Strengthening of the case for teacher judgement: a critique of the rationalities and technologies underpinning Gonski 2.0’s renewed call for evidence-based practice.

The idea that teaching practices should be informed by evidence continues to capture the imagination of politicians and policy makers throughout Western democracies. In Australia, for example, the recently released 2018 Federal Government report - Through Growth to Achievement (Gonski et al. 2018) - recommends evidence-based practice and the formation of a National Evidence and Research Institute. In the paper, I critique the idea of 'evidence-based practice' in education and offer a reimagining of teacher professionalism as a scholarly, activist stance (Sachs 2000, 2003). This identifies the teacher's role as contributing to social change and preparing students to contribute to change in society, rather than just transmitting knowledge and preparing students for work in an existing world. What is proposed is a strengthening of the case for teacher judgement and the role that research can play for professional (read intellectual and scholarly) action in the ambiguous circumstances of teaching. Research can only indicate what has worked, not what will work, which means that the outcomes of research cannot be translated instrumentally into rules for action. The re-imagining of a scholarly stance for teaching has an important bearing on teacher and leader education in neo-liberal universities.