RE: [xmca] voice in relation to normative and relational knowledge

[Vera John-Steiner <vygotsky@unm.edu>]

Hi David et al,

 

I think the problem was less Bernstein, but the way his distinction  was used for “remedial” programs (I don’t have the Hess and Shipman reference available at the moment.)Some of the misuse provoked Bernstein to refine his system this his latter publications.

 

Vera

 

From: xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of kellogg
Sent: Friday, March 15, 2013 3:39 PM
To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
Subject: RE: [xmca] voice in relation to normative and relational knowledge

 


Huw:

 

Of course, "Welsh" can be perfectly prototypical (I bet you can sing!) and there is probably a lot more scientific literature on the origins of Britishness. So I assume you are really talking about syntagmatic, everyday, weakly framed and weakly classified understandings versus paradigmatic, strongly classified and framed ones, the distinction at the root of Basil Bernstein's idea of "pedagogical device" and at the bottom of his very controversial distinction between a restricted code and an elaborated one.

 

Bernstein put forward this distinction to explain why working class kids were not doing well in schools in post-war Britain, and he was criticized a lot (and often unfairly, e.g. by William Labov) for blaming the victim and creating a deficit model of working class culture. A lot of the same criticisms that are made of Vygotsky's ideas about primitivism.

 

But Bernstein's model has been thoroughly operationalized for classroom data by the systemic functional linguists (Halliday, Hasan, Painter, Cloran, and others). It seems to me tht his distinction is one of the facts that people dislike but which is empirically true (although I think it doesn't really explain what Bernstein set out to explain because by the time kids are in middle school they talk like each other and not like their parents).

 

There are a lot of good studies in that direction:

 

Bernstein, B. (1996, 2000) Pedagogy, Symbolic Control and Identity. Lanham, MD: Rowan and Littlefield

Christie F. and J.R. Martin (eds) (2007) Languages, Knowledge and Pedagogy. London: Continuum.

Christie, F. (ed) (1999). Pedagogy and the Shaping of Consciousness. London: Continuum.

 

And don't forget:

 

Lemke, J. (1990) Talking Science. Norwood, NJ: Ablex

Halliday, M.A.K. and Martin, J.R. (1993) Writing Science. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press.

 

 

David Kellogg

Hankuk University of Foreign Studies

 

 

--------- 원본 메일 ---------

보낸사람: Huw Lloyd <huw.softdesigns@gmail.com>
받는사람 : "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" <xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
날짜: 2013년 3월 15일 금요일, 22시 17분 33초 +0900
제목: [xmca] voice in relation to normative and relational knowledge

Can anyone point me to studies that have explored the differences between
recollections/descriptions of circumstances on the basis of normative (i.e.
prototypical) and relational (i.e. scientific conceptual) knowledge, please?

For instance, with respect to Identity, I can normatively describe myself
as British. But if I feel the need for more precision, then I can relate
to my Welsh phylogeny etc.

Examples pertinent to the classroom would be especially good.

Thanks,
Huw
__________________________________________
_____
xmca mailing list
xmca@weber.ucsd.edu <http://mail2.daum.net/hanmail/mail/MailComposeFrame.daum?TO=xmca@weber.ucsd.edu> 
http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca





 <mailto:kellogg59@hanmail.net>   <http://wwl1601.hanmail.net:4280/@from=kellogg59&rcpt=xmca%40weber%2Eucsd%2Eedu&msgid=%3C20130316063915%2EHM%2Eb0000000008eGj4%40kellogg59%2Ewwl1601%2Ehanmail%2Enet%3E> 

__________________________________________
_____
xmca mailing list
xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca