This article was downloaded by: [University of Tasmania]On: 14 November 2014, At: 20:23Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House,37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK
Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of EducationPublication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/cdis20
THE CONSTITUTION OF TEACHERS' KNOWLEDGE: ALiterature ReviewJudyth Sachs aa University of QueenslandPublished online: 06 Jul 2006.
To cite this article: Judyth Sachs (1987) THE CONSTITUTION OF TEACHERS' KNOWLEDGE: A Literature Review, Discourse:Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education, 7:2, 86-98, DOI: 10.1080/0159630870070206
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0159630870070206
PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE
Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”) contained in thepublications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no representationsor warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Anyopinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and are not theviews of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and should beindependently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses,actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoevercaused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of the Content.
This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematicreproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in anyform to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions
© DISCOURSE Vol. 7, No. 2, April 1987
THE CONSTITUTION OF TEACHERS' KNOWLEDGE:A Literature Review
Judyth SachsUniversity of Queensland
Introduction
The knowledge that teachers use in their daily work is central tounderstanding their lives in schools. Elbaz (1983), Grant and Sleeter(1985) and Clandinin (1985) among others have identified thisknowledge as having its basis in experience, therein creating what hasbeen termed a practical orientation. Furthermore, this knowledge is,according to Bolster (1983:298), idiographic in origin andparticularistic in character; that is, it arises from the need tocomprehend the complexity of a particular context with sufficientaccuracy to be able to act efficaciously in it. These claims provide thepoint of departure for this paper where the argument is made from areview of pertinent literature that teachers' work situation and theirexperience create mindsets or conceptions of knowledge which, first,promote a practical predisposition and second, are individualistic inorientation. Consequently, practical knowledge takes precedence overtheoretical or prepositional knowledge. This suggests that teacherstranslate concepts into situational models which facilitate easierteaching. In order to support this claim, in what follows I drawattention from research studies on how teachers' work conditionspredispose them to particular ways of understanding and operating inthe social systems of schools. I do this by addressing, first, theconditions in which teachers develop their professional knowledge,second, how teachers' cultural systems are constituted, and finally,how the effects of these conditions are central in their utilization ofknowledge and generation of behaviour. Pecheux's (1975) claim thatwords receive their meanings from the discursive formation in whichthey are used is the basis for understanding the content of teachers'knowledge and the conditions in which certain mindsets are created.
This review assumes that the constitution of teachers' knowledge isreflexive, and that discursive practices are not necessarily imposed onteachers. Rather, as Giddens (1979) has observed, there is a dialecticalsynthesis in which social structures are both produced by humanagency and yet remain the very medium through which this productiontakes place. This implies that teachers are not automatically shaped bythe structures in which they work. It is because of the recursive nature
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f T
asm
ania
] at
20:
23 1
4 N
ovem
ber
2014
87
of social practices in the social systems of schools that teachers exhibitsome engagement within these systems. Following Giddens (1979:243),structure is seen as both the medium and outcome of those practiceswhich constitute social systems, and this is always a contingentaccomplishment of knowledgeable social actions to the reproductionof social systems.
Constraints on Teachers' Behaviour
It is part of the conventional wisdom of sociological studies conductedin schools that teachers are constrained by certain 'givens' in theirjobs. This claim is substantiated by the research of Dale (1977b),Esland (1971, 1977) and Grant and Sleeter (1985). The latter alsoclaim that teachers' life experiences and backgrounds act as modifiersof their work.
A number of relatively fixed factors impinge upon and hence set theconditions of teachers' practices in schools and classrooms. Theseinclude: the compulsory nature of education, class size and theteacher-pupil ratio, the use of time and space, the bureaucratic natureof schools, and the nature of the curriculum itself. The factors aredescribed in detail by Dale (1977b), Esland (1971) and Grant andSleeter (1985). How these factors shape and constrain teachers'practice requires more attention and will now be addressed.
The constraints the above have on teachers have been referred to byDale (1977b) as the 'teachers' problematic'. By this he means thatteachers are expected to operate and work within conditions overwhich they have very little personal control. Esland (1971, 1977a) hastaken the argument further in claiming that the key to understandingaspects of teachers' behaviour is through the interplay of physicalconstraints as they exist within classrooms and the often largenumbers of reluctant learners within these classrooms.
The compulsory nature of schooling as it exists at present meansthat students are forced to attend school until they are fifteen orsixteen, depending on state legislative requirements. The corollary ofthis is that teachers have a captive audience of students who have notnecessarily chosen to be at school, whom they must educate (Dale,1977b). Further compounding and confounding teachers' work is thatthey have little control over the composition and size of their classes.Class size or the teacher-pupil ratio is another dimension of 'theteachers' problematic' which sets the practical limits to what can bedone. Working in such an environment means that the exercise ofauthority is a central part of teachers' jobs. Furthermore, as bothSharp and Green (1975) and Denscombe, (1980, 1982) claim, teachersspend more time controlling students than teaching them. Accordingto Dale (1977b) this arises from a teacher's mandate to controlignorance and indiscipline. Dale's (1977b) identification of this issue
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f T
asm
ania
] at
20:
23 1
4 N
ovem
ber
2014
88
points to a deeper influence on teacher behaviour. Because teachersare subject to demands of control and discipline as lone adults,outnumbered by their students, their behaviours are influenced inparticular ways. Moreover, most of the work ethic of teaching is thatindividuals must 'prove' themselves. It is this combination of the needto control and transmit information in ways approved by otherteachers that constitutes what Denscombe (1982:25a) refers to as 'thehidden pedagogy', defined as
a set of aims and methods of teaching, which is tacitly understood byteachers which stems from practical imperatives created by the organisationof the classroom and which is basic to competence as a teacher.
In addition, he argues that since it is through the maintenance ofcontrol that competency as a teacher is judged, this maintenance mustbe achieved without the help of colleagues.
The curriculum also serves to shape teachers' behaviour in schools.Arguments about this proposition will be illustrated with specificreference to Queensland primary schools. Curriculum, as used withinthis context, refers to all planned activities of the school. According toKerr (1968:16),
curriculum is all the learning which is planned and guided by the school,whether it is carried on in groups or individually, inside or outside theschool.
Such a conception of curriculum is inclusive of activities whichstructure and place constraints on teachers' lives. The notion of time,and how it structures teachers' behaviour are coextensive with such aconception. The day is broken up into blocks during which a certainamount of knowledge and information is to be transmitted. Timeconstrains the amount presented and how it is to be presented.
In Queensland primary schools, teaching procedures are guided bycentrally developed curriculum guides or syllabuses. In these, teachersare presented with imperative statements which are to be translatedinto classroom practice. These imperatives are presented as aims,objectives and so on.
While aims are not content specific, they do orientate primaryschool teachers' views of the subject towards 'humanistic', child-centred and individualistic conceptions. Hargreaves (1982) suggeststhat the culture of individualism holds teachers firmly in its grip, thatteachers are concerned with the cultivation of individual children andtheir various aptitudes and abilities, intellectual and social. Suchconceptions and notions are central in the creation of mindsets whichpredispose teachers to understand their work in individualistic ways.
A final point to be considered when examining how mindsets arecreated is that teachers are part of a bureaucracy. The influence ofbureaucracy on them is two fold. First, they are part of larger
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f T
asm
ania
] at
20:
23 1
4 N
ovem
ber
2014
89
bureaucracy, the State Department of Education, which promulgates,through its various agencies, directives and curriculum imperatives.Wise (1979) has argued that bureaucratic structure and the associatedmindset are closely related to specific patterns in the management ofknowledge. Second, in schools, bureaucratisation via administrativeprocesses brings out not only a particular structuring of knowledge,but also a particular interpretation of that knowledge. Wise (1979:16)also makes the point that the attempt of administrators to organise theproduction, dissemination and utilisation of knowledge in the school isdirectly related to the imperatives of bureaucracy, where the over-riding concern in selecting, structuring and presenting knowledge is tofacilitate the administration of an organisation. This position, takenalong side Hargreaves' culture of individualism, reinforces the claimthat teachers possess individualistic mindsets.
To this point, the proposition has been developed that theconditions in which teachers work, both structural and organisational,create certain 'mindsets' which crucially influence how they interpretthe knowledge they transmit. Grant and Sleeter (1985) have made thefurther claim that teachers' biographies and experience are alsoinfluential in shaping their knowledge. The influence of these factorswill now be examined.
Teachers' Cultural Systems
In order to further develop the argument made by Grant and Sleeter(1985) that teachers' experience and backgrounds act as determinantsof their work, the point should be made that teachers enter socialsystems (schools) which are given, with already formed culturalsystems. The argument is made that teachers' cultural systems areconstituted by interpellations beyond schools, as well as theirprofessional training and finally by their experience as teachers.
Over the last twenty years a number of Australian studies inparticular have focused on the social location of individuals enteringteaching. These empirically based studies have typically defined classin terms of socio-economic status. Research by Bassett (1958, 1971)and Anderson and Western (1970, 1972) indicated that trainee teachersin Australia were less likely than other university students to havefathers in professional occupations. The research of Pike (1966), andMcKivitt and Douglas, (1973) indicated they were more likely to havefathers who are small businessmen, tradesmen or skilled workmen.While these studies are somewhat dated, the argument can still bemade that individuals entering teaching are, in general, from a lowersocio-economic class than those entering professions such as law,medicine and engineering (Anderson and Western, 1970, 1980;Anderson and Vervoorn, 1983).
The position that teachers are 'middle-class' is part of the collective
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f T
asm
ania
] at
20:
23 1
4 N
ovem
ber
2014
90
consciousness of those both within and outside of teaching circles.However, counter arguments of Marxist writers such as Wright (1978),Harris (1982) and White (1983) indicate that the structural location ofteacher work is both a confounding and a determining feature of suchwork. That is, teacher work is not simply a reflex to 'middleclassness'as claimed by sociologists but rather as Harris (1982) argues, teachers'class location is contradictory ̂ lying between the bourgeoisie and theproletariat. His claim is that teachers' positions in the labour marketdo not coincide with the relations of control over money capital,physical capital, or labour power. Likewise Wright's (1978) position isthat teachers execute, but do not create state policy; they disseminatebut do not control the production of bourgeois ideology. Theconfusion in identifying teachers' class location according to Harris(1982) is that teacher work and the perspectives of that work arelargely shaped by structural features and an individual's responses tothe work situation itself. Compounding this, teachers are not placedunder tight control or surveillance as are many factory workers.Indeed, their position in the hierarchy of control in occupationalstructure and the conditions of their work exemplify what Edwards(1979) refers to as the 'new class' worker who works on behalf ofcapitalism, but not for the capitalists. This orientation seriouslyundermines the conventional wisdom of teachers' class and statuspositions and the claim to professionalism. Nevertheless, the positionof teachers within the division of labour and the research evidencefrom studies of teachers' attitudes (Anderson and Western, 1970,1982, Feiman-Nemser, 1984) reinforce the notion of teachers as'middle class'. This is a euphemism for relatively conservativeattitudes and beliefs, for orientation into a bourgeois discourse and'habitus'. The effect on teachers of such 'middle-class' experience is,as Grant and Sleeter (1985) note, the limitation in their understandingof human diversity and of social inequality, based on race, class andgender. If this claim is true, in the light of an already discussedstructuring of teachers' knowledge, their interpretation of concepts tobe taught will be based on their biographies within schools andpersonal experience beyond their work which, it has been argued, are'middle-class'. In what follows I take this further by interrogating theformative process of 'becoming' a teacher through teacher education,arguing that practical and individualist knowledge is reinforcedthereby.
Dale (1977a) has suggested that teacher education programsinculcate a cognitive style of liberal individualism. Other writers suchas Hargreaves (1982) have also identified a 'culture of individualism'in secondary teachers' cultures. He claims that child-centredprogressivism of a liberal individualistic kind allows teachers toconcentrate on individual student performance without regard to thesocial effects of schooling. In this way schools are supportive of the
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f T
asm
ania
] at
20:
23 1
4 N
ovem
ber
2014
91
status-quo because the goals of teachers prescribed by theirprofessional ethic, are blind to 'society'. It is this element of liberalindividualism that is criticised by Bartholomew (1976) and Giroux(1980) who claim that teachers' own education serves to legitimate theexisting orders of the school and inhibits structural reform.
Denscombe (1980, 1982) and Dale (1977a) have claimed that thepre-service training period of teachers in general tends to reinforcealready existing attitudes. Mardle and Walker (1980) make a similarclaim when they argue that teachers' own school-days experience ismore significant in their professional performance than the curriculumof any training course. This claim is substantiated by researchundertaken by Zeichner and Grant (1981) with pre-service elementaryschool teachers. They argue that pre-service teacher education exertslittle impact on the beliefs and practices of teachers. Sarason (1971)goes so far as to argue that teachers are trained in a setting which israrely seen by them as being seriously relevant to their future work.
Lortie (1975) and Maddox (1968) have noted how teacher trainingdoes not link school practice to on-campus knowledge. If this claim isindeed true, it leaves teachers to create their own solutions to school-room dilemmas. Furthermore, the press of the institutional frameworkalready known by teachers, emphasised in pre-service preparation andmade more explicit in schools, throws teachers back on their ownresources, which it has already been suggested, are individualistic.
Pre-service preparation provides individuals with the opportunity tolearn what Mills (1977) refers to as 'vocabularies of motive'. That is,they learn and create a new set of rules and norms regardingappropriate behaviour within schools. Over time these become anunconscious part of teachers' language and behaviour in whichassumptions about schools and education are rooted. Furthermore, asPopkewitz (1978) notes, such language and social interaction as theyare exposed to during this preparation phase, establish the principlesof activity, power and rationality for guiding occupational conduct.
The effect of pre-service preparation on teachers is best summed upby Dale (1977a). He has claimed that the effect teacher education hason teachers (which is reinforced during their professional lives) is thedevelopment of an individualistic style that predisposes them to seeingand interpreting the world in particular ways. Part of this style is thepropensity to become aware of the world as having particularproperties and concomitantly to reject or fail to recognise as possiblealternatives, other propositions and possibilities. In the light of analready discussed culture of individualism, the corollary for teachers'interpretation of curriculum imperatives means that theirinterpretations will be pre-structured, in that certain mindsets or waysof interpretation will have already been created.
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f T
asm
ania
] at
20:
23 1
4 N
ovem
ber
2014
92
Professional Socialization
Upon completing their pre-service courses, teachers enter into thesocial systems of schools as fully fledged members. It has previouslybeen argued that their pre-service experience serves to reinforcealready existing dispositions, in particular 'liberal individualism'. Inwhat follows I intend arguing that teachers' experience and their senseof professionalism in schools are reinforced but modified.
In schools, professional socialisation creates the conditions in whichinstitutional social controls are internalised. In Larson's (1977) words,the standards set by the elite of a profession become part of thesubjectivity of initiates. The professional socialisation and experienceof teachers can be read in this light. Lortie's (1975) analysis forexample, identifies three factors which set the conditions under whichteachers develop individual perspectives and a shared discourse. Thefirst is that unlike other professions, socialisation into teaching islargely self-socialisation; one's personal dispositions are not onlyrelevant, but stand at the core of becoming a teacher (Lortie, 1975:79). Lortie's argument is based on several studies he cites whereteachers attested to the tangential role of their formal training andfrequently referred to the continuing influence of mentors. Suchexperience, according to Lortie (1975) and Feiman-Nemser (1984)precludes a shared technical culture for teachers. Unlike otherprofessions, teaching lacks an esoteric knowledge, encapsulated in aspecialist jargon which can be used to identify and exclude non-members. Hargreaves (1980) goes as far to say that the lack of ageneral shared technical vocabulary is instrumental in the developmentof individual solutions to individual problems. This, in conjunctionwith the isolated nature of teachers' work has led Feiman-Nemser(1984), Ozga (1981) and Hargreaves (1980) to comment that the lackof a general technical vocabularly may derive from the exigencies ofthe work of teaching itself.
This leads to the second factor. The lack of a technical vocabularyindicates that lay imagery penetrates professional practice in the formof 'apprenticeship by observation' (Lortie, 1975). This concept hasbeen taken up by Maddox (1968), Fuller and Brown (1975) and Pruitand Lee (1978). Their work indicates that teachers fall back onstrategies and routines remembered from their own school days.Further empirical support for the centrality of an 'apprenticeship byobservation' in the creation of teacher perspectives is provided byShipman (1966) and Petty and Hogben (1982) in their studies ofteacher practice. Bolster (1983:296) makes the further claim thatteacher decision-making in classrooms is anticipatory, based largely onbeliefs acquired from previous experience.
The third factor proposed by Lortie (1975) is that there is continuityin the experience of teachers, which manifests itself in conservative
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f T
asm
ania
] at
20:
23 1
4 N
ovem
ber
2014
93
practice. He argues that as teachers have in a sense never really leftschool, they have internalised models of teacher behaviour and roleenactment from their early days, which are triggered off in their ownteaching later.
This point complements both Sarason's (1971, 1982) claim thatteachers tend to teach in the way they themselves were taught, andSharp and Green's (1975) proposition that their images of teachingwere formed when they were pupils. Furthermore, Zeichner and Grant(1981) in a study of elementary school teachers have argued that theactivation of latent knowledge during the formal training andsubsequent membership of the profession is of major influence inshaping teachers' conceptions of their teaching role and performance.The activation of such knowledge has been referred to by Maddox(1968) as 'adaptive expediency', which he argues is influential inshaping teachers' behaviour.
By focusing on the way in which schools as cultural systems andinstitutions process knowledge and people, the proposition is madethat teachers' knowledge shapes and limits how they make sense oftheir working world. This proposition can be substantiated byfocusing on the nature and content of teachers' knowledge.
Teachers, through their protracted experience in schools, havethemselves been exposed to and incorporated into a selective tradition.Williams (1976a:205) clarifies this as
that which within the terms of an effective dominant culture is alwayspassed off as 'the tradition', the significant past. But always the selectivityis the point; the way in which from a whole possible area of past andpresent, certain meanings and practices are neglected and excluded ... someof these meanings are reinterpreted, diluted or put into forms whichsupport or at least do not contradict other elements within the effectivedominant culture.
Apple (1979) suggests that schools act as agents of selective traditionand cultural incorporation by means of the knowledge that istransmitted and the cultural competencies demanded. Further, asWhite (1980) observes, schools and education present a common worldview or perspective on the world.
Teachers are part of the process in which the selective tradition ispresented to students. More importantly, taking part in the processcreates the conditions in which a further selective tradition operates onand through teachers' knowledge. Dale (1977b), for example, arguesthat the source of teachers' explicit professional knowledge andrhetorics are embedded deeply within the dominant culture. While allschools promulgate a preferred knowledge for teachers, the primaryschool promotes a particular kind of individualistic, child-centredapproach to teaching. This claim is substantiated by the research ofGalton et al. (1980) and Bassett (1975) into primary schools. This
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f T
asm
ania
] at
20:
23 1
4 N
ovem
ber
2014
94
proposition suggests that teachers' knowledge in general andinterpretation of concepts in particular are subject to these formativepressures. It suggests that concepts as used by teachers are shaped bythe structural constraints of the work situation, the mindset reinforcedwithin that situation, and their biographies.
There are a number of themes in the research literature bearing onthis issue which, for convenience, can be grouped under the conceptof 'the practicality ethic' proposed by Doyle and Ponder (1977). Theirargument is that the institutional structures of teacher autonomy andisolation, together with the need to accomplish institutionalimperatives, create the conditions in which teachers provide meaningfor their practices.
Central to the 'practicality ethic' is the concept of 'practicalknowledge' (Elbaz, 1983) or 'common-sense' knowledge (Sharp andGreen, 1975; Dale, 1977a). By this the authors mean that teacherspossess a complex set of interpretive procedures and knowledge whichis created and sustained by the exigencies of the stream of events inteaching. Such knowledge is focused on the immediacy of the teachingact (Doyle and Ponder, 1977), on the constant need to make decisionswith the resources at hand. Clandinin (1985) reaches similarconclusions. She argues that this knowledge is both theoretical andpractical, blended by the personal background and characteristics ofteachers and expressed by them in different situations. The'practicality ethic' is self-sustaining insofar as it provides guides foraction as well as justifications (A. Hargreaves, 1984:246). This is whyEsland (1972) refers to such experientially based knowledge as 'recipeknowledge', or knowledge which enables actors to make sense of theirsituation and to solve problems (Schultz, 1975). This ability is basic toteachers' work.
This last point suggests a further characteristic of the 'practicalityethic'. While teachers control their own teaching, the level at whichthey exercise such control is that of means rather than ends. Lortie(1975), Jackson (1968) and Hargreaves (1984), for example, haveshown that teachers are concerned more with the instrumental aspectsof their work than those of goals or ends. Furthermore, recentdevelopments in the control of curriculum (Reynolds and Sullivan,1981; Apple and Weis, 1985) have emphasised the technical aspects ofthe teaching art.
It is important that the complexity of the 'practicality ethic' is notunder-rated. While it is primarily based in the experience of teachersin classrooms, it is not restricted to these experiences alone but isshaped by a teacher's life in the school, the system and beyond. Elbaz(1983) draws attention to the scope and range of teacher knowledge.She states that
this knowledge encompasses first_ hand experiences of student learningstyles, interests, needs, strengths and difficulties and a repertoire of
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f T
asm
ania
] at
20:
23 1
4 N
ovem
ber
2014
95
instructional techniques and classroom management skills. The teacherknows the social structure of the school and what it requires of teachersand students, for survival and success; she knows the community of whichthe school is part, and has a sense of what it will or will not tolerate.
This is similar to Clandinin's (1985) claim that this knowledge is notonly experiential, but is also value laden, purposeful and orientated topractice. Furthermore, as Esland (1971), Arfwedson (1979), Hatton(1985), Connell et al. (1982) and others have pointed out, teacherknowledge encompasses beliefs about teaching, knowledge of studentsand the catchment community, all of which partly shape their teaching'styles'. This point is important theoretically because it breaks with thenotion that while teachers are institutionally incorporated, they are notnecessarily ideologically incorporated.
Nevertheless, the idea that the 'practicality ethic' provides thecentral core of teachers' discursive practices is appropriate for thispaper as it provides a foil for the individualistic and relativistic notionthat 'every teacher is different'. At the level of the subject, this isclearly the case, but as schools are characterised by patterned sets ofactivities and events, teachers within the institution are far lesscomplex social and cultural entities than they are as social agents(Ardener, 1978). This understanding is captured by Freedman et al.(1983:261) when they state that
the work situation of elementary school teachers intrinsically creates aculture whose aspects are overwhelmingly shared by all the teachers at thislevel, no matter what their present teaching situation or what backgroundthey have brought to teaching ... Every one of us shares basic concerns andproblems. (Emphasis added)
This section can be drawn together by the proposition that if the'practicality ethic' dominates teacher work as the literature indicates,then educational and other 'theoretical' knowledge has no intrinsicprivileged status. That is, when faced with a choice between theacceptance of theoretical knowledge and the maintenance of practical/instrumentalist practice, teachers are likely to reject the former orcolonise it. By this I mean that they are likely to use the procedures of'revitalization' movements (Wallace, 1970) or 'bricolage'(Levi-Strauss, 1966) and reformulate 'theory' into 'practical' formsthat 'work'. This is what Berstein (1985) has referred to asdecontextualising knowledge, such that its meaning in a discourse islost as it is inserted into a different set of frames. The development ofthese concepts should provide the basis for future work in the area ofteachers' knowledge.
Conclusion
The preceding review of literature indicates that teachers' work
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f T
asm
ania
] at
20:
23 1
4 N
ovem
ber
2014
96
conditions foster a practical interpretation of knowledge, aninstrumentalist translation of curriculum goals, and an individualisticpedagogical style.
References
Anderson, D., Bowen, P., Fensham, P. and Power, J. (1980) Students in AustralianHigher Education. Canberra, ERDC Research Report 23.
Anderson, D. and Western, J. (1970) Social Profiles of Students in Four Professions.Quarterly Review of Australian Education. 3(4) pp 1-37.
Anderson, D. and Western, J. (1972) Professional Socialisation in F. Hunt (ed)Socialisation in Australia. Sydney, Angus and Robertson.
Anderson, D. and Vervoorn, A. (1983) Access to Privilege. Canberra, A.N.U. Press.Apple, M. (1979) Ideology and Curriculum. London, Routledge & Kegan Paul.Apple, M. and Weis, L. (1985) Ideology and Schooling: Class and Culture. Education
and Society. 3(1) pp 45-63.Ardener, E. (1978) Some Outstanding Problems in the Analysis of Events, in I. E.
Schwimmer, (ed) The Yearbook of Symbolic Anthropology. London Hurst andCo.
Arfwedson, G. (1979) Teachers' Work in U. Lundgren and S. Petterson, (eds) Class,Context and Curriculum Processes. Stockholm, Lund.
Bartholomew, J. (1976) Schooling Teachers: The Myth of the Liberal College, in G.Whitty and M. Young, (eds) Exposition in the Politics of School Knowledge.Diffield, Nafferton.
Bassett, G. (1958) The Occupational Background of Teachers. Australian Journal ofEducation. 2(2) pp 79-90.
Bassett, G. (1971) The Occupational Background of Teachers; Some Recent Data.Australian Journal of Education. 15(3) pp 211-214.
Bassett, G. (1975) Primary Education in Australia. Sydney, McGraw Hill.Bernstein, B. (1986) On Pedagogic Discourse in J. Richardson (ed) Handbook of
Theory and Research in the Sociology of Education. New York, GreenwoodPress.
Bolster, A. (1983) Toward a More Effective Model of Research on Teaching. HarvardEducational Review. 53(3) pp 294-308.
Brown, S. and McIntyre, D. (1982) Influences upon Teachers' Attitudes to DifferentTypes of Innovation. Curriculum Inquiry. 12(1) pp 35-51.
Clandinin, D. (1985) Personal Practical Knowledge: A study of Teachers' ClassroomImages. Curriculum Inquiry. 15(4) pp 361-385.
Connell, R., Ashenden, D., Kessler, S. and Dowsett, G. (1982) Making the Difference.Sydney, George Allen & Unwin.
Dale, R. (1977a) Implications of the Rediscovery of the Hidden Curriculum for theSociology of Teaching, in D. Gleeson (ed) Identity and Structure: Issues in theSociology of Education. Nafferton, Nafferton Books.
Dale, R. (1977b) The Structural Context of Teaching. Milton Keynes, Open Uni Press.Denscombe, M. (1980) The Work Context of Teaching: An Analytic Framework for the
Study of Teaching in Classrooms. British Journal of Sociology of Education. 1(3)pp 279-292.
Denscombe, M. (1982) The Hidden Pedagogy and Its Implications for Teacher Training.British Journal of Sociology of Education. 3(3) pp 249-265.
Doyle, W. and Ponder, G. (1978) The Practicality Ethic in Teacher Decision Making.Interchange. 8(3) pp 1-11.
Edwards, R. (1979) Contested Terrain. New York, Basic Books.Elbaz, F. (1981) The Teachers' Practical Knowledge: Report of a Case Study.
Curriculum Inquiry 11(1) pp 43-71.
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f T
asm
ania
] at
20:
23 1
4 N
ovem
ber
2014
97
Elbaz, F. (1983) Teacher Thinking: A Study of Practical Knowledge. London, CroomHelm.
Esland, G. (1971) Teaching and Learning as the Organisation of Knowledge in M.Young (ed) Knowledge and Control. London, Collier Macmillan.
Esland, G. (1977a) Legitimacy and Control. Milton Keynes, Open Uni Press.Esland, G. (1977b) Schooling and Pedagogy. Milton Keynes, Open Uni Press.Esland, G., Dale, R. and Sadler, J. (1972) The Social Organisation of Learning. Milton
Keynes, Open Uni Press.Feiman-Nemser, S. (1983) Learning to Teach in L. Shulman and G. Sykes (eds)
Handbook of Teaching and Policy. New York, Longman.Feiman-Nemser, S. and Floden, R. (1984) The Culture of Teaching. Occasional Paper
74 Michigan State Uni., East Lansing. Institute for Research on Teaching.Freedman, S., Jackson, J. and Boles, K. (1983) Teaching an Imperilled Profession, in
L. Shulman and G. Sykes (eds) Handbook of Teaching and Policy. New York,Longman.
Fuller, F. and Brown, O. (1975) Becoming a Teacher, in K. Ryan (ed) TeacherEducation. Chicago, Uni of Chicago Press.
Galton, M., Simon, B. and Croft, P. (1980) Inside a Primary Classroom. London,Routledge and Kegan Paul.
Giddens, A. (1979) Problems in Social Theory, Action, Structure and Contradiction inSocial Action. London, Macmillan.
Giroux, H. (1980) Teacher Education and the Ideology of Social Control. Journal ofEducation. 16(2) pp 5-27.
Gleeson, D. (ed) (1977) Identity and Structure: Issues in the Sociology of Education.Nafferton, Nafferton Books.
Grant, C. and Sleeter, C. (1985) Who Determines Teacher Work: The Teacher, TheOrganization or Both. Teaching and Teacher Education. 1(3) pp 209-220.
Hammersley, M. (1977) Teacher Perspectives. Milton Keynes, Open Uni Press.Hammersley, M. (1977b) The Social Location of Teacher Perspectives. Milton Keynes,
Open Uni Press.Hargreaves, A. (1977) Progressivism and Student Autonomy. Sociological Review. 25(3)
pp 585-621.Hargreaves, A. (1984) Experience Counts, Theory Doesn't: How Teachers Talk about
their Work. Sociology of Education. 57 Oct. pp 244-254.Hargreaves, D. (1980) The Occupational Culture of Teachers in P. Woods Teacher
Strategies. London, Croom Helm.Hargreaves, D. (1982) The Challenge of the Comprehensive School. London, Routledge
and Kegan Paul.Harris, K. (1982) Teachers and Classes. London, Routledge and Kegan Paul.Huberman, M. (1983) Recipes for Busy Kitchens: A Situational Analysis of Routine
Knowledge Used in Schools. Knowledge, Creation Diffusion and Utilization. 4 pp451-478.
Kerr, J. (ed) (1968) Changing the Curriculum. London, Uni of London Press.Larson, M. (1977) The Rise of Professionalism: A Sociological Analysis. Berkeley, Uni
of California Press.Levi-Strauss, C. (1966) The Savage Mind. London, Weidenfield and Nicholson.Lortie, D. (1966) Teacher Socialisation: The Robinson Crusoe Model, in R. Travers (ed)
Second Handbook of Research in Teaching. Chicago, Rand McNally.Lortie, D. (1975) School Teacher. Chicago, Uni of Chicago Press.Maddox, H. (1968) A Descriptive Study of Teaching Practice. Educational Review. 20
pp 177-190.Mardle, G. and Walker, M. (1980) Strategies and Structure: Some Critical Notes on
Teacher Socialization in P. Woods (ed) Teacher Strategies: Explorations in theSociology of School. London, Croom Helm.
McArthur, J. (1981) The First Five Years of Teaching. ERDC Report 30. Canberra,Australian Government Publishing Service.
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f T
asm
ania
] at
20:
23 1
4 N
ovem
ber
2014
98
McKivitt, O. and Douglas, G. (1973) The Occupational Background of IntendingTeachers. Australian Journal of Education. 17(1) pp 69-79.
Mills, C. Wright (1977) Situated Actions and Vocabularies of Motive in Cosin et al.School and Society: A Sociological Reader. 2nd Edition. London, Routledge andKegan Paul.
Ozga, J. and Lawn, M. (1981) Teachers, Professionalism and Class. London, FalmerPress.
Pêcheux, M. (1975) Les Vérités de la Palice. Paris, Maspéro.Petty, M. and Hogbin, D. (1980) Explorations of Semantic Space with Beginning
Teachers: A Study into Socialisation into Teaching. British Journal of TeacherEducation. 6 pp 51-61.
Pike, R. (1966) Some Social Aspects of the Recruitment to Teaching in New SouthWales. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Sociology. 2(2) pp 94-106.
Polanyi, M. (1969) The Logic of Tacit Inference in M. Grene (ed) Knowing and Being.New York, Routledge and Kegan Paul.
Popkewitz, T. (1980) Dulling the Senses: Research in Teacher Education. Journal ofTeacher Education. 30(5) pp 52-60.
Pruit, K. and Lee, J. (1978) Hidden Handcuffs of Teacher Education. Journal ofTeacher Education. 29 pp 69-72.
Reynolds, D. and Sullivan, M. (1981) The Comprehensive Experience, in L. Barton andS. Walker (eds) Schools, Teachers and Teaching. Sussex, Falmer Press.
Romberg, T. and Price, G. (1983) Curriculum Implementation and Staff Developmentas Cultural Change in Staff Development. Eighty Second Year Book of theNational Society for the Study of Education. Uni of Chicago Press.
Sarason, S. (1971) The Culture of the School and the Problem of Change. Boston,Allyn and Bacon.
Sarason, S. (1982) The Culture of the School and The Problem of Social Change. 2ndEdition. Boston, Allyn and Bacon.
Schutz, A. (1976) Recipe Knowledge in J. Berk, C. Jencks et al. Worlds Apart:Readings for the Sociology of Education. London, Collier Macmillan.
Sharp, R. and Green, A. (1975) Education and Social Control. London, Routledge andKegan Paul.
Shipman, M. (1966) Theory and Practice in the Education of Teachers. EducationalResearch. 9 pp 208-212.
Wallace, A. (1970) Culture and Personality (2nd Edition). New York, Random House.White, D. (1976) The Profession of Teaching, in P. Boreham (ed) The Professions in
Australia. St. Lucia, Uni of Queensland Press.White, R. (1980) Education in Bourgeois Society: A Matter of Common Sense.
Interchange. 11(1) pp 47-60.White, R. (1983) On Teachers and Proletarianisation. Discourse. 3(2) pp 45-57.Williams, R. (1976a) Base and Superstructure in Marxist Cultural Theory in R. Dale
(ed) Schooling and Capitalism: A Sociological Reader. London, Routledge andKegan Paul.
Wise, A. (1979) Legislated Learning: The Bureaucratisation of the American Classroom.Berkeley, Uni. of California Press.
Woods, P. (1977) The Ethnography of the School. Milton Keynes, Open Uni Press.Woods, P. (1979) The Divided School. London, Routledge and Kegan Paul.Woods, P. (1980) Teacher Strategies: Explorations in the Sociology of the School.
London, Croom Helm.Wright, E. (1978) Class, Crises and the State. London, New Left Books.Zeichner, K. and Grant, K. (1981) Biography and Social Structure in the Socialisation
of student teachers: A re-examination of the Pupil Control Ideologies of studentteachers. Journal of Education for Teaching. 7(3) pp 298-314.
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f T
asm
ania
] at
20:
23 1
4 N
ovem
ber
2014
