{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.02148106274731487, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.629213483146067, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Competing pressures in practice: Teachers’ pedagogies and work under complex policy conditions

Abstract Engaged and engaging teaching require teacher pedagogies and work which encourage respect for students and families, the ability to adapt curricula and policy reforms to contextual needs, and a willingness to learn on-the-job, on an ongoing basis. Arguably, current national and state curricula and testing policies in Australia seek to promote such capacity and complexity. However, such policies do not necessarily promote truly productive pedagogical practices. To elaborate this discrepancy, this paper draws upon Bourdieu’s notion of the world as comprising competing social spaces or ‘fields’ characterised by contestation, and applies this conception of practice to the effects of current national Australian and state policies upon teachers’ pedagogies, work and learning. To exemplify these effects, the paper draws upon the experiences and practices of two Special Education teachers working in a remote rural community in the state of Queensland, under policy conditions which encourage a strong focus upon prescribed curricula, and constant concerns about numeric/ quantifiable measures of students’ literacy and numeracy. The paper contrasts the context-responsiveness of these teachers’ pedagogies and work with a more generic curriculum and data-centric policy setting which makes it difficult to focus upon more genuinely student-centred teaching and learning practices. Such an approach implies the need to revisit policy efforts to enact standardised tests and curricula, and that the teaching profession would be better served if, at the very least, more attention were given to teachers’ own pedagogies, work and learning, in specific settings.