‘Powerful knowledge’ curriculum theories and the case of physics

Abstract

A stream of debate (including a previous special issue of this journal (25(1) 2014)) has made claims not just for ‘bringing knowledge back in’ as the framing underpinning of the school curriculum, but that subjects associated with disciplinary and disciplined knowledge forms have a particular power and that these characteristics are important to preserve in curriculum frameworks. This paper draws on a major Australian research project studying school and university physics in the context of these arguments to revisit the issue of the ‘discipline’ of physics and the curriculum logics for physics. Given that disciplines are social in origin and changing and expanding over time, can school curriculum be logically derived from the discipline to which they relate? Are questions about student engagement only questions about pedagogy and not curriculum? Does a focus on disciplinary knowledge mean that the role of school in forming identities and values is avoidable as a significant feature of what the curriculum does? The findings from the project are used both to illustrate and test these questions, and to challenge some over‐simple assumptions about the verticality of this form of knowledge for education purposes.

The challenge and opportunities of quantum literacy for future education and transdisciplinary problem-solving

“…As stated at the outset, we relate this to the UN SDG Quality Education in arguing the case for wider access to such powerful knowledge, which can be defined as (1) access to more reliable facts or truths; (2) access to higher level conceptual perspectives of the specialist field; (3) being able to see the specialist, structured form of a knowledge that differs from everyday experience; and (4) working with objective rather than learner-centred or social-interests-centred orientations to curriculum. (Yates and Millar 2016) If we are concerned to widen access to a body of systematic knowledge built over time, then we must address the issue of disciplinary specialisation. An educational critique concerns elitism, in that, by definition, specialised knowledge will not be distributed equally and those who tend to have access to it are the already powerful (White 2012).…”

A Rule-based Approach toward Automating the Assessments of Academic Curriculum Mapping

“…This research explores and disseminates ways in which educational programs and organizations could use evaluation information effectively to inform and enhance academic education and interact indirectly with decision-makers. Yates and Millar [21] discover the physics curriculum, in particular within Australian universities and schools. Physics was specifically chosen as it is a science that must adapt to change and update as time goes by.…”

Crossing boundaries: Exploring the theory, practice and possibility of a ‘Future 3’ curriculum

“…In this article we are examining what these social conditions might be. Powerful knowledge will look different in different disciplines and subjects (Firth, ; Lambert, ; Ormond, ; Maude, ; Yates & Millar, ; McPhail, 2017b), but essentially it is knowledge that is structured in a certain way—epistemically. Because of this structure—which is based on interrelationships between concepts—students can develop new ways of thinking about the world with which they are already familiar in their everyday lives (Rata, ).…”