Education Can Compensate for Society - a Bit

In this paper I reflect on the findings of a number of loosely related research projects undertaken with colleagues over the last ten years. Their common theme is equity, in formal education and beyond, in wider family and social settings, and with inequity expressed as the stratification of a variety of educational outcomes. The projects are based on a standard mixture of pre-existing records, official documents, large-scale surveys, observations, interviews and focus groups. The numeric data were largely used to create biographical models of educational experiences, and the in-depth data were used to try to explain individual decisions and disparities at each stage of the model. Data have been collected for England and Wales, in five other countries of the European Union and for Japan. A meta-view of these various findings suggests that national school intakes tend to be at least moderately segregated by prior attainment and socio-economic factors, and that learning outcomes as assessed by formal means, such as examinations, are heavily stratified by these same factors. There is no convincing evidence that compulsory schooling does very much to overcome the initial disparity in the resources and attainment of school intakes. On the other hand, there are indications that the nature of a national school system and the social experiences of young people in schools can begin to equalise educational outcomes as more widely envisaged, including learning to trust and willingness to help others, aspirations, and attitudes to continuing in education and training. The cost-free implications of the argument in this paper, if accepted, are that everything possible should be done to make school intakes comprehensive, and that explicit consideration, by teachers and leaders, of the applied principles of equity could reduce potentially harmful misunderstandings in educational contexts

Damaging real lives through obstinacy: re-emphasising why significance testing is wrong

This paper reminds readers of the absurdity of statistical significance testing, despite its continued widespread use as a supposed method for analysing numeric data. There have been complaints about the poor quality of research employing significance tests for a hundred years, and repeated calls for researchers to stop using and reporting them. There have even been attempted bans. Many thousands of papers have now been written, in all areas of research, explaining why significance tests do not work. There are too many for all to be cited here. This paper summarises the logical problems as described in over 100 of these prior pieces. It then presents a series of demonstrations showing that significance tests do not work in practice. In fact, they are more likely to produce the wrong answer than a right one. The confused use of significance testing has practical and damaging consequences for people's lives. Ending the use of significance tests is a pressing ethical issue for research. Anyone knowing the problems, as described over one hundred years, who continues to teach, use or publish significance tests is acting unethically, and knowingly risking the damage that ensues

The potential determinants of young people's sense of justice: an international study

This paper uses reports from 13,000 Grade Nine pupils in five countries to examine issues such as whether they were treated fairly at school, trust their teachers and adults in wider society, are willing to sacrifice teacher attention to help others, and support the cultural integration of recent immigrants. Using such reports as ‘outcomes’ in a multi‐stage regression model, it is clear that they are largely unrelated to school‐level pupil mix variables. To some extent, these outcomes are stratified by pupil and family background in the same way for all countries. However, the largest association is with pupil‐reported experience of interactions with their teachers. Teachers appear to be a major influence on young people's sense of justice and the principles they apply in deciding whether something is fair. The paper concludes by suggesting ways in which schools and teachers could take advantage of this finding

Failing boys and moral panics: perspectives on the underachievement debate

The paper re-examines the underachievement debate from the perspective of the ‘discourse of derision’ that surrounds much writing in this area. It considers the contradictions and inconsistencies which underpin much of the discourse – from a reinterpretation of examination scores, to the conflation of the concepts of ‘under’ and ‘low’ achievement and finally to the lack of consensus on a means of defining and measuring the term underachievement. In doing so, this paper suggests a more innovative approach for understanding, re-evaluating and perhaps rejecting the notion of underachievement

Do we really need Confidence Intervals in the new statistics?

This paper compares the use of confidence intervals (CIs) and a sensitivity analysis called the number needed to disturb (NNTD), in the analysis of research findings expressed as ‘effect’ sizes. Using 1,000 simulations of randomised trials with up to 1,000 cases in each, the paper shows that both approaches are very similar in outcomes, and each one is highly predictable from the other. CIs are supposed to be a measure of likelihood or uncertainty in the results, showing a range of possible effect sizes that could have been produced by random sampling variation alone. NNTD is supposed to be a measure of the robustness of the effect size to any variation, including that produced by missing data. Given that they are largely equivalent and interchangeable under the conditions tested here, the paper suggests that both are really measures of robustness. It concludes that NNTD is to be preferred because it requires many fewer assumptions, is more tolerant of missing data, is easier to explain, and directly addresses the key question of whether the underlying effect size is zero or not

Learner identities in the context of undergraduates: a case study

Background This paper examines the idea of learner identity of marketing undergraduates in the light of the widening participation agenda and identifies the challenges faced by those who enter HE by non-traditional routes. Purpose The research investigates the links between marketing students’ learner identities and their socio-economic backgrounds, previous experience of education and subject choice. It is hypothesised that marketing students, having selected a degree in a specific business discipline, are aware of employability issues and may be committed to their learning, leading to stronger learning identities than those evidenced in the literature about similar post-1992 universities. Sample The sample is all undergraduate marketing students at a University in England (the pseudonym UE is used throughout). The total available population was 135 and, of these, 99 completed the questionnaire. Non-UK students were excluded from the sample and one part-time student was excluded. This resulted in a total of 83 completed questionnaires for analysis. A sample of six self-selected students participated in follow-up interviews. Design and methods The primary research consists of a questionnaire administered to undergraduate marketing students and follow-up semi-structured interviews with a small number of students. The interviews examined issues in more depth and sought individual narratives of educational experience, with particular regard to the study of marketing and future employment and examined whether subject choice was in any way affected by previous educational experience, family background or ideas about employability. Results Links between learner identity and socio-economic background, educational experience and subject choice are shown. Nearly half the sample is shown to have positive learner identities but no link was found between subject choice and students’ thoughts on employability. Conclusions One should not presume students at lower-ranked universities to have poor learner identities as they may just be different, given their backgrounds and expectations, or actually be very strong. One should not presume that students of business disciplines are necessarily more focused on employability than other students.N/