Why is it difficult for schools to establish equitable practices in allocating students to attainment ‘sets’?

Research has consistently shown ‘ability’ grouping (tracking) to be prey to poor practice, and to perpetuate inequity. A feature of these problems is inequitable and inaccurate practice in allocation to groups or ‘tracks’. Yet little research has examined whether such practices might be improved. Here, we examine survey and interview findings from a large-scale intervention study of grouping practices in 126 English secondary schools. We find that when schools are encouraged to allocate students and move them between groups according to equitable principles by participation in a ‘best practice’ intervention, there is some increased equity of practice (i.e. a reduction in non-attainment factors used in allocation). However, the majority of schools continue to use subjective and potentially biased information to group students. Furthermore, some schools that claim to be using attainment setting appear to be using the inequitable practice of streaming. Our findings show that improvements in equity are constrained by operational and strategic factors, including timetabling, finance, and teachers’ values and beliefs relating to student ability and progression. We suggest strategies for encouraging schools to change their grouping practices, drawing on approaches for working with complex organisations.     

Gender, ‘bias’, assessment and feedback: analyzing the written assessment of undergraduate history essays

This paper reports on findings relating to a project on gender and essay assessment in HE. It focuses on one aspect of the study: the assessment of and feedback given to two sample essays by 50 historians based at universities in England and Wales. We found considerable variation both as to the classification awarded to the essays and to positive and negative comments made about their quality, supporting the argument that the ‘quality’ of a piece of writing for assessment is ultimately constructed by the reader of the essay and cannot be objectively ascertained. Gender issues emerging from the data are explored in the paper, relating to lecturers’ perceptions of the essays’ qualities; views concerning the way feedback should be presented; and the content and style of feedback given by lecturers on the sample essays. We found that gender constructions were manifested more in presentation than practice. These findings on the situated practice of assessment have implications for the conception of the ‘reliability’ of essay assessment in HE.     

Femininity,science, and the denigration of the girly girl

Hyper-femininity and the construction of the ‘girly girl’ label have been documented widely, but there has been less attention to their content (or any distinctions between these constructs). Indeed, it can be argued that the content of femininity remains a controversial and somewhat under-researched topic in feminist scholarship. This is also the case in relation to science, which has been widely characterised as a masculine terrain, but there has been less attention to why femininity is excluded from/by science. This article attempts to unpick some of these issues, with a particular focus on the construct of the ‘girly girl’, in relation to access to science. Drawing on qualitative data from the Economic and Social Research Council-funded ASPIRES 2 project, we analyse the discourses used by young people and parents in discussion of ‘girly girls’ and physics. We show the misogynist and excluding discourses projected onto the ‘girly girl’, and indeed that are used to interpolate femininity more broadly. We found that in discussions of science and (hyper-)femininity, even potentially positive feminine attributes were denigrated. Hyper-femininity was produced as ‘more than lack’: vacuous, but also a risible presence. In reflecting on our findings we consider whether femininity may be more derided in some discursive contexts (e.g. science discourse) than others, and whether femininity can or should be conceived as more than lack.     

Problem solving in the rat: Stay vs. shift solutions on the three-table task

Two experiments were conducted to determine the conditions under which a shift problem vs. a stay problem would be easier for animals tested on Maier’s three-table task. When animals were given a prior exploratory experience and a partial feeding during the feeding experience, the stay problem was easier. With a prior exploratory experience and a complete feeding experience, the shift solution was easier. In the absence of prior exploration, rats cannot solve either the stay or shift problem, regardless of the amount of feeding during the feeding experience.     

From “Producing” to “Consuming” Research: Incorporating Evidence-Based Practice Into Advanced Research Courses in a Master of Social Work Program

Schools of social work have begun to explore teaching evidence-based practice (EBP) across their curriculum. Although the current literature offers ideas on how to incorporate EBP in foundation research and practice courses, the literature seems nonexistent on how to teach EBP in an advanced research sequence, which could clearly address the widespread criticism that research courses are unsuccessful in making the practice–research link more apparent. This article describes the transition of one school from a “producing research” curriculum focus to an EBP focus, which embraces consuming research. In the present article, the authors discuss the benefits and struggles associated with these two different approaches.