X hits on this document

296 views

0 shares

0 downloads

0 comments

28 / 102

Figure 2.1: Three Message Systems of Bernstein’s Theoretical Concepts

Curriculum

Pedagogy

Evaluation

*A sense of what each of the three message systems mean. and how it intertwine and integrate (interdependent).

That which has to be

A way or means

of transmitting

a

legitimate

A way of measuring the

transmitted to the acquirer as legitimate message.

The message to be transmitted.

message/text.

How this message is gets transmitted? Structure/ form of the message system (Bernstein, 1982).

level/ depth acquisition of legitimate message.

of the

Collection

  • Contents clearly bounded. Mathematics concepts only for mathematics

  • No overlapping/ integration (subjects do not speak to each other).

  • Contents isolated/ insulated/ delineated.

  • Distinct content and status of subject (school).

  • Strongly classified.

Integrated

  • Contents overlap/ speak to each other. Shared concepts between EMS and

Mathematics

  • Open relation to one another (integration).

  • Weakening classification.

Classification

  • The degree of boundary maintenance between learning areas. To what degree does La‟s share concepts.

  • Level at which subjects relate to each other (integration).

  • Classification on broader sense: “Relation between contents, between agents, between discourses, or between practices.” (Bernstein, 1996)

  • Graven (2002): “it does not simply refer to what is classified but also to the relations between these areas of learning.”

    • (p.

      28)

  • Explains the structure of the curriculum.

Prevein Marnewicke: Forms and meanings of Integration. A case study towards completion

of a Master of Education degree.

Page 17

Document info
Document views296
Page views296
Page last viewedSun Dec 11 08:49:05 UTC 2016
Pages102
Paragraphs1627
Words29076

Comments