Not there yet: knowledge building in educational development ten years on

ABSTRACT

This paper responds to a question posed by [Shay, Suellen. 2012. “Educational Development as a Field: Are We There Yet?” Higher Education Research and Development 31 (3): 311–323. doii:10.1080/07294360.2011.631520] about the status of knowledge building in the field of Educational Development. In her paper, Shay critiques knowledge produced in the field arguing that it is ‘codified practice’ [Gamble, Jeanne. 2001. “Modelling the Invisible: The Pedagogy of Craft Apprenticeship.” Studies in Continuing Education 23 (2): 185–200. doii:10.1080/01580370120101957; Gamble, Jeanne. 2004. “Retrieving the General from the Particular: The Structure of Craft Knowledge.” In Reading Bernstein, Researching Bernstein, edited by J. Muller, B. Davies, and A. Morais, 189–203. Abingdon: Routledge; Gamble, Jeanne. 2006. “Theory and Practice in the Vocational Curriculum.” In Knowledge, Curriculum and Qualifications in South African Further Education, edited by M. Young and J. Gamble, 87–103. Pretoria: HSRC Press] rather than applied theory which could succeed in reconceptualising problems rather than simply trying to address them. This paper draws on a review of research produced in the field in recent years in South Africa to argue that, although some work does result in the reconceptualision of problems the higher education, it is limited in that (i) it has been produced by a relatively small group of practitioners located at a few universities and (ii) draws on theory developed in the Global North. The paper then proceeds to offer some tentative suggestions for the way future work aimed at knowledge building could proceed.

KEYWORDS:

• Knowledge building
• decolonisation of the curriculum
• educational development
• literacy/oracy
• enlightenment thinker

Acknowledgement

The development of the literature review on which this paper draws was supported by the South African Research Chair on Teaching and Learning at the University of Johannesburg.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).