ABSTRACT
A spectre is haunting education – the spectre of segmentalism, when knowledge is so strongly tied to its context that it is only meaningful within that context.1 In intellectual fields, segmentalism occurs when a new approach or theory is produced that fails to integrate and subsume existing knowledge. The new approach typically announces the rebirth of the field but then goes on to tell the same fundamental story as previous approaches. In curriculum and pedagogy, segmentalism occurs when pupils learn a series of discrete ideas or skills as they move through a curriculum, rather than progressively building on what they previously learned. This segmented learning makes it difficult for students to apply their understanding to new contexts, such as later studies, everyday life or future work. Knowledge or understanding is thus locked within its contexts of production or learning. The problem of segmentalism is more than an exclusively educational issue. It is central to contemporary social and economic changes. In his later work, Bernstein (2001) argued that we are entering a “Totally Pedagogized Society” where workers are expected to change skills at a moment’s notice, constantly retraining and learning throughout their lives. Among policymakers, the rhetoric of “lifelong learning” proclaims the need to continually build our knowledge, adding new skills and giving new meaning to our existing abilities, to meet the ever-changing demands of the contemporary economy (Field 2006). We are thus said to need knowledge we can build on, whatever the changing contexts we find ourselves in. That education is evolving to meet these needs finds prima facie support in changes to the traditional organization of educational practices. We are said to be moving towards a “post-” or “trans-disciplinary” landscape in which reflexive, heterogeneous and applied knowledge has come to the fore (e.g. Gibbons et al. 1994). The spirit of the age is fluidity, the belief that boundaries are dissolving, within education and between education and everyday life. From this perspective it appears segmentalism is being overcome. In this chapter I develop the theoretical framework of Basil Bernstein to suggest this rhetoric does not always match reality. First, I briefly outline Bernstein’s later work on “discourses” and “knowledge structures”, and introduce concepts that develop this approach. Second, I use these concepts
to analyse two contrasting examples of educational practices that are proclaimed by proponents as overcoming segmentalism, one from professional education at university, the other from the humanities in the school curriculum. Lastly, I discuss the social consequences of segmented learning and how they relate to contemporary economic changes.
