Equality and diversity in secondary schools: teachers’ agentic and constrained enactments of the curriculum

IF 1.9 Q2 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH London Review of Education Pub Date : 2022-12-14 DOI:10.14324/lre.20.1.49
Asma Lebbakhar, Katie Hoskins, A. Chappell
{"title":"Equality and diversity in secondary schools: teachers’ agentic and constrained enactments of the curriculum","authors":"Asma Lebbakhar, Katie Hoskins, A. Chappell","doi":"10.14324/lre.20.1.49","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In England educators have been concerned about ensuring equality and diversity in education due to ever-diversifying school populations, who find themselves positioned as outsiders to England’s National Curriculum. This article explores the accessibility and limitations of the curriculum from the perspective of ten secondary school teachers in nine different subjects in inner city state schools. We begin by examining the participants’ goals and aims when enacting the curriculum to make it accessible to all students. However, the prescriptive nature of the curriculum in most subjects makes this task challenging. We then examine how participants perceived that they enabled students’ access to the curriculum and the challenges encountered. We focus on art and English to highlight the different spaces to enact equality and diversity within the curriculum. In the nonprescriptive art curriculum, teachers choose their own resources and themes, allowing for greater creativity and cultural inclusivity. In contrast, in the English curriculum, teachers find the process of equalising and diversifying the curriculum difficult, particularly at Key Stage 4, due to the high status of the subject. To conclude, we argue that the more prescriptive a curriculum subject is, the more difficult it is to make it equal, diverse and inclusive of everyone.","PeriodicalId":45980,"journal":{"name":"London Review of Education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"London Review of Education","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.14324/lre.20.1.49","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In England educators have been concerned about ensuring equality and diversity in education due to ever-diversifying school populations, who find themselves positioned as outsiders to England’s National Curriculum. This article explores the accessibility and limitations of the curriculum from the perspective of ten secondary school teachers in nine different subjects in inner city state schools. We begin by examining the participants’ goals and aims when enacting the curriculum to make it accessible to all students. However, the prescriptive nature of the curriculum in most subjects makes this task challenging. We then examine how participants perceived that they enabled students’ access to the curriculum and the challenges encountered. We focus on art and English to highlight the different spaces to enact equality and diversity within the curriculum. In the nonprescriptive art curriculum, teachers choose their own resources and themes, allowing for greater creativity and cultural inclusivity. In contrast, in the English curriculum, teachers find the process of equalising and diversifying the curriculum difficult, particularly at Key Stage 4, due to the high status of the subject. To conclude, we argue that the more prescriptive a curriculum subject is, the more difficult it is to make it equal, diverse and inclusive of everyone.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
中学的平等和多样性:教师对课程的自主和约束
在英格兰,由于学校人口的不断多样化,教育工作者一直担心确保教育的平等和多样性,他们发现自己被定位为英格兰国家课程的局外人。本文从内城州立学校九个不同科目的十名中学教师的角度探讨了课程的可及性和局限性。在制定课程时,我们首先要检查参与者的目标和目的,让所有学生都能使用。然而,大多数科目的课程规定性使这项任务具有挑战性。然后,我们研究了参与者如何看待他们使学生能够获得课程以及所遇到的挑战。我们专注于艺术和英语,以突出不同的空间,在课程中实现平等和多样性。在非脚本艺术课程中,教师选择自己的资源和主题,从而提高创造力和文化包容性。相比之下,在英语课程中,教师发现课程均衡化和多样化的过程很困难,尤其是在关键阶段4,因为该学科的地位很高。总之,我们认为,一门课程越是规定性的,就越难使其平等、多样化和包容所有人。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
London Review of Education
London Review of Education EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
6.70%
发文量
39
审稿时长
48 weeks
期刊介绍: London Review of Education (LRE), an international peer-reviewed journal, aims to promote and disseminate high-quality analyses of important issues in contemporary education. As well as matters of public goals and policies, these issues include those of pedagogy, curriculum, organisation, resources, and institutional effectiveness. LRE wishes to report on these issues at all levels and in all types of education, and in national and transnational contexts. LRE wishes to show linkages between research and educational policy and practice, and to show how educational policy and practice are connected to other areas of social and economic policy.
期刊最新文献
Researcher developers: an emerging third space profession Decentring engineering education beyond the technical dimension: ethical skills framework Understanding international student experiences in Japanese higher education: belonging as an indicator of internationalisation success Critical thirding and third space collaboration: university professional staff and new type of knowledge production The third space, student and staff co-creation of gamified informal learning: an emerging model of co-design
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1