This paper develops a framework for conceptualising social justice in education, drawing particularly on Martha Nussbaum's (2000) capabilities approach. The practical case for consideration is that of widening participation and pedagogical implications in higher (university) education in England. While the paper supports the value and usefulness of Nussbaum's list of ten capabilities for developing a more radical and challenging language and practice for higher education pedagogies, it also argues that her approach is limited. Other ways of conceptualising social justice are (...) also required in order to develop adjudicating theories which enable us to judge which practices take us closer to social justice. An argument is made for ‘bivalent’ theorising which integrates individual and institutional development and agents and social structures. (shrink)

This paper develops a framework for conceptualising social justice in education, drawing particularly on Martha Nussbaum's (2000) capabilities approach. The practical case for consideration is that of widening participation and pedagogical implications in higher (university) education in England. While the paper supports the value and usefulness of Nussbaum's list of ten capabilities for developing a more radical and challenging language and practice for higher education pedagogies, it also argues that her approach is limited. Other ways of conceptualising social justice are (...) also required in order to develop adjudicating theories which enable us to judge which practices take us closer to social justice. An argument is made for 'bivalent' theorising which integrates individual and institutional development and agents and social structures. (shrink)

The current ‘widening participation’ and ‘key skills’ agendas in higher education present the challenge of developing curriculum models that can accommodate a more heterogeneous student body. Drawing primarily on the South African experience, and similar findings from Australia, this article examines various forms of provision in terms of intended target group, assumptions, goals and curriculum context. A distinction is made between separate, semi-integratedand integratedapproaches and associated models. On the grounds of both educationally relevant theory and actual practice, it is argued (...) that ‘separate’ provision of the ‘academic support’ type has a limited impact, and that a mix of semi-integrated and integrated models of curriculum provision offers better prospects for helping a wide spectrum of students to succeed at university. Some implications for teaching and curriculum development are illustrated with reference to the Arts and Humanities. (shrink)