Terry Wrigley

‘Knowledge’, curriculum and social justice

ABSTRACT This article considers the place of knowledge in developing a socially just curriculum. It pursues the unusual route of a critique of Social Realism, a small but influential tendency in curriculum studies which claims that knowledge has been squeezed out by recent curriculum reforms and that there has been a descent into relativism. This paper shares the Social Realist view that ‘powerful knowledge’ is needed, and particularly by disadvantaged or marginalised young people. However, it critiques Social Realisms limited definition of ‘powerful knowledge’, arguing that for knowledge to be truly powerful, it must open up issues of power and inequality. It contests the Social Realist argument that critical pedagogy which begins from a subaltern stance is intrinsically relativist, arguing instead that alternative perspectives can help uncover concealed truths and break through hegemonic paradigms and ideologies. It argues that this is entirely compatible with a Critical Realist epistemology. Furthermore, the paper presents reasons why a socially just curriculum needs to draw upon the vernacular knowledge of marginalised groups as well as the canonical knowledge of academic disciplines to produce truly powerful knowledge and a social justice curriculum.

John Dewey’s democracy and education: a British tribute. Edited by Steve Higgins and Frank Coffield

This stimulating collection shines a light in murky times. It is scholarly in the best sense, and in a way that Dewey himself would recognise. Each of its diverse set of chapter authors ‘works with Dewey’ (as Scandinavian colleagues express it), entering into dialogue with his work, and particularly Democracy and Education. It is a real strength that they relate to some of its key ideas from the perspective of their own research, are not afraid to challenge when they disagree andmake important links with our contemporary concerns. I repeatedly foundmyself noting further reading to pursue, and even when I disagreed, felt grateful for the stimulus to my own thinking. The editors deserve congratulation for assembling this collection on the 100th anniversary of Dewey’s seminal work. In Chapter 1, Steven Cowan and Gary McCulloch evaluate Dewey’s influence in Britain. This was often indirect, operating through a wider progressive movement. His ideas informed the Hadow Report of 1931 and later Plowden in 1967. Dewey was a major influence on the London Day Training Centre (predecessor of the Institute of Education) and on Susan Isaacs. Perhaps the indirectness of influence has also been a source of confusion, since Dewey’s thinking became assimilated, in the professional imagination, to the wide river of progressivism (Rousseau, Pestalozzi, Owen, Froebel, Montessori, etc.). Any shallow interpretation of ‘child centredness’ as sidelining the role of teachers or subjects is particularly inappropriate in Dewey’s case, as various chapter authors explain (see also Richard Pring’s 2007 book). In Chapter 2, Diane Reay sharply reminds us of the parlous state of English education. Nothing could be further from Dewey’s vision than the current ‘intense competitive individualism in a context of growing social and economic inequalities’. Drawing on her recent research, she highlights the sense of ‘abjection and failure’ ofmany bottom-set students, felt as individual failure but rooted in the structures of society and the school system:

Infantile accountability: When big data meet small children

This article examines a government attempt to impose testing of 4-year-olds as a baseline against which to ‘hold primary schools accountable’ for children’s subsequent progress. It examines the various forms of baseline testing in this experiment and analyses the misleading claims made for the ‘predictive validity’ of baseline scores. The article also takes a broader look at standardised ways of tracking children’s attainment and progress to the end of primary school and tacit assumptions of linear progress underpinning large-scale data-based accountability processes.

The complexities and contexts of school reform: a review of three recent books

These three books, in their different ways, aim to fill significant gaps in policy studies. All three wrestle with questions of national difference within the globalisation of policy. All place a substantial emphasis on questions of equality and social justice, all raise important questions of governance, including the role of numerical data, and all seek to understand what is the implication of these issues for classrooms. All the authors are extremely knowledgeable, and have established reputations in their own countries and internationally. Unfortunately, I can only enthuse about the first two books: despite Simola’s evident scholarship, even a second reading has left me confused.

Evidence-based teaching: Rhetoric and reality

This essay connects a number of recent books relating, in different ways, to the contentious issue of how teaching might be better guided by research evidence. It probably does justice to no single title, but hopefully sheds some light on this problematic area. It is important to stress from the start that raising awkward questions about terms such as ‘evidence-based teaching’ is not the same as saying that evidence is unimportant. No one would wish to be treated by a doctor, nor educated by a teacher, who disregards evidence: in the former case, this can be a matter of life and death. Indeed, part of the impetus behind the Evidence-Based Medicine movement was the recognition that too many doctors were relying on habit or tradition despite solid evidence to the contrary: it is beyond doubt that patients have benefited enormously from it. This makes the argument difficult to pursue: evidence (like ‘effectiveness’ and ‘improvement’ in schools) is so obviously a ‘good thing’ that it becomes difficult to raise doubts.