A discussion on the new critical convergences towards the centrality of knowledge in school: the theories of the relation to knowledge of Bernard Charlot and the return of Michael Young's powerful knowledge

In the late 1960s, driven by the increasing capacity of computational data processing, statistics that linked school success with students' social backgrounds became the main argument in favor of the idea that schools -even the public ones- did little more than reproduce class inequalities and legitimize them by attributing school failure to the poor intellectual abilities of subordinate class students. Both in England and France, critical theories about education questioned the curriculum, which they saw as arbitrary and related to the interests and tastes of the privileged classes, as well as the authority of the teacher, transmitter of these contents and legitimizer of educative but especially social failure, of children from low strata. This apparent consensus is explicitly broken with the turn of the century, and authors such as Bernard Charlot in France and Michael FD Young in England, converge on pointing to knowledge as the central factor in educational work. The objective of this article is to examine the approaches of the two authors on this point, to compare both perspectives, and to propose overcoming visions of some distances that separate them. It concludes with a theoretical critique of both perspectives, an attempt of an overcoming synthesis, underlining the value of knowledge as a central factor in educational activities.

The Purposes of History Education in the Context of “Flourishing Life”, “Powerful Knowledge” and Political Reconciliation

Stretching beyond its theoretical field, the debates about the purposes of history education are of great importance to curriculum writers and classroom practitioners. The content selection from a broad field of history is connected to what educators deem an overarching purpose of education. With this in mind, this paper aims to examine the purposes of teaching history against the background of the two general theories of education, namely – the theories of a flourishing life and powerful knowledge. While the theory of a flourishing life encourages the development of personal autonomy, allowing individuals to make successful choices, the theory of powerful knowledge examines the importance of traditional academic knowledge for individual success. The paper will also use the context of post-conflict societies, to reflect on the question of possible purposes of history education.

Philosophy for All Children: enhancing knowledge

<p>Building students’ critical thinking has been a focus in Education around the world in recent years. The New Zealand Curriculum (2007) is no exception, with an emphasis on critical and creative thinking in its vision statement. However, no advice is offered on how to teach critical thinking. This study uses a qualitative case study approach to explore how teachers teach critical thinking through Philosophy for Children (P4C) and offers some guidance on this for teachers. One of the contributions of this thesis is the claim that the P4C approach enhances social justice by supporting diverse learners – children who need support to achieve at school – to develop critical thinking and language capability. The theoretical framework underpinning my research draws on Bernstein’s (2000) ‘democratic pedagogic rights’ to enhancement, inclusion, and participation, and Wheelahan’s (2007), Young’s (2009) and Young and Muller’s (2013) conceptions of powerful knowledge. While much attention has been given to the theory of powerful knowledge in tertiary and secondary education contexts, to date, very little research has explored what powerful knowledge might look like, in practice, at primary school. Therefore this study makes an original contribution by investigating this unexplored area. Participants in this research included 104 primary school students aged between 8 and 11 years old and their teachers (n = 4) from four diverse primary schools in New Zealand. The research data is drawn from four main sources: audio recordings of classroom discussions, semi-structured focus group interviews with sample students, open-ended interviews with teachers, and student thinking journals. Over a period of 6 months, classes held weekly hour-long P4C dialogues with a focus on both philosophical content and developing critical thinking language and skills. Students were encouraged to evaluate their philosophical and critical thinking both verbally and in written form. The methodological approach incorporates sociocultural perspectives highlighting the key role of language as a mediator and tool for thinking (Mercer, 2000; Vygotsky, 1962, 1978). Transcripts of classroom discussions were analysed both inductively and deductively, using Hennessy et al.’s (2016) coding system for analysing classroom dialogue across educational contexts and Daniel et al.’s (2005) matrix outlining the development of the dialogical critical thinking process. Observation of students’ everyday learning in the classroom, together with their and their teachers’ reflections, revealed that teachers played a significant role in shaping students’ language and critical thinking through modelling, facilitating dialogue, establishing a democratic classroom culture, making thinking visible, and innovating and personalising teaching according to their students’ particular needs. Both students and teachers developed a range of capabilities through participating in (or, in the case of the teachers, leading) P4C dialogue: resilience, receptivity, intersubjectivity. This thesis presents one of the first investigations into the practice of teaching powerful knowledge in primary schools and suggests that explicit teaching of disciplinary language enhances students’ critical thinking capability and constitutes powerful knowledge. A new conception of powerful knowledge is advanced, termed enhancing knowledge, which emphasises how disciplinary knowledge enhances and is complementary to other knowledges, such as social or cultural knowledge, without devaluing their importance. This term also seeks to avoid the potential dominant connotations of the word ‘powerful’. The findings of this study suggest that P4C can offer diverse learners access to enhancing knowledge which has the potential to improve equity in education and enhance social justice.</p>

Philosophy for All Children: enhancing knowledge

<p>Building students’ critical thinking has been a focus in Education around the world in recent years. The New Zealand Curriculum (2007) is no exception, with an emphasis on critical and creative thinking in its vision statement. However, no advice is offered on how to teach critical thinking. This study uses a qualitative case study approach to explore how teachers teach critical thinking through Philosophy for Children (P4C) and offers some guidance on this for teachers. One of the contributions of this thesis is the claim that the P4C approach enhances social justice by supporting diverse learners – children who need support to achieve at school – to develop critical thinking and language capability. The theoretical framework underpinning my research draws on Bernstein’s (2000) ‘democratic pedagogic rights’ to enhancement, inclusion, and participation, and Wheelahan’s (2007), Young’s (2009) and Young and Muller’s (2013) conceptions of powerful knowledge. While much attention has been given to the theory of powerful knowledge in tertiary and secondary education contexts, to date, very little research has explored what powerful knowledge might look like, in practice, at primary school. Therefore this study makes an original contribution by investigating this unexplored area. Participants in this research included 104 primary school students aged between 8 and 11 years old and their teachers (n = 4) from four diverse primary schools in New Zealand. The research data is drawn from four main sources: audio recordings of classroom discussions, semi-structured focus group interviews with sample students, open-ended interviews with teachers, and student thinking journals. Over a period of 6 months, classes held weekly hour-long P4C dialogues with a focus on both philosophical content and developing critical thinking language and skills. Students were encouraged to evaluate their philosophical and critical thinking both verbally and in written form. The methodological approach incorporates sociocultural perspectives highlighting the key role of language as a mediator and tool for thinking (Mercer, 2000; Vygotsky, 1962, 1978). Transcripts of classroom discussions were analysed both inductively and deductively, using Hennessy et al.’s (2016) coding system for analysing classroom dialogue across educational contexts and Daniel et al.’s (2005) matrix outlining the development of the dialogical critical thinking process. Observation of students’ everyday learning in the classroom, together with their and their teachers’ reflections, revealed that teachers played a significant role in shaping students’ language and critical thinking through modelling, facilitating dialogue, establishing a democratic classroom culture, making thinking visible, and innovating and personalising teaching according to their students’ particular needs. Both students and teachers developed a range of capabilities through participating in (or, in the case of the teachers, leading) P4C dialogue: resilience, receptivity, intersubjectivity. This thesis presents one of the first investigations into the practice of teaching powerful knowledge in primary schools and suggests that explicit teaching of disciplinary language enhances students’ critical thinking capability and constitutes powerful knowledge. A new conception of powerful knowledge is advanced, termed enhancing knowledge, which emphasises how disciplinary knowledge enhances and is complementary to other knowledges, such as social or cultural knowledge, without devaluing their importance. This term also seeks to avoid the potential dominant connotations of the word ‘powerful’. The findings of this study suggest that P4C can offer diverse learners access to enhancing knowledge which has the potential to improve equity in education and enhance social justice.</p>

Learning to code: A narrative inquiry - “Without code we would probably be like cave people”

<p>In 2018 there was educational change in New Zealand with the introduction of new curriculum content for digital technologies. A key component of the digital technologies curriculum content was computational thinking where all students from Years 1 to 10 were expected to learn core coding concepts. The reasons for introducing coding into schools reflected a range of ideologies including preparing children to contribute meaningfully to society in the digital age. This narrative inquiry aimed to explore the value of coding in the curriculum through the experiences of students in Years 7 and 8. The research questions to meet this aim were; Why do students think coding is taught in school? Do students use coding outside of school? Why do students want to learn how to code and how do students think coding might help them or be useful? Curriculum ideologies underpinned this study as a theoretical framework to evaluate student experiences of coding across two case studies. The narratives were derived from focus group interviews held at two different schools. Similarities across the case studies included students’ beliefs about the benefits of including coding in the curriculum. Students’ felt confident that learning coding allowed them to; understand the digital world, create digital products, prepare for the future, teach others and fix broken technology. They could not comprehend what their lives would be like without technology and therefore coding. Some students believed that “without code we would probably be like cave people”. The main difference between the case studies was the level of teacher direction. This reflected a contradiction between competing curriculum ideologies and addressed the broader debate in education of 21st century skills versus powerful knowledge. The contradictions highlighted how the pedagogical design of coding in the curriculum could be effectively structured. Traditional knowledge and teacher explanation were found to be important to students when learning more complex coding. However, globalisation is a key concept for education in a digital age. Therefore, opportunities can be created for students to build on knowledge and collaborate in new and challenging ways. Treating coding as a social practice by teaching students to connect with the wider community or to use programming for social good can engage them with experiences beyond their own. This does not mean abandoning the elements of 21st century learning, such as students’ own experiences or active learning. Drawing on the strengths of both traditional knowledge and 21st century learning approaches can lead to more powerful knowledge creation.</p>

Learning to code: A narrative inquiry - “Without code we would probably be like cave people”

<p>In 2018 there was educational change in New Zealand with the introduction of new curriculum content for digital technologies. A key component of the digital technologies curriculum content was computational thinking where all students from Years 1 to 10 were expected to learn core coding concepts. The reasons for introducing coding into schools reflected a range of ideologies including preparing children to contribute meaningfully to society in the digital age. This narrative inquiry aimed to explore the value of coding in the curriculum through the experiences of students in Years 7 and 8. The research questions to meet this aim were; Why do students think coding is taught in school? Do students use coding outside of school? Why do students want to learn how to code and how do students think coding might help them or be useful? Curriculum ideologies underpinned this study as a theoretical framework to evaluate student experiences of coding across two case studies. The narratives were derived from focus group interviews held at two different schools. Similarities across the case studies included students’ beliefs about the benefits of including coding in the curriculum. Students’ felt confident that learning coding allowed them to; understand the digital world, create digital products, prepare for the future, teach others and fix broken technology. They could not comprehend what their lives would be like without technology and therefore coding. Some students believed that “without code we would probably be like cave people”. The main difference between the case studies was the level of teacher direction. This reflected a contradiction between competing curriculum ideologies and addressed the broader debate in education of 21st century skills versus powerful knowledge. The contradictions highlighted how the pedagogical design of coding in the curriculum could be effectively structured. Traditional knowledge and teacher explanation were found to be important to students when learning more complex coding. However, globalisation is a key concept for education in a digital age. Therefore, opportunities can be created for students to build on knowledge and collaborate in new and challenging ways. Treating coding as a social practice by teaching students to connect with the wider community or to use programming for social good can engage them with experiences beyond their own. This does not mean abandoning the elements of 21st century learning, such as students’ own experiences or active learning. Drawing on the strengths of both traditional knowledge and 21st century learning approaches can lead to more powerful knowledge creation.</p>

Interdisciplinary and Integrated STEM

Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) is an approach and movement in innovative educational practices from the primary level internationally. This would provide a platform for an inquiry approach, creativity, and innovation in young children and formulate a path for changes in existing practices. The STEM approach is widely accepted as a key educational practice; however, it is dealt with as a combination of disciplines in actual teaching and learning practice. Coherence in this interdisciplinarity and integration has yet to be evolved as a practice in synthesising and designing instruction and could be harbinger for an effective design for future practice. Integrated and interdisciplinary STEM can only generate powerful knowledge to deal with issues that are affecting the planet and bring abiotic and biotic equilibrium. Interdisciplinary and integrated powerful knowledge (IIPK) can act as a roadmap for innovation that can bring changes in existing practices, produce informed citizens, build capacity for informed decisions, and generate sustainable living practices. Interdisciplinary and integrated STEM could lay foundations for IIPK and generate a mindset, approach, and practice. IIPK could lead to the formation of new paths for energy generation, transport, agricultural practices, medical treatment, and clean environment. Interdisciplinary and integrated STEM is not seen in actual practice anywhere nowadays. For coherence in curriculum, implications in instructions need reform and development by the governments across the world. That could lead to a new policy for interdisciplinary and integrated STEM.

Some pupils should know better (because there is better knowledge than opinion). Interim findings from an empirical study of pupils’ and teachers’ understandings of knowledge and big questions in Religious Education

In this paper, we draw on interim findings of our research project on Religious Education (RE), knowledge and big questions. We have found Miranda Fricker’s concept of epistemic injustice useful in our analysis—that is, the notion that a person can be wronged “specifically in their capacity as a knower (Fricker 2007, 1). In interviews with Key Stage 3 pupils (aged 12–14) we found that for many pupils, their capacity to know was hindered by the prioritisation of respect for opinion. Where opinion is considered something not to be questioned, this seems to be a key indicator of epistemic disadvantage while some pupils valued and could employ criticality when considering knowledge claims (including opinions). Epistemic advantage in this way exacerbates epistemic injustice, broadening a gap between the epistemic haves and have-nots. This research is part of a larger project where we attempt to answer the question: ‘Does Religious Education have a distinctive contribution to make to the development of epistemic literacy?’. We begin with our account of epistemic literacy underpinned by Young’s powerful knowledge (Young and Muller 2010) and contextualise our data with discourses about knowledge and school education. We focus largely on the emergent theme of (respect for) opinions and we argue that the prioritisation of respect in RE is (for some pupils) a barrier to knowledge. We go on to explore why this matters for individuals, society and RE.

Bridging powerful knowledge and lived experience: Challenges in teaching mathematics through COVID-19

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic supported an investigation of ongoing challenges as to whether and how to make mathematics relevant to learners’ lifeworlds. Given that COVID-19 created major disruptions in all learners’ lives, we developed and taught tasks that attempted to make links between their experiences of the pandemic and disciplinary mathematical knowledge. We located our investigation in current debates about the extent to which disciplinary knowledge can be linked to learners’ out-of-school experiences. We developed and analysed two tasks about COVID-19 that could support link-making and productive disciplinary engagement, and analysed one Grade 10 teacher teaching these tasks. We found that linking mathematics to learners’ lifeworlds is both possible and extremely difficult in relation to task design and how the teacher mediates the tasks. In relation to task design, we argue that teachers cannot do it alone; they need to be supported by the curriculum and textbooks. In relation to mediation, we saw that teacher practices are difficult to shift, even in the best of circumstances. We articulate the complexities and nuances involved in bridging powerful knowledge and lived experience and thus contribute to debates on how to teach powerful knowledge in relation to learners’ lifeworlds.