Education Systems and Learners: Knowledge and Knowing

166 Pages·2017·13.128 MB·English

by  David Scott (auth.)

Education Systems and Learners
DavidScott
Education Systems
and Learners
Knowledge and Knowing
DavidScott
InstituteofEducation
UniversityCollegeLondon
London,UnitedKingdom
ISBN978-1-137-59883-7 ISBN978-1-137-59884-4(eBook)
DOI10.1057/978-1-137-59884-4
LibraryofCongressControlNumber:2016957761
©TheEditor(s)(ifapplicable)andTheAuthor(s)2017
Theauthor(s)has/haveassertedtheirright(s)tobeidentifiedastheauthor(s)ofthisworkin
accordancewiththeCopyright,DesignsandPatentsAct1988.
This work is subject to copyright. All rights are solely and exclusively licensed by the
Publisher,whetherthewholeorpartofthematerialisconcerned,specificallytherightsof
translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on
microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission or information storage and
retrieval,electronicadaptation,computersoftware,orbysimilarordissimilarmethodology
nowknownorhereafterdeveloped.
Theuseofgeneraldescriptivenames,registerednames,trademarks,servicemarks,etc.inthis
publicationdoesnotimply,evenintheabsenceofaspecificstatement,thatsuchnamesare
exemptfromtherelevantprotectivelawsandregulationsandthereforefreeforgeneraluse.
Thepublisher,theauthorsandtheeditorsaresafetoassumethattheadviceandinformation
in this book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the
publishernortheauthorsortheeditorsgiveawarranty,expressorimplied,withrespectto
thematerialcontainedhereinorforanyerrorsoromissionsthatmayhavebeenmade.
Coverillustration:©IuliaShevchenko/AlamyStockPhoto
Printedonacid-freepaper
ThisPalgraveMacmillanimprintispublishedbySpringerNature
TheregisteredcompanyisMacmillanPublishersLtd.
Theregisteredcompanyaddressis:TheCampus,4CrinanStreet,London,N19XW,
UnitedKingdom
To: Lucas, Robinand Jake Scott
A
CKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Versionsofchapterstwoandfourwereoriginallypublishedrespectivelyin
D. Wyse, N. Selwyn, E. Smith & L. Suter (Eds.). (2016). The BERA/
SAGE handbook in educational research, SAGE, and Scott, D. (2017).
New perspectives on curriculum, learning and assessment, Springer. In
addition, pages 49–52 and 63–69 of Scott, D. (2000). Realism and
educational research, Routledge, and pages 49–52 of Scott, D. Learning
affordances of language and communication national curricula. The
Curriculum Journal, 27, 1 are republished in this book in a significantly
abridgedform.Permissionshavebeenreceivedfromthethreepublishers,
with thanks.
vii
C
ONTENTS
1 Introduction–EducationSystems andTheir Sub-systems 1
2 Accountsof EducationSystems, Teachers andLearners 21
3 JudgementsAboutEducationSystems,PeopleandPractices 41
4 LearningEnvironments 55
5 LearningandAcademicKnowledge 91
6 GlobalEducation andEducational Reform 101
7 Conclusions–Educational Discourses 109
References 147
Author Index 155
SubjectIndex 159
ix
L T
IST OF ABLES
Table1.1 Overallqualityprofile:definitionsofstarredlevels 3
Table1.2 Gradedescriptorsforoveralleffectiveness 8
xi
CHAPTER1
–
Introduction Education Systems
and Their Sub-systems
Thisbookisaboutknowledgeandthewayitisandcanbeformed,thatis,
givenshapeandmeaning.Sociohistoricalcasesofknowledgedevelopment
that I will be examining in this book are: the Research Excellence
Framework (REF) for UK higher education institutions and its proposed
complementaryframeworkforteachingandlearninginthesehigheredu-
cationinstitutions,theTeachingExcellenceFramework(TEF);classsizes
in English schools; teaching and learning practices in schools and higher
education institutions; disciplinary knowledge; international comparative
assessment systems such as the Programme for International Student
Assessment(PISA); andpeer reviewingin academicjournals, forresearch
grants and in promotion exercises in higher education institutions.
Broadly, the focus will be on how we make educational judgements
about educational matters, where the we is understood as not just the
author and readers of this book but all those interested in the formation
and development of the education system in the UK and its equivalences
elsewhere.
Knowledgeisnotasaconsequencetreatedunproblematically,asitisby
manypoliticianswhoseparateoutfactsfromvaluesinanunreflectiveway;
or by journalists who refuse to accept that their carefully managed
accounts of events and happenings in the world are always ideologically
framed both in relation to their content and to how they are presented
(A recent editorial in the Guardian Newspaper (15 August 2016)
suggested that: ‘Journalists do not deserve protection because they
©TheAuthor(s)2017 1
D.Scott,EducationSystemsandLearners,
DOI10.1057/978-1-137-59884-4_1
2 EDUCATIONSYSTEMSANDLEARNERS
constitute a protected group, they need it because they can show the
world as it really is and allow the unheard to find a voice’); or of course
by many academics, not least in the field of education in which I work,
whosebrandofknowledgeisbothdangerouslyreductiveandphilosophi-
callynaïve.So,forexample,somearguethattheepistemologicalframefor
anyenquiryhastobereducedtoconceptsandtherelationsbetweenthem
that can subsequently be measured; or that it is not possible to judge
between different andrival theoriesabout the samesocialobject.
However, nothing that I have written here proscribes a social dimen-
siontothedevelopmentofknowledge,andinturnthishastobecarefully
plotted and recorded by those committed to some form of truthful
enquiry.Research,whichistheprincipalmechanismforknowledgedevel-
opment,isbothdescriptive(understoodinanon-representationalistway)
and developmental and prescriptive, that is, it both gives an account of
realityandintheprocesschangesthenatureofthatreality,thoughnotin
everyinstance.Itredescribesandreformulatestheobjectoftheinvestiga-
tion, and in some cases this is quite clearly its intention. (For evidence of
thislooknofurtherthantheextraordinaryinfluenceoftheProgrammefor
International Student Assessment (PISA) on educational communities
and systems round the world.) It is incumbent on us, however, to treat
all knowledge development as work in progress, as the philosopher, Karl
Popper (2002),wasinclined todo.
THE RESEARCH EXCELLENCE FRAMEWORK
The Research Excellence Framework (REF) in 2014 is the most recent
exercise in a series of national assessments (formerly known as Research
Assessment Exercises (RAEs)) of the quality of research in British
Universities goingbackto1986. The Higher Education FundingCouncil
(HEFCE)andtheirequivalentbodiesinWales(HigherEducationFunding
CouncilforWales(HEFCW)),Scotland(ScottishFundingCouncil(SFC))
andNorthernIreland(DepartmentforEducationandLearning(DEL))are
responsiblefororganisingtheREFandaccountabletothegovernmentfor
doingso.Asaresult,HEFCEandtheotherthreebodiesallocateresearch
monies to the UK universities using a formula that is decided after the
exercise has been completed (in some of these exercises 2* outputs were
fundedgenerously,whereasinotherstheyonlyreceivedacursoryreward).
In 2014, universities were required to submit four outputs per member
of staff (with some exceptions) (65% of the aggregated score), a series of