Trajectories of powerful knowledge and epistemic quality: analysing the transformations from disciplines across school subjects

IF 2.3 3区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH Journal of Curriculum Studies Pub Date : 2023-02-26 DOI:10.1080/00220272.2023.2182164
Brian Hudson, N. Gericke, C. Olin-Scheller, Martin Stolare
{"title":"Trajectories of powerful knowledge and epistemic quality: analysing the transformations from disciplines across school subjects","authors":"Brian Hudson, N. Gericke, C. Olin-Scheller, Martin Stolare","doi":"10.1080/00220272.2023.2182164","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This paper outlines the development of a comparative research framework in subject didactics and applies this in the process of analysing the transformations from academic disciplines across different school subjects. The theoretical framework builds on the concepts of ‘powerful knowledge’ and ‘transformation’ and ‘epistemic quality’ within which transformation processes from the classroom to the societal level are considered as ‘trajectories of powerful knowledge and epistemic quality’. The framework is used to analyse the findings from recent empirical studies across school subjects that have been reported on in publications arising from the Knowledge and Quality across School Subjects and Teacher Education (KOSS) network. 1 The paper then focuses on analysing the transformations from disciplines across school subjects, given that the first boundary in defining powerful knowledge concerns knowledge that is specialized in both how it is produced and transmitted. To analyse this boundary, the findings from the empirical studies are grouped into broad subject categories. These are then compared with the corresponding disciplines by using the widely cited Biglan classification scheme of academic disciplines in higher education. Finally, we consider the implications for curriculum planning and teacher education policy and reflect on the concept of subject-specific educational content knowledge (SSECK).","PeriodicalId":47817,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Curriculum Studies","volume":"9 1","pages":"119 - 137"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-02-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"13","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Curriculum Studies","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00220272.2023.2182164","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 13

Abstract

ABSTRACT This paper outlines the development of a comparative research framework in subject didactics and applies this in the process of analysing the transformations from academic disciplines across different school subjects. The theoretical framework builds on the concepts of ‘powerful knowledge’ and ‘transformation’ and ‘epistemic quality’ within which transformation processes from the classroom to the societal level are considered as ‘trajectories of powerful knowledge and epistemic quality’. The framework is used to analyse the findings from recent empirical studies across school subjects that have been reported on in publications arising from the Knowledge and Quality across School Subjects and Teacher Education (KOSS) network. 1 The paper then focuses on analysing the transformations from disciplines across school subjects, given that the first boundary in defining powerful knowledge concerns knowledge that is specialized in both how it is produced and transmitted. To analyse this boundary, the findings from the empirical studies are grouped into broad subject categories. These are then compared with the corresponding disciplines by using the widely cited Biglan classification scheme of academic disciplines in higher education. Finally, we consider the implications for curriculum planning and teacher education policy and reflect on the concept of subject-specific educational content knowledge (SSECK).
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
强大知识和认知质量的轨迹:跨学校学科的学科转换分析
本文概述了学科教学比较研究框架的发展,并将其应用于分析不同学校学科的学科转型过程中。理论框架建立在“强大的知识”、“转化”和“认知质量”的概念之上,在这些概念中,从课堂到社会层面的转化过程被认为是“强大的知识和认知质量的轨迹”。该框架用于分析最近跨学校学科的实证研究结果,这些研究结果已在跨学校学科和教师教育(KOSS)网络的出版物中报道。考虑到定义强大知识的第一个边界涉及如何产生和传播的专门知识,本文随后重点分析了跨学校学科的学科转换。为了分析这一界限,实证研究的结果被分为广泛的主题类别。然后使用被广泛引用的Biglan高等教育学科分类方案,将这些学科与相应的学科进行比较。最后,我们考虑了课程规划和教师教育政策的影响,并反思了特定学科教育内容知识(SSECK)的概念。
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
Journal of Curriculum Studies
Journal of Curriculum Studies EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
4.70
自引率
4.80%
发文量
19
审稿时长
24 weeks
期刊介绍: Journal of Curriculum Studies publishes conceptually rich contributions to all areas of curriculum studies, including those derived from empirical, philosophical, sociological, or policy-related investigations. The journal welcomes innovative papers that analyse the ways in which the social and institutional conditions of education and schooling contribute to shaping curriculum, including political, social and cultural studies; education policy; school reform and leadership; teaching; teacher education; curriculum development; and assessment and accountability. Journal of Curriculum Studies does not subscribe to any particular methodology or theory. As the prime international source for curriculum research, the journal publishes papers accessible to all the national, cultural, and discipline-defined communities that form the readership.
期刊最新文献
Materialities of progressive curriculum reform: a case study of one kindergarten classroom Situating potentially and kinetically powerful knowledges: the power of meaning-making and social change The palimpsests of knowledge Principals’ conceptions of mathematics instruction: Co-constructing sophisticated instructional vision through professional development Alignment thinking and complementary curriculum: a qualitative study addressing the urgent need for environmental education
×
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