Search

This paper presents an account of the development of the sociology of education in the UK, by means of an analysis of papers published in the field's flagship journal, the British Journal of Sociology of Education and its US equivalent, Sociology of Education. In particular, we examine the representation of two contrasting traditions in addressing social inequalities: 'political arithmetic'; and the more recent 'cultural turn'. We find that in the UK, the cultural turn dominates; whilst in the US, it is political arithmetic which does so. In accounting for these contrasting national profiles, we argue that they are underpinned by divergent social infrastructure and organisation. We also discuss some of the implications of the dominance of the cultural turn in the UK, specifically in terms of the relationship between the fields of academic research and policy and the development of a cumulative evidence base to address social inequalities in education. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Reflecting through the prisms of past, present ("the shape of things that are and were") and future ("the shape of things to come"), this paper discusses three challenges for sociology of education: the rise of populism and declining faith in 'experts'; inequities within and re/produced by the sociology of education; and how to enact a sociology of education that can 'make a difference' to social inequalities. The paper puts forward some ideas in support of a current and future practice of the discipline that is pluralistic and orientated towards social justice. Arguments are made for the value of public-orientated dialogue that is conducted in a range of registers and the importance of acknowledging and engaging with the 'debt' (Ladson-Billings) that is owed to minoritized communities and minoritized researchers. Finally, a case is made for a sociology of education based on the principle of service as enacted through praxis partnerships. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper provides an introduction and framing for this special issue of International Journal of Inclusive Education on pedagogies as an issue of social justice and inclusion. The paper works in the interstices between a sociologically sophisticated reproduction theory and a sociologically naïve school effectiveness framework in suggesting pedagogies can make a difference in terms of schooling as a good in and of itself and as a positional good. It rejects the pessimism of the former and the optimism of the latter and accepts the stance of the US school reform literature that teacher classroom practices have the greatest impact of all school-based factors. However, pedagogies alone cannot make all of the difference, particularly given the vast inequalities which surround schooling and what Ladson-Billings (2006) calls the 'educational debt'. Further, it is argued that considerations of socially just pedagogies also must of necessity involve considerations of curriculum, the purposes of schooling and assessment. The paper then summarizes the ways in which the essays included here provide a scaffold for what socially just pedagogies might look like today, stretching from the public pedagogies of politics to school-based pedagogies in the 'totally pedagogised society' (Bernstein, 2001b). Asking about socially just educational practices requires policy sociology to combine action-oriented and critical perspectives. It demands a respect for practice and a willingness to see educational practices as sites of justice, not merely sites of injustice (Cribb & Gewirtz, 2003, p. 28). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The last two decades have seen a significant growth of research studies concerned with young people living in rural places with a strong focus on social and economic inequalities. In these studies, equality has become a key organising principle in understanding young people's lives in settings that offer continuous social, economic, and cultural disadvantages. Drawing on a qualitative research study in a rural school in Victoria, Australia, this paper seeks to examine the ways in which young people make sense of and negotiate the challenges they encounter in their communities and in their post-secondary school transitions through two dominant discourses of equality: liberal egalitarianism and neoliberalism. These competing discourses conceptualise equality and approaches to addressing disadvantage differently. The former places the emphasis on a social approach underpinned by the idea of equality of opportunity, while the latter focuses on an individualised approach based on the notion of merit. I draw on a radical egalitarian critique by Iris Marion Young to reveal limitations from both positions and to show that adopting an individualised approach rather than a social one has significant implications for the way youth and institutions frame not only post-secondary school transitions and rural disadvantage but inequality as a whole. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper argues that the ‘traditional conception of moral responsibility’ authorizes and supports denials of white complicity. First, what is meant by the ‘traditional conception of moral responsibility’ is delineated and the enabling and disenabling characteristics of this view are highlighted. Then, three seemingly good, antiracist discourses that white students often engage in are discussed – the discourse of colour‐blindness, the discourse of meritocracy and the discourse of individual choice – and analysed to show how they are all grounded in the ‘traditional conception of moral responsibility’. The limitations of these discourses are drawn and how these discourses work to conceal white complicity is established. Finally, implications for social justice education are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]