Dr Carol Brown

Expectancy-Value Theory predicts that expectancy of success and subjective task value (STV) underlie differences in motivation and achievement. This study investigated how gender and SES related to achievement mediated by expectancy of success, STV, and their interaction. The sample consisted of 396 participants in their final year of upper secondary education. Self-report measures were completed of expectancy, STV, gender and socio-economic indicators. These were linked to exit examination grades (A Levels). Only parental education was directly related to achievement however gender and SES were indirectly linked to student grades through expectancy, STV, and the expectancy-STV interaction. Males, students with a higher level of parental education, and students from households with a higher number of possessions, all performed better in their examination due to higher expectations; higher STV amplified these relations. Gender and SES differences in achievement can be partly explained by psychological factors, namely students’ expectations of success and STV.

According to Eccles’ expectancy-value model of achievement motivation students’ expectations and values relate to their performance and are influenced by goals and identities. When specific identities are important to an individual the tasks associated with them will have value and the individual will be motivated to act them out. This study explores students’ perceptions of the relationship between their identities, goals, task demands, and their expectations and values for A-levels. Purposeful sampling of twenty A-level student participants and semi-structured interviews were employed. The results indicated that students attached value to doing well in their A-levels; they were perceived as important for the way they saw themselves, for their educational and occupational goals and future lives. Seemingly A-levels both confirmed aspects of students’ identity but were also perceived to facilitate change and have positive effects. Overall, it appeared that A-levels are perceived to be important for the development of young people and illustrates ways in which these qualifications might shape how individuals see themselves and the impact upon them. The relationships are however complex and warrant further explanation including research methodologies employing student voice.

Ethics committees have an important role to play in ensuring ethical standards (e.g. BERA, ESRC, RCUK recommendations) are met by educational researchers. Balancing obligations to participants, society, institutions and the researchers themselves is not, however, easy.  Researchers often experience the Ethics committee as unsympathetic to their research endeavour, whilst Ethics committees find some research approaches do not make ethical implications sufficiently explicit. This potential for misunderstanding is evident in the literature; but studies investigating how participants perceive this relationship is missing. 

This study comprises a novel empirical study which explores researcher perceptions of research ethics committees. Fifty-five participants in Higher Education departments of Education responded to an online survey. Open and closed ended questions were used to collect data on roles, methodological stance, experiences of the research ethics committee, perceived tensions and examples of good practice. 

The results indicated that contemporary educational researchers regard research ethics committees as friends when researcher and reviewer are transparently engaged in a shared endeavour. When this shared endeavour breaks down, for a variety of reasons including apparently unreasonable demands or mutual misunderstanding, the research ethics committees can become foe.  The difference between foe and friend lies in the quality of communication, clear systems and a culture of respectful mutual learning.

The contributions of this study have practical implications for the ways that education researchers and research ethics committees relate to one another within university settings, both to alleviate areas of tension and to arrive at shared understanding which will enable best ethical research practice. 

There has been a period of intense policy change involving GCSE examinations in England, proposed partly in response to schools using tactics to maximise performance against accountability measures. The reforms included a change to linear rather than modular entry, removing partial re-sits, and limiting early and multiple entry to examinations by changing school accountability measures. We present new empirical data from interviews conducted with senior teachers at 15 schools. The focus of these interviews has been in the English and mathematics departments; the first subjects to be examined in the new specifications. The data suggest that teachers acknowledge this practice of ‘gaming’ but only as something ‘other’ schools did. Whilst the reforms have now allowed for the system to be viewed as a more level playing field, teachers still describe a constant tension in the decisions surrounding examination entry. They describe the desire for a balance that is not just between school and student outcomes, but also between different outcomes such as motivation, performance, and engagement. Tensions arise between these outcomes when entry choices are being made.