Institutional culture, social interaction and learning

Abstract

This paper is concerned with the the development of a theoretical and methodological approach to the study of the cultures of institutions and the patterns of social interaction within them as they exert a formative effect on the 'what' and 'how' of learning. It does this through the development of an approach in which a dialectical relation between theoretical and empirical work draws on the strengths of the legacies of sociological and psychological sources to provide a theoretical model which is capable of descriptions at levels of delicacy which may be tailored to the needs of specific research questions. The paper provides an introduction to a model of description that may be used to study the way in which societal needs and priorities and/or curriculum formations are recontextualised within institutions such as schools. Institutional structures are analysed as historical products which themselves are subject to dynamic transformation and change as people act within and on them.

Multilingualism as legitimate shared repertoires in school communities of practice: students’ and teachers’ discursive constructions of languages in two schools in England

“…As Leung (2001: 38) explains, 'It is taken as axiomatic that official policy discourse reflects an ideological selection of ideas and at the same time it legitimises the practices associated with the selected ideas.' However, sociological determinism has been strongly criticised by researchers (Daniels, 2012). Indeed the voices on the ground need to be heard and acted upon.…”

‘Trying to get our message across’: successes and challenges in an evidence-based professional development programme for sport coaches

“…Understanding the different pathways through which knowledge is transmitted is important because organisational structures are cultural products that serve to mediate the construction and delivery of CPD curricula (Daniels, 2012).…”

“…That said, focusing on the socially constructed communication of professional knowledge allows for increased explanatory power when considering 'what works' and 'in what contexts' (Day & Sachs, 2004). Evaluating the dynamic relationships between the macro and microstructures of professional development interventions offers an opportunity to go beyond the usual boundaries of evaluations, and to re-imagine CPD aspirations and processes (Daniels, 2012). It is in this space that this paper has attempted to contribute fresh understandings.…”

“…In addition, the language of Bernstein (2000) offers researchers the opportunity to describe and position the discursive practices of an organisation by relating macro-structures to micro-interactions in terms of power and control (Singh, 2002). Mindful of Daniels (2012) observation that, 'the boundaries which shape researchers' horizons often serve to severely constrain the research imagination' (p. 2), Bernstein's work broadens the evaluative lens through which to examine learning impact, and contributes to understandings about the nature of effective CPD from a new perspective.…”

Exploring a Third Space for Sustainable Educational Development—HIV/AIDS Prevention, Zambia

“…Bernstein argues that the main contradictions are to be found in what guides behavior and determines people's way of living, referred to as symbolic control. Bernstein's [10] and Daniel's (2012) [23] theories give an added dimension to CHAT, highlighting the symbolic control of culture as well as academic and scientific power, all of which are important dimensions as integrated parts of the processes underlying any human interaction. They introduce symbolic power as a regulating and controlling force (i.e., the mediating artifacts).…”