Teacher Responsibility

  • Alex KostogrizEmail author


In contrast to the representation of teachers as free agents whose professional knowledge, skills and ability to demonstrate a sense of mandated moral duty signify their professional identity, Kostogriz argues for an alternative understanding of professional ethics ‘as an ability to respond to others—that is, ethics as responsibility’, or, as he later puts it, ethics as ‘responsibility’. Kostogriz draws attention to an increasingly important tension between, on the one hand, the externally mandated expectation that teachers comply with performance indicators (standards) which conceive of professional ethics as ‘a moral add-on to knowledge, skills and behaviour’, and on the other, the question of whether this captures well enough just what constitutes the professional ethics of teachers. Significantly, the argument draws on the experiences of beginning teachers as they work to establish relations with students, revealing the situated nature of teachers’ work from which it is clear that a sense of ‘relational practice’ emerges grounded in an ethics or responsibility. What these experiences reveal is, in a sense, the poverty of externally mandated performance indicators emphasising accountability in relation to high-stakes testing (a relatively recent policy demand), while putting to one side codes of conduct drawing on broadly agreed moral principles. In Kostogriz’s view, this illustrates a turn away from the moral nature of education and the ethical in human relations such that teachers’ ‘only motivation is to enact externally mandated performance indicators and moral principles’, a situation not helped by initial teacher education programmes which defer so readily to an externally imposed representation of the professional teacher. In response, Kostogriz urges an awareness of the human subject (teacher, student), as always in the process of becoming, interconnected with each other in the same ongoing experience of being. In this relational process of self to self and self with self, we develop an ethic of responsibility to and for one another.



The Studying the Effectiveness of Teacher Education project was supported by a strong partnership involving the Victorian Institute of Teaching (VIT), the Queensland College of Teachers (QCT), the Victorian Department of Education and Early Childhood Development (DEECD, now the Department of Education and Training), the Queensland Department of Education Training and Employment (QDETE), Deakin University’s School of Education in Victoria and Griffith University’s School of Education and Professional Studies in Queensland. This research was supported under Australian Research Council’s Linkage Projects funding scheme (project LP110100003). The views expressed herein are those of the author and are not necessarily those of the other members of the research team, the Australian Research Council or the Industry Partners. The project team consisted of Diane Mayer (Sydney University), Brenton Doecke (Deakin University), Mary Dixon (Deakin University), Alex Kostogriz (Monash University), Andrea Allard (Deakin University), Simone White (Queensland University of Technology), Bernadette Walker-Gibbs (Deakin University), Leonie Rowan (Griffith University), Jodie Kline (Deakin University), Julianne Moss (Deakin University) and Phillipa Hodder (Deakin University).


  1. Ashiedu, J., & Scott-Ladd, B. (2012). Understanding teacher attraction and retention drivers: Addressing teacher shortages. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 37(11), 17–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Aspland, T. (2006). Changing patterns of teacher education in Australia. Education Research and Perspectives, 33(2), 140–163.Google Scholar
  3. Australian Institute for Teaching and School Leadership. (2011). Australian professional standards for teachers. Retrieved March 11, 2018 from
  4. Bakhtin, M. (1981). The dialogical imagination. In M. Holquist (Ed.) Austin, TX: University of Texas Press.Google Scholar
  5. Bakhtin, M. (1986). Speech genres and other late essays (C. Emerson & M. Holquist, Eds., V. McGee, Trans.). Austin: Texas University Press.Google Scholar
  6. Bakhtin, M. (1993). Toward a philosophy of the act. In V. Liapunov & M. Holquist (Eds.) Austin, TX: University of Texas Press.Google Scholar
  7. Brennan, M. (2009). Steering teachers. Journal of Sociology, 45(4), 339–359.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Darling-Hammond, L. (2006). Powerful teacher education: Lessons from exemplary programs. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  9. Darling-Hammond, L., LaFors, J., & Snyder, J. (2001). Educating teachers for California’s future. Teacher Education Quarterly, 28(1), 9–55.Google Scholar
  10. Debord, G. (1967). Society of the spectacle (K. Knabb, Trans.). London, UK: Rebel Press.Google Scholar
  11. Evans, R. (2015). Schooling corporate citizens: How accountability reform has damaged civic education and undermined democracy. New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
  12. Freidson, E. (2001). Professionalism, the third logic: On the practice of knowledge. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  13. Hattie, J. (2011). Visible learning for teachers: Maximizing impact on learning. Milton Park, OX: Routledge.Google Scholar
  14. Hattie, J. (2009). Visible learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to achievement. Milton Park, OX: Routledge.Google Scholar
  15. Holquist, M. (1990). Dialogism: Bakhtin and his world. London, UK: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Kleinhenz, E., & Ingvarson, L. (2004). Teacher accountability in Australia: Current policies and practices and their relation to the improvement of teaching and learning. Research Papers in Education, 19(1), 31–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Klenowski, V., & Wyatt-Smith, C. (2012). The impact of high stakes testing: The Australian story. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 19(1), 65–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Kostogriz, A. (2012). Accountability and the affective labour of teachers: A Marxist-Vygotskian perspective. Australian Educational Researcher, 39(4), 397–412.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Kostogriz, A., & Doecke, B. (2011). Standards-based accountability: Reification, responsibility and the ethical subject. Teaching Education, 22(4), 397–412.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Ladd, H. (2011). Teachers’ perceptions of their workplace conditions: How predictive of planned and actual teacher movement? Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 33(2), 235–261.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Lortie, D. (1975/2002). School teachers: A sociological study. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  22. Mayer, D., Dixon, M., Kline, J., Kostogriz, A., Moss, J., Rowan, L., et al. (2017). Studying the effectiveness of teacher education: Early career teachers in diverse settings. Singapore: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Martin, C. (2013). On the educational value of philosophical ethics for teacher education: The practice of ethical inquiry as liberal education. Curriculum Inquiry, 43(2), 189–209.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. OECD (2016). PISA 2015 Results (Vol. I): Excellence and Equity in Education. Paris: OECD Publishing.
  25. Quality teaching must be the focus of school reform. Commentary. (2017, April 18). The Australian, p. 11. Accessed March 6, 2018
  26. Raffoul, F. (2010). The origins of responsibility. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
  27. Rowe, K. (2007). School and teacher effectiveness: Implications of findings from evidence-based research on teaching and teacher quality. In T. Townsend (Ed.), International handbook of school effectiveness and improvement (pp. 767–786). Dordrecht: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Standards for Teachers of English Language and Literacy in Australia (STELLA). (2002). Retrieved March 12, 2018 from
  29. Taubman, P. (2009). Teaching by numbers. New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
  30. Teacher Education Ministerial Advisory Group (TEMAG). (2015). Action now: Classroom ready teachers. Canberra, Australia: Department of Education and Training.Google Scholar
  31. Thompson, S., De Bortoli, L., & Underwood, C. (2017). PISA 2015: Reporting Australia’s results. Melbourne, Australia: Australian Council for Educational Research.Google Scholar
  32. Todorov, T. (1984). Mikhail Bakhtin: The dialogical principle. Manchester, UK: Manchester University Press.Google Scholar
  33. Weber, M. (1978). Economy and society: An outline of interpretive sociology. Berkley, CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of EducationMonash UniversityClaytonAustralia

Personalised recommendations