Untitled

Examining Basil Bernstein's rules of recognition and realization in the case of underachieving students in math tests

“…Unfortunately, most of our informants appeared to hold strong commitment to math knowledge, the arbitrary internal ordering of which appreciates hierarchical organizations of knowledge units similar to Bernstein's notion of vertical discourse (Bernstein, 1999). As this meaning orientation configures their professional identity, which directs how they define themselves and interact with others (Bernstein, 1996), it often leads teachers to take intellectual students as the main sources of their professional identity (Apple, 1988;Ashendon, Connell, Dowsett & Kessler, 1987;Author, 2020, Author, 2021. This techno-efficient approach thus reinforces the strong combination of teaching professional identity and academic curricula, which in this study saw the teachers designing assessment items with the intention of grouping students into different ability categories.…”

What Freirean Critical Pedagogy Says and Overlooks from a Durkheimian Perspective

“…This scenario was confirmed by a study finding that the purpose of schooling exercised through academic curricula was aligned with professional identity among teachers that was predicated on appreciation of academic performance, so that intellectual students became the source of teachers' identity. As the majority of the working-class students in the study failed in academic curricula, teachers employed their authority to control them, unfortunately marginalizing them in the process (Ashendon et al, 1987). Other studies have revealed that such identity was associated with teachers' concerns with effectiveness, as evidenced by a finding that an elaborated code (often found in middleclass students) expressly fostered engagement by teachers in interactions with students (𝛽 = .325, p < .001).…”

“…It was also discovered that self-reflexivity and peer review led empowerment not to instructive pedagogy but an engaged one (Jeyaraj & Harland, 2016). Without a pedagogy that embraced open dialogue, more oppressive contexts predictably provoked resistance among working-class students (Ashendon et al, 1987;Chiang, 2019;McLaren, 1989a;Ogbu, 2003Ogbu, , 2004Willis, 1977) and among teachers (Simmons, 2016).…”