Not Signed-In
Which clippings match 'Pedagogic Recontextualising Field' keyword pg.1 of 1
06 NOVEMBER 2012

Open Courses are upending the higher education paradigm

"Open Courses will definitively shift the power from content to community in Higher Learning. The second coming of knowledge is firmly associated with free connections, inquiry and conversations, something that textbooks implicitly discourage. Textbooks, for all they stand for, are the industrial age contraptions that dominated learning for most of last fifty years; Open courses bring a much needed, paradigm shifting update.

In summary, then, Open Courses are eating the publishers' lunch, and that's where the resentment comes from. These masters of the learning universe already had enough trouble with the culture of Internet, and Open Courses represent everything they feared: the communities, the conversations and the knowledge commons. This isn't a battle which is over yet, but we may just be witnessing a passing of an age."

(Supriyo Chaudhuri, 05 November 2012)

TAGS

2012connectivismcredentialism • credentials or access • diploma mill • free connections • from content to community • game-changer • higher learningindustrial ageindustrial revolutioninternet cultureknowledge commonsknowledge communitiesknowledge conversations • learning conversations • learning networksMOOCsnew business models • open courses • open courseware • open education • paradigm shiftpedagogic recontextualising fieldpolitical legitimacy • power shift • PRF • privileged access • publisher and the profit • publishing revenues • sale of print • Supriyo Chaudhuri • textbook publishers • textbooksuniversities

CONTRIBUTOR

Simon Perkins
13 JULY 2012

Trevor Hussey and Patrick Smith: The Uses of Learning Outcomes

"This paper argues that learning outcomes need to be reclaimed from their current use as devices for monitoring and audit, and returned to their proper use in aiding good teaching and learning. We require a broader, flexible and more realistic understanding of learning outcomes, better suited to the realities of the classroom and of practical use to those teachers who wish to respond to the enthusiasm of their students. To this end, a new model is produced that starts from the idea of an articulated curriculum, and embraces both intended and emergent learning outcomes. The model employs the distinction between predicted and unpredicted learning outcomes, together with the distinction between those that are desirable and those that are undesirable. The resulting account is intended to aid understanding of the nature and proper use of learning outcomes in teaching and learning."

(Trevor Hussey & Patrick Smith, p.357, 2003)

Trevor Hussey & Patrick Smith (2003). "The Uses of Learning Outcomes", Teaching in Higher Education, Vol. 8, No. 3, 2003, pp.357–368, ISSN 1356–2517 (print)/ISSN 1470–1294 (online)/03/030357–12, 2003 Taylor & Francis Ltd., DOI: 10.1080/1356251032000088574

TAGS

accountabilityadministriviaaid to understandingambiguityambiguity and uncertainty • articulated curriculum • auditaudit culture • auditing • best practicebureaucracy • constructive alignment • contiguous learning outcomes • corridor of tolerance • curriculum designcurriculum development • David Megginson • desirable outcomes • effective alignment • ELO • emergent curriculum • emergent learning outcomes • enhancing learning • experienced teachers • flexibility • good teaching and learning • higher education • ILO • incidental learning outcomes • indecisiveness • intended learning outcomes • John Biggs • learnerslearning and teaching • learning moments • learning outcomesmonitoring • Patrick Smith • pedagogic recontextualising fieldpedagogypractical usepredictability • predicted learning outcomes • QAA • realistic understanding • realities of the classroom • related learning outcomes • responding to enthusiasm • student enthusiasmstudent learningteachersteaching • Teaching in Higher Education (journal) • Trevor Hussey • uncertainty • unpredicted learning outcomes

CONTRIBUTOR

Simon Perkins
22 MAY 2011

Mastery of recognition, realisation and evaluation rules is hallmark of academic life

"Recontextualising rules regulate the work the discipline's teachers – those who constitute its Pedagogic Recontextualising Field (PRF). The pedagogic recontextualising field produces textbooks, curricula, examination criteria and standards. The knowledge produced by researchers and theorists 'passes through ideological screens as it becomes its new form, pedagogic discourse' (Bernstein, 2000, p.115). Recontextualising knowledge for teaching involves selection, translation, and filtering: emerging as a syllabus for 'physics 101' or 'sociology 300' etc. In the late nineteenth century, the establishment of state funded and regulated education systems established Official Pedagogic Recontextualising Fields (ORF) 'created and dominated by the state for the construction and surveillance of state pedagogic discourse' (Bernstein, 2000, p.115). Emanating from the ORF, the PBRF rewards contributions to the knowledge base (laboratory science, field work, theoretical writing), but not the production of its teaching texts, especially those used in schools. The recontextualising activities needed to reproduce and advance a discipline are devalued.

As a pedagogic device, the PBRF recontextualises government policies: they are summarised, translated, operationalised in handbooks, manuals, pro–forma, and seminars. Like any pedagogic practice, these are 'there for one purpose: to transmit criteria' (Bernstein, 2000, p.28). They define the system's evaluative rules and 'provide for acquirers the principles for the production of what counts as the legitimate text. The legitimate text is any realisation on the part of the acquirer which attracts evaluation' (Bernstein, 2000, p.xiv). The production of legitimate texts is a hallmark of academic life – essays, theses, journal articles, curriculum vitae, or promotion applications require mastery of recognition, realisation and evaluation rules. Recognition rules help identify contexts – a sociology class, faculty meeting, psychology journal, Evidence Portfolio, etc. Realisation rules enable textual production – written, spoken, visual etc. It is possible to recognise a context, but lack the realisation rule needed to speak or write its texts.

Bernstein argues that those working in a field of knowledge may feel 'threatened by a change in its classificatory relation, or by an unfavourable change in the economic context' (Bernstein, 2000, p.203). From the mid to late twentieth century, Educationists experienced continual shifts in the classification and framing of their subject/s, and these reconfigured the constraints and possibilities for collective and individual identity formation."

(Sue Middleton, 2006)

1). Middleton, S. (2006). Research Assessment as a pedagogical device: A Bernsteinian exploration of its impact on New Zealand's subject/s of Education. Australian Association for Research in Education Conference Adelaide.

TAGS

AARE • Aotearoa New ZealandBasil Bernstein • classificatory relation • collective identity • evaluation rules • evaluative rules • evidence portfolio • examination criteria • government policy • ideological screens • individual identityknowledge field • legitimate texts • nineteenth century • official pedagogic recontextualising fields • ORF • PBRF • pedagogic device • pedagogic discoursepedagogic practicepedagogic recontextualising fieldPerformance Based Research FundPRF • production of teaching texts • realisation rulesrecognition rules • recontextualising • recontextualising activities • recontextualising knowledge • recontextualising rules • regulated education systems • research contributionresearcherssyllabus • textual production

CONTRIBUTOR

Simon Perkins
22 MAY 2011

Disciplinary Identities: Professional Writing, Rhetorical Studies, and Rethinking 'English'

"In his concept of 'disciplinary boundary–work,' sociologist Thomas Gieryn offers a useful lens through which to examine the controversies that arose within our department (see also David Russell's discussion of boundary work in the composition/literature split). According to Gieryn, a discipline's representatives strategically shape its boundaries by means of discourse: they articulate the discipline's mission in a certain way, they define a set of characteristic problems to coincide with the discipline's methodologies, they articulate collective values, and they engage in other practices to widen the discipline's scope and strengthen its resources. In Gieryn's approach, the epistemological, ontological, and practical relationship between a discipline and the surrounding culture is interpreted according to a cartographic metaphor. Gieryn employs this familiar metaphor to explain that a discipline relates to other disciplines, and to larger systems of knowledge and activity, in the same manner as a geographic territory relates to neighboring territories and to the larger land mass that encloses it. Furthermore, the relationships between neighboring territories strongly influence the overall health, power, and legitimacy of the involved territories. As such, it is helpful to know how the boundaries between territories are formulated and how they share resources.

What's up for grabs in boundary conflicts is not just traditional 'resources' (such as faculty lines, research funds, courses, and students), but also control over representations of the discipline's central problems, concepts, and methods – that is, the 'rhetorical resources' that disciplines create and maintain in order to solidify their boundaries. Contests over the department's undergraduate curriculum have the potential to shape not only very practical matters like hiring priorities and new course creation, but also the distribution of rhetorical resources – namely, formulations of 'English' as a discipline. One of the primary rhetorical resources in this case is control over the names assigned to different programmatic elements – concentrations, degrees, and so on – of the department."

(Brent Henze, Wendy Sharer and Janice Tovey, 2010, p.70)

Russell, David R. 'Institutionalizing English: Rhetoric on the Boundaries.' Disciplining English: Alternative Histories, Critical Perspectives. Ed. David R. Shumway and Craig Dionne. Albany, NY: SUNY P, 2002. 39–58.

1). Henze, B., W. Sharer, et al. (2010). Disciplinary Identities: Professional Writing, Rhetorical Studies, and Rethinking 'English'. Design Discourse Composing and Revising Programs in Professional and Technical Writing. D. Franke, A. Reid and A. DiRenzo. Fort Collins, Colorado, The WAC Clearinghouse and Parlor Press, LLC. 32.

TAGS

academic disciplinesboundaries • boundaries between territories • boundary conflicts • boundary work • cartographic metaphor • characteristic problems • classification and framingcollective valuescontextually specific practices • contextually specific texts • control over representations • David Russell • disciplinary boundariesdisciplinary classification • disciplinary discourse • disciplinary identities • disciplinary protectionism • disciplinary resources • disciplinary structures • distributing principles • distribution of rhetorical resources • epistemology • geographic territory • hiring priorities • knowledge territorialisationlegitimate scholarly practicesmethodologiesontology • pedagogic codes • pedagogic recontextualising field • professional writing • research funds • rhetorical resources • rhetorical studies • Thomas Gieryn • undergraduate curriculum

CONTRIBUTOR

Simon Perkins
Sign-In

Sign-In to Folksonomy

Can't access your account?

New to Folksonomy?

Sign-Up or learn more.