Higher apprenticeships in England: professional and vocational formation

This paper identifies how a series of higher apprenticeships projects funded by the UK coalition government in England between 2012 and 2014 are located within structures of professional and vocational formation. Factors that relate to the structuring of formation are discussed, including how notions of professionalisation and legitimacy, and the political economy of skill, impact on formation processes. Using sketches of three modes of formation, and evidence from documents associated with eight developmental and capacity building projects, higher apprenticeships are perceived as providing opportunities to vertically extend formation structures ‘upwards’ and ‘downwards’, in addition to providing forms of ‘horizontal extension’ through the development of new alternative progression routes to professional qualification. Alterations and extensions to formation structures are engendered by the specific macro and meso context of the relevant sector or profession, and may be influenced by the involvement of further and higher education institutions, leading to the prioritisation of particular types of progression, professional accreditation and qualification

Grammaticality and educational research

This paper uses Bernstein’s concept of grammar to illuminate aspects of educational research. The relationship between internal and external languages of description in the production of disciplinary knowledge is examined. This leads to a reflection on the various factors both internal and external to the discipline of educational studies that foster and undermine forms of research knowledge

Teaching, teacher formation, and specialised professional practice

This paper starts by exploring the relevance of Bernstein’s work on vertical and horizontal discourses and the constitution of professional knowledge for conceptualisation of the knowledge needed for teaching practice. Building on arguments for the differentiated nature of knowledge, and drawing on the work of Winch, Young and Muller on expertise, and the sociology of the professions, this paper advances a conception of teaching as a ‘specialised professional practice’ that requires the support of particular socio-epistemic arrangements and conditions embedded in professional communities. Prevalent notions of teaching and teacher education that find favour in some European countries are examined in the light of these arguments, with particular reference to recent reforms in England

The context of placement and work-based learning

This chapter will locate placement and work-based learning within organisational and wider socio-economic and political contexts, in addition to discussing various conceptions of what is being learnt in the workplace. Drawing on research into learning at work the chapter will provide an introduction to models and frameworks that can be used to evaluate the extent to which workplaces offer opportunities for learning of both an academic and professional nature. Changes in the way work is organised will be considered, in addition to the extent to which workplace processes and activities provide access to specific knowledge and competence, and to distinctive forms of learning. These aspects will be closely related to student experiences of placement and work-based learning

Workforce development, higher education and productive systems

Workforce development partnerships between higher education institutions and employers involve distinctive social and technical dynamics that differ from dominant higher education practices in the UK. The New Labour government encouraged such partnerships in England, including through the use of funding that aimed to stimulate reform to institutional processes and build capacity. In the broader policy context, greater workforce development activity had the objective of supporting national skills policy targets and increasing industrial productivity. In this article, the notion of the productive system is used to identify factors influencing the outcomes of this policy, using three models of the production of higher education provision. Attention is paid both to the structure in which these productive processes are situated, and the stages that result in new higher education programmes. To evaluate the sustainability of the productive systems, the development of mutual interests between participants is examined, in addition to the norms that structure culture and relationships and the distribution of power and influence. The role of the institution in respect of the employer and the student is also addressed, with reference to uncertainty regarding the value of workforce development provision in economic and political contexts of perpetual change

How is vocational knowledge recontextualised?

This paper sets out to examine how vocational knowledge is recontextualised in curricula, pedagogy and workplaces, by learners, and to ensure the availability of valuable and relevant knowledge for vocational practice. Starting from Bernstein’s notion of recontextualisation, and with reference to literature in the sociology of educational knowledge, studies of workplace learning and learning theory, recontextualisation is understood here as a socio-epistemic process which is influenced by the interrelation between the distinct structures of different knowledge types and the social dynamics of vocational education infrastructure. Various aspects of recontextualisation are considered, including whether the overall process can be disaggregated to reveal a series of separate elements, how knowledge is transformed and concepts are developed, and influences on the character of recontextualisation. Potential tensions that may affect recontextualisation in vocational environments are identified, and some conditions for reconciling these are briefly discussed

Differentiating knowledge, differentiating (occupational) practice

This paper extends arguments for differentiating knowledge into conceptualisations of occupational practice. It is argued that specialised forms of knowledge and practice require recognition and differentiation in ways that many contemporary approaches to practice theory deny. Drawing on Hager’s interpretation of MacIntyre is it suggested that occupational practices are differentiated from non-occupational practices by their ‘purposiveness’, and by how their internal and external goods relate. Furthermore, we can differentiate within the category of occupational practices by (i) the character and extent of specialised knowledge that underpins the practice, and by (ii) how socio-epistemic and institutional conditions shape how knowledge is recontextualised within the practice. This leads to an outline differentiation between forms of specialised and non-specialised occupational knowledge and practice

Specialized, systematic and powerful knowledge

This article starts with a comment on John White’s article published in 2019 in the London Review of Education, 17 (3), entitled ‘The end of powerful knowledge?’, and particularly on the point made about specialized knowledge and its relation to powerful knowledge. It is argued here that it is important to clarify the distinction between specialized knowledge, systematic knowledge, and what Young and Muller mean by powerful knowledge, as, while these are related, they are not equivalent. Not all specialized knowledge is codified and systematized, and not all systematic specialized knowledge is necessarily powerful. It is suggested that some of the characteristics attributed to powerful knowledge by Young and Muller, in particular ‘systematic revisability’ and its enactment in specialized communities, are crucial for understanding what they mean by powerful knowledge

Recontextualisation and the teaching of subjects

This paper interrogates the concept of recontextualisation and discusses its relevance for understandings of the knowledge required for teaching subjects. While various distinctive approaches to recontextualisation can be identified, this analysis primarily draws on the work of Bernstein, with recontextualisation discussed in the broader context of work on the sociology of educational knowledge. It is argued that Bernstein's approach to recontextualisation can be usefully extended by absorbing insights derived from recent work conceptualising expertise and practice, through a reconsideration of disciplinarity, and by reflecting on historical studies of the transformation of specialised practical knowledge. It is suggested that recontextualisation can help us better understand (i) the structure of subjects and their relationship to disciplines and (ii) the relationship between knowledge and ‘content’ in the process of curriculum making. Recontextualisation is nevertheless problematic without an acknowledgement of the role of teachers in shaping and enacting recontextualisation principles and navigating recontextualisation rules