The rhetoric and results of efforts to empower and professionalize teachers are examined to gain insight into ways in which the language of educational reform functions in both maintaining and changing power relations. This critical analysis clarifies how the ways people communicate both influence and are influenced by the structures and forces of social institutions, e.g., schools, universities, unions, and school boards. How the ideology of professionalism operates is illustrated by examining two realms of authority related to schooling: (1) organization-management authority over schools (characteristically, political and social); and (2) educational authority within the schools (substance matters, such as curriculum content, pedagogy, etc.). The analysis concurs with findings of other researchers that even relatively neutral statements reflect acts of valuation. It is concluded that the interests served in the process of professionalizing teaching may not include the interests of the teachers themselves. To further these interests, teachers will have to regain control over the curriculum as well as school organization issues and develop a much stronger voice in the production of knowledge about teaching. (JD)