德里公立学校能力分组课堂中教师的声音、教学法与话语实践

Q3 Social Sciences Contemporary Education Dialogue Pub Date : 2023-01-01 DOI:10.1177/09731849221149254
Megha Bali
{"title":"德里公立学校能力分组课堂中教师的声音、教学法与话语实践","authors":"Megha Bali","doi":"10.1177/09731849221149254","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article discusses the pedagogic practice of ability grouping in government schools in Delhi. Despite practical evidence against homogenous student settings, ability grouping is implemented as a policy solution to reduce the huge variance in students’ learning levels within a classroom. Research data is drawn from interviews with 110 government schoolteachers in Delhi, where achievement data from baseline surveys conducted by the Delhi government was used to group students. Using Bourdieu’s (1998) theoretical tools, this article explores how the objective practice of ability grouping positions teachers and their pedagogical practices as intending to obtain performance measurement. Ability grouping creates an environment for teachers in which they submit to consigning students with low achievement results to low ability classrooms. Their habitus is less empowering as teachers’ ability to be teachers and in developing their own curricular content is curtailed by ability setting. The findings of this study reveal that most of the teachers’ pedagogic practice take the shape of educational triage. This had implications for enacted pedagogies and curriculum, as there is an extensive application of the exam-oriented technique of teaching, including selective and abbreviated curriculum in low-ability classrooms as teachers selectively cover less curriculum.","PeriodicalId":37486,"journal":{"name":"Contemporary Education Dialogue","volume":"20 1","pages":"39 - 64"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Teachers’ Voices, Pedagogy and Discursive Practices in Ability Grouping Classrooms in Delhi Government Schools\",\"authors\":\"Megha Bali\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/09731849221149254\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This article discusses the pedagogic practice of ability grouping in government schools in Delhi. Despite practical evidence against homogenous student settings, ability grouping is implemented as a policy solution to reduce the huge variance in students’ learning levels within a classroom. Research data is drawn from interviews with 110 government schoolteachers in Delhi, where achievement data from baseline surveys conducted by the Delhi government was used to group students. Using Bourdieu’s (1998) theoretical tools, this article explores how the objective practice of ability grouping positions teachers and their pedagogical practices as intending to obtain performance measurement. Ability grouping creates an environment for teachers in which they submit to consigning students with low achievement results to low ability classrooms. Their habitus is less empowering as teachers’ ability to be teachers and in developing their own curricular content is curtailed by ability setting. The findings of this study reveal that most of the teachers’ pedagogic practice take the shape of educational triage. This had implications for enacted pedagogies and curriculum, as there is an extensive application of the exam-oriented technique of teaching, including selective and abbreviated curriculum in low-ability classrooms as teachers selectively cover less curriculum.\",\"PeriodicalId\":37486,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Contemporary Education Dialogue\",\"volume\":\"20 1\",\"pages\":\"39 - 64\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Contemporary Education Dialogue\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/09731849221149254\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Contemporary Education Dialogue","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/09731849221149254","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文探讨了德里公立学校能力分组的教学实践。尽管有实际证据反对同质学生设置,但能力分组作为一种政策解决方案来实施,以减少课堂内学生学习水平的巨大差异。研究数据来自对德里110名公立学校教师的采访,其中来自德里政府进行的基线调查的成绩数据被用于对学生进行分组。本文利用布迪厄(1998)的理论工具,探讨了能力分组的客观实践如何将教师及其教学实践定位为旨在获得绩效测量的。能力分组为教师创造了一种环境,在这种环境中,他们屈服于将成绩低的学生分配到低能力的教室。他们的习惯是不太授权,因为教师的能力是教师和发展自己的课程内容受到能力设置的限制。本研究发现,教师的教学实践大多采取教育分类的形式。这对制定的教学法和课程产生了影响,因为以考试为导向的教学技术得到了广泛的应用,包括在低能力教室中选择性和简短的课程,因为教师有选择地涵盖较少的课程。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Teachers’ Voices, Pedagogy and Discursive Practices in Ability Grouping Classrooms in Delhi Government Schools
This article discusses the pedagogic practice of ability grouping in government schools in Delhi. Despite practical evidence against homogenous student settings, ability grouping is implemented as a policy solution to reduce the huge variance in students’ learning levels within a classroom. Research data is drawn from interviews with 110 government schoolteachers in Delhi, where achievement data from baseline surveys conducted by the Delhi government was used to group students. Using Bourdieu’s (1998) theoretical tools, this article explores how the objective practice of ability grouping positions teachers and their pedagogical practices as intending to obtain performance measurement. Ability grouping creates an environment for teachers in which they submit to consigning students with low achievement results to low ability classrooms. Their habitus is less empowering as teachers’ ability to be teachers and in developing their own curricular content is curtailed by ability setting. The findings of this study reveal that most of the teachers’ pedagogic practice take the shape of educational triage. This had implications for enacted pedagogies and curriculum, as there is an extensive application of the exam-oriented technique of teaching, including selective and abbreviated curriculum in low-ability classrooms as teachers selectively cover less curriculum.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Contemporary Education Dialogue
Contemporary Education Dialogue Social Sciences-Education
CiteScore
2.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
15
期刊介绍: Contemporary Education Dialogue serves as an independent open forum for researchers and practitioners to sustain a critical engagement with issues in education by engendering a reflective space that nurtures the discipline and promotes inter-disciplinary perspectives. The peer-reviewed journal allows for a refinement of theoretical and practical basis for improving the quality of education, furthering the opportunity to directly create reflective classroom practices. It invites contributions by academicians, policy-makers and practitioners on various topics related to education, particularly elementary education. Discussions and responses to published articles are also welcome.
期刊最新文献
Understanding Graphical Literacy Using School Students’ Comprehension Strategies Social Science Teacher? Anyone 
Can Become’: Examining 
Professional Subject Identity of Social Science Teachers in India Feminist Pedagogy in Women’s Studies Classrooms: Some Critical Reflections Language as a Tool for Inclusive and Equitable School Education: A Critical Review of NEP 2020 New Education Policy and Higher Education Reforms in India
×
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