ABSTRACT
A significant aspect of the changing language of education is that of the shift to ‘management-speak’, as indeed with public services more generally. This is reflected in various Government documents (for example, The Government’s Measures of Success: Outputs and Performance Analyses, 1999) and in the influential book by the Americans Odden and Kelly, Paying Teachers for What They Know and Can Do (1997), with its language of performance management, audits by inspection teams which spell out ‘performance thresholds’, and programmes to ensure ‘value for money’. Such language, with all its consequences, entered also into the understanding of universities, as reflected in the 1984 Jarrett Commission. Hence, it is important to examine critically the implications for such a language on our understanding of what we mean by education and in particular what it means to teach. This paper seeks to ‘bring back teaching’ – restoring the ethical and professional dimension of teaching and leadership - a very different ‘logic of action’ from that of ‘performativity’.
