Redistributing and Recognising
Multiple Capitals: Social
Justice and Teaching First
Years
Professor Bob Lingard
The University of Queensland,
Australia
1 July, 2010, Flinders University,
Adelaide.
Structure of Address













Defining Social/Equity Justice in Higher Education.
Nancy Fraser: politics of recognition and politics of redistribution.
Bourdieu and multiple capitals argument.
Higher Education Policy Context.
Higher Education Equity Policy Context.
Issue of Schools in Low SES Communities and School Performance.
Premises of Argument.
Overarching Premise.
Queensland School Reform Longitudinal Study: productive pedagogies.
Alignment: Curriculum, Pedagogy and assessment.
Whose Knowledges? Epistemologies/Ontologies.
Relevance to university context.
Conclusion.
Social Justice and Equity






In policy terms still defined by 1990 statement: A Fair Chance for All.
Proportional representation definition – concern with point of
university entry.
High SES b/grd students 3 times more likely to enter university than
those from low SES b/grds. Indigenous students 2.2% of population
and 1.3 % of all university students. Low SES 15% for 20 yrs.
25% of population regional and remote, only 18% of university
students from these bgrds.
8% with disability, only 4% of university students.
Current policy framed by proportional representation argument.
Need a bigger narrative: a new ‘social
imaginary’ of social justice






End of history (Fukuyama), Post-Socialist
condition(Fraser), end of meta-narratives (Lyotard).
Globalisation and impact on SES/social class.
Scholte (2000, p.260): ‘stratified access to global space’;
hyper-mobility and immobility.
Access to, performance in and outcomes from.
Framed by considerations of justice/social justice (cf
equity).
Vince Tinto (2008): ‘access without support is not
opportunity’; Trevor Gale (2010, p.9): ‘opportunity
confined to support is not equity’. Challenges to what a
higher education means: redistributing of capitals and
recognising other capitals. Pedagogy, curriculum and
assessment.
Social Justice, Barack Obama and
Martin Luther King
I know you are asking today, ‘How long will it take?’...I
come to say to you this afternoon, however difficult the
moment, however frustrating the hour, it will not be long
because truth pressed to the earth will rise again.
How long? Not long, because no lie can live forever.
How long? Not long, because you shall reap what you
sow...
How long? Not long, because the arc of the moral
universe is long but it bends toward justice.
(Martin Luther king, 26 March, 1965)
Need a narrative and politics of hope.
Nancy Fraser (1997) Social Justice and a
Politics of Redistribution and a Politics of
Recognition





Rejects an ‘end of history’ thesis: but suggest in our
‘post-socialist’ condition the grammar of political claim
making has changed (USA focus). Here she speaks of
politics of ‘recognition’: the rise of identity politics and
decentering of class and the prioritising of a recognition
politics around identity and difference.
Related to a decoupling of this cultural politics of
recognition from a social politics of redistribution.
Decentring of claims for equality in face of neo-liberal
marketisation and sharply rising inequality.
Rose (1999) ‘self-capitalising’ individual.
Need for both politics: affirmation to transformation.
Bourdieu,multiple capitals and the
(re)production of inequalities.





A sociological account: Bourdieu – habitus, capital, fields, practice.
Habitus: a socially, culturally, historically embodied ‘system of
dispositions’ (classed and gendered); possession and relationship to
different capitals.
Fields: the social consists of multiple fields: a specific field provides
a magnetic attraction for agents disposed to engage in a given field
because of the alignment of their habitus with the field.
Capitals: cultural capital – disposition towards high status cultures
and knowledges; social capital – networks; all linked to economic
capital; multiple capitals involved in construction of social class.
‘Praxaeological knowledge’: statistical probability and dispositions to
act.
Bourdieu and the (re)production and
legitimation of inequality



‘In fact to favour the most favoured and disfavour the most
disfavoured, all that is necessary and sufficient is for the school to
ignore in the content and teaching it transmits, in the methods and
techniques of transmission and the criteria for judgement it deploys,
the cultural inequalities that divide children from different social
classes. In other words, by treating all students, however much they
differ, as equal in rights and duties, the educational system actually
gives its sanction to the initial inequality in relation to culture’.
(Bourdieu, 2008, p.36)
This cultural reproduction ‘misrecognised’ as related to differences
in individual capacities; a ‘social gift treated as a natural one’
(Bourdieu, 1976, p.110).
Need to recognise difference capitals and scaffold to and be explicit
about all requirements across the three message systems of
curriculum, pedagogy and assessment.
Bourdieu and explicitness of pedagogies for
interrupting reproduction



‘If all pupils were given the technology of intellectual inquiry, and if in
general they were given rational ways of working (such as the art of
choosing between compulsory tasks and of spreading them over
time), then an important way of reducing inequalities based on
cultural inheritance would have been achieved’. (Bourdieu, 1990,
p.309)
‘Absolutely necessary to give priority to those areas where the
objective is to ensure that fundamental processes are thoughtfully
and critically assimilated. These processes – the deductive, the
experimental, the historical as well as the critical and reflective –
should always be included’. (Bourdieu, 1990, p.309).
Need for a ‘rational pedagogy’ that ‘seeks to neutralise the effects of
social factors of cultural inequality’. (Bourdieu, 1979, p.76)
Bourdieu and neo-liberal globalisation

Bourdieu (1998) suggests in this context workers in the
‘left hand’ of the state have to bear the fall-out from neoliberal policies framed by what he calls the ‘right-hand’ of
the state. Thus teachers are almost forced to take on a
social worker role. This most often results in a trade-off
between an almost therapeutic culture of care within
classrooms (particularly in schools in poor and working
class communities) and intellectual demand, to the
academic disadvantage of the disadvantaged.
Capitals and the codes of
schooling/university





‘Intellectual rigour’ and ‘relevance’ as equity strategies.
Schools and universities: Brennan and Zipin (2005) two
strategies re disadvantaged students: ‘give them the
codes’ vs ‘stuff the codes: give them intelligent
relevance’.
Access to the codes: redistribute the required capitals,
but also recognise different capitals.
Bernstein (1990) makes a distinction between vertical
and horizontal discourses.
Carolyn Williams and Steve Evans (2010) ‘Pedagogies
for Social Justice: Did Bernstein get it wrong?’
International Journal of Inclusive Education, 14 (4),
pp.417-434.
Teaching FYHE, Social Justice and the HE
Policy Context






Higher education policy aspiration: 2020, 20% of all u/g students in unis
from low SES (cf 15% constant figure across recent past).
Necessary to meet 2025 target of 40% of 25-34 years olds with a Bachelors
degree.
Relationship between student demand and supply will change with student
demand being at a constant level over last decade and will trend down if
economy does well again (counter cyclical nature of student demand).
‘Expanding the higher education system and diversifying its student
population will need to be done in the context of insufficient student
demand’ (Gale (2010, p.1).
Gale (2010) argues in this context student aspiration will become more
important than student achievement for achieving Bradley and government
targets, but aspirations less amenable to policy interventions. Relationship
between achievement and aspiration.
Re-differentiation, re-hierarchisation of universities; Go8 ‘downsize’ u/g
intake?
First Year Students and the Equity Agenda






Federal government target: 90% retention to Yr 12 or equivalent by
2015.
Rise in VET participation by 15-19 yr olds.
Only 20% of VET students are enrolled in courses (Cert 4 and
Diploma and above) that articulate clearly with university.
In terms of equity: participation rates in these VET courses which
articulate with university reflect University student SES profile.
Queensland figures next slide as an example of the issue; enhanced
Yr 12 retention not enhanced numbers of ‘traditional candidates’: the
biggest equity issue?
‘To achieve the sector targets, Australian universities will need to
find ways in which to work collaboratively to address the more basic
problem of insufficient supply of qualified applicants’. (Gale, 2010,
p.8); issues of achievement in many low SES schools.
Queensland example: expanded provision of
senior schooling and retention to Yr 12
Year
Cohort
OP
eligible
%
OP
ineligible
%
2000
38211
27839
73
10372
27
2002
38820
27749
71
11071
29
2004
38451
27235
71
11216
29
2006
39579
26233
66
13346
34
2009
43191
25305
59
17886
41
Trend Data: OP eligible and OP ineligible students, 2000-2009
Context: Issue of SES and School
Performance



Low SES and retention, subject and course choice in Yrs
11 & 12, performance.
Relationship between Gini Coefficient of Inequality and
strength of correlations between social class background
and school performance. An issues in context of neoliberal policy contexts.
Redistribution: National Partnership Low SES Schools:
accountability tied tightly to NAPLAN results: thus won’t
distribute the necessary capitals.
Premises of Argument 1






Nature of pedagogies: a social justice issue: Skills of ‘deep learning’ (not
‘surface learning’), ‘criticality’ etc are central to emancipatory/socially just
higher education (Hockings, Cooke and Bowl, 2010, p.96).
Limited research re changed higher education populations and required
pedagogies. Recognise work of Sally Kift, Keitha Wilson, Karen Nelson etc.
Lessons to be learnt from school pedagogies research.
Effects of social class or socio-economic background on student
performance at school; Gini Coefficients of Inequality; relationship between
amount of social inequality in a society and strength of correlations between
social class background and school performance.
‘…the TER is an authoritative measure that rewards the cultural resources
characteristic of the most economically powerful groups in society’ (George
et al., 2005, p.144).
‘In other words, the ENTER (or TER or OP or UAI) is more indicative of
socioeconomic status than it is of a student’s academic potential’ (Gale
2009, p.7).
Premises of Argument 2





School factors: teachers’ pedagogies most significant (see Hattie, 2009) cf
university?.
School factors: Townsend (2001, p.119): 5-10 % of variance in student
performance to do with school and 35-55 % of variance due to teacher
effects.
Pedagogies can make a difference, but not all the difference re student
capitals and social class backgrounds.
Effects of social class or socio-economic background on student
performance at school; ‘Economic capital’ and valued ‘cultural capital’
relationships (Bourdieu); recognition and redistribution.
Need for alignment of the message systems of educational institutions:
curriculum, pedagogy and assessment.
Overarching Premise




Set against a definition of Equity and Social Justice as needing to
take into account: access to, performance in and outcomes from
university.
To adequately meet government’s equity targets: serious thought
will need to be given to the equity and social justice aspects of
university pedagogies, especially in first year, but not exclusively
there. Recognise that once low SES students and others get in to
university their performance and retention no different from total
student population, but to meet targets, students without traditional
forms of preparation will get to university (aspiration agenda).
In this context: issues of curriculum, pedagogy and assessment will
become of paramount importance.
Curriculum issue probably links to epistemology and ontology:
Trevor Gale’s (2009) Keynote: ‘Towards a Southern Theory of
Higher Education’.
The Queensland School Reform
Longitudinal Study (QSRLS)

Developed concepts of productive pedagogies,
productive assessment and productive
leadership.
Sociological approach to pedagogy






Jennifer Gore (1993): The Struggle for Pedagogies: binary of
pedagogical research vision vs explicit instructional focus.
Critical pedagogy tradition: Paulo Freire (1973) Pedagogy of the
Oppressed. Feminist pedagogies; empirical, Fred Newmann and
Associates (1996).
Need a more empirically grounded approach to pedagogies, but with
political aspirations of critical pedagogy.
Renewed interest in pedagogies from a sociological perspective:
evaluation message system become a major steering mechanism of
schools.
Robin Alexander’s (2000) Culture and Pedagogy and Bernstein’s
(2004) work on pedagogy as ‘cultural relay’.
Bernstein and Bourdieu: pedagogies and social and cultural
reproduction.
Definitions of pedagogy



Alexander (2000, p.540): ‘Pedagogy connects the
apparently self-contained act of teaching with culture,
structure and mechanisms of social control’.
Alexander (2000, p.3): pedagogy includes: ‘culture and
classroom, policy and practice, teacher and learner,
knowledge both public and personal’.
Bernstein (2001): ‘totally pedagogised society’.
References: school reform

Fred M. Newmann and Associates (1996) Authentic
Achievement: Restructuring Schools for
Intellectual Quality, San Francisco, Jossey-Bass.

Valerie E. Lee with Julia B. Smith (2001)
Restructuring High Schools for Equity and
Excellence What Works, New York, Teachers
College Press
QSRLS
Backward mapping
Student
Outcomes
Classroom
Classroom
Practices
Practices
School Organisational
School Capacity
Organisational
Capacity
External Supports
External
Supports
Four Levels of School Restructuring
(Queensland School Reform Longitudinal Study)
Centrality of teachers
Changing practice is primarily a problem of teacher
learning, not a problem of organization… School
structures can provide opportunities for the learning of
new teaching practices and new strategies for student
learning, but structures, by themselves do not cause
learning to occur…School structure follows from good
practice but not vice versa.
(Elmore, Peterson and McCarthey, 1996, p.149)

Main References from QSRLS


Lingard, B., Hayes, D., Mills, M. and Christie, P.
(2003) Leading Learning Making Hope Practical
in Schools, Maidenhead, Open University Press.
Hayes, D., Mills, M., Christie, P. and Lingard, B.
(2006) Teachers & Schooling Making a
Difference, Sydney, Allen & Unwin.
References: Publications from
the QSRLS




Lingard, B., Hayes, D. and Mills, M. (2003) ‘Teachers and
Productive Pedagogies: Contextualising, Conceptualising,
Utilising’, Pedagogy, Culture and Society, Vol 11, No 2,
pp.399-424.
Lingard, B., Mills, M. and Hayes, D. (2000) ‘Teachers,
School Reform and Social Justice’, The Australian
Educational Researcher, Vol 27, No 3, pp.93-109.
Lingard, B., Hayes, D. and Mills, M. (2002) ‘Developments in
School-Based Management: The Specific Case of
Queensland, Australia’, Journal of Educational
Administration, Vol 40, No 1, pp.111-122.
Lingard, B. and Christie, P. (2003) ‘Leading Theory: Bourdieu
and the Field of educational leadership’, International
Journal of Leadership in Education, Vol 6, No 4, pp. 317333.
Other publications derived from QSRLS




B.Lingard (2005) Socially Just Pedagogies in Changing Times,
International Studies in Sociology of Education, 15 (2), pp.165186.
B.Lingard, M.Mills and D. Hayes (2006) Enabling and aligning
assessment for learning: some research and policy lessons
from Queensland, International Studies in Sociology of
Education, 16 (2), pp.83-103.
B.Lingard and M.Mills (2007) Pedagogies making a difference:
issues of social justice and inclusion, International Journal of
Inclusive Education, 11 (3), pp.233-244.
B.Lingard (2007) Pedagogies of indifference, International
Journal of Inclusive Education, 11 (3), pp.245-266.
Authentic Pedagogy

Newmann’s research identified 4 elements of what
was termed Authentic Pedagogy;


Higher order thinking

Depth of knowledge and understanding

Substantive conversation

Connectedness to the world beyond the classroom.
QSRLS Productive Pedagogies represent a
refinement and expansion of these elements to a
20 item instrument consisting of 5 point scales,
which measure performance on 4 domains
The twenty elements of productive
pedagogies




















Problematic knowledge
Higher-order knowledge
Depth of knowledge
Depth of student understanding
Substantive conversation
Metalanguage
Connectedness to the world beyond the classroom
Knowledge integration
Background knowledge
Problem-based curriculum
Students’ direction
Explicit quality performance criteria
Social Support
Academic engagement
Student self-regulation
Cultural knowledges
Active citizenship
Narrative
Group identities in learning communities
Representation
Examples of elements of Productive
Pedagogies



Substantive conversation: Does classroom
talk break out of the
initiation/response/evaluation pattern and lead to
sustained dialogue between students, and
between teachers and students?
Metalanguage: Are aspects of language,
grammar and technical vocabulary being
foregrounded?
Higher-order thinking: Are higher-order
thinking and critical analysis occurring?
Queensland School Reform
Longitudinal Study (QSRLS)

Conducted by UQ for EQ – 1998 – 2000.

Commissioned to study the impact of school-based management on student outcomes.

Reconceptualised to ‘backward map’ from desired learning outcomes to classroom practices
(pedagogies and assessment) (social as well as academic outcomes).

Concern about alignment of the 3 message systems: curriculum, pedagogy, assessment.

Focuses on classrooms








24 schools, purposive sample
Teacher questionnaires
975 lessons mapped – Maths, Science, English, Social Studies
Across years 6, 8 and 11, plus observed ‘outstanding teachers’
Lessons coded on 20 elements (of Productive Pedagogies)
Productive pedagogies derived from ‘authentic pedagogy’
Assessment work collected as well (tasks and student work)
Supportive school organisational capacity building: mobilising social capital.
Dimensions of
Productive Pedagogies
Intellectual
Quality
Connectedness
Supportive
Environment
Working with and
valuing differences
Higher order
thinking
Knowledge integration
Student direction
Cultural knowledges
Deep knowledge
Background knowledge
Social support
Inclusivity
Deep understanding
Problem-based
curriculum
Academic
engagement
Narrative
Substantive
Conversation
Connectedness
beyond classroom
Explicit criteria
Group identities
Student selfregulation
Active citizenship
Problematic
knowledge
Metalanguage
Supportiveness dimension





Engagement: Are students engaged and ontask?
Student self-regulation: Is the direction of
student behaviour implicit and self-regulatory or
explicit?
Student direction of activities: Do students
have any say in the pace, direction or outcomes
of the lesson?
Social support: Is the classroom a socially
supportive and positive environment?
Explicit criteria: Are the criteria for judging
student performances made explicit?
1998
1999
2000
TOTAL
(n=302)
(n=343)
(n=330)
(n=975)
Mean Std
Mean
Dev
Intellectual
Quality
Connectedness
Std
Mean
Dev
Std
Mean
Dev
Std
Dev
2.16
.77
2.17
.73
2.47
.91
2.27
.82
1.84
.77
1.97
.79
2.39
.97
2.07
.88
2.75
.63
3.05
.67
3.26
.67
3.03
.69
1.79
.51
1.89
.50
2.13
.54
1.94
.54
Supportive
Classroom
Environment
Working with
and Valuing
Difference
Central findings re pedagogies in approx
1000 classrooms
High levels of supportiveness: high mean
and low standard deviation.
 Low levels of intellectual demand and
connectedness: low mean and high
standard deviation.
 Absence of working with and valuing
difference: low mean and low standard
deviation.

Other Findings














A lot of social support: social capital? Supportive pedagogies.
Not enough intellectual demand, connectedness and working with
difference: need for focus on other forms of capital in addition to
social capital.
Differences across curriculum areas.
Differences across year levels.
Teacher goals significant and perception of nature and location of
teachers’ work.
Equity considerations; pedagogy as a social justice issue.
Too much curriculum content; less is more?
Non-alignment of assessment practices (particularly in primary schools).
Need for greater teacher assessment literacy, including consistency of
teacher judgement; need for teacher networks within and across
schools.
School size effects: implications in terms of social capital.
Primary and secondary differences.
School leadership: learning communities and pedagogical focus.
Need for teacher professional learning communities: significance of
‘we’.
Relevance to university teaching?
Table 1.12
Correlations between productive classroom practices and student
outcomes aggregated to the school level
Academic
performance
Overall intellectual quality
Overall connectedness
Overall supportive practices
Overall recognition of
difference
*
Social
performance
.59 **
.27
.40 *
.53 **
.54 **
.37 *
.15
.40 *
Correlation is significant at the .05 level (2-tailed)
** Correlation is significant at the .01 level (2-tailed)
Explanations of ‘Findings’






Extent of curriculum coverage.
Curriculum pacing.
Class size?
Teacher threshold knowledges.
Systemic reforms: testing and accountability,
social justice ones?, definition of teacher work
(care and support); trade-offs care/support and
intellectual demand.
Growing inequalities.
Teachers with high ratings on the productive pedagogies
measure differed significantly from those with low
ratings particularly in terms of their:

Sense of responsibility

Efficacy in improving student learning outcomes


Broad Conceptions of their role as teacher – in
school, community and society, and
Understanding of curriculum, pedagogy and
assessment links and need for alignment
Bourdieu and the findings of the productive
pedagogies research





The absence of intellectual demand particularly in schools serving
disadvantaged communities has social justice implications.
Indeed, this absence of intellectual demand works in ways which
Bourdieu suggests schools reproduce inequality, that is, by
demanding of all that which they do not give, those with the requisite
cultural capital are advantaged through schooling.
Also ‘decontextualised’ knowledge: knowledge not scaffolded and
linked to students’ life worlds.
Impact of NAPLAN. Differential impact across schools positioned
differently in relation to NAPLAN and My School tables.
Pedagogies are a social justice issue: need redistribution of capitals:
‘give them the code’: even more the case for universities.
Fraser’s ‘recognition of difference’





Why so little?
Context: ‘fear of difference’; lack of teacher PD
cf Fraser’s politics of recognition.
Appropriate unit of analysis?
Counterintuitive finding: inverse relationship
between ethnic diversity of school population
and amount of working with and valuing
difference.
Indigenous school: ATSI Studies, Principal,
Motto: ‘strong and smart’.
Bernstein (1971)
‘Education cannot compensate for
society’.
 BUT schools and teachers can make a
difference.
 Pedagogies and assessment practices are
central to teachers making a difference.
 Alignment issue: curriculum, pedagogy
and assessment

Productive pedagogies

Productive pedagogies work with a redistributive as well
as recognition politics and as such seek to maximise
teacher effects in respect of both knowledge production
and identity and disposition formation. Such pedagogies
seek to broaden access to high status capitals, to in
effect redistribute capitals and at the same time valorise
other capitals as a way of working with and valuing
difference. These are central to transformative,
progressive pedagogies today in what Fraser (1997)
calls our ‘postsocialist’ condition’.
PPs and further research



Productive pedagogies sit across critical pedagogy tradition (social
justice focus) and more empiricist, instructional tradition (Newmann
and Associates (1996) ‘authentic pedagogy’).
‘Productive pedagogies, politically aware and empirically based –
working with both vision and instructional concerns – would appear
to offer potential for future pedagogical research from a sociological
perspective’.
Research on university pedagogies and recontextualising the
framework.
What does the research tell us: context and school
effects?






Effects of social class or socio-economic background on student
performance at school; Gini Coefficients of Inequality.
‘Economic capital’ and valued ‘cultural capital’ relationships (Bourdieu).
School factors: teachers’ pedagogies most significant (see Hattie, 2009).
School factors: Townsend (2001, p.119): 5-10 % of variance in student
performance to do with school and 35-55 % of variance due to teacher
effects.
Teachers’ pedagogical practices central here: productive pedagogies four
dimensions (intellectual quality, connectedness, supportiveness, working
with and valuing differences) and alignment with curriculum goals and
assessment practices, very important.
Qualities of pedagogies a social justice issue, but also need to address
issues of poverty: need to redistribute capitals (give them the code) and
recognise multiple capitals; care and support – necessary but not sufficient.
Queensland Longitudinal Study of Teaching
and Learning (2007-2008) (Mills, Goos et
al.)

This project to focus on







middle years: 4,6, 8, 9
trends in teaching practice associated with government initiatives
18 Case study schools
lesson observations (English, Mathematics, Science,
SOSE; Years 4, 6, 8, 9) (approx 400)
analysis of assessment tasks, student responses,
teacher judgments,
interviews with teachers, students, school leaders,
parents
150 Survey schools – teachers, parents and students
Dimensions
Correlation coefficients
Intellectual
quality
0.063
Connectedness
0.135**
Supportive
environment
0.138**
Working with
difference
0.006
Correlations between PP Dimensions and IRSED scores
* Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
Comparison of Means for Two Dimensions for All Schools,
2000 and 2008 (Productive Pedagogies)
Intellectual demand
Working with and
valuing difference
2000
2.27
1.95
2008
2.47
2.10
QLSTL (2007-2008): Transition Problem in
Pedagogies
Yea r 4
Yea r 8
5
Yea r 6
Yea r 9
4.5
4
Mean Score
3.5
3
2.5
2
1.5
1
IntQual
Connect
Support
Dimension
Difference
Transition problem?
Cultural differences across institutions.
 Changes in students.
 Different pedagogical approaches.
 Assumptions about students.
 Transition to university issues – transition
pedagoges.

Alignment: Curriculum, Pedagogy and
Assessment





Central to socially just schooling.
Assessment practices and pedagogies aligned
in terms of dimensions and with higher order
purposes of curriculum.
Assessment: scaffolding, ‘give them the codes’,
criteria sheets, examples of essay structures,
good assignments etc.
Central because this message system can steer
the others (e.g, high stakes testing)
Alignment and assessment need to be on the
equity agenda.
Curriculum: Knowledges






Trevor Gale (2010): ‘Towards a Southern Theory of
Higher Education’. (R. Connell (1993) ‘Northern Theory:
The Poiltical Geography of General Social theory’,
Theory and Society., 35 (2), pp.237-264. R.Connell
(2007) Southern Theory, Sydney, Allen & Unwin.
International Students: Appadurai (2000).
Indigenous Students.
Low SES Students.
Rejection of ‘epistemological innocence’ (Bourdieu,
1999).
Edward Said: displacement.
Conclusion







Need bigger narrative of hope, a new social imaginary of social
justice and education in a globalised world.
‘…the arc of the moral universe is long but it bends toward justice’.
Equity and expansion concerns if HE policy: more ‘non-traditional’
students will enter university. Support is necessary but so too is
thought about pedagogies as a social justice issue: access the
codes, redistributing capitals and recognising other capitals.
Alignment of curriculum, pedagogy and assessment: assessment:
scaffolding, explicitness and access to the codes.
Focus on the knowledges produced and reproduced in universities.
Access to questions of epistemology and ontology.
Productive pedagogies research: large amounts of support, little
intellectual demand, decontextualised knowledge, and little working
with and valuing difference.
What is the situation in first year university teaching? How does the
argument apply across humanities, social sciences, professional
degrees, maths and sciences? Application to mass lectures and
tutorials?