ABSTRACT
Michael Young’s (2014) notion of powerful knowledge is grounded in an assumption that there are two types of knowledge, one of which is evidence-based, abstract, theoretical, out with the direct experience of the teacher and learner, and discipline-based; and the other which is concrete, practical, and is generally focused on how to do something or other. Those human beings who are denied access to this first type of knowledge are in some sense disadvantaged and consequently are likely to have restricted life chances. If this argument is to be sustained, then it is necessary to show that acquiring this knowledge is better in some specified way than not acquiring it, i.e., having this powerful knowledge conveys advantages to the holder. But before I do this, it is important to itemise in detail the differences and similarities between these two types of knowledge. This chapter is an attempt at this difficult but essential task.
