Session Information
99 ERC SES 04 E, Social Justice and Intercultural Education
Paper Session
Contribution
This paper aims to understand how inequalities manifest in classrooms in India and interact with learning processes. It will focus on the pedagogic practices utilised by teachers in the classroom, specifically the classification and framing rules of knowledge and pedagogy, to understand the relations of power and control lying within the classrooms. This paper is based on an ethnographic study conducted in the government schools of Delhi which aimed at understanding the role of the social identity- the intersection of caste, class, religious, and gender identity- of the learner in mediating the teaching-learning practices and relations in the classroom to facilitate the learning process.
Several studies and assessment surveys worldwide have indicated a link between socio-economic background of students and their schooling experiences. PISA analysis has highlighted the gaps in learning outcomes between students from advantaged and disadvantaged socio-economic backgrounds. Even within schools in India, disparities in learning outcomes are indicated by the poor performance of students from marginalised caste/class groups in arithmetic and language skills. Often poor performance is concentrated in rural or government-run schools. This is furthered by a stratified schooling system wherein students from marginalised castes and the working class attend the majority of the government-run (public) schools, while the most (more expensive) private schools are attended majorly by the middle and upper class/castes. Theories of social class reproduction have been used to analyse schools as sites for the recreation and solidifying of inequalities by embodying the dominant culture or middle-class habitus, developing skills compatible with hierarchical positions, and as a state apparatus for exercising control and hegemony. Studies have indicated the existence of prejudices and discrimination in the schooling experiences of students from marginalised groups but there is limited research that examines the impact of socio-economic differences directly on learning processes especially in the urban context.
This paper uses Basil Bernstein’s theoretical framework that analyses the dialectical relationship of structural inequalities and agency by looking at the relations of power and control at the macro (knowledge production) and also micro (recontextualization) level of the classroom where inequalities can be negotiated or legitimised. Although the conceptualisation originates from a European context, Bernstein provides a comprehensive framework to understand the learning processes in a classroom where the intersection of structural inequalities permeate in light of the gaps in learning outcomes between advantaged and disadvantaged students. This paper theoretically engages with Bernstein and tries to expand the framework beyond social class to include the intersection of identities of caste, religion, class, and gender.
Bernstein explains the pedagogic code of schools as an elaborated code which is transmitted through variations in classification degree ("organisational" elements of pedagogy or “degree of boundary maintenance” of contents) and framing of knowledge (interactional elements of knowledge or degree of control over selection, pacing, and organisation) at the level of instructional discourse and regulative discourse. These shape the power and control relations between teachers, students, knowledge structures, etc. Bernstein argues that although schools reward students with the orientation that enables them to access the context-independent knowledge structures of the school, it is also needed to enable an environment that recognises the identity of working-class students and does not hold a deficit view of marginalised people.
By following this line of inquiry, the paper tries to address the overarching research question: what pedagogic practices (including what knowledge [classification] and how it is transmitted [framing]) are used by the teachers to recontextualize knowledge in the classroom?
Method
The methodological foundation for this study is provided by Roy Bhaskar’s conceptualisation of critical realism as a means of understanding the relationship between social structure and social action. Social structures are reproduced and transformed by everyday action while also containing and enabling agency, and can be observed through their effects and causal relationships in the material world. This study takes a qualitative approach using methods of ethnography and participant observation in a government-run school in Delhi. Ethnography and participant observation enable studying a context holistically, revealing the social relations of the group and the social processes while practising the dialectical relationship of intimacy and estrangement. Continuous action-oriented interviews are conducted with teachers to understand their perspectives, strategies employed in the classrooms, and reasons behind the pedagogic processes which will complement observational data. Informal conversations with students also help understand and get feedback on the teaching-learning practices in the classroom. It also contributes to understanding the recognition and realisation rules possessed by them which enable them to recognise a particular context, understand the appropriate response to it (make meaning) and produce that response. The collected data will be coded using NVivo. For analysis, a combination of Gee’s (1999) approach to critical discourse analyses (CDA) and Bernstein’s framework will be used as both focus on discourse and the link between language and social practice. Gee (1999) provides tools to operationalize the analysis of language (written and spoken), everyday talk and identify discourse pervasive among teachers and students that is used to make meaning, position individuals (to form biases and prejudices), construct and deconstruct identity (of both teacher and student) and inform teaching-learning practices. This will be integrated into Bernstein’s framework, which will help analyse processes of transmission, acquisition and evaluation of knowledge in the classroom.
Expected Outcomes
This paper contributes to the emerging literature on understanding the role of socio-economic differences on learning. It also contributes to understanding “why” and “how” the gaps in learning outcomes between students from advantaged and disadvantaged backgrounds occur. It understands advantages and disadvantages as a sociological phenomenon i.e. as a condition of stigma, segregation and inequality that exist in Western societies as well. This can add to the developing work on the interplay of social structure and power and control relations in the classroom and its role in shaping learning processes. The paper highlights the strategies and methods used by teachers to make taught content significant in the classroom, and highlight the rules of criteria, whether they are explicit rules that allow students to understand what is the legitimate text in the classroom or are implicit that allow questioning and rethinking of the evaluation criteria and rules of pacing of knowledge. It helps to understand assumptions of social identity (class, caste, etc.) that shape pedagogic practices. Specifically, the teachers’ perceptions and ideas towards students, about teaching in government-run schools and how those shape their pedagogical approaches and also students' self-perception. It will also show the advantages or disadvantages learners have over each other by virtue of their social location. Another aspect highlights the nature of the relationship of the teacher-students, student-student and the position of the teacher within the larger structure of the schooling institution (rules of hierarchy). The findings will overall help understand how knowledge is recontextualised in the classroom and how teachers incorporate and utilise students' identities and orientations in the classroom. Furthermore, this paper understands learning as a process that promotes participation and access to academic discourse while also recognising local knowledge. This can also help understand students' motivations and interests in schooling and learning.
References
Annual Status of Education Report. (2020). Annual Status of Education Report (Rural) 2019 Early Years’. Batra, P. (2015). Curriculum in India: Narratives, Debates, and a Deliberative Agenda. In Pinar, W. (Ed.), Curriculum studies in India: Intellectual histories, present circumstances (pp 35-63). Springer. Barrett, B. D. (2017). Bernstein in the urban classroom: A case study. British Journal of sociology of education, 38(8), 1258-1272. Bernstein, B. (1964). Elaborated and restricted codes: Their social origins and some consequences. American anthropologist, 66(6), 55-69. Bernstein, B. (1990). Class, codes and control: The structuring of pedagogic discourse (Vol. 4). Bernstein, B. (1999). Vertical and horizontal discourse: An essay. British journal of sociology of Education, 20(2), 157-173 Bernstein, B. (2004). Social class and pedagogic practice. The RoutledgeFalmer reader in sociology of education, 196-217. Desai, S., Adams, C. D., & Dubey, A. (2010). Segmented Schooling: Inequalities in Primary Education. In Thorat, S., & Neuman, K. S. (Eds.), Blocked by Caste: Economic Discrimination in Modern India (pp. 230-252). Oxford University Press. Gee, J. P. (1999). An introduction to discourse analysis: Theory and method. Routledge. Hoadley, Ursula & Muller, Johan. (2010). Codes, Pedagogy and Knowledge: Advances in Bernsteinian Sociology of Education. The Routledge International Handbook of the Sociology of Education. Routledge. Hoff, K., & Pandey, P. (2006). Discrimination, social identity, and durable inequalities. American economic review, 96(2), 206-211. Hoff, K., & Pandey, P. (2014). Making up people—The effect of identity on performance in a modernizing society. Journal of Development Economics, 106, 118-131. Majumdar, M., & Mooij, J. E. (2011). Education and inequality in India: A classroom view (Vol. 46). Routledge. Morais, A. M. (2002). Basil Bernstein at the micro level of the classroom. British journal of sociology of education, 23(4), 559-569. Nambissan, G. B. (2010). Exclusion and Discrimination in Schools: Experiences of Dalit Children. In Thorat, S., & Neuman, K. S. (Eds.), Blocked by Caste: Economic Discrimination in Modern India (pp. 253-286). Oxford University Press. Sachar, R., Hamid, S., Oommen, T. K., Basith, M. A., Basant, R., Majeed, A., & Shariff, A. (2006). Social, economic and educational status of the Muslim community of India (No. 22136). East Asian Bureau of Economic Research. Sayed, Y., Subrahmanian, R., Soudien, C., Carrim, N., Balgopalan, S., Nekhwevha, F., & Samuel, M. (2007). Education exclusion and inclusion: Policy and implementation in South Africa and India. London: Department for International Development.
Search the ECER Programme
- Search for keywords and phrases in "Text Search"
- Restrict in which part of the abstracts to search in "Where to search"
- Search for authors and in the respective field.
- For planning your conference attendance you may want to use the conference app, which will be issued some weeks before the conference
- If you are a session chair, best look up your chairing duties in the conference system (Conftool) or the app.