07. Social Justice and Intercultural Education
Paper
A place for Basil Bernstein in the field
Ómar Örn Magnússon, Guðrún Ragnarsdóttir, Amalía Björnsdóttir
University of Iceland, Iceland
Presenting Author: Magnússon, Ómar Örn
In this paper, key aspects of Bernstein’s theory will be analysed within the Icelandic context to determine whether his theory can be adapted and employed when researching socio-economic inequities in upper-secondary education in Iceland during the COVID‑19 pandemic and beyond (Bernstein, 1971/2009, 1973/2009, 1977/2009, 1990/2009). Theoretical ideas about educational inequity included in recent Icelandic research are dominated by Bourdieu’s (Bourdieu, 1990) argument that class is constituted by economic, cultural and social capital. While researchers have employed this theory to better understand the role of education in the creation of social inequalities within society, Bourdieu himself questioned whether education operates as a disruptive and emancipatory force in society since it is reflective of dominant groups and is, therefore, a social reproduction force. While Bourdieu has dominated the research field of socio-economic inequity in education in Iceland, Basil Bernstein tends to only be cited in passing.
Þórlindsson (1987) conducted an empirical test of Basil Bernstein’s socio-linguistic model in Icelandic surroundings around forty-five years ago. In his findings, he suggested that while there was a correlation between social class, family interaction, IQ and school performance within his dataset of 338 randomly selected 15‑year-old students in Reykjavik, important revisions should be made to Bernstein’s model, specifically his methods for measuring elaborated[1] and restricted codes. Bernstein defines codes as elaborating or restricted. The principles of elaborating and restricted codes involve access to meanings. In the case of restricted codes, meaning is symbolically condensed and restricted to those sharing common bodies of knowledge. In the case of elaborating codes, meaning is semantically expanded and exchanged with those not sharing the same body of knowledge. Þórlindsson’s test was premised upon Bernstein’s earlier papers (Bernstein, 1962a, 1962b, 1964, 1966, 1970) on restricted and elaborated linguistic codes being analysed using a syntactic approach. Later Bernstein developed a more semantic approach under the influence of Hasan and Halliday (Moore, 2013).
Prior to examining Bernstein’s work, it is important that researchers consider whether his ideas are applicable in the setting in which they are operating. Bernstein developed his theory in the latter part of the twentieth century in England, where the educational system and social environment were very different from what they are in contemporary Iceland, especially considering the unusual circumstances within educational settings resulting from the COVID‑19 pandemic.
The following questions should be asked before applying Bernstein’s ideas to contemporary Iceland:
- To what extent can Bernstein’s tools help to analyse the educational system during unconventional circumstances, such as home teaching and learning during school closures?
- Is Bernstein’s idea of classes, or social groups as he later referred to them, useful in educational research in contemporary Iceland?
- Are there any indications that would suggest access to pedagogic discourse is different for parents based on their socio-economic status?
[1] Bernstein later changed the term ‚elaborated code‘ to ‚elaborating code‘.
Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources UsedThis article includes interviews with 12 parents conducted in the course of a more extensive study on upper-secondary education during the COVID 19 pandemic. Three upper-secondary schools were selected for the research, and four parents were selected from each of school to provide a nuanced understanding of the interplay between home life during the pandemic and distance teaching and learning; participants of all genders and family types with various socio-economic backgrounds, education and language skills were selected. The interview framework consisted of questions related to the parents’ background, the students’ study habits, life and facilities at home during the pandemic and the general well-being of the parents and students.
ISEI 08 will be used in this article to indicate the parents’ socio-economic status (Ganzeboom & Treiman, 2010). By analysing data provided in the interviews, a profile of each household was able to be constructed to provide background information from the interviews. Utilising the ISEI 08 allowed the parents to be arranged into an order in which the highest score represented the strongest socio-economic position and the lowest score represented the weakest; other background factors were also considered. To fully understand the parents’ ability to use restricted codes in the interviews, all of their words in the interviews were evaluated and placed into categories according to their meaning or the meaning of the context in which the words were used.
Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or FindingsThe purpose of this paper is to determine whether and to what extent Basil Bernstein’s theory on language and social groups is applicable in Iceland during the COVID 19 school closures. Using a scaled index such as ISEI 08 to estimate different social groups based on their respective socio-economic backgrounds is useful, because the traditional middle class makes up the largest portion of the Icelandic population, even though its composition is diverse. When parents’ usage of specialised education-related vocabulary was analysed and associated with their socio-economic positions, it became apparent that parents in the weakest position had less access to specialised vocabulary or restricted language codes, while parents in the strongest position used, on average, twice as many specialised vocabulary words. In line with Bernstein, it can therefore be assumed that parents in the weakest position had the worst access to the pedagogic discourse and by extension, the educational system.
The findings introduced in the paper expose issues related to student access to assistance during the COVID 19 school closure periods and future scenarios of this sort. School authorities must consider the manner in which students are able to benefit from opportunities offered to them. It is not enough to merely provide the same opportunities to students; arrangements should also be made to ensure all students are capable of utilising the opportunities they are offered, and one way in which this can be accomplished is by raising awareness of parents’ different abilities to employ restricted code or specialised education-related vocabulary. The paper contributes to an understanding of the interplay among students, parents, and practitioners within any education system. Its importance lies in the contribution to general discussions about equity in education and important aspects of educational discourse that might improve opportunities in education for all students.
ReferencesBernstein, B. (1962a). Linguistic codes, hesitation phenomena and intelligence. Language and speech, 5(1), 31-48.
Bernstein, B. (1962b). Social class, linguistic codes and grammatical elements. Language and speech, 5(4), 221-240.
Bernstein, B. (1964). Elaborated and restricted codes: Their social origins and some consequences. American anthropologist, 66(6), 55-69.
Bernstein, B. (1966). Elaborated and restricted codes: An outline. Sociological Inquiry, 36(2), 254-261.
Bernstein, B. (1970). A sociolinguistic approach to socialization: With some reference to educability. In Language and poverty (pp. 25-61). Elsevier.
Bernstein, B. (1971/2009). Class, codes and control I: Theoretical studies towards a sociology of language (Vol. 1). Routledge. (1971)
Bernstein, B. (1973/2009). Class, codes and control II: Applied studies towards a sociology of language (Vol. 2). Routledge. (1973)
Bernstein, B. (1977/2009). Class, codes and control III: Towards a theory of educational transmission (Vol. 3). Routledge. (1977)
Bernstein, B. (1990/2009). Class, codes and control IV: The structuring of pedagogic discourse (Vol. 4). Routledge. (1990)
Bernstein, B. (2000). Pedagogy, symbolic control, and identity. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.
Bourdieu, P. (1990). The logic of practice. Stanford university press.
Ganzeboom, H. B., & Treiman, D. J. (2010). Occupational status measures for the new International Standard Classification of Occupations ISCO-08; with a discussion of the new classification. Annual Conference of International Social Survey Programme, Lisbon,
Moore, R. (2013). Basil Bernstein: The thinker and the field. Routledge.
Þórlindsson, Þ. (1987). Bernstein's sociolinguistics: An empirical test in Iceland. Social Forces, 65(3), 695-718.
07. Social Justice and Intercultural Education
Paper
Social Justice in Educational Psychology Practice: Experiencing Aporia
Daniela Mercieca, Duncan P. Mercieca
University of Dundee, United Kingdom
Presenting Author: Mercieca, Daniela;
Mercieca, Duncan P.
This presentation reflects an ongoing research project inquiring into the practice of educational psychologists and how such practice helps to bring about social justice. Based on Standish’s (2001) view of ethics as “that broader conception in which it is recognised that values permeate our lives” (487), this research seeks an understanding of educational psychology practice as constantly ethical, rather than seeing “the ethical com[ing] in, as it were, at points of conflict” (487). The research question that underpins this research presentation is: how do practicing educational psychologists construct social justice through their practices?
In past writing, we have argued that the structures which are aimed at supporting social justice often position educational psychologists who inhabit them, so that their thinking, being and doing are shaped by these systems. This is because structures tend to fix the meanings and implementations of the values they are created to support, such as social justice, as well as determine the educational psychologists’ identity and their function. This is also the case for other professionals and educators working within these structures, and also for those requiring the involvement of EPs and other professionals.
In such an environment, it is easy to forget that every thought, decision and stance is ethical, and can have an impact on promoting social justice. Practitioners are “lulled into a sweet sense of security” as established procedures and policies effectively replace thinking and reduce complexity in situations. In this presentation, through the use narratives, we argued that that EPs can interrupt the procedural flow and provide a dissenting voice which can ultimately lead to social justice in ways that the normal flow of procedure does not.
In this presentation we would like to frame this invitation for EPs to recognise their interruptions and dissensus (with what feels like the natural order of things) as ethical and just, although it can lead to discomfort in practice. We draw upon Jacques Derrida’s (1992) writing on aporia to distinguishes between law, as seen in procedures and prescribed practices, and that which spurs us to question them because of a specific situation. Derrida calls this questioning a reaching out for justice, as it “involves reinventing, rejustifying and reaffirming (or otherwise) that which is prescribed” (writing and aporia paper). Merely following the law or a rule is legal, it is procedural, whereas for a law to be just there must be ‘fresh judgement’ where the person thinks and evaluates again whether the procedure is the appropriate course of action in the specific circumstance.
This presentation will use narratives constructed from research carried out with educational psychologists working in Scotland. International literature (see for example Shriberg et al. 2008; Schulze et al. 2019) indicates that educational psychologists contribute to understanding their role in supporting social justice within complex educational contexts. This presentation contributes to this international literature by introducing Derrida’s notion of aporia, as irresolvable internal contradiction for educational psychology practice, where often educational psychologists have that unsettling feeling of uncertainty, discomfort and self-doubt. Thus this presentation seeks to make strange what is familiar (Allan 2004) and is an acknowledgement that it is impossible to ever capture all in a system, method or law.
Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources UsedThis presentation is based on a qualitative research study that has theory as its foundation. We are a group of 6 academics with an interest in social justice, four of whom are also practising educational psychologists.
Engaging with the work of Nancy Fraser (2008), the research team developed a shared understandings of social justice in educational psychology practice. This was followed by engaging in reading Jacques Derrida’s work, and the contribution of one of the researchers who works in philosophy of education was helpful to support such reading. Following from that we carried out a conversational interview with educational psychologists in practice in Scotland. We follow a phenomenological methodology as we were keen to ask EPs about their lived experiences in practice of moments of aporia and the impact of such recognition on their agency for social justice.
Analysis involved both eliciting narratives from the interviews as well as generating themes influenced by Derridean philosophy. Several meetings took place during this process to check out that the thematic analysis was reliably done by all of us and there was consistency in the process and analysis. This presentation shares this research experience.
Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or FindingsWe believe that this kind of research has an impact on the profession as practitioners report that they resonate with the findings that educational psychologists experience this aporia. This can be particularly powerful for early career educational psychologists who struggle with feelings of inadequacy when experiencing the uncertainty which we believe makes us more ethical and just in our practice. This presentation also contributes to bring closer Educational Psychology and philosophy, an engagement that is not always seen as possible. There is a movement at international level to develop critical educational psychology, and this paper contributes to this development.
ReferencesAllan, J. (2004). Deterritorializations: Putting Postmodernism to Work on Teachers Education and Inclusion. Educational Philosophy and Theory 36 (4): 417–432.
Derrida, J. (1992). “Force of Law: The ‘Mystical Foundation of Authority’.” In Deconstruction and the Possibility of Justice, edited by D. Carlson, D. Cornell, and M. Rosenfeld, 3–67. London: Routledge.
Derrida, J. (1993) Aporias. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
Fraser, N. (2008). Scales of Justice: Reimagining Political Space in a Globalizing World. Oxford, UK: Polity Press.
Mercieca, D., & Mercieca, D. P. (2022). Educational Psychologists as ‘Dissenting Voices’: Thinking Again about Educational Psychologists and Social Justice. Education Sciences, 12(3), [171].
Schulze, J.; Winter, L.A.; Woods, K.; Tyldsley, K. (2019) An international social justice agenda in school psychology? Exploring educational psychologists’ social justice interest and practice in England. J. Educ. Psychol. Consult. 29, 377–400.
Shriberg, D.; Bonner, M.; Sarr, B.; Walker, A.M.; Hyland, M.; Chester, C. (2008) Social justice through a school psychology lens: Definition and application. Sch. Psychol. Rev. 37, 453–468.
07. Social Justice and Intercultural Education
Paper
Doing Scholarly Advocacy: Reflections on Rationales and Challenges
Tebeje Molla
Deakin University, Australia
Presenting Author: Molla, Tebeje
Beyond scholarly publications and communications, what do we do with our knowledge of crisis, disadvantage, or domination?
In this presentation, I reflect on my experience of (or attempt at) what Ernest Boyer referred to as the scholarship of engagement. The scholarship of engagement entails putting the power of our ideas and knowledge in service to pressing societal problems, including inequality, poverty, racism and sexism, and environmental crisis. For Boyer (1996), when we take the scholarship of engagement seriously, we use research and knowledge "in the search for answers to our most pressing social, civic, economic, and moral problems" (Boyer, 1996, p.11). One aspect of the scholarship of engagement is evidence-based advocacy. To advocate is to work on behalf of those on the margin of society. To scholarly advocate is to use robust evidence to push for changes in policy and practice. It aims at raising awareness about unjust inequalities in society, empowering people who live with disadvantages, and influencing policy actions.
This paper outlines three pillars of scholarly advocacy: empirical evidence, ethical expectations, and theoretical commitments.
Empirical Grounds
In a recently completed nationally funded project, I explored the educational experiences and attainment of refugee-background African youth in Australia. Data were generated through interviews with young people and equity practitioners at schools and universities, policy document reviews, and statistical information requests from government agencies. The study's findings highlight the group's policy invisibility, the low success rate in higher education, and the experience of racial Othering.
Ethical Expectations
Is it ethically acceptable to use refugee stories without any benefit to them? To answer this question, it is important to start with expectations of procedural ethics. Beyond the empirical evidence on persisting disadvantage of refugees, my advocacy work has also been guided by a desire to meet the ethical expectations regarding the fair distribution of research benefits. Echoing ethical principles outlined in the Belmont Report, the National Statement on Ethical Conduct in Human Research defines justice as one of the key principles that guide human studies. The National Statement underlines the importance of ensuring distributive and procedural justice in human research: "While benefit to humankind is an important result of research, it also matters that benefits of research are achieved through just means, are distributed fairly, and involve no unjust burdens" (NHMRC, ARC & UA, 2018, p.9). In other words, ethical research is not extractive; it does not extract data and run away with little or no commitment to the voices and benefits of the participants. Ethical research uses the stories of the participants to generate benefits to them. There might be many ways to ensure that the benefits of research are distributed fairly. In refugee research, I believe one way of ensuring fair and timely distribution of the benefits of research is through evidence-based advocacy work.
Theoretical Commitments
My research is also informed by a critical theory of society, which assumes that existing relations and power dynamics are not "givens to be verified" (Horkheimer, 1972, p.244) but social constructions that reflect the interests of powerful members of society. Accordingly, the role of the critical social researcher is to faithfully reflect reality from the situation and perspective of the disadvantaged. As Collier (1998) noted, "When it is just a set of false beliefs that enslaves, their replacement by true beliefs is liberation" (p. 461, emphasis in original). In essence, critical theory challenges what Bourdieu refers to as "a 'socially weightless' mode of thought that is so far removed from ordinary dynamics of oppression that ultimately its own validity and normative relevance is thrown into question" (McNay 2012, p.235). Put differently, a critical scholar cannot afford to be a 'disinterested expert' and should not assume the position of a neutral observer—taking a stance on issues is an unavoidable responsibility.
Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources UsedThe main project from which this paper is developed drew on a multimethod inquiry approach (Hesse-Biber & Johnson, 2015) that combined critical inquiry and quantitative data to shed light on key indicators of African refugee integration. The research used a range of methods of data generation tools. I interviewed 44 refugee-background AHAY-R (26 male and 18 female), six equity managers in five universities, and nine school career counsellors and Multicultural Education Aides of government secondary schools in Victoria. Most African-heritage youth who participated in the study came to Australia with their parents at a young age (only two participants reported arriving as unaccompanied underage refugees). Before they signed the consent forms, all participants were given plain-language statements and were fully informed of the study's purpose. The length of the interviews ranged from 45 minutes to 70 minutes. In addition, HE participation and population Census data sets were also secured from, respectively, the Commonwealth Department of Education and Training (DET) and the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS). I also reviewed national and institutional equity policy documents.
The analysis proceeded inductively, from identifying meaningful segments to building themes. Although the initial data sense-making occurred simultaneously with data generation, the formal coding process involved immersion in the personal accounts of each participant. I thematically coded the transcribed data. That is, I closely read the textual data (policy documents and interview transcripts), identified meaningful segments to mark relevant sections, and mapped out emerging themes and patterns. Then, by way of synthesising the empirical data and theoretical concepts, I constructed emergent themes associated with the educational experiences and integration outcomes of AHAY-R. The themes were then theoretically re-described; that is, the participant accounts and policy reviews were placed in the context of ideas and concepts drawn from the literature. As Danermark et al. (2002) noted, applying theory to empirical data enables a social researcher to detect "meanings and connections that are not given in our habitual way of perceiving the world" (p. 94). Retrospective analysis of the lived experience of refugee youth is instrumental in understanding their life-courses, including how their current condition relates to their past experiences and future opportunities. That means accessing constructed reality requires interactive data generation instruments such as interviews and focus group discussions.
Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or FindingsMy account of advocacy entails two elements. First, in many instances, after the interview sessions, I spent considerable time advising how my participants could strategise their responses to racial discrimination. Following disturbing accounts of experiences of racism, I discussed with participants about practical measures they should take when facing racial discrimination. During the fieldwork, I learned that a commitment to ethics-in-practice necessitates intercultural competence, relational integrity, and ethic of care. Second, in an effort to raise awareness about the triad challenges African youth encounter in society, I wrote short commentaries for media outlets. Specifically, I wrote commentaries to The Conversation; I appeared in local community radio (SBS/Amharic); I gave interviews to journalists at The Australian, The Geelong Advertiser, and Educational Review; and I published in professional outlets such as The TAFE Teacher and Research Professional News.
The proposed presentation sheds light on key foundations of scholarly advocacy work in the areas of refugee education and integration. It specifically highlights how the synergy of empirical evidence, a desire to meet ethical expectations, and a commitment to critical theory support the scholarship of engagement. In the era of increased scepticism toward expertise and science, it is crucial that we firmly establish the warrant for our advocacy work. Our public engagement needs to draw on rich and sound empirical evidence. Relatedly, engaged scholarship requires a dedication to ensuring that the benefits of our research are distributed fairly to our participants and their communities. Finally, our theoretical disposition must align with our intellectual commitment to advocacy and social justice. In this regard, critical research is disposed to entertain the dual concerns of (a) why things are as they are and (b) how they can be made different. Doing scholarly advocacy entails using knowledge on behalf of research participants and making the knowledge available to them so they can use it on their own behalf.
ReferencesBourdieu, P. (2000). Pascalian meditations. Polity Press.
Boyer, E. (1996). The scholarship of engagement. Journal of Public Service and Outreach, 1(1), 11-20.
Collier, A. (1998). Explanation and emancipation. In M. Archer, R. Bhaskar, A. Collier et al. (Eds.), Critical realism: Essential readings (pp. 444-472). Routledge.
Danermark, B., Ekström, M., Jakobsen, L., & Karlsson, J. C. (2002). Explaining Society: An Introduction to Critical Realism in the Social Sciences. London: Routledge.
Hesse-Biber, S. N., & Johnson, R. B. (Eds.). (2015). The Oxford Handbook of Multimethod and Mixed Methods Research Inquiry. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Horkheimer, M. (1972). Critical theory: Selected essays. Continuum.
McNay, L. (2012). Suffering, silence and social weightlessness: Honneth and Bourdieu on embodiment and power. In S. Gonzalez-Arnal, , G. Jagger & K. Lennon (Eds.) Embodied selves (pp.230-248). Palgrave Macmillan.
Molla, T. (2021). Critical policy scholarship in education: An overview. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 29(2). https://doi.org/10.14507/epaa.29.5655
NHMRC [the National Health and Medical Research Council]. (2018). Australian Code for the Responsible Conduct of Research. Commonwealth of Australia, Canberra.
Said, E. (1994). Representations of the intellectual. Vintage.
|
