Search

This paper arose out of the empirical requirements to describe and position agents and agencies of symbolic control concerned with the regulation of social relationships, consciousness, disposition and desire. These requirements led to a differentiation of agents in terms of their function and discourse and their segmentation through their specialized fields of activity and their stratification according to hierarchical position in a given field. This model generated a sensitive differentiation and segmentation which provides the social basis for expected differences in interests, motivations and identifications of functionally similar agents operating in different fields of activity. The model raises general issues of social class allocation and the relation between theory and methods. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Sociologist Basil Bernstein's theory of symbolic control and cultural production, reproduction and change, developed since the late 1950's until present day, is famous for its complex, formal and generative character and has gained international acknowledgement. It has provided inspiration for theoretical work in a variety of disciplines and the conceptual framework for robust and sensitive sociological empirical research on cultural and particularly, pedagogic practices and their effects, in many parts of the world. This research in turn was used in the continuous development and refinement of the theory. For a variety of reasons, the theory was not always welcome, or well treated, in the Anglo-Saxon intellectual milieu. It has caused strong controversy and has sometimes become the object of crude oversimplification and miscomprehension, as well as of political and ideological misuse. The theory is explicitly grounded on selected and inventively remolded elements of modern social theory and critically incorporates features of more recent currents of thought.

The analysis in this paper has its origins in a critical account of the sociology of education (Bernstein, 1975) where the various approaches to the study of sociology were taken as the distinguishing feature of the discourse. This matter was further developed (Bernstein, 1996), with the distinction between vertical and horizontal discourses and their various modalities introduced in the context of differentiating this mode of analysis from more 'Bourdieuan' perspectives. This present paper is concerned with filling out and extending the sketches adumbrated in earlier work in a more accessible form. The model proposed generates a language which relates the internal structure of specialised knowledges, the positional nature of their fields or arenas of practice, identity constructions and their change, and the forms of acquisition for successful performances. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Criticizes A.D. Edwards' construct of an idiosyncratic concept of classroom code and that classroom practice fails to demonstrate the use of such code. Set of concepts whereby code modalities may be identified; Close relation between the theory and its empirical base.

This paper is a response to Harker & May 1987 which rejects as inaccurate and misleading their 'exposition' of the theory, the analysis of the place of rules in the theory, the analysis of what is taken to be its structuralist base, and shows how forms of the practical sense may be realised in, and described by, the theory. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]