Bernstein's theory of pedagogic discourse as a theoretical framework for educators studying student radiographers' interpretation of normality vs. abnormality

PurposeTo acknowledge the tacit rules underpinning academic practice of undergraduate radiographers in determining normality vs. abnormality when appraising skeletal images.MethodologyTwelve students were interviewed (individually) using in-depth semi-structured questions. Interviews were mediated through a PowerPoint presentation containing two digital X-ray images. Each image was based on a level of expertise; the elementary (Case 1) and the complicated (Case 2). The questions were based on regular ‘frames’ created from observing tutor–student contact in class, and then validated through a group interview.Bernstein's theory of pedagogic discourse was then utilised as a data analysis instrument to determine how third year diagnostic radiography students interpreted X-ray images, in relation to the ‘recognition’ and ‘realisation’ rules of the Educational Theoretical Framework.ConclusionBernstein's framework has made it possible to specify, in detail, how issues and difficulties are formed at the level of the acquirer during interpretation. The recognition rules enabled students to meaningfully recognise what trauma characteristics can be associated with the image and the demands of a detailed scrutiny so as to enact a competent interpretation. Realisation rules, made it possible for students to establish their own systematic approach and realise legitimate meanings of normality and abnormality. Whereas obvious or visible trauma generated realisation rules (represented via homogenous terminology), latent trauma authorised students to deviate from legitimate meanings. The latter rule, in this context, has directed attention to the student issue of visioning abnormality when images are normal.