The culture of professionalism. New
York: W. W. Norton.
Bloch, M. (1987). Becoming scientific and professional: An
historical perspective on the aims and effects of early
education. In T. Popkewitz (Ed.), The formation of school
subjects: The struggle for creating an American institution
(pp. 25-62). London: Falmer Press
Bourdieu, P. (1991). Language and symbolic power. In J.
Thompson (Ed.), G. Raymond & M. Adamson (trans.).
Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Bourdieu, P., Chamboredon, J., & Passeron, J. (1991). The
craft of sociology; epistemological preliminaries. Berlin:
Walter de Gruyter.
Cherryholmes, C. (1988). Power and criticism: Poststructur-
al investigations in education. New York: Teacher College
Press.
Collins, R. (1979) The credential society, an historical
sociological study o f education and stratification. New
York: Academic Press.
Englund, T. (1986). Curriculum as a political problem:
Changing educational conceptions with special reference to
citizenship education. Uppsala, Sweden: Student Litera-
ture, Chartweil-Bratt.
Foucault, M. (1970). The birth of the clinic. New York:
Vintage Books.
Franklin, B. (1986). Building the American community: The
school curriculum and the search for social control. London:
Falmer Press.
Giddens, A. (1990). The consequences o f modernity. Stanford,
CA: Stanford University Press.
Ginsburg, M. (1987). Reproduction and conceptions of
professionalization: The case of pre-service teachers. In T.
Popkewitz (Ed.), Critical studies in teacher education; its
folklore, theory and practice (pp. 186-129). New York and
London: Falmer Press.
Giroux, H. (1992) Border crossings, cultural workers and the
politics of education. New York: Routledge.
Gore, J. (1990). What we can do for you! What can "we"
do for "you"? Struggling over empowerment in critical
and feminist pedagogy. Educational Foundations, 4(3),
5-26.
Hamilton, D. (1989). Towards a theory o f schooling. London:
Falmer Press.
The Holmes Group Standards Development. (1985). Goals
for educating teachers as professional." An interim report.
Draft presented at Wingspread, Racine, Wisconsin.
Hughes, E. (1958). Men and their work. Glencoe, IL: The Free
Press.
Kliebard, H. (1986). Struggle for the American curriculum.
London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
Kocka, J. (1990) 'Biigertum' and professions in the nineteenth
century: Two alternative approaches. In M. Burrage & R.
Torstendahl (Eds.), Professions in theory and history,
rethinking the study of the professions (pp. 62 74). London:
Sage Publications.
Krause, E. (1977). Power and illness; the political sociology o f
health and medical care. New York: Elsevier.
14 THOMAS S. POPKEWITZ
Ladwig, J. (1991). Is collaborative research exploitative?
Educational Theory, 41(2), 11-20
Larson, M. (1977). The rise o f professionalism: A sociological
analysis. Berkeley: University of California Press;
Lather, P. (1991). Getting smart; Feminist research and
pedagogy within the postmodern. New York: Routledge.
Lemert, C. (1991). Intellectuals and politics: Social theory in
a changing world. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.
Lundgren, U. (1983). Between hope and happening: Text and
context in curriculum. Geelong, Australia: Deakin Univer-
sity Press.
Luke, C. (1989). Pedagogy, printing, and Protestantism. The
discourse as childhood. Albany, NY: State University of
New York Press.
Mattingly, P. (1975). The classless profession: American
schoolmen in the nineteenth century. New York: New York
University Press.
Mattingly, P. (1987). Workplace autonomy and the reform-
ing of teacher education. In T. Popkewitz. (Ed.), Critical
studies in teacher education: Its folklore, theory and
practice (pp. 36 56). London: Falmer Press.
McCaslin, M., & Good, T. (1992). Compliant cognition: The
misalliance of management and instructional goals in
current school reform. Educational Researcher, 21(3), 4-17.
Mills, C. W. (1959). The sociological imagination. New York:
Oxford University Press.
Napoli, D. (1981). Architects of adjustment: The history of the
psychological profession in the United States. Port Wash-
ington, NY: Kennikat Press.
National Council for the Social Studies (in press). Curriculum
standards for the social studies. Washington, DC: National
Council for the Social Studies.
O'Donnell, J. (1985). The origins of behaviorism: American
psychology, 1876--1920. New York: New York University;
Popkewitz, T. (1984). Paradigm and ideology in educational
research, social functions of the intellectual New York:
Falmer Press.
Popkewitz, T. (1987). Organization and power: Teacher
education reforms. Social Education, 51, 496-500.
Popkewitz, T. (1990). Some problems and problematics in the
production of evaluation. In M. Grandheim, M. Kogan,
& U. Lundgren (Eds.), Evaluation as policy making."
Introducing evaluation in a national decentralized educa-
tional system (pp. 103-118). U.K.: Jessica Kingsley
Publishers.
Popkewitz, T. (1991). A political sociology o f educational
reform. Knowledge/power in teaching, teacher education,
and research. New York: Teachers College Press.
Popkewitz, T. (Ed.). (1993). ChanginO patterns of power."
Social regulation and teacher education reform. Albany,
NY: The State University of New York Press.
Popkewitz, T. (in press). Preface In P. McLaren, J. Giarelli,
& J. Kincheloe (Eds.), Critical theory and educational
research. New York: State of New York Press.
Popkewitz, T., & Lind, K. (1989). Teacher incentives as
reform: Implications for teachers' work and the changing
control mechanism in education. Teachers College Record,
90, 575 594.
Popkewitz, T., Tabachinick, B., & Wehlage, G (1982). The
myth o f educational reform." A study of school responses to a
program of change. Madison: University of Wisconsin
Press.
Powell, A. (1980). The uncertain profession; Harvard and the
search for educational authority. Cambridge: Harvard
University Press.
The Report of the New York State Social Studies Review and
Development Committee (1991). One nation, many
peoples: A declaration of cultural interdependence. Albany,
NY: New York State Education Department.
Resnick, L., Levine, J., & Teasley, S. (1991). Perspectives on
socially shared cognition. Washington, DC: The American
Psychological Association.
Roseneu, P. (1992). Post-modernism and the social sciences.
Insights, inroads and intrusions. Princeton, NJ: Princeton
University Press.
Ross, D. (1991). The origins o f American social science. New
York: Cambridge University Press.
Scott, J. (1991). The evidence of experience. Critical Inquiry,
17, 773-797.
Silva, E., & Slaughter, S. (I 984). Servino power: The making of
the academic social science expert. Westport, CT:
Greenwood Press.
Silver, H. (1983). Education as history, interpretin9 nineteenth
and twentieth century education. London: Methuen.
Smylie, M. (1992). Teachers' reports of their interactions with
teacher leaders concerning classroom instruction. The
Elementary School Journal, 93(1), 85 98.
Starr, P. (1982). The social transformation of American
medicine: The rise o f a sovereign profession and the makin 9
of a vast industry. New York: Basic Books.
Svensson, L. (1990). Knowledge as a professional resource:
Case studies of architects and psychologists at work. In
R. Torstendahl & M. Barrage (Eds.), The formation o f
professions." Knowledge, state and strategy (pp. 51-70).
London: Sage Publication.
Torstendahl, R. (1990). Essential properties, strategic aims
and historical developments: Three approaches to theories
of professionalism. In M. Burrage & R. Torstendahl
Eds.), Professions in theory and history, rethinking the
study o f the professions (pp. 44-61). London: Sage
Publications.
Wertsch, J. (1991). Voices of the mind, A sociocultural
approach to mediated action. Cambridge, MA: Harvard
University Press.
Woodward, A. (1987). From professional teachers to activity
managers: The changin 9 role of the reading teachers" guide,
1930-1986. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the
American Educational Research Association, Washington,
DC.
Submitted 27 November 1992
Accepted 16 April 1993