Abstract
This paper examines the concept of ‘powerful knowledge’ and provides new perspectives on an important emergent theory for education. We claim that the key to attaining powerful knowledge is ‘epistemic access’ to the discipline, which is access of the generative principles of knowledge creation. We draw on 15 years teaching and researching a university science programme in which undergraduate ecology students are trained as researchers during the 3 years they attend university. Hence, there is close alignment between teaching students to do research and powerful knowledge. In addition, it has been suggested that the ‘power’ in powerful knowledge is realised in what is done with that knowledge, that its purpose is social since it allows the holder to make a better contribution to society. We argue that in addition to such an aspirational ‘outcome’, it can be part of the process of education and early acquisition of powerful knowledge can influence all subsequent formal and informal learning experiences as the student progresses though university. A model for powerful knowledge is presented in which there is the possibility of powerful action after graduation, but this remains in the theoretical realm while there is very little empirical evidence supporting such a hypothesis for ecology students. Powerful action also questions the limits of responsibility for a teacher.
![](http://media.springernature.com/m312/springer-static/image/art%3A10.1007%2Fs10734-017-0228-8/MediaObjects/10734_2017_228_Fig1_HTML.gif)
![](http://media.springernature.com/m312/springer-static/image/art%3A10.1007%2Fs10734-017-0228-8/MediaObjects/10734_2017_228_Fig2_HTML.gif)
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Barnett, R. (1997). Higher education: a critical business. Buckingham: Society for Research into Higher Education and Open University Press.
Beck, J. (2013). Powerful knowledge, esoteric knowledge, curriculum knowledge. Cambridge Journal of Education, 43(2), 177–193.
Bernstein, B. (1996). Pedagogy, symbolic control and identity: theory, research, critique (Vol. 4). London: Taylor & Francis.
Custers, E. J. (2010). Long-term retention of basic science knowledge: a review study. Advances in Health Sciences Education, 15(1), 109–128.
Education Act (1989). Education Act 1989, New Zealand Legislation. Available from http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1989/0080/latest/DLM183668.html. Accessed 27 Apr 2017.
Freire, P. (2000 [1970]). Pedagogy of the oppressed (M. Bergman Ramos, Trans.). New York: Continuum.
Gibbons, M., Limoges, C., Nowotny, H., Schwartzman, S., Scott, P., & Trow, M. (1994). The new production of knowledge: the dynamics of science and research in contemporary societies. London: Sage.
Harland, T. (2016). Teaching to enhance research. Higher Education Research & Development, 35(3), 461–472.
Harland, T. (2017). The contemporary research university and the contest for deliberative space. In B. K. Daniel (Ed.), Big data and learning analytics in higher education: current theory and practice (pp. 73–86). Basel: Springer.
Harland, T., & Pickering, N. (2011). Values in higher education teaching. Abingdon: Routledge.
Harland, T., Tidswell, T., Everett, D., Hale, L., & Pickering, N. (2010). Neoliberalism and the academic as critic and conscience of society. Teaching in Higher Education, 15(1), 85–96.
Harland, T., Wald, N., and Randhawa, H. (2016). Student peer review: enhancing formative feedback with a rebuttal. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 42(5), 801–811.
Jenkins, A., Healey, M., & Zetter, R. (2007). Linking teaching and research in disciplines and departments. York: Higher Education Academy.
Joseph, J. (2002). Hegemony: a realist analysis. London: Routledge.
Kincheloe, J. L. (2008). Critical pedagogy primer (Vol. 1, 2nd ed.). New York: Peter Lang.
Morrow, W. (2009). Bounds of democracy: epistemological access in higher education. Cape Town: HSRC Press.
Wald, N., & Harland, T. (2017). A framework for authenticity in designing a research-based curriculum. Teaching in Higher Education, 22(7), 751–765.
Wheelahan, L. (2007). How competency based training locks the working class out of powerful knowledge: a modified Bernsteinian analysis. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 28(5), 637–651.
Wheelahan, L. (2010). Why knowledge matters in curriculum: a social realist argument. Abington: Routledge.
Wheelahan, L. (2014). Babies and bathwater: revaluing the role of the academy in knowledge. In P. Gibbs & R. Barnett (Eds.), Thinking bout higher education (pp. 125–137). Cham: Springer International.
Wheelahan, L. (2015). Not just skills: what a focus on knowledge means for vocational education. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 47(6), 750–762.
Winch, C. (2013). Curriculum design and epistemic ascent. Journal of Philosophy of Education, 47(1), 128–146.
Young, M. (2008). Bringing knowledge back in: from social constructivism to social realism in the sociology of education. London: Routledge.
Young, M. (2009). What are schools for? In H. Daniels, H. Lauder, & J. Porter (Eds.), Knowledge,values and educational policy: a critical perspective (pp. 10–18). Abington: Routledge.
Young, M. (2013). Overcoming the crisis in curriculum theory: a knowledge-based approach. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 45(2), 101–118.
Young, M., & Muller, J. (2013). On the powers of powerful knowledge. Review of Education, 1(3), 229–250.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Harland, T., Wald, N. Curriculum, teaching and powerful knowledge. High Educ 76, 615–628 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-017-0228-8
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-017-0228-8