- Title
- Demystifying subjects, troubling status: a pedagogical analysis of high school mathematics and drama in the Australian schooling context
- Creator
- Harper, Matthew Daniel
- Relation
- University of Newcastle Research Higher Degree Thesis
- Resource Type
- thesis
- Date
- 2024
- Description
- Research Doctorate - Doctor of Philosophy (PhD)
- Description
- In many Western countries, arts subjects exist in the margins of schooling systems. By contrast, high status subjects – so-called ‘academics’ – are central, and widely perceived to be the most valuable form of knowledge. Deep-seated assumptions underpinning this hierarchy are particularly evident in the Australian school curriculum, government policy, and public media discourses, which continue to set apart the usual collection of ‘core’ subjects from lesser-valued ‘peripheral’ subjects. Such assumptions, policies, and discourses shape people’s perceptions of subjects as ‘in opposition’ rather than mutually beneficial pursuits as part of a well-rounded education – and life. While Australian schooling systems aspire to a ‘world-class’ education, these systems reinforce a subject hierarchy that denies students proper access to a quality arts education. Such patterns are worrying given little evidence demonstrating how the presiding subject-based model meets the needs of a globalised world. This thesis contributes to debate about the regulation of knowledge and educational experience by investigating two high school subjects – mathematics and drama – which have rarely, if ever, been compared. The study uniquely draws on multiple data sources from one selective performing arts government school located in New South Wales (NSW), Australia, to generate fresh insights about mathematics and drama in a context where the two subjects have more equal status than is common in most Australian schools. The mixed-methods analysis uses a comprehensive methodology which combines onto-epistemic perspectives of critical realism with Basil Bernstein’s theory of the structuring of pedagogic discourse. This approach involved the alignment of Bernsteinian theory with a pedagogical framework for observing and analysing teaching and assessment practice – the NSW Quality Teaching (QT) Model – to enable deep analysis of the functioning of the two subjects. Mobilising this robust conceptual framework, the study examined the functioning of mathematics and drama from the varying perspectives of classroom observation, specialist teachers’ views (n = 2 teachers), and students’ perceptions (n = 19 students). Quantitative data on the quality of teachers’ classroom practice were generated by coding observations of their lessons across entire units of work (n = 51), as well as coding assessment tasks attached to these units (n = 4). Qualitative data took the form of lesson narratives, pre- and post-unit interviews with the teachers, and student focus groups, which included visual elicitation. These were analysed in the context of the four units of work being taught during the study to gain a deeper understanding of the subjects in relation to prevalent assumptions about their relative value. Overall, these data highlight and challenge dominant assumptions about mathematics and drama and expose complex accounts of teaching and learning experiences in both subjects. My analysis using the QT Model demonstrated that the quality of teaching was similar in mathematics and drama, while assessment task quality was higher in drama. These results highlight how different forms of quality teaching and assessment are shaped by subjects, including longstanding beliefs about knowledge and pedagogical activity. Meanwhile, the student data illuminated differences between the ‘observed’ and ‘experienced’ curriculum, prompting fresh conceptual and methodological considerations about what constitutes quality in education. Collectively, these insights suggest that despite deep-seated differences between mathematics and drama, the two subjects are more similar than is commonly recognised. I argue that while school subjects are complicated by the complex intersections among curriculum, pedagogy, and assessment, demystifying subjects from multiple perspectives within schools can expose how they open ways for thinking about, and being in, the world, now not just as preparation for an imagined future. From this viewpoint, I contend that valuing both mathematics and drama is likely to deliver greater benefits for students and society than continuing to position mathematics as superior. This argument cautions against the devaluing of arts subjects and signals a need to better understand how the ranking of subjects advances or hinders individual and collective capabilities, especially in dealing with large-scale societal issues.
- Subject
- school subjects; mathematics education; drama education; curriculum; pedagogy; assessment; classroom practice; student experience
- Identifier
- http://hdl.handle.net/1959.13/1503980
- Identifier
- uon:55427
- Rights
- Copyright 2024 Matthew Daniel Harper
- Language
- eng
- Full Text
- Hits: 1522
- Visitors: 1439
- Downloads: 119
| Thumbnail | File | Description | Size | Format | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| View Details Download | ATTACHMENT01 | Thesis | 3 MB | Adobe Acrobat PDF | View Details Download | ||
| View Details Download | ATTACHMENT02 | Abstract | 298 KB | Adobe Acrobat PDF | View Details Download |