Interrogating the continuing professional development policy framework in Ethiopia: a critical discourse analysis
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The continuing professional development (CPD) of teachers has increasingly come to be considered an important component of teacher policy reforms throughout much of the world. As part of its comprehensive school improvement and teacher development programmes, Ethiopia has recently developed a national policy framework on CPD for teachers. Arguing from a critical discourse analytic perspective, the present article interrogates the fundamental assumptions and discourses underpinning the framework. An argument is made that the CPD policy framework draws heavily from the discourses of school effectiveness, blame/derision and teacher centrality. As such, it provides too narrow a view of teaching as technical exercise, reconstructs the teaching profession as being one of mastering pedagogical skills, and repositions teachers both as central to educational success and as culprits for falling education standards. The discursive effects of these constructions are further discussed.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it