Teachers’ voice, power and agency: (un)professionalisation of the early years workforce

Abstract

This article examines Slovak early years teachers' concerns with conceptions of teacher professionalism. It suggests that there is a mismatch between understandings of professionalism, policy aspirations and the attitudes of teachers to their own professionalism, and that this mismatch fuels early years teachers' sense of agency. These tensions between conceptions of professionalism, teaching practice and actual working conditions have led to a groundup approach to self-governance within the early years teacher workforce. We analyse teachers' discussions in an early years online forum of 12,500 members that was started and remains governed by the teachers themselves. It represents in itself a very particular attitude and response to the need to determine what it means to be a professional teacher. This analysis examines intersections of policy, quality and professionalism, and highlights considerations of power and voice, and the complexities of uncertainty and change. The article concludes with the suggestion that teacher attitudes, power and agency are impacted in unpredictable ways by the policy landscape.

Teachers’ voice behavior—Principal leadership‐driven or teacher self‐driven? Evidence from Taiwan

“…Such findings provide empirical evidence that voice is a critical aspect when teachers make the decision to express their thoughts. Teacher agency positively promotes teachers’ voice behavior, e.g., putting forward their ideas on school curriculum reform and professional teaching practices (Jenkins, 2020; Tesar et al, 2017). Emphasizing teachers’ capacity contributes to school effectiveness.…”

“…On the other hand, teacher agency has also been found to promote voice behavior (Kayi‐Aydar, 2015; Tesar et al, 2017). Teacher agency is seen as an employee's drive to actively engage in organizational structures through the interaction of habit, imagination, and judgment, reproducing and changing those structures in an interactive response to problems (Emirbayer & Mische, 1998).…”

Comparing teacher autonomy in different models of educational governance

“…These changes have resulted from discourse on reducing inequalities and ensuring quality education for all (Lennert da Silva & Parish, 2020). The Slovak Republic (Tesar et al, 2017) and Estonia (Keskula et al, 2012) are also in this group since these countries show high production of standardized performance data, several forms of evaluation by external parties, and high incentives and sanctions resulting from this evaluation. Sweden, despite being a Northern European country with a welfare state governance model, is also included in this group.…”

Topography of power relations in Slovak preschool sector based on Bourdieu’s field theory

“…It is gradually invigorating and breathing life into the power fields, producing new actors, awakening new tensions and conflicts, and altering the quality and structure of power relations (Tesar et al, 2017). The preschool field is losing its specificity, becoming part of the discourses of the education field generally and starting to be more substantially reflected in the academic sphere, multiplying the number of political actors who are incorporating preschool education into their agendas.…”