My paper concerns a relation that is both vital and inevitable in educational contexts. More specifically it concerns the frequently discussed dyad of moral values and content knowledge, as well as the relation between the two phenomena. How to understand this relation seem to be a matter perpetually attracting interest from educational actors such as teachers, policy makers and researchers. However, the assumption that the variety of understandings depends heavily on ideological starting points is not as often discussed. Thus, the aim of my paper is twofold. First, it aims at shedding light on the relation between two responsibilities of education, i. e. the development of pupil identities on the one hand and the teaching of pedagogical content knowledge on the other. Second, it aims at illustrating different versions of this relation and their connection to pedagogic discourses with, in turn, orientations to different ideologies.

Often the two phenomena, i. e. moral values and content knowledge, are seen as separate. A basic assumption for my paper is that they, in contrast, should be seen as inseparable. For this assertion I rely on a specific conceptual pair, derived from Basil Bernstein's theoretical framework. The conceptual pair referred to involves theregulative and theinstructional discourse (Bernstein 1990, 2000). The regulative discourse concerns moral values, behaviour, orderliness, character, identity and attitude. It has to do with what pupils exhibit in, or what attitudes they are encouraged to bring into, the classroom. The instructional discourse,instead, denotes what is usually referred to as content knowledge. It includes facts, specialized texts or theories based in a subject discipline.  In line with Bernstein (1990, 2000) I argue that the regulative discourse (RD) and the instructional discourse (RD) should not be viewed as separate, but intertwined. Put it differently the instructional discourse should always be viewed as embedded in the regulative.  Thus, the relationship between the instructional and regulative discourse is of outermost importance. Bernstein presents this circumstance in the following visual way:

Figure 1:

INSTRUCTIONAL DISCOURSE          ID

______________________________________    ______

REGULATIVE DISCOURSE    RD

Bernstein (2000, p. 32)

The conceptual pair in question benefits, I argue, from being linked to yet another theoretical phenomenon, i. e. certain pedagogic discourses, such as they have been identified by Bernstein (1990, 2000). I am here referring to approaches known as for example progressive, neo-liberalistic or conservative discourse. Such a connection has not been done in a systematic way in pervious research.

As is clear from the theoretical frame chosen, my exposition is oriented to sociology of education. In consequence, the elaboration to be presented makes it possible to draw conclusions with regard to social reproduction.

Bernstein, Basil. (1990). Class, codes and control. Vol. 4, The structuring of pedagogic discourse. London: Routledge. Bernstein, Basil. (2000). Pedagogy, symbolic control and identity: theory, research, critique. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers. Norlund, Anita, Dimenäs, Jörgen, Kolback, Kerstin & Wede, Christer (2012). Lärares ledarskap i perspektivet av undervisning och bedömning. I Berg, Gunnar, Sundh, Frank & Wede, Christer (red.). Lärares ledarskap. Lund: Studentlitteratur.