Preview

Powerful Knowledge in the Curriculum for Excellence

Powerful Essays
Open Document
Open Document
7146 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
Powerful Knowledge in the Curriculum for Excellence
POWERFUL KNOWLEDGE IN THE CURRICULUM FOR EXCELLENCE

Rick Instrell

This is an expanded version of a paper delivered at the United Kingdom Literacy Association conference at the University of Chester on 15 July 2011.

Abstract

The Curriculum for Excellence (CfE) is the current Scottish curricular initiative for 3-18 year-olds. Although most educationists agree with its progressive goals, its documents have been criticised as being vague, anti-intellectual and ignorant of subject disciplines.

This paper will argue that all curriculum designers would benefit from insights from educational linguistics, a hybrid field formed by fusing educational sociology and linguistics. The most potent ideas come by combining Basil Bernstein’s analysis of knowledge structures with ideas from linguistics. Linguistics is a vast discipline but three related fields are of particular relevance: systemic functional linguistics (SFL), critical discourse analysis (CDA) and multimodal social semiotics (MMSS). Each comes with a formidable battery of methodologies and jargon. Despite this their key concepts and applications can be translated into a teacher- and learner-friendly form (Instrell 2008, 2010).

The paper will apply educational linguistics ideas to the teaching of high-level intellectual processes such as abstraction and metacognition and then extend the ideas into an analysis of subject English.

Critics have labelled the CfE as anti-intellectual but few have actually suggested how to repair its obvious shortcomings. This paper is a constructive attempt to put academic disciplines and the pursuit of excellence back into the Scottish curriculum.

Context: Curriculum for Excellence
The ideas explored in this paper have been developed within the context of the Scottish Government’s curriculum development for 3-18 year-olds, grandly titled the Curriculum for Excellence (CfE). It is claimed that the CfE focuses on learners’ needs by providing a coherent, more flexible



References: Anderson, L.W. & Krathwohl D. R. (eds.) (2001). A Taxonomy for Learning, Teaching, and Assessing: A Revision of Bloom 's Taxonomy of Educational Objectives. New York: Longman. Association for Media Education in Scotland (2011) Breaking Barriers: Multimodal and Media Literacy in the Curriculum for Excellence (Revised edition July 2011). Belsey, C. (2002) Critical Practice (2nd edition). London: Routledge. Bernstein, B. (1999) ‘Vertical and horizontal discourse: an essay’. In British Journal of Sociology of Education, Vol. 20, no. 2, 157-173. Bernstein, B. (1996) Pedagogy, Symbolic Control and Identity: Theory, Research, Critique. London: Taylor and Francis. Biggs, J. B. & Collis, K. E. (1982) Evaluating the Quality of Pupil Learning Experiences: the Solo Taxonomy. New York: Academic Press. Bloom, B. S. (ed.) (1956) Taxonomy of Educational Objectives, the classification of educational goals – Handbook I: Cognitive Domain. New York: McKay. Bruner, J. (1960) The Process of Education. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press. Christie, F. & Martin, J. R. (eds.) (2007) Language, Knowledge and Pedagogy: Functional Linguistics and Sociological Perspectives. London: Continuum. Christie, F. & Macken-Horarik, M. (2007) ‘Building verticality in subject English’. In F. Christie & J. R. Martin (eds.) (2007) Language, Knowledge and Pedagogy: Functional Linguistics and Sociological Perspectives. London: Continuum. Chapter 8. Christie, F. & Maton K. (eds.) (2011) Disciplinarity: Systemic Functional and Sociological Perspectives.  London, Continuum. Eggins, S.(2007) An Introduction to Systemic Functional Linguistics (2nd edition). London: Continuum. Fairclough, N. (1995) Media Discourse. London: Edward Arnold. Halliday M.A.K. (1993) ‘Towards a language-based theory of learning’. In Linguistics and Education, 5, 93-116. Halliday M.A.K. & Mathiessen C.M.I.M. (2004) An Introduction to Functional Grammar (3rd edition). London: Hodder Arnold. Instrell, R. (2008) ‘Something old, something new, something excellent? – Part 1’ in Media Education Journal, 43, Summer 2008, 9-16. Instrell, R. (2010) ‘Something old, something new, something excellent? – Part 2’ in Media Education Journal, 48, Winter 2010/2011, 3-11. Jenkins, H. et al. (2006) Confronting the Challenges of Participatory Culture: Media Education for the 21st Century. MacArthur Foundation. Jewitt, C. (ed.) (2009) The Routledge Handbook of Multimodal Analysis. London: Routledge. Kelly, A.V. (1999) The Curriculum: Theory and Practice (4th edition). London: Sage. Kress, G. (2010) Multimodality: a Social Semiotic Approach to Contemporary Communication. London: Routledge. Lakoff, G. & Johnson, M. (2003) Metaphors We Live By (2nd edition). Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Lei, E. R. (2011) Metacognition: a Literature Review. Pearson: London. Macken-Horarik, M. & Christie, F. (2011) ‘Disciplinarity and the case of school subject English’. In F. Christie & K. Maton (eds.) (2011) Disciplinarity: Systemic Functional and Sociological Perspectives.  London, Continuum. Martin, J.R. (2011) ‘Bridging troubled waters: interdisciplinarity and what makes it stick’. In F. Christie & K. Maton (eds.) (2011) Disciplinarity: Systemic functional and sociological perspectives.  London, Continuum. Martin, J.R. & Halliday M.A.K. (1993) Writing Science: Literacy and Discursive Power. London: Falmer Press. Maton, K. and Muller, J. (2007) ‘A sociology for the transmission of knowledge’. In In F. Christie & J. R. Martin (eds.) (2007) Language, Knowledge and Pedagogy: Functional Linguistics and Sociological Perspectives. London: Continuum. Chapter 2. Miller, D. J. & Robertson, D. P. (2010) ‘Using a games console in the primary classroom: effects of ‘Brain Training’ programme on computation and self-esteem’. In British Journal of Educational Technology, Vol. 41, no.2, 242–255. New London Group (1996) ‘A pedagogy of multiliteracies: designing social futures’. In B. Cope & M. Kalantzis (eds.) (2000) Multiliteracies. London: Routledge. Paterson, L. (2010) Assessment and Curriculum for Excellence. Lecture to SSTA conference 7 May 2010. Accessed 12/07/2011 athttp://www.ssta.org.uk/news.php?item.159.5. Priestley, M. & Humes, W. (2010) ‘The development of Scotland’s Curriculum for Excellence: amnesia and déjà vu’. In Oxford Review of Education, Vol. 36, no. 3, 345–361. Royal Society of Edinburgh (2008) Comments on Curriculum for Excellence draft experiences and outcomes for Literacy and English, for Expressive Arts and for Social Studies. Edinburgh: Royal Society of Edinburgh. Scottish Government (2009) Literacy Across Learning. Edinburgh: Scottish Government. Scottish Qualifications Authority (2004) Arrangements for Higher Media Studies. Glasgow: SQA. Scottish Qualifications Authority (2010) Arrangements for Higher English. Glasgow: SQA. Scottish Qualifications Authority (2011) 2011 English Higher Writing Folio Finalised Marking Instructions. Glasgow: SQA. Scottish Screen (2009) Moving Image Education in Scotland. Glasgow: Scottish Screen. Van Leeuwen, T,. (2005) Introducing Social Semiotics. London: Routledge. Young, M. (2008) ‘From constructivism to realism in the sociology of the curriculum’. In Review of Research in Education, Vol. 42, no. 1, 1-28.

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Powerful Essays

    'Taxonomy Of Educational Objectives: Handbook 1, The Cognitive Domain ' (Bloom, Engelhart, Furst, Hill, Krathwohl, 1956).…

    • 2733 Words
    • 11 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    References: Anderson, L. W., Krathwohl, D. R., & Bloom, B. S. (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives. New York, NY: Longman.…

    • 505 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Best Essays

    Martin, J. (1993). Technicality and abstraction: Language for the creation of specialized texts. In M. Halliday & J. Martin. (Eds.), Writing Science: Literacy and discursive power. London: Falmer Press.…

    • 2407 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Best Essays
  • Good Essays

    Bloom, B.S. (Ed.) (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives: The classification of educational goals: Handbook I, cognitive domain. New York: Longmans, Green.…

    • 957 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    In “Literacy, Discourse, and Linguistics,” James Paul Gee attempts to explain “a way of talking about literacy” and “literacy studies.” He describes how a Discourse is not the same as discourse, details the different types of Discourses, and introduces several new terms to strengthen his argument. Gee’s overall claims, in his own words, is “the focus of literacy studies or applied linguistics should not be language, or literacy, but social practices.”…

    • 729 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    References: Anderson, L. W., & Krathwohl, D. R. (2001). _A Taxonomy For Learning, Teaching, and Assessing: A Revision Of Bloom 's Taxonomy of Educational Objectives_. New York, NY: Addison Wesley Longman.…

    • 593 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Better Essays

    Theorist: Benjamin Bloom

    • 1266 Words
    • 6 Pages

    Benjamin Bloom made great contributions in the area of education. A great deal of his research focused on the study of educational objectives. Together with a group of cognitive psychologists at the University of Chicago, Bloom developed his theory on taxonomy and his book Taxonomy of Educational Objectives, Handbook 1: Cognitive Domain was published in 1956. His theory on taxonomy is his most significant work; it promoted the concept that any given task favors one of three psychological domains: Cognitive, affective, or psychomotor. The cognitive domain deals with the ability to process and utilize (as a measure) information in a meaningful way. The affective domain is concerned with the attitudes and feelings that result from the learning process. Lastly, the psychomotor domain involves manipulative or physical skills (New World Encyclopedia). Like Abraham Maslow and his hierarchy of needs, Bloom believed that in each of his psychological domains there are levels of learning, and an individual must be able to perform at the lower level before they can…

    • 1266 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Better Essays

    Sayner, J. (2010). Approaches to the media, The media: an introduction. Birmingham: Pearson education ltd.. p20-22.…

    • 1277 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Curriculum For Excellence

    • 6401 Words
    • 26 Pages

    on what could be seen as a rather arbitrary, albeit non-controversial, set of values. Far…

    • 6401 Words
    • 26 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    benjamin bloom

    • 1031 Words
    • 5 Pages

    Bloom was a well known educational theorist and teacher. Together with a group of cognitive psychologists at the University of Chicago, Bloom developed his theory on taxonomy and his book of Taxonomy of Educational Objectives Handbook 1: The Cognitive Domain was published in 1956. His theory of taxonomy however is his most significant work. It promoted the concept that any any given task favors one of three psychological domains; cognitive, affective, and psychomotor. The cognitive domain deals with the ability to process and utilize information in a meaningful way. The affective domain is concerned with the…

    • 1031 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    Yaguello, Marina. Language through the Looking Glass: Exploring Language and Linguistics. Trans. Marina Yaguello and Trevor Harris. Oxford: Oxford UP, 1998.…

    • 571 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Functionalism in Linguistics and in E. S. P Seems to have been derived from the functional Notional Approach .Thus Louise Sullivan’s dictum “FORM FOLLOWS FUNCTION “That is, the result of what I write comes from my purpose of writing .Thus the functional Notional Approach to language learning places more emphases on the communicative purpose of speech .It focuses on what people want to do or accomplish through language. This approach has a goal to help learner use the real language or appropriate language when communicating. . Thus the primary preoccupation of the Functional Notional Approach is sensitivity to the individual needs of the students.…

    • 329 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Bloom, B. S., Hastings, J. T., & Madaus, G. (1971). Handbook on formative and summative evaluation of student learning. New York: McGraw-Hill.…

    • 2907 Words
    • 12 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    Organized into eleven chapters, the book has the forward summarizing changes in the second edition, appendix which provides detailed analysis of texts and a bibliography. The first chapter: An overview of systemic functional linguistics aims at the orientation: the author attempts to initiate a dialogue with the reader and set out to give an overview of systemic functional linguistics. The chapter introduces many key concepts and terms to the readers which are developed in detail in subsequent chapters. The author begins with the explanation of the book which is "to introduce you the principles and techniques of the systemic functional approach to language" Besides explaining a functional semantic approach to language, the author provides with text examples the answers to the questions concerning the systemic functional approach to language (1) How do people use language? (2) How is language structured for use?…

    • 1824 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Better Essays

    Prague School

    • 3074 Words
    • 13 Pages

    Bibliography: 1.Coşeriu, Eugeniu- Introducere în lingvistică, Editura Echinox, Cluj, 1999 2. Coteanu, Ion- Crestomaţie de lingvistică generală, Editura Fundaţiei România de Mâine, Bucureşti, 1998 3. Elgin Haden, Suzette-What is Linguistics? Prentice Hall-Inc., New Jersey, United States of America, 1979 4.Graur, Alexandru; Wald, Lucia- Scurtă istorie a lingvisticii, Editura Didactică şi Pedagogică, 1977 5.Ionescu, Emil- Manual de lingvistică generală, Editura All, Bucureşti, 1997 6.Archibald, A. Hill- Linguistics, United States of America, 1969. 7.Lyons, John- Introducere în lingvistica teoretică, Editura Ştiinţifică, Bucureşti, 1995 8.Lyons, John; Coates, Richard; Deuchar, Margaret; Gadzar, Gerald- New Horizons in Linguistics, Great Britain, Penguin Books, 1987. 9.Manoliu Manea, Maria- Structuralismul lingvistic, Editura Didactică şi Pedagogică, Bucureşti, 1973 10. Saussure, Ferdinand de- Curs de lingvistică generală, Editura Polirom, Iaşi, 1998 11.http: //www.heartfield.demonco.uk/ jakobson.html 12.http: //www.shlrc.mq.edu.aux / trubetzkoy.html.…

    • 3074 Words
    • 13 Pages
    Better Essays