英国的器乐训练能力?核心内容框架的“官方教学法”

IF 1.7 3区 教育学 Q2 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH
Jim Hordern, Clare Brooks
{"title":"英国的器乐训练能力?核心内容框架的“官方教学法”","authors":"Jim Hordern, Clare Brooks","doi":"10.1080/00071005.2023.2255894","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This paper focuses on the structure and substance of the Core Content Framework (CCF), a controversial document which stipulates content that providers of teacher education in England must incorporate in their programmes. We identify both a concept of instrumental trainability and a lack of coherence in the CCF which suggests it is unsuitable as a guide to a curriculum for teacher education. Drawing on Bernstein’s work and its application by other sociologists of educational knowledge, we identify how the CCF embeds a ‘generic mode’ in teacher education that has roots outside of disciplinary structures of knowledge production and therefore foregrounds a type of official pedagogy that sees teaching as a technical performance and leaves gaps in the knowledge and understanding a new teacher requires to make sound educational judgements. Employing Muller’s distinction between conceptual and contextual coherence, we argue that the CCF is based upon an imaginary notion of instructional practice that does not fully grasp the context of teachers’ work. We illustrate the argument via an analysis of the language, structure, and three of the eight sections in the CCF.","PeriodicalId":47509,"journal":{"name":"British Journal of Educational Studies","volume":"71 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"TOWARDS INSTRUMENTAL TRAINABILITY IN ENGLAND? THE ‘OFFICIAL PEDAGOGY’ OF THE CORE CONTENT FRAMEWORK\",\"authors\":\"Jim Hordern, Clare Brooks\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/00071005.2023.2255894\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This paper focuses on the structure and substance of the Core Content Framework (CCF), a controversial document which stipulates content that providers of teacher education in England must incorporate in their programmes. We identify both a concept of instrumental trainability and a lack of coherence in the CCF which suggests it is unsuitable as a guide to a curriculum for teacher education. Drawing on Bernstein’s work and its application by other sociologists of educational knowledge, we identify how the CCF embeds a ‘generic mode’ in teacher education that has roots outside of disciplinary structures of knowledge production and therefore foregrounds a type of official pedagogy that sees teaching as a technical performance and leaves gaps in the knowledge and understanding a new teacher requires to make sound educational judgements. Employing Muller’s distinction between conceptual and contextual coherence, we argue that the CCF is based upon an imaginary notion of instructional practice that does not fully grasp the context of teachers’ work. We illustrate the argument via an analysis of the language, structure, and three of the eight sections in the CCF.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47509,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"British Journal of Educational Studies\",\"volume\":\"71 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-09-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"British Journal of Educational Studies\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/00071005.2023.2255894\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"教育学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"British Journal of Educational Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00071005.2023.2255894","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文主要关注核心内容框架(CCF)的结构和内容,这是一个有争议的文件,规定了英国教师教育提供者必须纳入其课程的内容。我们确定了工具可训练性的概念和CCF中缺乏一致性,这表明它不适合作为教师教育课程的指南。借鉴伯恩斯坦的工作以及其他教育知识社会学家对其的应用,我们确定了CCF如何在教师教育中嵌入一种“通用模式”,这种模式植根于知识生产的学科结构之外,因此展望了一种将教学视为技术表现的官方教学法,并在新教师做出合理教育判断所需的知识和理解方面留下了空白。采用穆勒对概念连贯和语境连贯的区分,我们认为CCF是基于一种想象的教学实践概念,它没有完全掌握教师工作的语境。我们通过对CCF的语言、结构和八个部分中的三个部分的分析来说明这一论点。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
TOWARDS INSTRUMENTAL TRAINABILITY IN ENGLAND? THE ‘OFFICIAL PEDAGOGY’ OF THE CORE CONTENT FRAMEWORK
This paper focuses on the structure and substance of the Core Content Framework (CCF), a controversial document which stipulates content that providers of teacher education in England must incorporate in their programmes. We identify both a concept of instrumental trainability and a lack of coherence in the CCF which suggests it is unsuitable as a guide to a curriculum for teacher education. Drawing on Bernstein’s work and its application by other sociologists of educational knowledge, we identify how the CCF embeds a ‘generic mode’ in teacher education that has roots outside of disciplinary structures of knowledge production and therefore foregrounds a type of official pedagogy that sees teaching as a technical performance and leaves gaps in the knowledge and understanding a new teacher requires to make sound educational judgements. Employing Muller’s distinction between conceptual and contextual coherence, we argue that the CCF is based upon an imaginary notion of instructional practice that does not fully grasp the context of teachers’ work. We illustrate the argument via an analysis of the language, structure, and three of the eight sections in the CCF.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
British Journal of Educational Studies
British Journal of Educational Studies EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
4.50
自引率
5.30%
发文量
36
期刊介绍: The British Journal of Educational Studies is one of the UK foremost international education journals. It publishes scholarly, research-based articles on education which draw particularly upon historical, philosophical and sociological analysis and sources.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信