Since educational criticism aims to reeducate teachers' perception in order to improve or illuminate educational practices, the audience's role is particularly important. In many ways, the intended audience determines the evidence presented. The evaluator must write the criticism in language which is meaningful to the audience (for example researchers, teachers, or lay persons). Because the gap between the concerns and the language of teachers and researchers is so wide, the educational critic who writes for teachers must rethink his or her communication with the audience. Educational criticism differs from artistic criticism because the critic is not an aloof critic of a completed work; the sustained contact with teachers enhances collegiality rather than distance; and the critic aims to instigate change. Criticism grounded in an individual teacher's concerns would detect nuances in progress and would reeducate the teacher's perceptions over the course of the visits. For a report on a teacher's skill deficiencies, the "connoisseur/critic" would consider the teacher's lived experience, the patterns of his or her practices, and the demands for action. (GDC)