Culture Clash: The Experiences of Overseas-Trained Supply ...



Culture Clash: The Experiences of Overseas-Trained Supply Teachers in English Schools

Uvanney Maylor(, Merryn Hutchings(, Kathy James(, Ian Menter( and Sarah Smart(

Paper presented at the British Educational Research Association Annual Conference, University of Warwick, 6-9 September 2006

Abstract

In recent years the UK teacher shortage has led to an increasing reliance on the recruitment of overseas-trained teachers to fill vacancies, especially in London schools. Their recruitment has however, drawn attention to difficulties such teachers appear to encounter when trying to fulfil the demands of schools, and at the same time, cope with an unfamiliar educational system and in some instances unfamiliar teaching contexts. The teaching difficulties that some overseas-trained teachers have experienced have been perceived as constituting a ‘culture clash’. This paper explores the experiences of a small group of teachers trained overseas working in English schools temporarily as supply teachers. It seeks to challenge the notion of overseas-trained teachers presenting a ‘culture clash’ in English schools, and elicit wider discussion.

Introduction

Overseas-trained teachers are an increasing presence in English schools, especially in London (Government Office for London, 2002; Ofsted, 2003; DfES, 2006). In 2000 10,000 were recruited via English supply teacher agencies (Barlin and Hallgarten, 2002).Overseas-trained teachers without UK qualified teaching status are allowed to work as temporary teachers in England and Wales for a maximum of four years (Department for Education and Skills (DfES) regulations). The largest numbers of overseas-trained teachers working temporarily in English schools originate from Australia, New Zealand and South Africa (McNamara et al., 2005; Hutchings et al., 2006). Teacher shortages in England and Wales primarily during the late 1980s and towards the end of the 1990s, and an inability of some schools to appoint and retain indigenous qualified teaching staff to permanent posts, led to an increase in the recruitment of teachers from Commonwealth countries (Smithers and Robinson, 2000; 2003; Ross, 2003; Ross and Hutchings, 2003). Appleton et al. (2006:124) point to an ‘oversupply’ of teachers in South Africa during the 1990s as contributing to South Africa being viewed by teacher supply agencies as ‘an attractive location’ for recruiting overseas-trained teachers. While teacher shortages have subsided to a certain extent overseas-trained teachers continue to be recruited to work in England. Recruitment drives to Australia in 2003 and Canada in 2004 by the Government Office for London may also account for these teachers increasing numbers in London (ALG, 2004).

Young teachers from Australia and New Zealand are actively recruited by teacher supply agencies owing to shared language and similarities in educational systems with the British and because they are perceived as being ‘very good, excellently trained’ practitioners (Morrison, 1999:179; see also McNamara et al., 2005). Their ‘youthful enthusiasm and adaptability’ (ibid:180) makes them desirable as well as their commitment to working in challenging schools (Morrison, 1999). Such teachers bring a variety of teaching experiences, strengths, commitment and understanding of teaching and learning to the classroom. A small-scale study by Maylor and Hutchings (2003:24) found that in some schools overseas-trained teachers (from diverse backgrounds; not just Australian) are regarded as ‘an asset’ and ‘incredibly strong, good classroom practitioners’, who have the ability to enthuse pupils (see also Barlin and Hallgarten, 2002; McNamara et al., 2005). The strengths displayed by overseas-trained teachers have led to their services at times being sought on a long-term basis (Maylor and Hutchings, 2003). Notwithstanding this, many have been found to be inadequately equipped to cope with an unfamiliar school system and poor pupil behaviour (Ofsted, 2002, 2003).

Culture clash

The recruitment of overseas-trained teachers to work as supply teachers allows for greater flexibility in addressing teacher vacancies especially in more challenging schools. However, the difficulties encountered by some groups has drawn attention to what has been characterised by the media and others as ‘cultural clashes’ (Boyland and Mansell, 2002; Midgley, 2002) between overseas-trained teachers’ understanding and perceptions of the teaching and learning styles that exist within the British educational system, and their comprehension of the ways in which schools operate. For example, with regard to pupil learning behaviour, it has been argued that some overseas-trained teachers have been ‘shocked’ by the perceived ‘lack of discipline in UK schools’ (Stuart et al., 2003; Midgley, 2002). The ‘considerable culture shock’ experienced by some of the teachers (from Eastern Europe, Asia and Africa) in Stuart et al’s (2003:15) study led them to conclude that newly arrived overseas-trained teachers ‘may need much longer to adjust to these cultural differences’. However, it is not clear what these ‘cultural differences’ refer to.

Research by Maylor and Hutchings (2003) showed that overseas-trained teachers working temporarily in England from countries such as Australia, Canada and the United States, not only share expectations of good pupil behaviour and respect for the teacher, but also similar expectations of teaching and learning with teachers from the Caribbean, Africa and Europe (Pole, 1999; Stuart et al., 2003). Stuart et al. (2003) reported overseas-trained teachers experiencing difficulties in their practice in classrooms where there was a lack of respect for teachers. Overseas-trained teachers are not a homogeneous group. Their teacher identity(ies) are differentiated by country of origin, gender, ‘race’/ethnicity, class, age, teacher training and teaching experience. Nevertheless, their similar expectations and experiences of pupil learning and behaviour suggests that what has been identified as a ‘culture clash’ is a ‘clash’ of educational systems (i.e. teaching values and approaches) which might be reinforced by cultural expectations.

Culture transmits the ideas, beliefs and values that help to shape the actions and subjective experiences of particular groups or communities. Such ideas and values transcend social and cultural differences and help to develop shared meanings and understandings (Jordan and Weedon, 1995). They are also the means through which groups or communities develop a sense of identity and belonging, and ‘negotiate their conditions of existence’ (Bottomley, 1997:3). Cultural identities ‘acquire specific meaning in a given context’ (Brah, 2000:443). This suggests that the construction of cultural identities is a social process whereby cultural identities are transformed and/or re-negotiated through social interaction. Cultural identities are deemed to be complex (Phoenix, 1998; Alexander, 2002), multifaceted and ‘subject to the continuous ‘play’ of history, culture and power’ (Hall, 1993:394). In other words cultural identity formation ‘is a matter of ‘becoming’ as well as of ‘being’’ (ibid).

Like cultural identity, the professional identity of teachers develops and/or is reconstructed over time across different educational and political discourses (Pratt and Nesbit, 2000; Sachs, 2001; Moore et al., 2002; Woods and Jeffrey, 2002). It is dependent on their ‘beliefs and values about what it means to be a teacher’ (Sachs, 2001:154), the roles or classroom situations teachers find themselves working in and/or how they negotiate and make meaning of such contexts (Grosvenor and Lawn, 2001; Woods and Jeffrey, 2002). The professional identity of teachers is also framed or underpinned by their ‘race’, ethnicity, gender and class (Dillabough, 1999; Maguire, 2001). Such factors have led researchers to argue that it is not possible to separate the person from the teacher (Goodson, 1994; Mahony and Hextall, 1997; Johnson, 2003; Bullough, 2005). Grosvenor and Lawn (2001) take this a stage further and suggest that when teachers teach they are often working to recreate activities and senses of self that are basic to their identity. In such instances teacher identity and practice are said to ‘mirror each other’ (Sachs, 2001:155). According to Carson and Johnston (2000) issues of cultural identity and cultural difference are brought to the forefront particularly when teachers are faced with teaching in contexts of cultural difference (see also Johnson, 2003). Thus it is reasonable to question if overseas-trained teachers have a cultural sense of self that influences their professional teacher identity.

Cultural analyses have been criticised for offering ‘partial explanations of why people think and behave as they do’ (Kuper, 2000: xi). Despite this, an emphasis on cultural identities in teaching and learning is considered essential for eliciting a wider understanding of the experiences and praxis of overseas-trained teachers. Relatively little is known about the employment experiences of overseas-trained teachers on temporary contracts in Britain. This paper seeks to explore some of the aspects that appear to contribute to overseas-trained teachers experiencing a ‘culture clash’ while working as supply teachers in English schools.

The study

The findings discussed in this paper are derived from a larger DfES funded national study which collected data on the numbers of supply teachers and examined the factors contributing to the recruitment, deployment and management of supply teachers in England (Hutchings et al., 2006). This paper focuses on one group of supply teachers; overseas-trained teachers working temporarily in England as supply teachers.

The research design involved the collection of quantitative and qualitative data during January to October 2005. Questionnaires were sent to local education authorities (LEAs) and teacher supply agencies across England (achieving a 55% response rate) and interviews were conducted in ten LEAs and eleven private supply agencies. A national sample of primary, secondary, special and nursery schools were surveyed, resulting in 1375 responses. This was followed up with case studies in twenty schools: these included interviews with the member of staff responsible for supply teachers, and where possible, with any supply teachers in school on the day, and a review of relevant documentation and records. The third strand of the data collection process involved a survey of supply teachers working in primary and secondary schools. A total of 1554 responses were analysed. Of the 1554 supply teachers who responded to the national questionnaire survey, 126 were overseas-trained[1]. Additional data was collected from supply teachers participating in nine focus groups in ethnically and geographically diverse areas in England; two of the focus groups specifically targeted overseas-trained supply teachers. Each focus group consisted of five supply teachers. Telephone interviews were held with an additional nine supply teachers whose particular patterns of work had not been represented in the discussion groups.

Focus group respondents

Eleven teachers from Australia, Canada and South Africa aged 24-30 took part in two focus group discussions which were held in the south of England in July and September 2005. The findings outlined below primarily relate to the empirical data derived from these two focus group discussions. The level of teaching experience of supply teaching in England amongst these overseas-trained teachers ranged from very limited to between seven and eighteen months. All worked as short-term (mainly daily) supply teachers in both primary and secondary schools; although one had had two long-term placements of one term and a term and a half. Most were only intending to work in England for a short period of time (i.e. between one and two years).

Findings

Classroom behaviour

The area that seemed to cause the overseas–trained teachers in this study the most angst was the level of poor behaviour they encountered in schools. These teachers had high behavioural expectations but found that this was mostly not replicated in pupil practice. Several complained about pupils constantly talking, not listening or getting on with their work and having the tendency to ‘talk back’. One teacher referred to one of the classes she taught as ‘the stereotypical class from hell’. Another reported his worst day as being when he was ‘sworn at, spat at, downright verbally abused … I just wanted to cry, by half nine I had had enough’. Others referred to some pupils being ‘nasty’, ‘idiots’, constantly fighting and arguing, and who sought to challenge their authority at every opportunity. Typical examples included: ‘our teacher lets us do x’ and ‘they try and walk themselves out of the class before the end of the lesson’. One teacher was so upset by what he described as a ‘slow build up to nastiness’ by secondary aged pupils in years 9-11 which had resulted in him ‘yelling at the top of [his] voice’ and ‘punching the table’; something which he deeply regretted. It was felt that at the secondary school level day to day supply teaching ‘can just be murder’. Such problem behaviours were however, not confined to secondary pupils:

It was just this awful escalating awfulness all through the day and so I left the school a little bit wound up, a little bit stressed, and I got a phone call, ‘they really like you and they want you back’. I said: ‘as long as I am not in that classroom again I will give it a go’, and so I went back a second time and I had the Year 3 class from hell. The teacher knew it; she had put up with it for a whole year. It was just awful they had had a lot of problems. It was awful, it was murderous and I rang and said: ‘I am not going back there again’ and they [the agency] rang again after I had said I am not going back there again. I went back a third time thinking I will give it a go and if it is a different class, but no, it was that awful class again. And the thing was all the teachers were pretty nice, but they knew themselves that the kids were awful. … And then I just rang and said: ‘do not send me back, I don’t want to work, if that is the last school you have got for the day don’t even bother ringing me’. It was just awful.

Such behaviours led to these teachers hoping for ‘survival’ as opposed to thinking how they might positively impact on pupil learning.

The difficulties experienced by some in trying to establish authority and maintain control may in part relate to their inexperience of teaching in general and particularly in England. One of the teachers referred to above was newly qualified and because of a shortage of jobs in Canada had sought to gain experience and develop her practice in England:

I think supply agencies and schools have to recognise that not all supply teachers know what they are doing; they are still learning themselves.

They may also relate to a lack of awareness of discipline techniques used in schools (including behaviour policies e.g. whether pupils in that school are allowed to go to the toilet during lesson time - and what is acceptable or not) and behaviour management strategies that work best in the English context. A South African teacher, for example, expressed surprise at being reprimanded for telling a primary aged pupil to lay her head on her desk and take five minutes out, when she sought to address the child’s disruptive behaviour. (This was reported to be accepted practice in the schools she had taught at in South Africa.) One teacher indicated that it usually took her ‘till morning break’ to establish her authority in the classroom with the rest of the time spent trying to get the pupils to get on with their work, with both proving difficult. This teacher bemoaned ‘not having the time to get the pupils to behave as they would with their class teacher’ because as a supply teacher the expectation was to cover the relevant work, not spend time establishing effective teacher pupil relationships.

The lack of preparedness for the behaviour that some teachers encountered in schools in some ways may reflect the short space of time spent in the country before commencing supply teaching. Two teachers were known to have arrived at the end of August 2005 with the expectation of beginning teaching in the September, shortly after the start of the new term.

Some teachers drew attention to behavioural difficulties encountered when teaching age groups/levels they were not familiar with (e.g. primary teachers attempting to teach secondary aged pupils) and subjects they had not trained for (e.g. ‘Year 6 maths is definitely quite a challenge for me’). Further problems were experienced when teaching large classes (which were sometimes considered ‘overwhelming’) and classes that had pupils with special educational needs and/or emotional and behavioural difficulties:

There were probably about 10 or 12 kids in that class out of 30 that either required some kind of help or had kind of behavioural and emotional problems, that was my worst day because there was no support and there was no respect, no assistance and this was my first day.

Teacher authority/respect

All of the supply teachers generally felt there was a lack of respect for supply teachers in schools from both teaching staff and pupils which led to them being ignored and lacking authority in the classroom (e.g. pupil to overseas-trained teacher - ‘supply teachers aren’t allowed to keep us in’). However, they felt that the disrespect they sometimes experienced from pupils and staff was exacerbated by their lack of experience teaching in English schools.

The lack of respect for supply teachers alluded to by these respondents seemed to take on greater significance when they sought support from teaching and senior management staff with regard to disciplining pupils. For example, a headteacher reportedly failed to discipline two pupils who had been fighting in a classroom being taught by an overseas-trained teacher, and later returned to the classroom from which they were sent (to the Headteacher) without being reprimanded. Such behaviour reinforced the impression held by these supply teachers that supply teachers lack authority and are not considered ‘real teachers’. This perceived absence of authority was reinforced when other teaching staff corrected supply teachers in front of pupils; which in turn served to further undermine pupil respect for overseas-trained supply teachers. While the lack of authority experienced by these supply teachers is not specific to overseas-trained (supply) teachers (see Hutchings et al., 2006), it was nevertheless perceived by these teachers as a clash of different teaching expectations.

Assessment

Another area, which might be construed as constituting a ‘culture clash’, related to these overseas-trained teachers lack of familiarity with assessment criteria. The following quote illustrates the type of difficulty experienced:

Especially being from another country, we will be given something to fill in and you will sit there, and be like, it is not like what we would do and so we are not quite sure what you want from us … you think I don’t actually understand what they are asking for because the school haven’t given me the guidelines to fill out the booklets. I had to track one down, eventually we had to phone the department [the DfES] to get one mailed to the school because the school didn’t actually have one, just so I could fill in these forms because I didn’t know fundamentally what they were looking for … and [whether] to tick this or this option I thought well I am overseas-trained we run on a totally different system, please can someone tell me what this is?

Curriculum and appropriate terminology

Like assessment strategies, the respondents suggested that they lacked familiarity with the National Curriculum, Numeracy and Literacy Strategies and terms used such as Key Stages (and what each stage denotes), SATs (Standard Assessment Tasks), GCSE (General Certificate of Secondary Education) when they commenced their supply teaching:

You know my first class was getting ready for GCSE. I said: ‘What is that?’ They said: ‘You don’t know what that is’ and I said: ‘I’ve been here 24 hours give me a break’. But the reality is they are putting people who don’t know the system in charge of classrooms that have very serious things to get ready for.

For the first month and a half I couldn’t even get the anagram right of PSHE.

These overseas-trained teachers also reported being asked to teach subjects and year groups they did not consider themselves qualified to teach:

As an English teacher I was asked, you know we have got a couple of gaps, can you take up four RE classes a week and I was like well if you want me to because I’m not qualified, ‘oh it doesn’t matter’ … I even had to do Spanish!.

I am predominantly nursery, reception and Year 1 and I have been expected by the agencies to teach up to Year 6.

An example of the way in which coming from a particular curriculum approach could lead to ‘culture clashes’ was given by a Canadian teacher who was asked to explore ‘Christianity’ with Muslim pupils when covering a religious education lesson. This was particularly difficult for the teacher concerned, as religious education is purportedly ‘a touchy subject’ in Canada.

Reducing ‘culture clashes’

In their study of overseas-trained teachers (McNamara et al., 2005: iv) recommended that upon arrival in the country overseas-trained teachers ‘are provided with an induction package targeted to their individual needs’. Although all of the teachers in the focus groups were inducted by their respective recruiting supply teacher agencies, it was argued that more could be done to help engender a better understanding of teaching in English schools. As a way of addressing supposed ‘cultural clashes’ and facilitating more effective supply teachers, these respondents would have liked precise information from their recruiting supply teacher agency as to ‘what to expect from a typical day’ and how teachers are expected to teach (e.g. rote learning, scheduled lesson plans, cross curricular activities, in rows or groups etc.), examination structures and how the British educational system works. They also saw the need for more in-depth curriculum information (especially what each year group and each Key Stage should be learning) and more information on terms/abbreviations used in school (e.g. in Canada they say ‘recess’ while in the UK, ‘it’s break’). An understanding of the distinctions between school types (e.g. primary, middle, high) and discipline techniques used in schools would be particularly useful. Knowing whether a school is ‘challenging’ or ‘really multicultural’ would not only help to prepare teachers from overseas but more importantly, help to ensure as one teacher said, ‘it’s not a shock to your system when you get there’.

While such information would clearly benefit overseas-trained teachers new to working in England, induction provided by supply teacher agencies has been found to be limited with schools expressing concern about overseas-trained teachers knowledge of the curriculum (Maylor and Hutchings, 2003; McNamara et al., 2005). A two-day induction cannot by itself eliminate differences in perception and expectations of teaching and learning derived from different educational systems:

…it seems to me that the biggest issue is that education overseas in many cases is regarded in such a different light to the UK, and the expectations of a teacher’s role, is so different, when they get here, what they were expecting just isn’t the reality and that’s the real challenge: how you actually prepare people for that …. [i.e.] actual experience of being in an English school. (Comment by a recruitment agency in McNamara et al., 2005:37).

It’s to do with knowledge about, it’s not even the British school system, it’s knowledge about how young people are nowadays and understanding that what might work back home doesn’t always work here because things are different. In some cases subject knowledge and also looking at a variety of teaching and learning methods. It’s also to do with knowledge about students levels of literacy and also the fact that not all students have English as their first language. And the whole issue of social inclusion. Most schools in London are mixed ability schools. It’s looking at the whole system really. It’s not a system of standards. I think most people come with that knowledge, but it is trying to get your head round well, how could this kid be in this class when they can’t read? It’s to do with ways of teaching and learning as well. In this country students will not accept that they copy from the blackboard for an hour. They would find that very difficult … We had one teacher who had the class standing up all lesson and you can’t do that here. I think it’s in terms of teaching pedagogy in this country that you wouldn’t expect children generally to do that whereas it might be the case in other countries. (Headteaher comment in Maylor and Hutchings, 2003:24-25)

Or indeed empower teachers to deal with a lack of discipline found in some schools and enable them to ‘form meaningful relationships with learners from deprived backgrounds’ who are experienced as ‘unmotivated’ (McNamara et al., 2005:5).

Concluding comments

This paper has sought to explore some of the factors that are associated with perpetuating a ‘culture clash’ in schools. We have focused in particular on the level of poor pupil behaviour experienced by a small group of overseas-trained teachers from diverse backgrounds. Their own articulations suggest that coping with poor pupil behaviour preoccupied most of their time and caused them the most distress. Yet this was something which few had discussed or even associated as being influenced by ‘cultural differences’. For these teachers what they encountered was bad behaviour full stop. Sharing their experiences with members of the same and different ethnic groups allowed them the space they had yearned (but had never sought) to voice their concerns. This would seem to support Pratt and Nesbit’s (2000:1) contention that ‘teaching … is often enacted without reflection on the hidden values and assumptions that lie beneath behaviour’.

Arguably, the diverse teaching environments and school populations in English schools provide different types of teaching experiences and challenges to those to which most overseas-trained teachers are used (see for example, Whitehead and Taylor, 2000). While some of the classroom behaviours highlighted here are not dissimilar to the experiences of indigenous supply teachers (Hutchings et al., 2006) or teachers teaching in permanent posts (Ofsted, 2005) they appear to ‘reflect both the urban areas (e.g. London where overseas-trained teachers mainly teach), often in challenging schools and the clash between their expectations of pupil behaviour developed in their own countries and the reality found in England’ (Hutchings et al., 2006:103). Interestingly, these findings would also seem to support earlier findings by Stuart et al., (2003:16) who referred to a Polish teacher who found pupil behaviour in English schools ‘quite shocking’ and those of those of McNamara et al. (2005:32) who similarly suggest that teachers from overseas find ‘the lack of discipline and ensuing behaviour management problems’ as presenting them with the most challenges. Indeed for some teachers (e.g. South African) the ‘cultural divide’ was considered too wide. Whitehead and Taylor (2000) also report different teaching expectations as accounting for adjustment problems being experienced by French student teachers undertaking their teacher training in England. For example:

I was not prepared to face so many problems with the classroom management, the discipline, the lack of respect for teachers … and the lack of power teachers have in England.

Different tasks demanded of teachers that are not demanded in France … paper work, pastoral role, detentions, school assemblies. (Whitehead and Taylor, 2000:375)

Although derived from a small sample size, our findings further suggest that overseas-trained supply teachers regardless of their country of origin, appear to find pupil behaviour and a lack of discipline in some English classrooms problematic, especially ‘where they are accustomed to seeing kids sitting down and listening and learning’ (McNamara et al., 2005:38; see also Maylor and Hutchings, 2003). This points to the need for more research to examine further differences in experiences for overseas-trained teachers.

Returning once more to the question of a ‘culture clash’, if the employment of overseas-trained teachers presents a ‘culture clash’ in schools then all would experience teaching in accordance with their own cultural backgrounds/perspectives, and understandings/expectations of teaching and learning. Instead, these teachers highlighted common experiences and challenges to their practice that cut across their diverse backgrounds and supply teacher backgrounds (e.g. indigenous/overseas). This is further indication that it is differences in teaching and learning approaches which need to be explored and addressed.

The data suggests that overseas-trained teachers need time to develop greater clarity of the British educational system (including curriculum requirements) and the teaching philosophies and behaviours they are likely to encounter. They also need time to comprehend a school’s expectations and adjust to the teaching environments they find themselves in. Time is also essential to challenging perceptions of their employment resulting in a ‘culture clash’. Unfortunately, time is something that is often not available to teachers working as supply teachers and time is something that schools can ill afford when they are a teacher short in the classroom.

References

Alexander, C. (2002) ‘Beyond Black: Re-Thinking the Colour/Culture Divide’, Ethnic and Racial Studies, 25 (4): 552-571.

Appleton, S., Sives, A. and Morgan, W. J. (2006) ‘The Impact of International Teacher Migration on Schooling in Developing Countries – The Case of Southern Africa’, Globalisation, Societies and Education, 4 (1): 121-142.

Association of London Government (2004) ‘Education Newsletter No.2’, March, London: ALG.

Barlin, D. and Hallgarten, J. (2002) ‘Supply Teachers: Symptom of the Problem or Part of the Solution?’, in M. Johnson and J. Hallgarten (eds.), From Victims of Change to Agents of Change: The Future of the Teaching Profession, London: IPPR.

Bottomley, G. (1997) ‘Identification: Ethnicity, Gender and Culture’, Journal of Intercultural Studies, 18 (1): 1-12.

Boyland, R. and Mansell, W. (2002) ‘Developing States Fear a Brain Drain’, The Times Educational Supplement (4496): 8.

Brah, A. (2000) ‘Difference, Diversity, Differentiation’, in L. Back, and J. Solomos, (eds.) Theories of Race and Racism: A Reader, London: Routledge, pp. 431-446.

Bullough, Jr., R. (2005) ‘Being and Becoming a Mentor: School-Based Teacher Educators and Teacher Education Identity’, Teaching and Teacher Education, 21 (2): 143-155.

Carson, T. and Johnston, I. (2000) ‘Towards a Pedagogy of Compassion’, Alberta Journal of Educational Research XLV1: 75-83.

DfES (2006) Trends in Education and Skills,

Dillabough, J. (1999) ‘Gender, Politics and Conceptions of the Modern Teacher: Women, Identity and Professionalism’, British Journal of Sociology of Education, 20 (3): 373-394.

Goodson, I. (1994) ‘Studying the Teacher’s Life and Work’, Teaching and Teacher Education, 10 (1): 29-37.

Government Office for London (2002) ‘Teacher Recruitment and Retention’, go-.uk

Grosvenor, I. and Lawn, M. (2001) ‘This is Who We Are and This is What We Do: Teacher Identity and Teacher Work in Mid-Twentieth Century English Educational Discourse’, Pedagogy, Culture and Society, 9 (3): 355-370.

Hall, S. (1993) ‘Cultural Identity and Diaspora’ in, P. Williams, and L. Chrisman, (eds.) Colonial Discourse and Post Colonial Theory, New York: Harvester Wheatsheaf, pp. 392-403.

Hutchings, M., James, K., Maylor, U., Menter, I. and Smart. S. (2006) The Recruitment, Deployment and Management of Supply Teachers in England, Research Report 738, Nottingham: DfES.

Johnson, K. (2003) ‘‘Every Experience is a Moving Force’’: Identity and Growth Through Mentoring’, Teaching and Teacher Education, 19 (8): 787-800.

Jordan, G. and Weedon, C. (1995) Cultural Politics, Oxford UK and Cambridge USA: Blackwell.

Kuper, A. (2000) Culture: The Anthropologist’s Account, London: The Harvard Press.

McNamara, O., Lewis, S. and Howson, J. (2005) The Recruitment of Overseas Trained Teachers, Research Report, Birmingham: NASUWT.

Maguire, M. (2001) ‘‘The Cultural Formation of Teachers’ Class Consciousness: Teachers in the Inner City’, Journal of Educational Policy, 16 (4): 315-331.

Mahony, P. and Hextall, I. (1997) ‘Sounds of Silence: The Social Justice Agenda of the Teacher Training Agency’, International Studies in Sociology of Education, 7 (2): 137-156.

Maylor, U. and Hutchings, M. (2003) The Induction of Temporary Teachers in Secondary Schools (Final Report), London: IPSE.

Midgley, S. (2002) ‘Strangers in a Foreign Land’, Times Educational Supplement, Briefing, 5 April.

Moore, A., Edwards, G., Halpin, D. and George, R. (2002) ‘Compliance, Resistance and Pragmatism: The (Re)Construction of Schoolteacher Identities in a Period of Intensive Educational Reform’, British Educational Research Journal, 28 (4): 551-565.

Morrison, M. (1999) Temps in Teaching: The Role of Private Employment Agencies in a Changing Labour Market for Teachers’, Journal of Education Policy, 14 (2): 167-184.

Ofsted (2002) Schools' Use of Temporary Teachers, HMI 503. London: The Stationery Office.

Ofsted (2003) Annual Report of HMI: Standards and Quality in Education 2001-2, London: The Stationery Office.

Ofsted (2005) Managing Challenging Behaviour, London: Ofsted, HMI 2363.

Phoenix, A. (1998) ‘Dealing with Difference: The Recursive and the New’, Ethnic and Racial Studies, 21 (5): 859-880.

Pole, C. (1999) ‘Black Teachers Giving Voice: Choosing and Experiencing Teaching’, Teacher Development, 3 (3): 313-328.

Pratt, D. and Nesbit, T. (2000) ‘Discourses and Cultures of Teaching’, in E. Hayes and A. Wilson, (eds.) Handbook of Adult and Continuing Education, San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.

Ross, A. (2003) Teachers as Transients? The Effect on the Future Shape of the Teaching Profession in England. Paper presented to the BERA Conference Symposium: Temporary Teachers. Heriot-Watt University, Edinburgh, 12 September.

Ross A. and Hutchings, M. (2003) Attracting, Developing and Retaining Effective Teachers in the United Kingdom. OECD.

Sachs, J. (2001) ‘Teacher Professional Identity: Competing Discourses’, Journal of Educational Policy, 16 (2):149-161.

Smithers, A. and Robinson, P. (2000) Teachers Leaving, Liverpool: University of Liverpool and London: NUT.

Smithers, A. and Robinson, P. (2003) Factors Affecting Teachers’ Decisions to Leave the Profession, Research Report 430, Nottingham: DfES.

Stuart, J. and Cole, M. with Birrell, G., Snow, D. and Wilson, V. (2003) Minority Ethnic and Overseas Student Teachers in South-East England: An exploratory study, London: TTA.

Whitehead, J. and Taylor, A. (2000) ‘The Development of Foreign Native Speakers Training to be Modern Foreign Languages Teachers in England: are there wider lessons for the profession’, Teacher Development, 4 (3): 371-382.

Woods, P. and Jeffrey, B. (2002) ‘Primary Teachers’ Identities’, British Journal of Sociology of Education, 23 (1): 89-106.

-----------------------

( Institute for Policy Studies in Education, London Metropolitan University

( University of Glasgow

[1] The main countries/regions of origin of the overseas-trained supply teachers in the survey were Australia and New Zealand (36), USA and Canada (36), South Africa (23) Africa (not South Africa - 12) and Europe (12).

................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download