**3. The theory of practice architectures**

Turning to this characterisation of practice illuminates the notion that practices make sense or are comprehensible to practitioners in the practice (like teachers and students in lessons) because of the idea that "a *Zusammenhang* of lives is not interrelated individuals *simpliciter*, but individuals interrelated within and through practices" ([1], p. 14). Practices, consequently, are a dimension of human coexistence distinct - though not separate - from individuals and their actions, interactions and interrelationships. This means individuals in practices make sense of practices through participation; they understand, or come to understand, what is being said, what is being done and how to relate to the others present at the time by being present or participating. Participation in the moment and over time contribute to the emergence and development of particular characteristics of practices - like characteristic or distinctive scientific language and educational discourses spoken in their discussion, characteristic or distinctive school-type listening, reading, writing or science activities, or characteristic or distinctive ways for teachers and students to relate to one another in the lesson like the teacher organising and controlling the turns of talk in the class discussions, or students waiting to be nominated to speak. According to this view of practice, pedagogical practices are formed socially (within the company of others), dialogically (through talk and interaction), ontologically (in particular places) and temporally (in and through time) through a complex of actions constituted by characteristic sayings, doings and relatings that 'hang together' in a distinctive

124 New Pedagogical Challenges in the 21st Century - Contributions of Research in Education

Returning to Extract 1, it is evident that in this Year 3 Science lesson, participants (the students

**1.** characteristic or particular *sayings* formed discursively in language known to and spoken by those present (like using specific scientific terms and language such as terra, aqua, ter-

**2.** characteristic or particular *doings* formed through doing activities understood and undertaken by those present (like reading a book, writing, engaging in a class discussion; see for

**3.** characteristic or particular ways of *relatings* developed through the ways these students and their teacher related to one another in their different roles and understood relationships they demonstrate there (like peers in a cohort, or a teacher with power over students).

These characteristic sayings, doings and relatings are tightly entangled and interconnected in ways that formed for them this distinctive project, this particular 'lesson'. These three dimensions of the practice of pedagogy unfold discursively through language in real flows of time as characteristically interdependent and overlapping. However, this is far too simple a view of practices since it overlooks the particularity of the conditions and circumstances that exist in the actual site itself. For example, the particular students in this particular Year 3 classroom knew about blue tongue lizards because their local experience of them enabled them to bring this knowledge into this practice (evidenced in lines 8–10), or that the use of technical terminology is valued and praiseworthy (see line 6). Therefore, it can be said that pedagogical practices *as they happen* [14] in lessons cannot be understood without a theory of practice that explains (especially for teachers as they set about to develop their pedagogical practices) how

rarium, earth, moisture, blue tongued lizard; see for e.g. lines 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8 & 9),

project like learning about terrariums in a science lesson.

and their teacher) enact:

e.g. lines 1–10), and

The theory of practice architectures [3] is among a broad group of practice theories that draw attention to social life, and in particular the different and distinctive ways people, objects, discourses, relationships, activities and circumstances are entangled *in practices* in sites. It is a theory interested in the sociality, situatedness and happeningness of practices, thus conceptualises all practices as being formed socially among and between practitioners as they encounter one another. Fundamental to the theory of practice architectures is the importance given to the arrangements that enable and constrain the conduct of practices in any given site at. It suggests that practices – like teaching and learning practices - always involve people (or practitioners) interacting with one another in and through language, people doing particular things together, and people relating to one another and the world in particular ways. The theory of practice architectures thus explains how human beings (e.g., students, teachers and others) orient to, and so encounter, one another as interlocutors in practices through:


This complex of actions – or interconnected sayings, doings and relatings – exist as bundles 'hanging together' in projects like in a lesson teaching students about terrariums. Furthermore, as Kemmis and colleagues ([3], p. 2) suggest, understanding the theory of practice architectures,

*depends upon orienting ourselves and one another to a shared culture through shared language and symbols,*

*orienting ourselves and one another to the same salient features of the* material space–time *we inhabit,*

*and orienting ourselves and one another* socially *and* politically *amid arrangements that contain and control conflict, secure social solidarities, and give us our agency, selfhood and identities as members of families, communities and organisations.*

*It is an achievement secured by human social* practices *– the practices by which we secure and stabilise the world of today as continuous with the world of yesterday, and as the precursor of the world of tomorrow.*

The theory explains how particular arrangements (present in the dimensions of the cultural-discursive, material-economic and social-political) found in or brought to a site influence how practices actually happen in real time in real sites; for instance, government endorsed curriculums are practice architectures for teaching since these may influence what language might be used in a lesson or what activities might be done or even how the teacher relates to the students in the course of a lesson. Pedagogical practices as social phenomena encompass interconnectivities between:


The conduct of practices is never neutral but always undergirded by prior experiences of all practitioners involved as well as pre-existing ideas, ideologies, traditions of the field, discipline knowledge, standards, curriculums and policy agendas and so on. This is described as the prefigurement of practices. However, enacting practices (in the moment) is not only influenced by what conditions pre-exist at the site but by what is brought into the site (like particular resources, ideas, policies, language) and by who is present at the time (like students, others teachers, colleagues, the principal) and the relationships between them. Each of these dimensions of practice influence or prefigure the happenings, but do not necessarily determine what

The Practice Architectures of Pedagogy: Conceptualising the Convergences between Sociality…

http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.72920

127

*The formation of learners' capacities to 'go on' in and to be the bearers of practices can best be understood as occurring in a lived dialectical relationship between participants' sayings, doings and relatings and the way they hang together in the project of a practice, on the one hand, and, on the other, their lived encounters and engagements with the practice architectures (cultural-discursive, material-economic and social-political arrangements) that are laid down and developed in practice traditions. On this* 

*Myles Horton and Paulo Freire gave their 1990 book about community education the felicitous title*  We Make the Road by Walking*. For us, the title captures the way practices make paths, on the one hand, and, on the other, how the practice of walking paths, whether paths already laid down or trails we blaze for ourselves, also makes us. We see practices as passages through time and space that people enter and that people make: they enable and constrain our movement in time and in semantic, physical and social space.*

actually happens at the time. According to Kemmis and colleagues ([3], p. 90),

**Figure 1.** The theory of practice architectures ([3], p. 38).

*view, practices are paths for those who walk them, ways of being for those who inhabit them.*

In practice, these arrangements are present in the intersubjective spaces which 'lie between' people in temporally located spaces in time and place. In these intersubjective spaces teachers and students in classrooms for example display through their talk and their actions levels of comprehensibility of one another and what is happening; that is, in semantic space, in physical space time and in social space. Practices, thus, are interactionally secured. And so, practitioners of practices comprehend one another in shared language, coordinate their activities with one another in talk and interaction, and connect with one another in social relationships.

From this, pedagogical practices (the sayings, doings and relatings encountered in lessons) and the practice architectures that shape them, do not simply exist as contained, arbitrary or isolated entities. They are enabled and constrained by other practices and practice architectures, but also are enabling and constraining of other practices and practice architectures. For example, particular teaching practices create conditions for particular student learning practices – and vice versa. So, practices themselves create conditions for the conduct of other practices and other practice architectures. The complexity of practices and interconnectedness between practices and practice architectures has been represented diagrammatically by Kemmis et al. [3], and is presented in **Figure 1**.

The Practice Architectures of Pedagogy: Conceptualising the Convergences between Sociality… http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.72920 127

**Figure 1.** The theory of practice architectures ([3], p. 38).

This complex of actions – or interconnected sayings, doings and relatings – exist as bundles 'hanging together' in projects like in a lesson teaching students about terrariums. Furthermore, as Kemmis and colleagues ([3], p. 2) suggest, understanding the theory of practice architectures, *depends upon orienting ourselves and one another to a shared culture through shared language and* 

*orienting ourselves and one another to the same salient features of the* material space–time *we inhabit, and orienting ourselves and one another* socially *and* politically *amid arrangements that contain and control conflict, secure social solidarities, and give us our agency, selfhood and identities as members of* 

*It is an achievement secured by human social* practices *– the practices by which we secure and stabilise the world of today as continuous with the world of yesterday, and as the precursor of the world of tomorrow.* The theory explains how particular arrangements (present in the dimensions of the cultural-discursive, material-economic and social-political) found in or brought to a site influence how practices actually happen in real time in real sites; for instance, government endorsed curriculums are practice architectures for teaching since these may influence what language might be used in a lesson or what activities might be done or even how the teacher relates to the students in the course of a lesson. Pedagogical practices as social phenomena encompass interconnectivities between:

• *cultural-discursive* dimensions secured interactionally in language and understanding (or

• *material-economic* dimensions secured interactionally in the doing of the activities in physical space–time (or what is done, how it is set up in the space, what resources are required

• *social-political* dimensions secured interactionally through relationships (or ways of relating, who relates to whom and the displays of power, agency and solidarity at any given moment

In practice, these arrangements are present in the intersubjective spaces which 'lie between' people in temporally located spaces in time and place. In these intersubjective spaces teachers and students in classrooms for example display through their talk and their actions levels of comprehensibility of one another and what is happening; that is, in semantic space, in physical space time and in social space. Practices, thus, are interactionally secured. And so, practitioners of practices comprehend one another in shared language, coordinate their activities with one another in talk and interaction, and connect with one another in social relationships. From this, pedagogical practices (the sayings, doings and relatings encountered in lessons) and the practice architectures that shape them, do not simply exist as contained, arbitrary or isolated entities. They are enabled and constrained by other practices and practice architectures, but also are enabling and constraining of other practices and practice architectures. For example, particular teaching practices create conditions for particular student learning practices – and vice versa. So, practices themselves create conditions for the conduct of other practices and other practice architectures. The complexity of practices and interconnectedness between practices and practice architectures has been represented diagrammatically by

what is said, how it is said, what words are used in lessons),

126 New Pedagogical Challenges in the 21st Century - Contributions of Research in Education

*symbols,*

*families, communities and organisations.*

in the conduct of lessons), and

Kemmis et al. [3], and is presented in **Figure 1**.

in lessons).

The conduct of practices is never neutral but always undergirded by prior experiences of all practitioners involved as well as pre-existing ideas, ideologies, traditions of the field, discipline knowledge, standards, curriculums and policy agendas and so on. This is described as the prefigurement of practices. However, enacting practices (in the moment) is not only influenced by what conditions pre-exist at the site but by what is brought into the site (like particular resources, ideas, policies, language) and by who is present at the time (like students, others teachers, colleagues, the principal) and the relationships between them. Each of these dimensions of practice influence or prefigure the happenings, but do not necessarily determine what actually happens at the time. According to Kemmis and colleagues ([3], p. 90),

*The formation of learners' capacities to 'go on' in and to be the bearers of practices can best be understood as occurring in a lived dialectical relationship between participants' sayings, doings and relatings and the way they hang together in the project of a practice, on the one hand, and, on the other, their lived encounters and engagements with the practice architectures (cultural-discursive, material-economic and social-political arrangements) that are laid down and developed in practice traditions. On this view, practices are paths for those who walk them, ways of being for those who inhabit them.*

*Myles Horton and Paulo Freire gave their 1990 book about community education the felicitous title*  We Make the Road by Walking*. For us, the title captures the way practices make paths, on the one hand, and, on the other, how the practice of walking paths, whether paths already laid down or trails we blaze for ourselves, also makes us. We see practices as passages through time and space that people enter and that people make: they enable and constrain our movement in time and in semantic, physical and social space.*

From this, it can be said that practices are made in the doing. Furthermore the conduct of practices is always pre-figured by other practices and practice architectures, but not necessarily pre-determined [3]. In this way, practices are not fixed or static because they are always created, organised and enacted anew at the moment of happening, are prefigured but not predetermined, are always enabled and constrained by other practices, are always dynamic and contestable in their conduct, and always occur amid other practices.

in language, in the doing of activities and by relating to one another in different kinds of interpersonal relationships. Consider this next extract recorded in the same Year 3 classroom but occurred after the science lesson presented earlier (Extract 1). Here, the teacher Mrs. Kallo (T) begins the English lesson focused on writing with an organisational phase, followed by discussion about camouflage based on a jointly read text which acted as a shared reading

The Practice Architectures of Pedagogy: Conceptualising the Convergences between Sociality…

http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.72920

129

*Extract 2: Practice architectures and pedagogical practices in Year 3 shared reading*

1. T: …before our writing task let's have a bit of a read to get some ideas (0.2) 2. everybody stand up, get in a comfy spot on the floor so you can see (0.4) 3. everyone↑ facing front, no Jase (0.2) beside your talking buddy ((students 4. shuffling)) the way we do for our reading (0.3) have a stretch cos you've been

7. T: Yes (0.3) big stretch up, o:oh now sideways, okay down you go (0.2) sitting↑ 8. ready? (0.4) ((various noises from students)) Mrs Celi will think we don't do 9. anything but learn big words, cos this new book is a-all about a big word (0.2) 10. remembering↑what was the other big word? c'mon now recalling the rich 11. vocabulary we learnt in our science groups this morning? away from the bin 12.

17. T: I'm gonna ask you two in a minute ((points to students)) (0.3) there's 18. something in this picture? ((teacher pointing to the picture on the cover))

20. T: Don't call out, wait your turn Josie, be fair! We all get a say here, 21. wait your turn. There's an animal in this picture, can you see it?

stimulus for the subsequent writing task.

6. Jane: can I go to the (toilet)?

13. S1. [terra, terrarium

22. S(s): [Yes::s] [Yes] [Yes] 23. S4: [It's a lizard

27. T: Why not Ben?

25. S(s): [Ye::es 26. Ben: [no::o

32. S(s): [No::o

24. T: Can you see what it is?

31. Ben: No, it's a thorny devil

34. S6: =it's camoufla[ged

14. S2. [aquarium 15. S3. [°camouflage°

5. sitting on your bottoms for a while. Jane?

Max (0.2) where's your partner?

16. S(s): ((overlapping utterances from students))

28. S(s): ((utterances called out from students))

29. Ben: Cos its granite it's made out-it's made out of, like rock

35. T: [it's camouflaged isn't it? that was that other big word we learnt,

36. it's a good metaphor though, skin looking like granite, well let's have a closer

30. T: Do you think it's really made out of rock, Ben?

33. S5: But it looks, as if it's made out of rock, or stone=

19. Josie: it's there, Mrs Kallo, the lizard

In summary, the theory of practice architectures orients to and avails itself of seven master concepts about practice that propose that:


This line of thinking inaugurates the possibility of viewing pedagogy as a constellation of practices enabled and constrained by conditions or practice architectures present at or brought into the site.
