Teaching sociology within teacher education : revisiting, realigning and re-embedding

This paper uses theoretical resources from the sociology of education to consider the teaching of sociology in teacher education programs in Australia. Once a disciplinary ‘pillar’ of teacher education, sociology’s contribution has become less explicit while more integrated, with consequences for disciplinary identity. Here we explore how sociology is taught in teacher education curricula on two fronts. Firstly we outline how sociology is embedded as one of a number of competing perspectives in foundational studies, and its pedagogic consequences. Then we consider the powerful contribution of sociology in literacy studies, amidst public debate about literacy performance. The analysis draws on Bernstein’s (2000) distinction between singular disciplinary curriculum design and practically-oriented regional curriculum design. We seek to trouble the commonsense binary between theory and practice that structures debates around professional education in higher education more broadly, and to dignify service sociology as a valuable, generative site for the discipline’s future.

A grand challenge : reflecting on university science curriculum design, collaborative partnerships and integration of information literacy skills

In 2012, Queensland University of Technology (QUT) committed to the massive project of revitalizing its Bachelor of Science (ST01) degree. Like most universities in Australia, QUT has begun work to align all courses by 2015 to the requirements of the updated Australian Qualifications Framework (AQF) which is regulated by the Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency (TEQSA). From the very start of the redesigned degree program, students approach scientific study with an exciting mix of theory and highly topical real world examples through their chosen “grand challenge.” These challenges, Fukushima and nuclear energy for example, are the lenses used to explore science and lead to 21st century learning outcomes for students. For the teaching and learning support staff, our grand challenge is to expose all science students to multidisciplinary content with a strong emphasis on embedding information literacies into the curriculum. With ST01, QUT is taking the initiative to rethink not only content but how units are delivered and even how we work together between the faculty, the library and learning and teaching support. This was the desired outcome but as we move from design to implementation, has this goal been achieved? A main component of the new degree is to ensure scaffolding of information literacy skills throughout the entirety of the three year course. However, with the strong focus on problem-based learning and group work skills, many issues arise both for students and lecturers. A move away from a traditional lecture style is necessary but impacts on academics’ workload and comfort levels. Therefore, academics in collaboration with librarians and other learning support staff must draw on each others’ expertise to work together to ensure pedagogy, assessments and targeted classroom activities are mapped within and between units. This partnership can counteract the tendency of isolated, unsupported academics to concentrate on day-to-day teaching at the expense of consistency between units and big picture objectives. Support staff may have a more holistic view of a course or degree than coordinators of individual units, making communication and truly collaborative planning even more critical. As well, due to staffing time pressures, design and delivery of new curriculum is generally done quickly with no option for the designers to stop and reflect on the experience and outcomes. It is vital we take this unique opportunity to closely examine what QUT has and hasn’t achieved to be able to recommend a better way forward. This presentation will discuss these important issues and stumbling blocks, to provide a set of best practice guidelines for QUT and other institutions. The aim is to help improve collaboration within the university, as well as to maximize students’ ability to put information literacy skills into action. As our students embark on their own grand challenges, we must challenge ourselves to honestly assess our own work.

The ABCs of teaching alphabet knowledge : affordances and challenges of ‘weaving’ visible and invisible pedagogies

As researchers interested in the pursuit of high quality/high equity literacy learning outcomes, we focus on the learning experiences of five early years French students, with a special regard for those who are already considered as being at-risk of educational failure. We narrow the empirical focus to a single lesson on a mechanical concept of print, that is matching lower and upper case alphabet letters. In doing so, we examine a deeply philosophical question: Which pedagogical practices dis/enable what sorts of early years students as literacy learners? We extend Cazden’s (2006) notion of ‘weaving’ knowledge across dimensions of knowing to describe how the case study teacher ‘weaves’ visible and invisible pedagogies over the four movements of a lesson. The findings reveal different pedagogical framings (Bernstein, 1996) have potentially different cognitive and social effects that constitute different kinds of literacy knowledge and oppressive subject positions for at-risk students (Young, 1990).

Playing with Grammar in the Early Years : Learning about Language in the Australian Curriculum : English

As teacher/researchers interested in the pursuit of socially-just outcomes in early childhood education, the form and function of language occupies a special position in our work. We believe that mastering a range of literacy competences includes not only the technical skills for learning, but also the resources for viewing and constructing the world (Freire and Macdeo, 1987). Rather than seeing knowledge about language as the accumulation of technical skills alone, the viewpoint to which we subscribe treats knowledge about language as a dialectic that evolves from, is situated in, and contributes to a social arena (Halliday, 1978). We do not shy away from this position just because children are in the early years of schooling. In ‘Playing with Grammar’, we focus on the Foundation to Year 2 grouping, in line with the Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority’s (hereafter ACARA) advice on the ‘nature of learners’ (ACARA, 2013). With our focus on the early years of schooling comes our acknowledgement of the importance and complexity of play. At a time where accountability in education has moved many teachers to a sense of urgency to prove language and literacy achievement (Genishi and Dyson, 2009), we encourage space to revisit what we know about literature choices and learning experiences and bring these together to facilitate language learning. We can neither ignore, nor overemphasise, the importance of play for the development of language through: the opportunities presented for creative use and practice; social interactions for real purposes; and, identifying and solving problems in the lives of young children (Marsh and Hallet, 2008). We argue that by engaging young children in opportunities to play with language we are ultimately empowering them to be active in their language learning and in the process fostering a love of language and the intricacies it holds. Our goal in this publication is to provide a range of highly practical strategies for scaffolding young children through some of the Content Descriptions from the Australian Curriculum English Version 5.0, hereafter AC:E V5.0 (ACARA, 2013). This recently released curriculum offers a new theoretical approach to building children’s knowledge about language. The AC:E V5.0 uses selected traditional terms through an approach developed in systemic functional linguistics (see Halliday and Matthiessen, 2004) to highlight the dynamic forms and functions of multimodal language in texts. For example, the following statement, taken from the ‘Language: Knowing about the English language’ strand states: English uses standard grammatical terminology within a contextual framework, in which language choices are seen to vary according to the topics at hand, the nature and proximity of the relationships between the language users, and the modalities or channels of communication available (ACARA, 2013). Put simply, traditional grammar terms are used within a functional framework made up of field, tenor, and mode. An understanding of genre is noted with the reference to a ‘contextual framework’. The ‘topics at hand’ concern the field or subject matter of the text. The ‘relationships between the language users’ is a description of tenor. There is reference to ‘modalities’, such as spoken, written or visual text. We posit that this innovative approach is necessary for working with contemporary multimodal and cross-cultural texts (see Exley and Mills, 2012). We believe there is enormous power in using literature to expose children to the richness of language and in turn develop language and literacy skills. Taking time to look at language patterns within actual literature is a pathway to ‘…capture interest, stir the imagination and absorb the [child]’ into the world of language and literacy (Saxby, 1993, p. 55). In the following three sections, we have tried to remain faithful to our interpretation of the AC:E V5.0 Content Descriptions without giving an exhaustive explanation of the grammatical terms. Other excellent tomes, such as Derewianka (2011), Humphrey, Droga and Feez (2012), and Rossbridge and Rushton (2011) provide these more comprehensive explanations as does the AC:E V5.0 Glossary. We’ve reproduced some of the AC:E V5.0 glossary at the end of this publication. Our focus is on the structure and unfolding of the learning experiences. We outline strategies for working with children in Foundation, Year 1 and Year 2 by providing some demonstration learning experiences based on texts we’ve selected, but maintain that the affordances of these strategies will only be realised when teaching and learning is purposively tied to authentic projects in local contexts. We strongly encourage you not to use only the resource texts we’ve selected, but to capitalise upon your skill for identifying the language features in the texts you and the children are studying and adapt some of the strategies we have outlined. Each learning experience is connected to one of the Content Descriptions from the AC:E V5.0 and contains an experience specific purpose, a suggested resource text and a sequence for the experience that always commences with an orientation to text followed by an examination of a particular grammatical resource. We expect that each of these learning experiences will take a couple if not a few teaching episodes to work through, especially if children are meeting a concept for the first time. We hope you use as much, or as little, of each experience as is needed. Our plans allow for focused discussion, shared exploration and opportunities to revisit the same text for the purpose of enhancing meaning making. We do not want the teaching of grammar to slip into a crisis of irrelevance or to be seen as a series of worksheet drills with finite answers. Strategies for effective practice, however, have much portability. We are both very keen to hear from teachers who are adopting and adapting these learning experiences in their classrooms. Please email us on b.exley@qut.edu.au or lkervin@uow.edu.au. We’d love to continue the conversation with you over time.

Cultural content matters: A critical sociology of language and literacy curriculum

A theoretical rationale, policy analysis and research agenda for a critical sociology of language and literacy curriculum, outlining the agenda for a political economy of textbooks.

Modelling as a vehicle for philosophical inquiry in the mathematics curriculum

Philosophical inquiry in the teaching and learning of mathematics has received continued, albeit limited, attention over many years (e.g., Daniel, 2000; English, 1994; Lafortune, Daniel, Fallascio, & Schleider, 2000; Kennedy, 2012a). The rich contributions these communities can offer school mathematics, however, have not received the deserved recognition, especially from the mathematics education community. This is a perplexing situation given the close relationship between the two disciplines and their shared values for empowering students to solve a range of challenging problems, often unanticipated, and often requiring broadened reasoning. In this article, I first present my understanding of philosophical inquiry as it pertains to the mathematics classroom, taking into consideration the significant work that has been undertaken on socio-political contexts in mathematics education (e.g., Skovsmose & Greer, 2012). I then consider one approach to advancing philosophical inquiry in the mathematics classroom, namely, through modelling activities that require interpretation, questioning, and multiple approaches to solution. The design of these problem activities, set within life-based contexts, provides an ideal vehicle for stimulating philosophical inquiry.

An evaluation of the Australian ‘reconceptualising early mathematics learning’ project : key findings and implications

The Pattern and Structure Mathematics Awareness Project (PASMAP) has investigated the development of patterning and early algebraic reasoning among 4 to 8 year olds over a series of related studies. We assert that an awareness of mathematical pattern and structure (AMPS) enables mathematical thinking and simple forms of generalization from an early age. This paper provides an overview of key findings of the Reconceptualizing Early Mathematics Learning empirical evaluation study involving 316 Kindergarten students from 4 schools. The study found highly significant differences on PASA scores for PASMAP students. Analysis of structural development showed increased levels for the PASMAP students; those categorised as low ability developed improved structural responses over a short period of time.

National curriculum reform and equipping pre-service teachers to teach about Australia in the Asian Century

Currently a range of national policy settings are reshaping schooling and teacher education in Australia. This paper presents some of the findings from a small qualitative pilot study conducted with a group of final year pre-service teachers studying a secondary social science curriculum method unit in an Australian university. One of the study’s research objectives aimed at identifying how students reflected on their capacity to navigate curriculum change and, more specifically, on teaching about Australia and Asia in the forthcoming implementation of the first national history curriculum. The unit was designed and taught by the researcher on the assumption that beginning social science teachers need to be empowered to deal with the curriculum change they’ll encounter throughout their careers. The pilot study’s methodology was informed by a constructivist approach to grounded theory and its scope was limited to one semester with volunteer students. Of the pre-service teacher reflections on their preparedness to teach, this paper reports on the content, pedagogy and learning they experienced in one segment of the unit with specific reference to the new history curriculum’s ‘Australia in a world history’ approach and the development of Asia literacy. The findings indicate that whilst pre-service teachers valued the opportunity to engage with learning experiences which enhanced their intercultural understanding and extended their pedagogical and content knowledge on campus, the nature of the final practicum in schools was also influential in shaping their preparedness to enter the profession.

The ‘Indigenous Australian’ theme in the Australian Curriculum English : necessary or not?

On Friday 10 January 2014 Education Minister Christopher Pyne formally announced a review of the inaugural Australian curriculum. In his three and half minute televised justification, Pyne (2014) identified a number of criticisms of the national curriculum document, including the ‘necessity to have themes’ of ‘Australia’s place in Asia, Indigenous Australia and sustainability’. It is the second of these themes that we consider as ALEA’s Hot Topic for March 2014. We respond to Pyne’s momentary musing of the necessity of the ‘Indigenous Australian’ theme in the Australian Curriculum with a particular focus on the discipline of English. In the nomenclature of the Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority’s Australian Curriculum (ACARA, 2013), we are of course referring to the ‘cross curriculum priority’ of ‘Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander histories and cultures’.

Higher Education and Sustainable Development : A Model for Curriculum Renewal

Responding to the global and unprecedented challenge of capacity building for twenty-first century life, this book is a practical guide for tertiary education institutions to quickly and effectively renew the curriculum towards education for sustainable development. The book begins by exploring why curriculum change has been so slow. It then describes a model for rapid curriculum renewal, highlighting the important roles of setting timeframes, formal and informal leadership, and key components and action strategies. The second part of the book provides detailed coverage of six core elements that have been trialled and peer reviewed by institutions around the world: - raising awareness among staff and students - mapping graduate attributes - auditing the curriculum - developing niche degrees, flagship courses and fully integrated programs - engaging and catalysing community and student markets - integrating curriculum with green campus operations. With input from more than seventy academics and grounded in engineering education experiences, this book will provide academic staff with tools and insights to rapidly align program offerings with the needs of present and future generations of students.

Curricula integration : identifying and locating engineering education across the Australian curriculum

Science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) has become an educational package emerging throughout the world (e.g. UK, China, US & Australia). Although science, technology and mathematics are taught in schools and engineering education occurs in universities, there appear to be few if any explicit engineering education programs in primary and junior secondary schools. A stronger inclusion of engineering education at these levels could assist students to make informed decisions about career opportunities in STEM-related fields. This paper suggests how engineering education can be integrated with other key learning areas such as English, mathematics, science, history and geography within the new Australian Curriculum.

Diversity or perversity?: Award-winning children's literature and the Australian curriculum

Two of the three cross-curriculum priorities for the national Australian Curriculum prescribed by the Australian Curriculum Assessment and Reporting Authority (ACARA) are focussed on what might be called diversity education: “Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander histories and culture”, and "Asia and Australia's Engagement with Asia” (ACARA, “Cross”). One need not be versed in complex rhetorical theory to understand that, laudable and legitimate as such priorities are, their existence implies that mainstream education in Australia has been or is characterised by the marginalisation or erasure of Australia's history—the original Indigenous cultures are not only living and vibrant today, but also have tens of thousands of years’ “head start” on Australia’s settler cultures—and of its geography—Australia is, after all, located in some physical proximity to Asia. Some might even suggest that Australia is in Asia. These temporal and spatial “forgettings” constitute a kind of cultural perversity which the cross-curricular priorities both seek to address and serve to reinscribe. Even as ACARA requires Australian school students to engage with Aboriginal and Asian histories, cultures, societies, they imply that such histories, cultures, and societies are “diverse”, that they are not those of the students in Australian classrooms; producing them as objects of study rather than as lived experience. This should not necessarily be surprising. Michael W. Apple has provocatively argued that: “one of the perverse effects of a national curriculum actually will be to ‘legitimise inequality.’ It may in fact help create the illusion that whatever the massive differences in schools, they all have something in common” (18). In the Australian context, attempts to mitigate such perversity are articulated via the selection of literary texts. As educators move to resource ACARA’s cross-curricular priorities, ACARA notes that “Teachers and schools are best placed to make decisions about the selection of texts in their teaching and learning programs that address the content in the Australian Curriculum while also meeting the needs of the students in their classes” (ACARA, “Advice”). This assertion appears on a webpage called “Advice on selection of literary texts” which is notable first and foremost for its total lack of any literary texts being named, and its list of weblinks pointing to lists of texts compiled elsewhere, by other organisations, and in the main, compiled to serve agendas other than the Australian curriculum. One of the major resources referred to by ACARA for literary text selection is the Children’s Book Council of Australia (CBCA). Of course, the CBCA’s annual book awards do not share ACARA’s educational priorities, but do have a history of being drawn upon by schools as a curriculum resource. In this paper, I consider the literary texts which have been prized by the CBCA in recent years attending to their engagements with Aboriginal cultures.

Curriculum, Syllabus Design and Equity : A Primer and Model

Curriculum scholars and teachers working for social justice and equity have been caught up in acrimonious and polarizing debates over content, ideology and disciplinary knowledge. At the forefront in cutting through these debates and addressing the practical questions involved, this book is distinctive in looking to the technical form of the curriculum rather than its content for solutions. The editors and contributors, all leading international scholars, advance a unified, principled approach to the design of syllabus documents that aims for high quality/high equity educational outcomes and enhances teacher professionalism.

Time, space, and text in the elementary school digital writing classroom

Theorists of multiliteracies, social semiotics, and the New Literacy Studies have drawn attention to the potential changing nature of writing and literacy in the context of networked communications. This article reports findings from a design-based research project in Year 4 classrooms (students aged 8.5-10 years) in a low socioeconomic status school. A new writing program taught students how to design multimodal and digital texts across a range of genres and text types, such as web pages, online comics, video documentaries, and blogs. The authors use Bernstein’s theory of the pedagogic device to theorize the pedagogic struggles and resolutions in remaking English through the specialization of time, space, and text. The changes created an ideological struggle as new writing practices were adapted from broader societal fields to meet the instructional and regulative discourses of a conventional writing curriculum.

Reflexive writers : re-thinking writing development and assessment in schools

Writing is a complex and highly individual activity, which is approached in different ways by different writers. Writers reflexively mediate subjective and objective conditions in specific and nuanced ways to produce a product in time and place. This paper uses a critical realist theory of reflexivity to argue that the teaching and assessment of writing must account for the different ways that students manage and make decisions in their writing. Data from linguistically and culturally diverse primary students in Australia are used to illustrate how four distinct reflexive modalities constitute the ways in which students approach writing. The paper offers a new approach to assessing writing for and of learning that considers writers as reflexive and agentic in different ways. It posits the importance of making visible and explicit the context and reflexive decision-making as writers shape a product for a purpose and audience.