Introduction: International Comparisons and the Global Reform of Teaching

Implicit comparisons of teacher characteristics, their work, their preparation and development are constantly found in the international literature. These comparisons are often done as an aside to comparisons of pupil achievement (Stigler & Hiebert, 1999; Alexander, 2000; Darling-Hammond, 2000; Hiebert et al, 2003), but more explicit comparisons have begun to examine teacher-related issues in their own right (Rust & Dalin, 1990; Craig et al, 1998; Stuart & Tatto, 2000; Tatto, 2001; Britton et al, 2003; Lewin & Stuart, 2003). Indeed, alleged concerns with pupil achievement findings as expressed by international assessments have brought teachers to the forefront of the global educational policy agenda (see, for instance, UNESCO, 1998, 2002; Eurydice, 2002; OECD, 2002a, b). Although it could be argued that the attention teachers are receiving is long overdue, it could also be argued that most of this attention could be dangerous, especially if teacher policy initiatives are drawn from insufficient empirical data and decontextualized conclusions. A number of scholars have already cautioned against the dangers of international comparisons in the use of data measuring pupil achievement across countries (Jaworski & Phillips, 1999). These dangers are also present in the current environment of ‘policy borrowing’ regarding teachers. At this time of vigorous change in education and particularly in teacher-related policy, international comparisons are essential to explore how the multiplicity of forces unleashed by ongoing global educational reforms are currently affecting teachers and teaching.