This article presents evidence from a linguistic analysis conducted on the National Curriculum Framework for Teacher Education (NCFTE) 2009, and explores the dialogic characteristics of the document driving the current reform of teacher education. I address one orienting research question: in what ways and to what extent are the aims and intentions of reformers linguistically realised in the text of the NCFTE? I begin this article with a brief on the foundations and content of the NCFTE. I then turn to an analysis of the data derived from the text of the NCFTE, and show that both monoglossic and heteroglossic dimensions are evident in the text, but that they are both used in very distinct ways. The implications of this work extend beyond semantics, and can serve to press policymakers to think about how the linguistic resources they employ can shape the discourse of educational reform in India.
AdeyP.S. (1997, March24–28). Factors influencing uptake of a large-scale curriculum innovation. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago, Illinois.
2.
AppleM.W. (1994). The politics of official knowledge: Does a national curriculum make sense?Teachers College Record, 95(2), 222–241.
3.
BakhtinM.M. (1981). The dialogic imagination: Four essays. Austin, TX: University of Texas Press.
4.
BatraP. (2006). Building on the national curriculum framework to enable the agency of teachers. Contemporary Education Dialogue, 4(1), 88–118.
5.
ChengY.C.ChowK.W.MokM.M.C. (2004). Reform of teacher education in the Asia-Pacific in the new millennium: Trends and challenges. Education in the Asia-Pacific region series, Vol. 3. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
6.
ChristieF. (2008). Genres and institutions: Functional perspectives on educational discourse. In Martin-JonesM.de MejiaA.M.HornbergerN.H. (Eds), Encyclopedia of language and education (2nd ed.), Vol. 3 (pp. 29–40). New York: Springer Science + Business Media LLC.
7.
CohenD.K.BarnesC.A. (1993). Pedagogy and policy. In CohenD.K.McLaughlinM.W.TalbertJ.E. (Eds), Teaching for understanding: Challenges for policy and practice (pp. 207–239). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
8.
CohenD.K.HillH.C. (2001). Learning policy: When state education reform works. New Haven: Yale University Press.
9.
CohenD.K.SpillaneJ.P. (1993). Policy and practice: The relations between governance and instruction. In FuhrmanS. (Ed.), Designing coherent education policy: Improving the system (pp. 35–95). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
10.
CohenD.K.MoffittS.L. (2009). The ordeal of equality: Did federal regulation fix the schools?Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
11.
CohenD.K.MoffittS.L.GoldinS. (2007). Policy and practice: The dilemma.American Journal of Education, 113(4), 515–548.
12.
ConnellyF.M.ClandininD.J. (2004). Canadian teacher education in transformation. In ChengY.C.ChowK.W.MokM.M.C. (Eds), Reform of teacher education in the Asia-Pacific in the new millennium: Trends and challenges. Education in the Asia-Pacific region series, Vol. 3 (pp. 35–44). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
13.
DesimoneL. (2002). How can comprehensive school reform models be successfully implemented?Review of Educational Research, 72(3), 433–479.
14.
EgginsS. (2004). An introduction to systemic functional linguistics. London: Continuum.
15.
EricksonF. (1986). Qualitative methods in research on teaching. In WittrockM. (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (3rd ed., pp. 119–161). New York: Macmillan.
16.
FemkeG.SleegersP.van den BergR.(1999). Transformational leadership and the implementation of large-scale innovation programs. Journal of Educational Administration, 37(4), 309–328.
17.
FiskeJ. (1994). Media matters: Everyday culture and political change. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
18.
HallidayM.A.K. (1994). An introduction to functional grammar (2nd ed.). London: Edward Arnold.
19.
HillH.C. (2001). Policy is not enough: Language and the interpretation of state standards. American Educational Research Journal, 38(2), 289–318.
20.
KantabutraS.AveryG.C. (2010). The power of vision: Statements that resonate. Journal of Business Strategy, 31(1), 37–45.
21.
KumarK. (1986). Textbooks and educational culture. Economic and Political Weekly, 21(30), 1309–1311.
22.
KumarK. (1987). Curriculum, psychology, and society. Economic and Political Weekly, 22(12), 507–512.
23.
KumarK. (2005). Political agenda of education: A study of colonialist and nationalist ideas. New Delhi: SAGE Publications.
24.
LeeM.N.N. (2004). Malaysian teacher education into the new century. In ChengY.C.ChowK.W.MokM.M.C. (Eds), Reform of teacher education in the Asia-Pacific in the new millennium: Trends and challenges. Education in the Asia-Pacific region series, Vol. 3 (pp. 81–92). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
25.
LipskyM. (1980). Street-level bureaucracy: Dilemmas of the individual in public services. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
26.
LittleJ.W. (1993). Teachers’ professional development in a climate of educational reform. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 15(2), 129–151.
27.
MartinJ.R.RoseD. (2003). Working with discourse: Meaning beyond the clause. London: Continuum.
28.
MartinJ.R.WhiteP.R.R. (2005). The language of evaluation: Appraisal in English. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
29.
MaxwellJ.A. (2013).Qualitative research design: An interactive approach (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
30.
MesaV.ChangP. (2010). The language of engagement in two highly interactive undergraduate mathematics classrooms. Linguistics and Education, 21(2), 83–100.
31.
MorphewC.C.HartleyM. (2006). Mission statements: A thematic analysis of rhetoric across institutional type. Journal of Higher Education, 77(3), 456–471.
32.
National Council for Teacher Education (NCTE). (2009). National curriculum framework for teacher education. New Delhi: NCTE.
33.
National Council of Educational Research and Training (NCERT). (2005). National curriculum framework (2005). New Delhi: NCERT.
34.
PenuelW.R.FishmanB.J.YamaguchiR.GallagherL.P. (2007). What makes professional development effective? Strategies that foster curriculum implementation. American Educational Research Journal, 44(4), 921–958.
35.
RogersE.M. (2003). Diffusion of innovations. New York: Free Press.
36.
SaigalA. (2012). Demonstrating a situated learning approach for in-service teacher education in rural India: The quality education programme in Rajasthan. Teaching and Teacher Education, 28(7), 1009–1017.
37.
SchleppegrellM.J. (2004). The language of schooling: A functional linguistics perspective. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
38.
SpillaneJ.P. (2000). Cognition and policy implementation: District policymakers and the reform of mathematics education. Cognition and Instruction, 18(2), 141–179.
39.
SpillaneJ.P. (2004). Standards deviation: How schools misunderstand education policy. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
40.
ThompsonJ.B. (1990). Ideology and modern culture: Critical social theory in the era of mass communication. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
41.
VelcoffJ.FerrariJ.R. (2006). Perceptions of university mission statement by senior administrators: Relating to faculty engagement. Christian Higher Education, 5(4), 329–339.
42.
VygotskyL.S.KozulinA. (Eds). (1986). Thought and language. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
43.
WaliaK. (2004). Reform of teacher education in India: Trends and challenges. In ChengY.C.ChowK.W.MokM.M.C. (Eds), Reform of teacher education in the Asia-Pacific in the new millennium: Trends and challenges. Education in the Asia-Pacific region series, Vol. 3 (pp. 93–108). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
44.
WangY.J. (2004). Patterns of development of Chinese teacher education in a reform context. In ChengY.C.ChowK.W.MokM.M.C. (Eds), Reform of teacher education in the Asia-Pacific in the new millennium: Trends and challenges. Education in the Asia-Pacific region series, Vol. 3 (pp. 63–80). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
45.
WertschJ.V. (1991). Voices of the mind: A sociocultural approach to mediated action. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
