Search

Despite the pervasive impact of US imperialism, it is often ignored in US schools and teacher preparation programs. This paper introduces the concept of imperial evasion, which refers to the process of ignoring and denying imperialism and its effects. The authors argue that it is imperative that educators work to interrogate imperialist ideologies through curricula, and prepare future educators to disrupt such ideologies, policies, and practices in schools. Using a collaborative scholarly personal narrative approach, the authors discuss their experiences and approach to designing and teaching a course on migration and education at a US university. Ultimately, this paper responds to calls to disrupt imperial ideologies in education by (1) providing a framework for identifying and naming imperial evasion and how it operates through schooling; and (2) describing and reflecting on curricular and pedagogical approaches to disrupting such evasions in a teacher education course. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Through an evaluation of an institution-wide curriculum change process, this paper analyses how strategic policy is variously enacted in departmental communities. Linguistic ethnography of public, institutional and internal policy documents illuminates departments' engagement with the change process. With curriculum change positioned as a disorienting dilemma, transformational learning theory provides a lens to analyse the departments' alignment with the intention of the curriculum change policy. The paper explores the extent to which departments transformed from a disciplinary content-based and high-stakes examination approach to the curriculum to incorporating broader institutional aims and active learning theories into disciplinary language, pedagogy and practices. Three stages of engagement are identified through an evaluation rubric, offering a framework to assess curriculum change initiatives. Implications for educational leaders include the need to integrate institutional strategy with disciplinary experts and expertise and the importance of language adoption as a precursor to implementation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Institution-wide curriculum change is a costly, time-intensive and politically fraught undertaking. It is a challenge identifying who has responsibility for the curriculum and who is empowered to change it. The unbundling of the traditional tri-partite academic role of teaching, research and service leaves a gap of who in those communities decides what features in the curriculum. Using discourse analysis of curriculum change documentation, this paper analyses the experience of departments in a research-intensive institution undergoing a holistic, large-scale curriculum review. Departments engaged to varying degrees, with associated integration of educational and disciplinary perspectives. Landscapes of practice are used to explore different communities within departments coming together, or not, in the process. The acknowledgement and appreciation of educational expertise alongside disciplinary research-based knowledge is highlighted as a marker for successful adoption of the curriculum review intentions. This paper contributes to the underdeveloped field of curriculum change in higher education. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Many studies highlight positive outcomes from curriculum co-creation including its transformational potential for students. In this paper, we explore how curriculum co-creation transforms students, drawing on Johansson and Felten's (2014. Transforming Students: Fulfilling the Promise of Higher Education. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press) theoretical framework including four factors of student transformation: (1) disruption of previous ways of working, (2) reflection on experiences, (3) new forms of action, and (4) integration of new perspectives and ways of working. We present our analysis of student and staff experiences of actively engaging in curriculum co-creation at five Scottish universities to understand the ways in which students are transformed through this experience. Our findings focus on four themes of student transformation in curriculum co-creation: developing positive relationships and community; engagement and enjoyment; taking risks and overcoming challenges; and academic achievement and retention. We conclude that the risks and challenges inherent in curriculum co-creation may in fact be exactly those conditions conducive to student transformation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper will re-visit the origins and early use in South African curriculum writing of the concept of 'coherence'; it will go on to show how Suellen Shay and her colleagues fleshed out the concept and created an instrument for its empirical analysis; it will then step back and examine the contribution and some problems that were brought to light; examine briefly how Shay's later work continued to wrestle with the notion of 'practice', particularly in light of curricula that were judged to display conceptual coherence; and will suggest one possible solution in the seminal paper by Bernstein (2000). Finally, the paper will reflect on two implicit definitions of 'curriculum', a 'strict' one and an 'extended' one and suggest why they should be distinguished. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper responds to a question posed by [Shay, Suellen. 2012. "Educational Development as a Field: Are We There Yet?" Higher Education Research and Development 31 (3): 311–323. doii:10.1080/07294360.2011.631520] about the status of knowledge building in the field of Educational Development. In her paper, Shay critiques knowledge produced in the field arguing that it is 'codified practice' [Gamble, Jeanne. 2001. "Modelling the Invisible: The Pedagogy of Craft Apprenticeship." Studies in Continuing Education 23 (2): 185–200. doii:10.1080/01580370120101957; Gamble, Jeanne. 2004. "Retrieving the General from the Particular: The Structure of Craft Knowledge." In Reading Bernstein, Researching Bernstein, edited by J. Muller, B. Davies, and A. Morais, 189–203. Abingdon: Routledge; Gamble, Jeanne. 2006. "Theory and Practice in the Vocational Curriculum." In Knowledge, Curriculum and Qualifications in South African Further Education, edited by M. Young and J. Gamble, 87–103. Pretoria: HSRC Press] rather than applied theory which could succeed in reconceptualising problems rather than simply trying to address them. This paper draws on a review of research produced in the field in recent years in South Africa to argue that, although some work does result in the reconceptualision of problems the higher education, it is limited in that (i) it has been produced by a relatively small group of practitioners located at a few universities and (ii) draws on theory developed in the Global North. The paper then proceeds to offer some tentative suggestions for the way future work aimed at knowledge building could proceed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Suellen Shay's work on higher education curricula foregrounds the importance of professional curricula which face inwards to disciplines and outwards to practice. This paper builds on her framing of professional curricula, distinctive in the differentiated knowledge base and the social relations which legitimate them. I extend Shay's work deeper into the internal governance structures underpinning curriculum decisions in engineering. Two dimensions of governance are explored: central control from the Faculty of Engineering over its departments; and the authority of individuals in department-level curriculum and accreditation roles over their colleagues. The empirical focus is on curricula reform towards 'graduate attributes' in engineering education, through a comparative study of eight universities in the United Kingdom, South Africa, Singapore, and Australia. The findings show that research-intensive universities are shielded from the full implications of accreditation requirements, while teaching-intensive universities are more likely to invest in developing the governance processes and systems demanded by professional bodies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

One of the intellectual threads to which Suellen Shay contributed was describing the curriculum structure of professional and vocational education. This work was part of the Bernsteinian call for a return to knowledge in the curriculum. But education for vocations and professions, termed 'regions', remains a vexing problem. Turning to LCT (Semantics), Shay attempted to elevate the knowledge produced in practice to that of theoretical knowledge. Although laying the foundations she did not fully capture the complex conceptual nature of knowledge of the contextual detail central to practice. Using empirical data from an engineering curriculum, this paper develops an alternative conceptualisation of 'practical knowledge' in terms of knowledge of the contextual details of professional problems. Professions recruit theory to solve contextually emergent problems, suggesting knowledge of the material detail is the origin of reasoning, Symbolic relations do function to develop reasoning in professional problems, but material relations dictate which knowledge is relevant. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

What knowledge matters in health professions education is an issue of debate in the literature, foregrounded by the COVID-19 pandemic and informed by calls for students who are not only clinically competent, but also critically conscious of global health inequity. Building on this work, this paper explores what kinds of knowledge are legitimated in two health science programmes at a South African university. Thirty-four health professions teachers participated in the study. Legitimation Code Theory (LCT) Specialisation was used as an analytical framework, with Epistemic and Social Relations as coding categories. Results revealed the dominance of a knowledge code, with the social dispositions and attributes relating to the development of critical consciousness often not considered knowledge at all. Our contention is that both knowledge and social dispositions are equally important in the development of future healthcare professionals and that collaborative curriculum conversations are needed to enable them being interwoven throughout curricula. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Through this point-of-departure paper we aim to prompt discussion and action around redesigning university learning to help students tackle climate-related challenges in a personally and societally meaningful way. We use the lens of assessment to draw attention to how discipline areas without an explicit environmental or climate science focus can play a fundamental part in prompting climate action. We draw on the very limited number of studies to date of assessment related to climate learning and on an illustrative example of teaching and assessing leadership practices for confronting climate change to make recommendations with relevance for all curricula. We reflect on assessment tools, approaches, strategies, and good practice that not only gauge the level of learning at individual and whole cohort level but also prompt meaningful learning to take place through the way they are designed, with potential impact outside the campus walls and beyond the end of formal university study. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Recent feedback literature suggests that the development of student feedback literacy has potential to address problems in current feedback practice. Students' feedback literacy involves developing the capacity to make the most of feedback opportunities by active involvement in feedback processes. How the development of student feedback literacy can be embedded within the undergraduate curriculum has not yet been discussed in any depth. This conceptual paper fills that gap by elaborating three key mechanisms for embedding feedback literacy within the curriculum: eliciting, processing and enacting. These are illustrated through enhanced variations of four existing practices: feedback requests, self-assessment, peer review, and curated e-portfolios. The discussion summarizes the key implications for practice and identifies the need for further empirical work investigating how students elicit, process and enact feedback in situ, and longitudinal research exploring the impact of curriculum design on the development of student feedback literacy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Since Universities Australia's Indigenous Strategy recommended a sector-wide approach to 'closing the gap' between Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australians, universities have grappled with how to do this. Resisting mainstream approaches to curriculum development that eschew any kind of relational accountability (Wilson, Shawn. 2008. Research is Ceremony: Indigenous Research Methods. Manitoba: Fernwood Publishing) requires entering difficult relations of power and occupying space to transform the act of curriculum development itself. This paper is the second in a series understanding Jindaola, a programme led by a Local Aboriginal Knowledge Holder within one Australian university. It 'hacks' the curriculum development space with staff through Aboriginal way towards Curriculum Reconciliation, building knowledge-based relationships between disciplinary and relevant Aboriginal Knowledge. We deliberately and controversially enact this type of relationship, by temporarily bringing the Foucauldian lens of 'heterotopia', and interview data from 30 participants, to describe how Jindaola usurps the neocolonial remit to embed Indigenous Knowledge, and creates and holds a counter-hegemonic space to decolonise curriculum development. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper seeks to understand how the curriculum is experienced across two higher education institutions to probe students' understandings of epistemic access in the context of decolonisation debates. Three particular aspects of student experience of the decolonised curriculum and pedagogy are scrutinised. First, we look at the kind of sociality encouraged in the pedagogic encounter. Since a core function of education is social and cultural formation, a question arises as to what kind of sociality is possible between students and lecturers in a decolonised education space, including in the context of COVID-19. Second, we explore patterns of participation including, academic activities and support provided. Third, we investigate the knowledge forms and canon to which students are exposed in their respective programmes, with consideration of language issues. Finally, we examine the decolonisation of the curriculum in the context of the Covid-19 pandemic. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]